EddyPro5 User Guide
EddyPro5 User Guide
EddyPro
5
i
NOTICE
The information contained in this document is subject to change without prior notice.
LI-COR, INC. MAKES NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND WITH REGARD TO THIS
MATERIAL, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. LI-COR shall not
be held liable for errors contained herein or for incidental or consequential damages in con-
nection with the furnishing, performance, or use of this material.
LI-COR
and EddyPro are registered trademarks of LI-COR, Inc. in the United States and
other countries. Campbell Scientific
gas analyzers (.ghg files). It also supports other raw file types, including
data stored as ASCII tables, binary files (including the TOB1 format), and SLT
(EddySoft and EdiSol) formats.
ECO2S is the result of a software development and validation effort that started in
2006 in the framework of the CarboEurope IP project
3
, was partially supported by
the ICOS European Infrastructure
4
. This project came to a conclusion in 2011 with
the release of ECO2S 1.6.5. During the IMECC-EU project, the first complete ver-
sions of the software were thoroughly validated against six other eddy covariance
packages, including EdiRe and EddySoft software.
In 2010, LI-COR
, Inc.
Suggested Documentation Reference: LI-COR, Inc. 2013. EddyPro 5 Help and
User's Guide. LI-COR, Inc. Lincoln, NE.
Suggested Software Reference: EddyPro (Version 5) [Computer software]. 2013.
Lincoln, NE. LI-COR, Inc; Infrastructure for Measurements of the European Carbon
Cycle consortium.
1
http://gaia.agraria.unitus.it/eco2s
2
http://imecc.ipsl.jussieu.fr
3
http://www.carboeurope.org
4
http://www.icos-infrastructure.eu
1-1
What to Expect from EddyPro
EddyPro will calculate fluxes accurately, given the available data. The interface is
simple, and even users with little-to-no knowledge of the underlying eddy cov-
ariance (EC) theory should be able to use it with ease.
How does EddyPro make this possible? Inspired by the ECO2S philosophy,
LI-COR
designed an innovative raw file format (called the GHG format, denoted
by a .ghg file extension) that embeds all relevant meta-information inside the data
file. Because each raw file includes all the information needed to be properly inter-
preted and processed, each raw file can be handled independently from the others.
GHG files are automatically created by properly configured LI-COR
data logging
software. EddyPro also allows you to calculate corrected fluxes starting from raw
files in other formats, such as generic ASCII, Binary, TOB1, and SLT files. In these
cases, meta-information must be provided before processing through the EddyPro
graphical interface.
Processing EC data requires a long sequence of operations including raw data fil-
tering, calibration, and other algorithms for calculating and correcting fluxes. For
many processing steps, several options are available. Despite many efforts, the sci-
entific community has yet to reach definitive agreements on which of these are best.
Making all these options available can only be done at the cost of increasing the
complexity of the software. The solution in EddyPro is to provide two paths for
data processing: Express Mode and Advanced Mode.
In Express Mode, EddyPro uses pre-determined processing settings that are well
established and accepted in the community. This approach dramatically reduces the
need for user interaction, allowing you to get fluxes with just a few clicks! Express
Mode is suitable for most eddy covariance setups, including:
systems operated over relatively flat and homogeneous terrain,
systems with open path gas analyzers (e.g. LI-7500A, LI-7700),
systems with closed (LI-7000) or enclosed (LI-7200) path analyzers with short
or properly heated intake tubes,
systems that include up to 3 analyzers.
In Advanced Mode, you can choose how corrections are applied, and configure
these settings to suit your research needs, making it the correct choice for data col-
lected in situations that deviate from those listed above. Effective use of Advanced
Mode requires both a certain level of understanding of the EC theory and a deeper
interaction with the software.
1-2
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
Using EddyPro
Installing EddyPro
EddyPro is compatible with computers running the Windows
operating systems
(XP, Vista, and 7), both 32 and 64 bit versions. The latest official version of EddyPro
can be acquired from www.licor.com/eddypro. Installing the software is a simple
matter of downloading it, and then launching the .exe file which is stored on your
computer. Accept the terms of the license agreement and click "Next" or "OK" until
the installation is complete.
Launch EddyPro by clicking the icon on your desktop, or navigate to the EddyPro
icon in your computer's "Start" menu.
Learning EddyPro
The simplest way to learn EddyPro is to use the software. Three levels of instruction
are available directly through the software interface.
The first level- EddyPro Tips - provides several-sentence descriptions of each feature
in the software when you hover your mouse over a feature. This is active by default,
and it can be turned on or off through the Tools menu (click EddyPro Tips) fea-
ture.
The second level - guided mode - indicates when required fields have not been com-
pleted. For example, if you are processing data in the ASCII format and you wish to
advance through the interface, EddyPro will prohibit you from advancing from the
Project Creation page to the Basic Settings page until the metadata has been
entered completely. Further, EddyPro will list the incomplete fields in the "Mes-
sages" panel. Messages in red font are essential. Messages in blue or green font
appear when the information provided to EddyPro is adequate to complete the pro-
ject. Messages are visible by default and it can be turned on or off through the
View menu (click EddyPro Messages).
The third level provides detailed descriptions of certain features when you click
(help question marks) in the interface. This takes you directly to the appropriate
topic in the software documentation.
1-3
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
What's New in this Version
Version 5.2
Version 5.2 is a minor update with bug fixes, refinements, and a few new features.
New features
Implementation of assessment tests for ancillary files (spectral assessment,
planar fit, and timelag optimization).
Analytic spectra correction after Massman (2000, 2001).
Biomet data are output for periods when corresponding high-frequency data
are not available or are corrupted.
Option to run engine with command-line specified .eddypro file (full path).
