Real-time quality control of data from Sea-Wing underwater glider installed with Glider Payload CTD sensor
-
Abstract: Profiles observed by Sea-Wing underwater gliders are widely applied in scientific research. However, the quality control (QC) of these data has received little attention. The mismatch between the temperature probe and conductivity cell response times generates erroneous salinities, especially across a strong thermocline. A sensor drift may occur owing to biofouling and biocide leakage into the conductivity cell when a glider has operated for several months. It is therefore critical to design a mature real-time QC procedure and develop a toolbox for the QC of Sea-Wing glider data. On the basis of temperature and salinity profiles observed by several Sea-Wing gliders each installed with a Sea-Bird Glider Payload CTD sensor, a real-time QC method including a thermal lag correction, Argo-equivalent real-time QC tests, and a simple post-processing procedure is proposed. The method can also be adopted for Petrel gliders.
-
Figure 2. Average descent (black) and ascent (red) rates of Sea-Wing gliders vs pressure in the northern South China Sea (SCS). The water density is denoted by the blue curve.
Figure 3. Temperature, salinity profiles and temperature–salinity curves from Sea-Wing gliders’ downcast (black) and upcast (red). a–c. Observed in the SCS (around 17.04°N, 113.44°E) by Sea-Wing glider 1000J003 on 5 July 2016; d–f. from Sea-Wing glider 1000J003, but observed at about 20.21°N, 118.30°E on 8 May 2015; and g–h. Sea-Wing glider 1000K003 east of the Luzon Strait (~ 19.28°N, 122.58°E) on 10 October 2016. The original and corrected downcast results are respectively shown as solid and dotted black lines whereas the upcast results are shown as red lines.
Figure 4. Mean difference between thermal-lag-corrected and raw salinities for downcast (dashed lines) and upcast (black solid lines) from Glider 1000J001 (a), 1000J002 (b) and 1000J003 (c) . The standard deviation of the salinity difference is denoted by gray shading.
Figure 5. Vertical salinity profile for Racape’s spike test. Open red circles indicate the salinities that failed Racape’s spike test.
Figure 6. Scatter plot of the profile positions from the DMQC_Argo CTD dataset. Colors indicate the years in which profiles were observed.
Figure 7. Example of the glider climatological test. a. Temperature–salinity curves (blue lines) observed by an Argo float (WMO number: 2902581). The abnormal profile (cycle number: 93) is shown in red line. b. The abnormal salinity derived by the Argo float (blue line) and the DMQC_Argo CTD-data-set-derived mean salinity profile (thick green line).The 6 times the standard deviation envelope is denoted by thin green line. c same as b but for temperature. The points that failed the climatological test are marked by red circles. The gray dots are randomly 1/3 profiles in the search box of the DMQC_Argo CTD data set.
Figure 8. CTD data observed by Sea-Wing glider 1000J003 in the SCS on May 8, 2015. Temperature (a), salinity profiles (b) and temperature–salinity curves (c) from the glider's downcast (black) and upcast (red). Original and corrected downcast results are respectively shown as solid and dotted black lines whereas the upcast results are shown as red lines. The (five-point) moving mean filtered and average data from the corrected downcast and upcast profiles are shown in blue lines.
Figure 9. Mean salinity difference (black solid lines) between post-processed (the averages of the corrected downcast and upcastsalinities after a five-point moving mean filtered) and corresponding corrected downcast profiles for Glider 1000J001 (a), 1000J002 (b) and1000J003 (c). The standard deviation of the salinity difference is denoted by gray shading.
-
[1] Baird M E, Suthers I M, Griffin D A, et al. 2011. The effect of surface flooding on the physical-biogeochemical dynamics of a warm-core eddy off southeast Australia. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 58(5): 592–605. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2010.10.002 [2] Baltes B, Rudnick D, Crowley M, et al. 2014. Toward a U.S. IOOS® Underwater glider network plan: part of a comprehensive subsurface observing system. Technical Report U S IOOS [3] Böhme L, Send U. 2005. Objective analyses of hydrographic data for referencing profiling float salinities in highly variable environments. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 52(3–4): 651–664. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2004.12.014 [4] Bouffard J, Pascual A, Ruiz S, et al. 2010. Coastal and mesoscale dynamics characterization using altimetry and gliders: a case study in the Balearic sea. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 115(C10): C10029. doi: 10.1029/2009JC006087 [5] Bouffard J, Renault L, Ruiz S, et al. 2012. Sub-surface small-scale eddy dynamics from multi-sensor observations and modeling. Progress in Oceanography, 106: 62–79. doi: 10.1016/j.pocean.2012.06.007 [6] Dobricic S, Pinardi N, Testor P, et al. 2010. Impact of data assimilation of glider observations in the Ionian Sea (Eastern Mediterranean). Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans, 50(1): 78–92. doi: 10.1016/j.dynatmoce.2010.01.001 [7] Dong J L, Domingues R, Goni G, et al. 2017. Impact of assimilating underwater glider data on Hurricane Gonzalo (2014) forecasts. Weather and Forecasting, 32(3): 1143–1159. doi: 10.1175/WAF-D-16-0182.1 [8] Gangopadhyay A, Schmidt A, Agel L, et al. 2013. Multiscale forecasting in the western North Atlantic: Sensitivity of model forecast skill to glider data assimilation. Continental Shelf Research, 63 Suppl: S159–S176 [9] Garau B, Ruiz S, Zhang W G, et al. 2011. Thermal lag correction on Slocum CTD glider data. