DQR ID | Subject | Data Streams Affected |
---|---|---|
D060112.4 | NIM/SKYRAD/M1 - IRTs do not agree with AERI | nimskyrad60sM1.b1 |
D060419.3 | NIM/MWRP/M1 - Instrument noise problem | nimmwrpM1.00, nimmwrpM1.b1, nimmwrprawM1.00 |
D060419.4 | NIM/MWR/M1 - Instrument noise problem/RF interference | nimmwrM1.00, nimmwrlosM1.b1, nimmwrtipM1.a1 |
D060420.5 | NIM/MWRP/M1 - IRT Sensor Calibration | nimmwrpM1.00, nimmwrpM1.b1, nimmwrprawM1.00 |
D060530.1 | NIM/ECOR/M1 - Flux Data Suspect for Some Wind Directions | nim30ecorM1.b1 |
D060619.1 | NIM/MWRP/M1 - Reprocessed - New retrieval coefficients | nimmwrpM1.b1 |
D060713.1 | NIM/MWRP/M1 - 51.25 GHz channel calibration drifted | nimmwrpM1.b1 |
D060718.1 | NIM/MWR/M1 - Reprocessed: Recalibration to correct for occasional overheating. | nimmwrlosM1.b1, nimmwrtipM1.a1 |
D060921.9 | NIM/TSI/M1 - Shadowband Misalignment | nimtsicldmaskM1.a1, nimtsimovieM1.a1, nimtsiskyimageM1.a1 |
D061003.3 | NIM/MWRP/M1 - IRTs do not agree with AERI | nimmwrpM1.b1 |
D070215.5 | NIM/ECOR/M1 - Effects on ECOR CO2 Flux and Concentration By Aircraft | nim30ecorM1.b1 |
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
11/26/2005 | 0000 | 06/07/2006 | 1900 |
Subject: | NIM/SKYRAD/M1 - IRTs do not agree with AERI |
DataStreams: | nimskyrad60sM1.b1 |
Description: | Since deployment at PYE, and then at NIM, the AMF SKYRAD IRT measured about 10K higher sky temperatures than the AERI and the MWRP IRT measureed about 20K higher than the AERI. Several actions were taken to diagnose the problem including confirming the correct configuration of the IRTs and data logger, cleaning the mirror and lens, and replacing the mirror. After several days of rain beginning 6/2/2006, the three instruments came into agreement. It is unknown whether this was a problem with the AERI, MWRP-IRT or SKYRAD-IRT. |
Measurements: | nimskyrad60sM1.b1:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
01/01/2006 | 0000 | 01/08/2007 | 0000 |
Subject: | NIM/MWRP/M1 - Instrument noise problem |
DataStreams: | nimmwrpM1.00, nimmwrpM1.b1, nimmwrprawM1.00 |
Description: | There are spikes and elevated noise in MWRP data. The origine of the spikes is RF interference from various sources. All brightness temperatures are affected, but in particular the 5 K-band channels. LWP retrievals are noisy and affected by spikes as a result. |
Measurements: | nimmwrprawM1.00:
nimmwrpM1.b1:
nimmwrpM1.00:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
01/15/2006 | 0000 | 01/08/2007 | 0000 |
Subject: | NIM/MWR/M1 - Instrument noise problem/RF interference |
DataStreams: | nimmwrM1.00, nimmwrlosM1.b1, nimmwrtipM1.a1 |
Description: | Data are affected by intermittent spikes that become more frequent starting in March 2006. Spikes affect data mostly around 9 AM and 18:00 PM. The origin of the spikes is probably RF interference. |
Measurements: | nimmwrlosM1.b1:
nimmwrM1.00:
nimmwrtipM1.a1:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
01/15/2006 | 0000 | 06/03/2006 | 0000 |
Subject: | NIM/MWRP/M1 - IRT Sensor Calibration |
DataStreams: | nimmwrpM1.00, nimmwrpM1.b1, nimmwrprawM1.00 |
Description: | Discrepancies between the MWRP and Skyrad IRT were observed in January. The MWRP IRT readings were constantly higher than those of the skyrad IRT. Some changes were introduced to the MWRP IRT to address the problem (see DQR D060602.2). On May 3, the IRT mirror was replaced. After the change in the mirror, the MWRP IRT readings became about 5-8 C lower. On June 3 the agreement between MWRP and Skyrad IRT became satisfactory (2-5 degree C difference). It is hard to numerically quantify the difference in the IRT readings caused by the change in the mirror. We can only warn the user that between January 1 and June 3 the MWRP readings are 8 to 15 degree higher than the skyrad IRT. |
Measurements: | nimmwrprawM1.00:
nimmwrpM1.b1:
nimmwrpM1.00:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
11/26/2005 | 1530 | 01/07/2007 | 2359 |
Subject: | NIM/ECOR/M1 - Flux Data Suspect for Some Wind Directions |
DataStreams: | nim30ecorM1.b1 |
Description: | NIM: For some wind directions the horizontal fetch was not representative of the field in which the AMF was located. Therefore, for the wind direction ranges 90-170 (buildings) and 220-280 (trees) degrees, the fluxes are affected by insufficient fetch and surfaces, buildings, or vegetation that are not similar to the local field conditions. |
Measurements: | nim30ecorM1.b1:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
01/01/2006 | 0000 | 08/24/2006 | 2300 |
Subject: | NIM/MWRP/M1 - Reprocessed - New retrieval coefficients |
DataStreams: | nimmwrpM1.b1 |