See help for usage (run "$eddypro_rp -h").
eddypro_rp now edits .eddypro file, so that eddypro_fcc can be launched
when eddypro_rp completes, without further interventions. This improves
portability and facilitate usages from command line and automation.
Engine bugs fixed
Bug causing off-season uptake correction to switch to 'simple linear' and stick
there, if radiation measurements were missing for just one half-hour.
Management of external biomet files (1 file, files in folder, 1 minute time-
step).
Bug causing TOB1 files without header (rare case) to be deleted from the
data folder, if they happened to contain less data than expected.
Bug causing soil temperature not to be duly treated as a biomet variable.
Call to CorrectionFactorsIbrom07 in BPCF_Fratini12. The wrong call pre-
vented use of backup solution (Ibrom model) in periods of too-low fluxes.
So, the correction was always using the direct method of Fratini et al. 2012,
also in low-flux conditions.
Functioning of metadata retriever, that got broken after refactoring for 5.0.
Footprint model of Kormann and Meixner 2001, as implemented in
'eddypro_fcc' (no corresponding bug in 'eddypro_rp').
Bug causing cross-wind correction to be applied to 'fast temperature' meas-
urements, but only if those were used in conjunction with an R2 anem-
ometer.
1-4
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
Exit condition for subs importing ASCII data. Was crashing in some con-
ditions, if a file contained more records than expected.
Module call to m_common_global_var in RenameTmpFilesCommon. The
bug was not causing problems because the same module is called by the
module that was mistakenly called.
Engine refinements
Eliminated squared root operating on the transfer function H, in Fratini et al.
(2012) spectral correction method. This refinement shall be made publicly
available in the form of a corrigendum to the paper. Thanks a lot to
Johannes Laubach for suggesting the change, demonstrating its foundation
and verifying the new implementation in EddyPro!
Refined format of GHG-Europe output file after specifications from European
Database managers.
In timelag optimization session and in main raw data processing session,
moved call to retrieve_sensor_params before time-lag estimations to have
instruments properties available for refined "starting time-lags" definition.
Moved 'normal exit instruction' in all subs importing raw data, in such a way
that the exception of reaching the end of the file is caught in most (possibly
all) occasions.
Implementation of random error after Finkelstein and Sims (2001):
Improved code quality and readability and improved speed in calculating the
ITS.
Revised retrieval of files in list, to safely skip files that do not comply the raw
file name format.
Eliminated N = N - 1 at the end of sub ReadSLTEddySoft.
Completely rewritten subroutine to import full cospectra and modified
approach in FCC to get the size of cospectra from the first file instead of
allocating in advance.
Improved control over missing lines, with an additional control after stat-
istical screening, so that period is skipped if not enough data remain after the
screening, also including native missing data such as -9999.
Improved format and function calls related to exception handling and cor-
responding output messages.
Simplified ShowDailyAdvancement and introduced advancement marks on
output, to allow for GUI estimates of processing time.
Revised the text displayed when running engines with option -h.
1-5
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
In "filelist_by_ext", anticipated exception handling if no files are found in
folder.
Proper setting of FileEndReached in ReadSLTEddySoft and ReadSLTEdisol.
Adjusted algorithms to calculated default timelags, which now include "tube
time", "cell time" and a "safety margin".
Eliminated useless "+1" on both sides of a "greater than" test, in subs import-
ing all binary files (TOB1, generic binary).
Removed the usage of auxiliary folder ..\mod in both RPP and FCC projects,
to ease and streamline the port to other OS.
In case of space separation in raw file with non-numeric field, defaults to con-
sidering multiple consecutive separations as only one.
Calculation of cutoff frequencies and dependence cutoff/RH when data for
very few RH classes are available.
Moved definition of 'null' spectra from fx to common module.
Moved function NameMatchesTemplate into src_common/dir_sub.f90 file.
Eliminated useless "+1" on both sides of a "greater than" test, in subs import-
ing SLT files.
Eliminated useless output 'Verifying time series integrity' during planar fit
data import.
Corrected the spelling of subroutine ShrinkString.
GUI (Graphical User Interface) bugs fixed
Improve information available in Run page (for example, show warnings and
errors, computation time estimates, etc.).
Improve progress bars in Run page.
Add separation of standard variables and custom variables in the Metadata
Editor; RawFile Description. Provide a Clear button for the Custom variables.
Fix minor bugs.
GUIRefinements
Integrate Massman 2000/2001 correction.
Implement testing of ancillary files (Spectral correction, Planar fit and Time
lag optimization) at loading time.
Add a dialog to inform about the Angle of Attack automatic selection.
Added an 'Open output directory' button in Run page.
Added keyboard shortcuts to navigate between pages (Alt+1...Alt+5).
1-6
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
Version 5.1.1 (2014-03-14)
Version 5.1.1 is a minor update with bug fixes and refinements.
Engine bugs fixed
Bug causing EddyPro to ignore the next raw file when current file is shorter
than expected.
Bug causing 'full co-spectra' files not to be read in 'eddypro_fcc'.
Version 5.1.0 (2014-01-29)
Version 5.1.0 is a minor update with bug fixes and refinements.
Engine bugs fixed
Import of TOB1 files, now avoids copying the same TOB1 file multiple times
and speeds up processing of long TOB1 files (typical use case).
Bug that was causing storage fluxes to be identically zero in most use cases.
File in src_common was importing module rp-related (did not cause com-
putation issues).
Engine refinements
Modified Absolute Limits Statistical test defaults as follows:
Minimum sonic temperature set to -40 C (was -20 C).
Maximum CO
2
set to 900 ppm (was 600 ppm)
Fixed ranges of accepted biomet values:
Changed minimum ambient pressure to 40 kPa (was 80 kPa).
Made all interval min/max closed instead of open, most importantly for
RH, to include values of 0 and 100.
