Talk:Benchmark datasets for velocity measurements - Revision history

CynthiaBluteau at 20:00, 5 July 2022

2022-07-05T20:00:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:00, 5 July 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	* Potential datasets notes		* Potential datasets notes
	** [[User:CynthiaBluteau\|CynthiaBluteau]] ([[User talk: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.		** [[User:CynthiaBluteau\|CynthiaBluteau]] ([[User talk: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.


			{\| class="wikitable"
			\|+Summary of potential benchmark datasets for testing existing and future algorithms
			\|-
			! style="width: 12%"\| Dataset name
			! Total depth
			! Deployment height above bottom
			! Background speed
			! <math>\varepsilon</math> range
			! Stratification/shear information
			! style="width: 20%"\| 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
			\| {{FontColor\|fg=white\|bg=red\|text=ask JM}}
			\| 0.4
			\|<0.18
			\| {{FontColor\|fg=white\|bg=red\|text=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
			\|}

CynthiaBluteau at 15:17, 26 April 2022

2022-04-26T15:17:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:17, 26 April 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	* Potential datasets notes		* Potential datasets notes
	** 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.		** [[User:CynthiaBluteau\|CynthiaBluteau]] ([[User talk: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.

CynthiaBluteau: Created page with "* Potential datasets notes ** 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 albe..."

2022-04-26T15:17:19Z

Created page with "* Potential datasets notes ** 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 albe..."

New page

* Potential datasets notes
** 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.