Description: | Occasionally, the retrieved relative humidity was exceeding 120%. Upon reviewing the data it was noticed that the high values were appearing in the highest layers (above 8 km) and especially during spring season. Since retrievals at the highest levels are mainly affected by the climatology used to constrain the retrievals, we reviewed the statistical coefficients that were used to retrieve temperature and humidity. It was discovered that, in the training dataset (radiosonde), there were a few outliers (invalid radiosonde soundings) that had escaped the screening process and were affecting the computations of the retrieval coefficients. We recomputed the retrieval coefficients with the newly screened set of radiosonde data and reprocessed all the previous data at Niamey. The reprocessed data were archived in August 2006. The new coefficients improve temperature and humidity profiles in two ways. The relative humidity will not exceed 120% in the upper layers and the temperature profiles will be in better agreement with the sonde in the first 4 km. |
Measurements: | nimmwrpM1.b1:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
05/05/2006 | 0000 | 01/08/2007 | 0000 |
Subject: | NIM/MWRP/M1 - 51.25 GHz channel calibration drifted |
DataStreams: | nimmwrpM1.b1 |
Description: | After a power outage on May 5 the 51.25 GHz had a slight change in the calibration. The resulting LWP computed by using all 6 channels increased of about 0.025 mm (25 g/m2). |
Measurements: | nimmwrpM1.b1:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
03/01/2006 | 0000 | 01/08/2007 | 0000 |
Subject: | NIM/MWR/M1 - Reprocessed: Recalibration to correct for occasional overheating. |
DataStreams: | nimmwrlosM1.b1, nimmwrtipM1.a1 |
Description: | The radiometer was intermittently thermally unstable resulting in poor calibrations for four brief time periods. These data have been reprocessed to apply corrected calibrations. The affected time periods were: 20060302-20060303 20060423-20060425 20060512-20060515 20060531-20060603 |
Measurements: | nimmwrlosM1.b1:
nimmwrtipM1.a1:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
03/20/2006 | 1820 | 09/29/2006 | 0945 |
Subject: | NIM/TSI/M1 - Shadowband Misalignment |
DataStreams: | nimtsicldmaskM1.a1, nimtsimovieM1.a1, nimtsiskyimageM1.a1 |
Description: | From installation, the shadowband was positioned south at solar noon until the vernal equinox when it began to migrate counter-clockwise until reaching east 37 days later on 4/26 (about 9 days before mid-spring). The shadowband at solar noon continued to migrate until reaching its most northerly position (~15 deg) on the summer solstice (if everything was perfectly aligned, it probably would have been pointed north on this day). It then began to migrate clockwise and reached east again 56 days later on 8/16 (about 14 days after mid-summer). As expected, the shadowband reached its most southerly position on the autumnal equinox but was about 10 deg off of being due south. With the apparent alignment problem, I don't understand why the shadowband was mostly blocking the sun. When I started noticing this offset in May, I chose to leave it alone because I felt that adjusting the shadowband to where I thought it should be would cause it to not block the sun at either sunrise or sunset. The alignment was corrected on 9/29 (6 days after the day of the autumnal equinox). |
Measurements: | nimtsiskyimageM1.a1:
nimtsicldmaskM1.a1:
nimtsimovieM1.a1:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
01/09/2006 | 0001 | 06/07/2006 | 1900 |
Subject: | NIM/MWRP/M1 - IRTs do not agree with AERI |
DataStreams: | nimmwrpM1.b1 |
Description: | Since deployment at PYE, and then at NIM, the AMF SKYRAD IRT measured about 10K higher sky temperatures than the AERI and the MWRP IRT measured about 20K higher than the AERI. Several actions were taken to diagnose the problem including confirming the correct configuration of the IRTs and data logger, cleaning the mirror and lens, and replacing the mirror. After several days of rain beginning 6/2/2006, the three instruments came into agreement. The cause of the discrepancy was probably dust accumulation on the lens of the instrument |
Measurements: | nimmwrpM1.b1:
|
Start Date | Start Time | End Date | End Time |
---|---|---|---|
11/26/2005 | 1530 | 01/07/2007 | 2330 |
Subject: | NIM/ECOR/M1 - Effects on ECOR CO2 Flux and Concentration By Aircraft |
DataStreams: | nim30ecorM1.b1 |
Description: | Aircraft landings, departures, and running aircraft on the airport pad were found to produce large spikes in the half hourly CO2 flux and small spikes in CO2 concentration on many days during the entire deployment of the AMF at NIM. This influence was found on 40% of the days in March and April 2006 and sometimes for multiple periods in a day; this was typical of the year of data. The spikes range from only several micromoles s-1 m-2 to one hundred or more for flux (a typical spike was in the twenties) and near zero to 1.0 mmoles m-3 for CO2 concentration (typically around 0.15). The aircraft influence was caused by persistent easterly winds; the airport terminal pad and the nearest part of the runway were almost directly to the east of the ECOR location. Occasionally an influence on water vapor density was detected, but this was fairly rare and usually of very small magnitude. |
Measurements: | nim30ecorM1.b1:
|