Optimized the output time stamp in case of shorter-than-expected raw files.
GUI bugs fixed
Improved computation progress bar to represent progress more accurately.
Decimal digits of the 4th gas molecular values were lost in the Basic Settings
page when saved.
GUIRefinements
Improved information available in Run page.
Added default button selection to SMARTFlux system package dialog.
1-7
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
Modified absolute limits statistical tests as described above.
Version 5.0.0 (2013-12-09)
EddyPro Version 5.0 introduces the SMARTFlux system configuration file creator.
GUI
Implemented SMARTFlux bar and file package creation buttons.
Removed "Number of files to merge" control.
Removed "Gas analyzer height" from Metadata editor.
Introduced "Open Sans" font.
Engine bugs fixed
Bug causing crash on short raw files.
Software not reading strings longer than 200 characters in .eddypro file.
Potential problems with timestamps in non-ISO format.
Crash if last raw file of the dataset is not a valid one (too short, invalid
header, etc.).
Bug causing the software not to process correctly averaging intervals shorter
than file length in certain circumstances.
Use dynamic metadata files. Same variables as usual, but now full inde-
pendence of processed time period from definition of dynamic metadata
dates.
Bug causing the spectral correction of Fratini et al. (2012) to virtually always
use the fallback solution (model) rather than the direct method (thanks Olli
Peltola and Ivan Mammarella!).
Bug causing the spectral assessment to fail if a large number of spectra files
were to be used.
Engine Refinements
Changed units of ET fluxes in the full output file. New units are mm+1hour-
1.
Changed Express settings. Cross-wind correction is no longer applied by
default.
Exception handling with SLT-EdiSol files if header reports implausible record
length.
Merged and simplified spectral correction code.
1-8
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
Period to be processed extended to include the very last averaging interval,
which was excluded from the automatic selection of start&end date per-
formed in the GUI.
Initialization of stats and their values when variables are missing.
Engine New Features
Creation of unique temp folder for allowing parallel runs.
Possibility to process indefinitely long raw files. Possibility to process datasets
for multiple years in one session.
Smart understanding of initial timestamp in the dataset.
Version 4.2.1 (2013-10-03)
GUI Improvement
EddyPro update 4.2.1 is a minor update that fixes a GUI bug related to the retrieval
of declination correction for magnetic north from the U.S. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website. The update corrects an error that
occurs when the website is unavailable.
Version 4.2 (2013-08-22)
EddyPro update 4.2 is a minor update that includes several bug fixes and improve-
ments to the processing engine and graphical user interface (GUI), including:
Engine Improvements
Fixed use of "Flags" (set in the "Basic Settings" page) for filtering out indi-
vidual raw data records.
Fixed import of SLT-EddySoft raw files featuring low-resolution data.
Fixed formulation of tube transfer function for laminar regimes and - only in
FCC - for turbulent regimes.
Fixed problem with Fratini et al. 2012 spectral correction giving NaN in
cases of high fluxes.
Fixed bug in the running mean and exponential running mean detrending
algorithms.
Fixed bug in planar fit with no velocity bias that caused rotations not to be
performed.
Fixed bug in time lag optimizer causing a crash.
1-9
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
Fixed initialization of footprint results for Kormann and Meixner (2001) and
Hsieh (2000) models.
Fixed labels of custom variables in full output, when created by FCC pro-
gram (added "_mean" padding to each variable name).
Fixed management of missing variables when passing from raw processing
engine to FCC.
Fixed the use of flow rate from raw data files when available, with both GHG
and non-GHG files, if time lags are not explicitly set by user.
Fixed bug that caused mismatch in full output headers when advanced pro-
cessing settings were used.
Fixed missing LI-7700 CH
4
flux output in full output file when data is
screened using LI-7700 Diagnostic Value.
Fixed wind coordinates rotation when AXIS configuration (Gill anem-
ometers) or R2 anemometer is selected, for angle of attack correction.
Added ET (evapotranspiration flux, in mm) to full output results.
Added optional crosswind correction of sonic temperature for Gill
WindMaster and WindMaster Pro anemometers (needed for type 1352,
not for types 1561 or 1590).
Refinement: extended range of accepted ambient pressures, now the min-
imum value accepted by EddyPro is 40 kPa, which replaces the former value
of 80 kPa.
Refinement: when running in Express mode, the default version of the angle
of attack correction depends on the anemometer model (Nakai et al. 2006 for
R3 and R2).
Refinement: increased resolution of footprint results, from 5 to 1 meter, Kor-
mann and Meixner (2001) and Hsieh (2000) models.
Refinement: support for TOB1 files with no header lines (explicit user spe-
cification of variable types 'IEEE4' or 'FP2' is needed).
Refinement: inverted time lag compensation and tilt correction procedures.
Refinement: stationarity test evaluated after time lag compensation and tilt
correction.
Refinement: minor modifications to QC flags to better match flag definitions
according to TK3 approach (M. Mauder, personal communications).
Refinement: resolving to the Integral Turbulence Time Scale simple defin-
ition from Billesbach (2011) if direct calculation fails.
GUI Improvements
1-10
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
Fixed behavior of North alignment for Generic Anemometer in the Metadata
Editor
Fixed bug that caused the default angle-of-attack to override user selection
when re-opening a saved project.
Fixed flags threshold and policy persistence when re-opening a saved project.
Fix bug that prevented overriding "Lowest noise frequency" settings.
Fixed overwriting of the anemometer user selection on the Basic Settings
page in case of multiple anemometers.
Fixed bug that prevented undue field persistence when changing units of the
input in the Metadata Editor.
Fixed Magnetic Declination fetching not working properly due to NOAA web-
site changes.
Refinement:Added dialog when clearing the raw data directory.
