Raw data review (QA1): Difference between revisions

From Atomix
No edit summary
m Burst links
 
(16 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Raw data review ==
The objective of the raw data review is to ensure that the velocity data used for the calculation of the structure functions are of good quality before proceeding with the turbulence analysis. Bad data are typically identified from the velocity data themselves and other ancillary data (e.g. correlations). It is recommended that velocity data should be flagged if the following are observed:


The objective of the raw data review is to ensure that the velocity data used for the calculation of the structure functions are of good quality before proceeding with the turbulence analysis. Bad data are typically identified from the velocity data themselves and other ancillary data (e.g. correlations). Recommendations for quality control based on each data type include:  
== Data quality is poor ==
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="poor quality" data-collapsetext="Collapse" data-expandtext="Expand">
Poor data qualifiers include:  
* Low correlation values
* Echo intensity anomalies
* Low percent good values
* Data return rate varies
</div>


# Correlation
== Unrealistic velocity values ==
#* flag data below a minimum threshold
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="unrealistic" data-collapsetext="Collapse" data-expandtext="Expand">
# Echo intensity
Velocities are unrealistic if there are
#* flag data where there are anomalies due to false targets (e.g “fish” detection, surface reflection, mooring line reflection)
* Evidence of phase wrapping
# Percent good
* Velocities outside nominal measurement range
#* flag data with low values (applies to measurement modes with in-instrument averaging across multiple pings per ensemble)
* Velocities outside expected distribution
# Orientation (heading, pitch, roll) and depth (if sensor installed)
</div>
#* flag periods of high variability 
== Significant instrument motion and orientation ==
#* flag periods where instrument orientation deviates significantly from the expected behaviour of the mooring or instrument frame [(JMM) REPLACEMENT FOR 'resolve location of observations', WHICH I FOUND CONFUSING. IS THIS ANY BETTER?]
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="motion" data-collapsetext="Collapse" data-expandtext="Expand">
# Along beam velocity
Reject data if there is:
#* flag values where there are variations in data return rate
* High variability in pitch, heading and roll
#* flag values outside the nominal measurement range for the instrument configuration
* Orientation deviates from expected values
#* flag values with evidence of phase wrapping (in pulse-pulse coherent observations)
</div>
#* flag values where there is periodicity indicating waves or oscillatory motion
== Wave or periodic motion contamination ==
#* flag values that are outside of the expected distribution  
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="waves?" data-collapsetext="Collapse" data-expandtext="Expand">
#* flag values where the burst variance shows evidence of spatial and temporal trends
# Earth coordinate velocities
#* flag data where the error velocity is large (from ADCPs with at least 4 beams)
#* flag data where the earth velocities are comparable to the ambiguity velocity to check for possible phase wrapping
#* flag data where the burst variance shows evidence of spatial and temporal trends
#* flag data where there is a large horizontal shear over the observation range
#* flag data where the ADCP orientation deviates from the vertical and bin mapping may be necessary [(JMM) ALREADY INCLUDED ABOVE?]
# Temperature and salinity (if sensors installed)
#* flag values where there is evidence of changes in local stratification and/or internal wave activity


If possible, it is also recommended that you compare your data between beams, between bins and over time. It can also be useful to compare data to other sensors (e.g. meteorological, wave or CTD sensors).
* Periodic motion at wave frequencies observed in velocity data
</div>
== Velocity shear is too large ==
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="highshear" data-collapsetext="Collapse" data-expandtext="Expand">


[(JMM) I STILL FIND THIS PAGE A LITTLE CONFUSING. A POSSIBLE OPTION TO REORGANIZE IS PROPOSED IN THE DISCUSSION]
* earth velocities indicate significant horizontal shear
</div>
== Stationary assumption may be violated ==
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="nonstationary" data-collapsetext="Collapse" data-expandtext="Expand">


* variance of velocity [[Burst sampling|bursts]] shows spatial or temporal trends
</div>
== Stratification is too large ==
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" id="toostratified" data-collapsetext="Collapse" data-expandtext="Expand">
* Temperature and salinity (if available) indicate local stratification
</div>
-----
Next step: [[Processing your ADCP data using structure function techniques | Compute structure functions and dissipation estimates]]<br></br>
Previous step: [[ Deployment ]] <br></br>
Return to [[ADCP structure function flow chart| ADCP Flow Chart front page]]
Return to [[ADCP structure function flow chart| ADCP Flow Chart front page]]
[[Category:Velocity profilers]]

Latest revision as of 19:21, 8 March 2022

The objective of the raw data review is to ensure that the velocity data used for the calculation of the structure functions are of good quality before proceeding with the turbulence analysis. Bad data are typically identified from the velocity data themselves and other ancillary data (e.g. correlations). It is recommended that velocity data should be flagged if the following are observed:

Data quality is poor

Poor data qualifiers include:

  • Low correlation values
  • Echo intensity anomalies
  • Low percent good values
  • Data return rate varies

Unrealistic velocity values

Velocities are unrealistic if there are

  • Evidence of phase wrapping
  • Velocities outside nominal measurement range
  • Velocities outside expected distribution

Significant instrument motion and orientation

Reject data if there is:

  • High variability in pitch, heading and roll
  • Orientation deviates from expected values

Wave or periodic motion contamination

  • Periodic motion at wave frequencies observed in velocity data

Velocity shear is too large

  • earth velocities indicate significant horizontal shear

Stationary assumption may be violated

  • variance of velocity bursts shows spatial or temporal trends

Stratification is too large

  • Temperature and salinity (if available) indicate local stratification

Next step: Compute structure functions and dissipation estimates

Previous step: Deployment

Return to ADCP Flow Chart front page