Talk:Benchmark datasets for velocity measurements

From Atomix
  • Potential datasets notes
    • CynthiaBluteau (talk) 17:17, 26 April 2022 (CEST) Might replace the lake with the low quality tidal flow example, which has fairly weak flows. The MAVS under the ice also has very weak flows albeit clean data since it's a travel time sensor.


Summary of potential benchmark datasets for testing existing and future algorithms
Dataset name Total depth Deployment height above bottom Background speed [math]\displaystyle{ \varepsilon }[/math] range Stratification/shear information Comment
Units [m] [m] [m/s] [W/kg]
Tidal slough 2.8 0.45 0.15-0.2 1e-8 to 1e-5 Unstratified, but shear-induced anisotropy Viscous subrange is occasionally resolved. Another ADV at 0.15 m shows wrapping issues.
Tidal shelf low quality 185 0.4 <0.3 but usually 0.1 1e-7 to 1e-4 Bottom one in log-layer using the classical definition Low-quality & noisy dataset
Tidal shelf high quality 250 0.4 <0.65 1e-7 to 1e-5 Stratified bottom log-layer High-quality dataset with phase wrapping. It overlaps with an ADCP Signature benchmark.
Underice MAVS 353 248 0.05 1e-8 to 1e-6 Weak stratification *under-ice boundary layer, MAVS suspended 5m depth
Tidal MAVS 20 1.45 0.9 to 1.1 1e-3 Weak stratification Strong tidal flows
Intertidal small waves ask JM 0.4 <0.18 1e-6 coastal area with weak stratification std(U)/mean(U) is roughly 1 (JM)
Surface waves large orbital sigma vs mean current (SM)- backburner
Lake 4.3 0.12 <0.1m/s Unstratified Shallow Lake (DW)- backburner