Refinement: Modified raw file name format displayed in the corresponding
dialog.
Refinement: Permitted negative altitudes in Metadata Editor
Refinement: Improved Metadata Editor stability.
Refinement: Added Gain-Offset automatic selection in the Metadata Editor.
Refinement: Added colors to variables ignored or not numeric in the
Metadata Editor.
Refinement: Disabled unnecessary fields and set Ignore to "yes" in case of
non-numeric variables in the Metadata Editor.
Refinement: Prevented column selection bug in metadata tables that
triggered first row editing.
Refinement: Ctrl+mouse-wheel resizes the GUI main window.
Refinement: Disabled Ctrl+F12 shortcut to launch the program.
Refinement: Cross-wind correction checkbox is always enabled, though
checked as suggestion when needed.
Refinement: Changed angle-of-attack correction policy with Gill anem-
ometers.
Refinement: Increased absolute limits ranges for statistical test on gases.
Refinement: Changed policies to update software, project and metadata files
versions at saving time.
Refinement: Custom variables created in the file description table of the
Metadata Editor will be permanently available in the local computer for
future uses.
1-11
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
Version 4.1 (2013-01-01)
EddyPro version 4.1 introduced 2 new major data processing options, completed a
few features already drafted in version 4.0, and fixed a number of bugs found in ver-
sion 4.0. The improvements in this version include:
New features
Spectral correction scheme, implemented after Fratini et al. (2012), spe-
cifically designed for closed-path systems, but applicable to any eddy cov-
ariance setup.
New angle-of-attack correction algorithm from Nakai and Shimoyama
(2012).
Improvements
Use of previous results to dramatically reduce program execution time.
Express processing uses the new angle-of-attack correction algorithm from
Nakai and Shimoyama (2012) rather than the correction from Nakai et al.
(2006) used in previous versions.
Support for binary SLT files containing more than 6 variables.
External biomet data files are no longer limited to 18,000 records.
Renamed Dataset Selection page to Basic Settings page.
Major bug fixes
Automatic time lag optimization
Bug description: The bug was under the Automatic time lag optimization
procedure (Advanced Settings > Processing Options > Time lag com-
pensation). The bug is such that time lags assessed for H
2
O (if this gas is
treated in flux computation) are erroneously used also for CO
2
or CH
4
. Selec-
tion of an erroneous time lag results in flux underestimations: the more the
used time lag deviates from the real one, the more fluxes are underestimated.
Who is affected: Anyone who used the Automatic time lag optimization
option for flux computations in a previous version of EddyPro is likely to be
affected. However, the severity of the effects depends upon the gas analyzer in
use. For open-path analyzers (e.g., LI-7500A), the bias if most likely neg-
ligible, if present at all. For enclosed-path analyzers (e.g., LI-7200), the bias is
probably detectable but still negligible, because time lags of H
2
O do not devi-
ate dramatically from those of CO
2
, especially if conditions of low relative
1-12
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
humidity (<50-60%, typically during daytime). In such analyzers, effects are
further minimized if a short (< 1 m) and/or heated or insulated sampling
line was used. For closed-path analyzers with sampling lines longer than 2
m, (e.g., LI-7000 or LI-6262), the effects are likely to be relevant and we thus
recommend that you recalculate fluxes using EddyProversion 4.1.
Who is not affected: All users who ran EddyPro in Express Mode or those
who did not use the Automatic time lag optimization.
Note: We recommend using the Automatic time lag optimization procedure
especially for closed-path setups featuring medium and long (>3-4 m) sampling
lines. The bug that affected this option is corrected in EddyPro 4.1.
Calculation of average CH
4
mole fractions and mixing ratios from the
LI-7700
Bug description: The bug prevented the band-broadening correction from
being applied in the calculation of average CH
4
concentrations. Note that
this did not affect flux calculations, as the band-broadening correction is
applied to fluxes separately in EddyPro 4.0. The effects of this bug were vis-
ible especially in conditions of very low ambient pressure with respect to nor-
mal values.
Other bug fixes
Fixed bug that caused the program to crash when the number of files selec-
ted for planar fit calculations were more than the maximum allowed (3,000).
The bug was fixed and this maximum value was increased to 18,000.
Fixed bug that caused the calculation of maximum wind speed to fail in cases
in which raw data records have at least one wind components set to -9999
(EddyPros internal error code). Most often this bug resulted in a maximum
wind speed of 17318.7 m/s, that was the result of wind speed calculated from
3 wind components set to -9999. This bug had no effects on fluxes.
Fixed bug that caused the crosswind correction of sonic temperature to be cal-
culated erroneously for individual data records that have any wind com-
ponent set to -9999. This bug resulted in implausible values for sonic
temperature and thus either in fluxes set to -9999, or to extremely spiky
fluxes. Note that for most anemometers the crosswind correction is applied
1-13
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
in the firmware, so there is no need to apply it at processing time with
EddyPro.
Fixed bug that caused the header of full output file to be erroneous when
using the option Use standard output format.
Fixed bug that caused the night-time/daytime indication in the full output
file to fail in some circumstances.
Fixed a bug in the Random uncertainty estimate, that caused the software
to crash with an Out of memory error message.
GUI changes
Added a general Restore Default Values button to restore all the Advanced
Settings to the Express (default) Settings.
Added constraints between fields to help fill the Metadata File Editor tables.
Improved management of previous versions of Project and Metadata files for
backward compatibility.
Added a Software Version field in the Metadata File Editor IRGA table.
Added an automatic Detect Dataset Dates button for the raw data files.
Prevented wheel mouse scrolling on setting controls.
Improved management on low resolution displays.
Added automatic saving when exiting sub-dialog.
Fixed opening of associated .eddypro project files when double clicking the
file.