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 28(9): 1065–1071. doi: 10.1175/JTECH-D-10-05030.1 [10] Garcia H E, Boyer T, Baranova O K, et al. 2019. World Ocean Atlas 2018: Product Documentation. Silver Spring, Maryland: National Centers for Environmental Information, USA [11] Liu Z H, Chen X R, Yu J C, et al. 2019. Kuroshio intrusion into the South China Sea with an anticyclonic eddy: Evidence from underwater glider observation. Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, doi: 10.1007/s00343-019-8290-y [12] Liu F, Wang Y H, Wu Z L, et al. 2017. Motion analysis and trials of the deep sea hybrid underwater glider Petrel-II. China Ocean Engineering, 31(1): 55–62. doi: 10.1007/s13344-017-0007-4 [13] Liu Y G, Weisberg R H, Lembke C. 2015. Glider salinity correction for unpumped CTD sensors across a sharp thermocline. In: Liu Y G, Kerkering H, Weisberg R H, eds. Coastal Ocean Observing Systems. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 305−325 [14] Liu Z H, Xu J P, Sun C H. 2007. Discussing on detecting and calibration method of Argo conductivity sensor drift errors. Ocean Technology (in Chinese), 26(4): 72–76 [15] Lueck R G, Picklo J J. 1990. Thermal inertia of conductivity cells: observations with a sea-bird cell. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 7(5): 756–768. doi: 10.1175/1520-0426(1990)007<0756:TIOCCO>2.0.CO;2 [16] Miles T, Seroka G, Kohut J, et al. 2015. Glider observations and modeling of sediment transport in Hurricane Sandy. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 120(3): 1771–1791. doi: 10.1002/2014JC010474 [17] Morison J, Andersen R, Larson N, et al. 1994. The correction for thermal-lag effects in sea-bird CTD data. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 11(4): 1151–1164. doi: 10.1175/1520-0426(1994)011<1151:TCFTLE>2.0.CO;2 [18] Oka E, Ando K. 2004. Stability of temperature and conductivity sensors of Argo profiling floats. Journal of Oceanography, 60(2): 253–258. doi: 10.1023/B:JOCE.0000038331.10108.79 [19] Owens W B, Wong A P S. 2009. An improved calibration method for the drift of the conductivity sensor on autonomous CTD profiling floats by θ-S climatology. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 56(3): 450–457. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr.2008.09.008 [20] Pan C D, Yaremchuk M, Nechaev D, et al. 2011. Variational assimilation of glider data in Monterey Bay. Journal of Marine Research, 69(2–3): 331–346 [21] Pan C D, Zheng L Y, Weisberg R H, et al. 2014. Comparisons of different ensemble schemes for glider data assimilation on West Florida shelf. Ocean Modelling, 81: 13–24. doi: 10.1016/j.ocemod.2014.06.005 [22] Racape V, Dobler D, Coatanoan C. 2018. Tests RTQC. In: Proceedings of the 19th Meeting of the Argo Data Management Team. San Diego: The 19th Meeting of the Argo Data Managemen Team [23] Rudnick D L, Davis R E, Eriksen C C, et al. 2004. Underwater gliders for ocean research. Marine Technology Society Journal, 38(2): 73–84. doi: 10.4031/002533204787522703 [24] Ruiz S, Pascual A, Garau B, et al. 2009. Mesoscale dynamics of the Balearic Front, integrating glider, ship and satellite data. Journal of Marine Systems, 78 (Suppl): S3–S16 [25] Shu Y Q, Wang Q, Zu T T. 2018. Progress on shelf and slope circulation in the northern South China Sea. Science China Earth Sciences, 61(5): 560–571. doi: 10.1007/s11430-017-9152-y [26] Shu Y Q, Xiu P, Xue H J, et al. 2016. Glider-observed anticyclonic eddy in northern South China Sea. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, 19(3): 233–241 [27] Shulman I, Rowley C, Anderson S, et al. 2009. Impact of glider data assimilation on the Monterey Bay model. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 56(3–5): 188–198. doi: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2008.08.003 [28] Stommel H. 1989. The SLOCUM mission. Oceanography, 19(1): 22–25 [29] Tintoré J, Vizoso G, Casas B, et al. 2013. SOCIB: The Balearic Islands Coastal Ocean Observing and Forecasting System Responding to Science, Technology and Society Needs. Marine Technology Society Journal, 47(1): 101–117. doi: 10.4031/MTSJ.47.1.10 [30] Troupin C, Beltran J P, Heslop E, et al. 2015. A toolbox for glider data processing and management. Methods in Oceanography, 13–14: 13–23. doi: 10.1016/j.mio.2016.01.001 [31] UNESCO. 1981. Tenth report of the joint panel on oceanographic tables and standards. UNESCO technical papers in Marine Sciences, No. 36 [32] U S. Integrated Ocean Observing System. 2016. Manual for quality control of temperature and salinity data observations from gliders Version 1.0. https://cdn.ioos.noaa.gov/media/2017/12/Manual-for-QC-of-Glider-Data_05_09_16.pdf [2017-12-1/2018-8-16] [33] Wong A P S, Johnson G C, Owens W B. 2003. Delayed-mode calibration of autonomous CTD profiling float salinity data by θ-S climatology. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 20(2): 308–318. doi: 10.1175/1520-0426(2003)020<0308:DMCOAC>2.0.CO;2 [34] Wong A, Keeley R, Carval T, et al. 2019. Argo quality control manual for CTD and trajectory data. http://dx.doi.org/10.13155/33951 [2018-1-16/2018-8-14] [35] Yu J C, Zhang A Q, Jin W M, et al. 2011. Development and experiments of the sea-wing underwater glider. China Ocean Engineering, 25(4): 721–736. doi: 10.1007/s13344-011-0058-x -
下载:
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 1179
- HTML全文浏览量: 335
- PDF下载量: 88
- 被引次数: 0
