Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-35
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-35
22 Jan 2024
 | 22 Jan 2024
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Measurement Techniques (AMT).

Inter-comparison of Eddy-Covariance Software for Urban Tall Tower Sites

Changxing Lan, Matthias Mauder, Stavros Stagakis, Benjamin Loubet, Claudio D'Onofrio, Stefan Metzger, David Durden, and Pedro-Henrique Herig-Coimbra

Abstract. Long-term tall-tower eddy-covariance (EC) measurements have been recently established in three European pilot cities as part of the ICOS-Cities project. We conducted a comparison of EC software to ensure a reliable generation of interoperable flux estimates, which is the prerequisite for avoiding methodological biases and improving the comparability of the results. We analyzed datasets covering five months collected from EC tall-tower installations located in urbanized areas of Munich, Zurich, and Paris. Fluxes of sensible heat, latent heat, and CO2 were calculated using three software packages (i.e., TK3, EddyPro, and eddy4) to assess the uncertainty of flux estimations attributed to differences in implemented post-processing schemes. A very good agreement on the mean values and standard deviations was found across all three sites, which can probably be attributed to a uniform instrumentation, data acquisition, and pre-processing. The overall comparison of final flux time-series products showed a good but not yet perfect agreement among three software packages. TK3 and EddyPro both calculated fluxes with low-frequency spectral correction, resulting in better agreement than between TK3 and the eddy4R workflow with disabled low-frequency spectral treatment. These observed flux discrepancies indicate the crucial role of treating low-frequency spectral loss in flux estimation for tall-tower EC systems.

Changxing Lan, Matthias Mauder, Stavros Stagakis, Benjamin Loubet, Claudio D'Onofrio, Stefan Metzger, David Durden, and Pedro-Henrique Herig-Coimbra

Status: open (until 27 Feb 2024)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-35', Anonymous Referee #1, 13 Feb 2024 reply
  • RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-35', Anonymous Referee #2, 21 Feb 2024 reply
Changxing Lan, Matthias Mauder, Stavros Stagakis, Benjamin Loubet, Claudio D'Onofrio, Stefan Metzger, David Durden, and Pedro-Henrique Herig-Coimbra
Changxing Lan, Matthias Mauder, Stavros Stagakis, Benjamin Loubet, Claudio D'Onofrio, Stefan Metzger, David Durden, and Pedro-Henrique Herig-Coimbra

Viewed

Total article views: 232 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
175 51 6 232 2 1
  • HTML: 175
  • PDF: 51
  • XML: 6
  • Total: 232
  • BibTeX: 2
  • EndNote: 1
Views and downloads (calculated since 22 Jan 2024)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 22 Jan 2024)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 227 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 227 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 21 Feb 2024
Download
Short summary
Using eddy covariance systems deployed in three cities, we aimed to elucidate the sources of discrepancies in flux estimations from different software. One crucial finding is the impact of low-frequency spectral loss corrections on tall-tower flux estimations. Our findings emphasize the significance of a standardized measurement setup and consistent post-processing configurations in minimizing the systematic flux uncertainty resulting from the usage of different software packages.