Added button to clear the output console.
Improved guided mode information messages.
Fixed many minor GUI bugs.
Version 4.0 (2012-04-25)
EddyPro version 4.0 introduced additional computation options that were limited
in the earlier releases of the software known as EddyPro 3.0 and EddyPro Express.
This version provides a wide variety of options that make it possible to compute
eddy covariance fluxes using one of many established techniques.
New Features
Support for biomet data (biological and meteorological data) collected from
ancillary sensors.
Ensemble spectra, cospectra, modeled spectra, and ensemble spectra based on
time period.
1-14
Section 1. What is EddyPro?
New Metadata Retriever tool to compile all site metadata from GHG files into
a single metadata file that can be edited or viewed.
Planar Fit tool customization with graphical controls.
Time Lag Optimization tool now supports automatic time lag optimization
to account for time lags.
Random Uncertainty estimation tool.
Version 3.0.1 (not public)
Bug fixes
Fixed initialization of latitude, longitude, and altitude when using dynamic
metadata.
Fixed Kljun et al. (2004) Footprint Estimation: Now uses measurement
height minus displacement height to compute footprint. Previously used
measurement height.
Fixed sampling line flow-rate calculation when average flow rate from high-
frequency data is used to initialize nominal, minimum and maximum time
lags.
Dialog boxes: Fixed bug that caused dialog boxes to display default settings
when a project is re-opened, even if the settings had been altered previously.
This presented risk that a setting could be reset to the default if a user
opened a dialog box and clicked OK while the incorrect settings were dis-
played, and subsequently saved the project.
Other minor bug fixes. See EddyPro
if true
North Alignment: For Gill models, select the setting set in the anem-
ometer
Wind data format: Select the setting set in the anemometer
North Offset (): Measured at site
Height (m): Measured at site
Anemometer > Input Settings
1
Aux1 Type: U; Units: m/s; m: 6; b: 0
Table 3-1. Checklist of mandatory and recommended EC system settings. Note: Some of the set-
tings below are required in order to log valid EC datasets.
1
The Auxiliary input settings given here correspond with anemometer analog output settings of U, V:
5V, 30 m/s; W: 5V, 5 m/s; Ts: 5V, -40 to +70 C.
3-7
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
Field Setting
Aux2 Type: V; Units: m/s; m: 6; b: 0
Aux3 Type: W; Units: m/s; m: 1 b: 0
Aux4 Type: Ts; Units: C; m: 11; b: 15
Site Setup > CO
2
/H
2
O Analyzer
Northward separation (cm): Measured at site
Eastward separation (cm): Measured at site
Vertical separation (cm): Measured at site
CO
2
/H
2
O Log Values Select All or Default
Flow Module (if using the LI-7200)
Tube length (cm): Length of intake tube
Tube diameter (mm): Inside diameter of intake tube
Flow Rate (lpm): Set to "On"
Site Setup > CH
4
Analyzer (if using an LI-7700)
Connect to LI-7700 Select if using LI-7700
Northward separation (cm): Measured at site
Eastward separation (cm): Measured at site
Vertical separation (cm): Measured at site
CH
4
Log Values Select All or Default
Site Setup > Biomet (if using a Biomet system)
Connect to Biomet Select if using Biomet system
Sync clock to 7550
(check this box)
SMARTFlux
Connect to SMARTFlux system Click the SMARTFlux button and select the unit
Table 3-1. Checklist of mandatory and recommended EC system settings. Note: Some of the set-
tings below are required in order to log valid EC datasets. (...continued)
GHG System Clock
In order to synchronize instrument clocks with GPS satellites, PTPtime keeping
must be enabled in the LI-7550.
3-8
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
Click Settings, under the Time tab, set Clock sync (PTP) to Preferred and the
time/location will be updated when the data is received from satellites. When using
PTP time keeping, the other fields (Date, Time, and Time Zone) are populated
automatically.
NOTE: SMARTFlux system PTP time keeping will override any settings you
enter because GPS satellite clocks are considered the most precise clocks in
the system.
If you do not want to use GPS time, simply unplug the GPS antenna cable from the
SMARTFlux system. This will also disable the GPSlocation, however, and is not
recommended.
Site Setup
Site information is entered in the GHG v7 (LI-7500A/LI-7200) software and recorded
in the GHG files that are logged by the gas analyzer. To enter site information,
install the PC software on your computer and connect with the gas analyzer.
The Site Setup window allows you to enter the site information that is required to
compute flux results. This information is logged in a metadata file. You are not
required to consider the metadata file explicitly, as it is created and modified in the
3-9
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
gas analyzer configuration software and used unobtrusively by EddyPro and the
SMARTFlux system. Nevertheless, all information is stored as plain text and can be
retrieved and edited at any time.
The Site Setup window provides the following tabs:
USB Data Collection: See "USB Data Collection" on the next page.
Site Description: See "Enter the Site Description" on page3-12.
Sonic Anemometer: See "Enter Anemometer Information" on page3-14.
CO
2
/H
2
O Analyzer: See "Enter CO2/H2O Analyzer Information" on
page3-20.
CH
4
Analyzer: See "CH4 Analyzer Data" on page3-23.
Biomet: See "Enter Biomet System Information" on page3-26.
3-10
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
USB Data Collection
Data are logged to a USB flash drive inside the LI-7550 Analyzer Interface
Unit.Datalogging will begin when the USB flash drive is inserted into the port.
The USB Log File tab allows you to configure the Update Rate, File Duration, and
the action to take should the USB flash drive run out of space. The values to be
logged to the USB flash drive from the CO2/H2O analyzer, the optional LI-7700
CH4 Analyzer, and the 7900 Biomet system, are chosen under the CO2 Analyzer,
CH4 Analyzer, and Biomet tabs, respectively.
IMPORTANT: For eddy covariance applications, we recommend collecting
data at a rate of 10 Hz or higher. 5 Hz is the minimum for tall canopies; 20 Hz
may be necessary in some situations.
The files are split based on the instrument clock; thus, with the 30-minute interval,
start logging at 10:22, the file will be split at 10:30, 11:00, 11:30, etc.
All raw files are assigned a timestamp with the format YYYY-MM-DDTHHMMSS_
InstrumentName.ext where date and time are year, month, day, and HHMMSS is
24-hour time (e.g. hour 15 = 3:00 p.m.). The file extension appended is either .data,
.metadata, or .status.
3-11
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
Enter the Site Description
The Site Description tab is used to enter information about the site. This inform-
ation configures the metadata file that is used for flux processing.
IMPORTANT: Some entries in GHG software are mandatory in order for
EddyPro to proceed with the calculations. If you do not enter this information or
enter it incorrectly, EddyPro will not calculate correct fluxes. Take special care to
complete the fields marked as mandatory.
Site name: Name of the research site (e.g., LI-COR Experimental Site).
Station Name: Optional, name of the flux station within the site.
Canopy Height (mandatory): Canopy height, in meters.
Displacement Height: Also referred to as zero plane displacement height, the dis-
placement height of a vegetated surface (usually designated d) is the height at which
the wind speed would go to zero if the logarithmic wind profile was maintained
from the outer flow all the way down to the surface (that is, in the absence of veget-
ation). In other words, it is the distance over the ground at which a non-vegetated
surface should be placed to provide a logarithmic wind field equal to the observed
one. For forest canopies, the displacement height is estimated to vary between 0.6
3-12
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
and 0.8 times the height of the canopy. If not entered explicitly, EddyPro
computes
displacement height as:
3-1 d = 0.67 x canopy height
Roughness Length: In the logarithmic wind profile, the roughness length is the
height at which wind speed is zero (indicated by z0). It provides an estimate of the
average roughness elements of the surface. With vegetated surfaces, because the
vegetation itself provides a certain roughness, the logarithmic wind profile goes to
zero at a height equal to the displacement height plus the roughness length. If not
entered explicitly, EddyPro
CSAT3
Gill Instruments HS-50 HS-100 R2 R3-50
R3-100 WindMaster WindMaster Pro
Metek uSonic-3 Class A uSonic-3 Scientific
R.M. Young 81000
Wind Data Format: From the three axis velocities, the wind speed is calculated, and
output as either signed U, V, and W, as Polar and W, or as raw velocity values. The
type of output is set during the anemometer configuration.
Choose the wind data format from the pull-down menu:
U, V, W (some Gill anemometers): U is defined as toward the direction in
line with the north spar, as shown in the diagram below. V is defined as
toward the direction of 90 counter-clockwise from the N/Reference spar. W
3-14
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
is defined as vertically up the mounting shaft.
U
W
V
1
2
3
N
Top View
Polar, W - The wind speed in the UV plane, with direction in degrees from 0
to 359, with respect to the Reference spar (normally aligned to North).
Axis velocities - Raw velocity values for U, V, W.
North Offset (): Offset, in degrees (0-359) from which the Reference spar varies
from true north.
Important note on North Offset:
EddyPro requires the offset with respect to true north as two pieces of inform-
ation: The offset with respect to true north, and the magnetic declination. Cur-
rently the GHG v7 software does not provide an entry for magnetic declination.
For the best results, enter the North Offset to magnetic North. This will create
small differences in the wind direction between EddyPro and the SMARTFlux
results (a constant offset equal to the magnetic declination), but the flux results
will be the same, if all other settings are the same.
Height (m) (mandatory): Sonic anemometer height above the ground, in meters,
measured to center of the anemometer sample volume.
Input Settings (mandatory): The button opens the Auxiliary Inputs
window, where you configure the measurement type, units, label, and calibration
coefficients.
About Sonic Anemometer Inputs
The LI-7500A or LI-7200 menu presents options to configure the sonic anemometer
inputs.
3-15
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
You can also open this dialog from the Input Settings... button under
Site Setup > Anemometer tab.
IMPORTANT: It is mandatory to specify the scaling of the anemometric meas-
urements under the Inputs dialog, to allow EddyPro to correctly read this data
and calculate fluxes.
The four Auxiliary Inputs (Aux1...Aux4) correspond with U, V, W, and T
s
(or
SOS) output from the anemometer.
Type specifies the variable.
Units are the units that will be logged with the variable.
Label is logged in the data and metadata. It identifies the variable.
Slope and offset values relate the measured variable with the voltage.
3-16
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
Configuring the Anemometer Inputs
1. Choose the Type of Input
The Type field allows you to choose from:
U Horizontal wind speed (m/s) as measured toward the direction in line
with the north spar (see diagram below)
V Horizontal wind speed (m/s) as measured toward the direction of 90
counterclockwise from the north spar
W Vertical wind speed (m/s) as measured up the mounting shaft
T
s
Sonic temperature (C)
SOS Speed of sound (m/s)
U
W
V
1
2
3
N
Top View
2. Choose the appropriate Units
The units available are typical anemometric units. The software provides
some controls over the units that are available with each variable:
Type Units
Other Other, m/s, cm/s, volts, K, and C
U m/s, cm/s, volts
V m/s, cm/s, volts
W m/s, cm/s, volts
Ts K, C, volts
SOS m/s, cm/s, volts
3-17
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
3. Enter the Label (optional).
The label is automatically set and cannot be changed for U, V, W, T
s
, or
SOS unless Other is selected. The Label will appear in the file header in
both the data and/or metadata files and is required for EddyPro and
SMARTFlux system.
Slope Offset Examples
The units selected for each auxiliary input determine the label in the data file
header, as well as the file header in the metadata file used with the SMARTFlux sys-
tem. Enter the slope and offset values that convert the sonic anemometer outputs
into scaled units.
The following table gives the appropriate values for m (multiplier) and b (offset) to
be used when converting raw voltages into units of m/s, using the default sonic
anemometer output ranges of -30 to +30 m/s for U and V, and -5 to +5 m/s for W.
U, V
(-30 to +30 m/s
W
(-5 to +5 m/s)
Sonic Temp.
(-40 to 70 C)
Speed of Sound
(300 to 370 m/s)
Sonic output (V)
m b m b m b m b
0-5V 12 -30 2 -5 22 -40 14 300
5V 6 0 1 0 11 15 7 335
2.5V 12 0 2 0 22 15 14 335
Example: You have configured the Gill WindMaster to output raw voltages for
auxiliary input U over the range of 0-5V, and over a full scale wind speed of -30 to
+30 m/s. You want to convert the raw voltages to wind speed and output the values
in units of m/s. What is the wind speed when the sonic anemometer outputs a raw
voltage value of 0.5V?
1. Set the Type field to U.
2. Set the Units field to m/s. The Label is set automatically.
3. Enter 12 for the Multiplier (m)
4. Enter -30 for the Offset (b)
Using the slope-intercept formula:
3-3 y = m*x + b
the wind speed is calculated as
3-4 y = 12(0.5) + (-30) = -24 m/s
3-18
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
Example 2: You have configured the Gill WindMaster to output raw voltages for
auxiliary input U over the range of 5V, and over a full scale wind speed of -30 to
+30 m/s. You want to convert the raw voltages to wind speed and output the values
in units of m/s. What is the wind speed when the sonic anemometer outputs a raw
voltage value of 1.5V?
1. Set the Type field to U.
2. Set the Units field to m/s. The Label is set automatically.
3. Enter 6 for the Multiplier (m).
4. Enter 0 for the Offset (b).
Using the slope-intercept formula (3-3 on the previous page), the wind speed is cal-
culated as:
3-5 y = 6(1.5) + 0 = 9 m/s
3-19
Section 3. SMARTFlux Configuration
Enter CO
2
/H
2
O Analyzer Information
Measurement of the separation between the CO2/H2O gas analyzer(s) and the sonic
anemometer is necessary to estimate the high-frequency flux losses due to the dis-
tance between the instruments that measured the vertical wind component and the
gas concentration(s). In order to allow EddyPro
GHG format
and entered the correct site information, the GHG file will contain an embedded
METADATA file with information needed for processing the accompanying DATA
file.
If, during the acquisition period, you changed settings in the gas analyzer data log-
ging interface in order to account for changes in the site parameters, these changes
will be stored in the metadata. EddyPro allows you to account for the time
dependency by processing each DATA file using meta-information retrieved from
the paired METADATA file embedded in the GHG archive.
Note: If there were no changes in the project metadata for the eddy covariance
dataset under consideration, you can speed up processing by using a single
metadata file for the entire project, as described in the following section.
To process the dataset, launch EddyPro:
1. Start a New Project.
2. Enter a Project name (optional).
3. Click the Basic Settings button to enter the Basic Settings page. See "Basic
Settings" on page 4-10
4-1
Processing GHG Data with Incorrect or No Site Parameters
If you collected eddy covariance data using LI-COR
X
out
- output value
X
in
- input value
Gain - gain value
Offset - offset value
Nominal, Minimal, and Maximum Time Lag
The name time lag refers to the delay with which the gas analyzer measures ambi-
ent quantities (concentrations, temperatures, pressures, etc.), with respect to the
6-21
Section 6. Interface Feature Reference
anemometer, taken as a reference. The anemometer provides measurements of an
air parcel virtually instantaneously. The gas analyzer provides readings for the same
parcel with a delay that can be due to: 1) the physical distance from the anem-
ometer; 2) the need to take the air sample to the measuring cell through an intake
tube (closed path analyzers).
The nominal time lag is the expected value of the delay time, which primarily
depends on the distance between the measuring volumes and, for closed-path sys-
tems, the sampling line geometry and the flow rate. However, due to changing wind
directions and possible instabilities of the flow rates, the actual time lag can deviate
from the nominal one. In addition, transit time of water vapor along the intake
tube of a closed path system can vary substantially with relative humidity, due to
absorption/desorption processes at the tube walls.
For these reasons, a range of plausible time lags can be specified by providing its
minimum and maximum values. Within this lag window EddyPro attempts to
determine the actual time lag for each averaging period, by means of the cov-
ariance maximization procedure. If not set explicitly, EddyPro will set nominal,
minimum, and maximum time lag values according to meta-information available.
Specifically, for closed path systems a nominal time lag (
nom
) is set by calculating
the nominal transit time of the airflow along the intake tube, based on tube
volume and the flow rate:
=
nom
tubelength tube cross section
flowrate
= 2
min nom nom
= + 2
max nom nom
The range is set asymmetrically because it is more likely that the time lag will
increase (due, for example, to lower flow rates caused by clogged filters), rather
than decrease. The constant 2 in the last equation is replaced by 10 for water vapor,
the reason being that the time lag of water vapor is observed to exhibit a strong
dependence on relative humidity (e.g., Ibrom et al., 2007b)
For open path systems, by contrast, the nominal time lag is set to zero as the most
likely value in sites that lack a prevailing wind direction. Minimum and maximum
values are calculated based on the separation between the gas analyzer and the
anemometer and a 0.5 m/s average wind speed:
= 0
nom
6-22
Section 6. Interface Feature Reference
=
min
sensor separation
0.5
=
max
sensor separation
0.5
where r
wc
is correlation coefficient of w and c and T is the flux averaging interval.
The approach of Finkelstein and Sims (2001), instead, is based on the calculation
of the variance of covariance (their Eq. 8):
( ) ( )
p p p p = + ( ) ( )
F
n
p m
m
w w c c p m
m
c w
1
= , , = ,
1/ 2
with
w,w
(p),
c,c
(p),
w,c
, and
c,w
(p) and given by Eq. 9 and 10 in the referenced
paper, n is the number of samples in the flux averaging interval and m the discrete
counterpart of the ITS (m = ITS * acquisition frequency).
The following figures exemplify the random uncertainty calculated for sensible heat
fluxes:
7-19
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Crosswind Correction
In a 3-dimensional sonic anemometer, the sonic temperature (T
si
) is estimated on
each of the three measurement paths. The three estimates are then averaged into a
single value of sonic temperature (T
s
). The crosswind correction accounts for the
effect of a wind component normal to the measurement path on each estimation of
the sonic temperature:
T T = + + +
s s
V V V 1
3 403 403 403
n n n 1
2
2
2
3
2
where T
s
(u
rot
, v
rot
, w
rot
) has zero v and w components, while its u
component holds the value of the mean wind speed over the flux averaging inter-
val.
7-23
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Note: In EddyPro rotation angles are evaluated using average wind components,
but the rotation is applied sample-wise. That is, after the rotation the wind data-
set is modified.
Triple Rotation Method
The "triple rotation" method involves the first two rotations as described in 2.9.1
and a third rotation around the new x axis, where the roll rotation angle is
defined to nullify the cross-stream stress component v w
( ) rot rot
:
= tan
w
v w
1
2
rot rot
rot rot
2 2
The third rotation equations are:
u u =
rot rot
v v w
~
= cos + sin
rot rot rot
w v w = sin + cos
rot rot rot
Where
u u v w
~
(
~
,
~
, )
rot rot rot rot
is the triple rotated wind vector.
The "Traditional" Planar Fit Method
The planar fit method (Wilczak et al., 2001) is based on the assessment of the anem-
ometer tilt with respect to long-term local streamlines. This method is deemed
more suitable in case of complex or sloping topography, when the mean vertical
wind component or cross-stream stresses might actually differ from zero (Lee et al.,
2004). In the planar fit method, the tilting is assessed by fitting a plane to the actual
measurements of the average vertical wind component
w
m , as a function of the hori-
zontal components,
u
m and
v
m . The rationale is that if the anemometer is tilted
with respect to the local streamlines, a certain amount of the horizontal wind speed
will be found in the measured vertical component, and
w
will show a certain pro-
portionality to (a linear combination of)
u
and
v
:
w b b u b v = + +
m m m 0 1 2
The fitting procedure involves a bilinear regression to determine the fitting para-
meters b
0
, b
1
and b
2
. The two (partial) planar fit rotation angles are then defined so
7-24
Section 7. Calculation Reference
as to place the z axis perpendicular to the plane of the local streamlines and thus to
nullify the long-term mean of the individual
w
values:
u M u =
pf pf m
and angles and are linked to the fitting plane coefficients by:
sin =
b
b b + + 1
1
1
2
2
2
sin =
b
b + 1
2
2
2
cos =
b
b b
+ 1
+ + 1
2
2
1
2
2
2
cos =
b
1
+ 1
2
2
Equations 42-44 in Wilczak et al., (2001) provide a different formulation for the
elements m
ij
, valid also for large tilt angles. This is the formulation implemented in
EddyPro.
A third rotation, similar to the first rotation in the Double Rotation Method, will
align the wind vector with the main wind direction.
u u v = cos + sin
rot of pf
v u v = sin + cos
rot pf pf
w w =
rot pf
with
= tan
v
u
1
pf
pf
.
The planar fit method can be applied sector-wise. In EddyPro you can define a
number of (equally wide) wind sectors. The calculations will then be performed for
each sector independently, and the appropriate rotation matrix will be applied,
depending on the current wind direction.
7-25
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Planar Fit with no Velocity Bias
After verifying that the coefficient b0 is not a proper estimator of the anemometer
bias in the measurement of vertical wind component as suggested by Wiczak et al
(2001), van Dijk et al. (2004) proposed a revision of the method, which assumes
that any bias in the measurement of w is already accounted for in the anemometer
calibration and thus that the fitting plane passes through the origin (b0=0). Under
these hypothesis the planar fit method reduces to
w b u b v = +
m m m 1 2
with the same relations between b
1
and b
2
and the tilt angles as with the original
planar fit. Both planar fit methods are available in EddyPro, with customizable
planar fit settings, sectors, and more.
Calculating Turbulent Fluctuations
See "Turbulent fluctuations" on page4-22 for more information.
Different methods are described in literature for extracting turbulent fluctuations
from time series data. The most commonly applied, in the context of eddy cov-
ariance, are the block-averaging, linear detrending (Gash and Culf, 1996) and two
types of high-pass filters, namely the moving average (Moncrieff et al., 2004) and
the exponentially weighted average (McMillen, 1988; Rannik and Vesala, 1999).
High-pass filters determine a local mean value in a time series by an averaging pro-
cedure that evaluates neighboring samples in order to extract a local trend and then
removes this trend from the original data. The linear detrending method implies
calculating deviations around any linear trend evaluated, for example, on the whole
flux averaging period.
Block averaging, or Reynolds averaging, is the simple operation of calculating the
mean value of the variable and calculating turbulence fluctuations as individual
departures from the mean. There are benefits and drawbacks to all methods, related
to the amount of genuine vs. artificial (e.g. instrumental drift) low frequency inform-
ation that is eliminated when the trend is removed.
Note: A block-averaging procedure is unavoidable at the moment when fluxes
are evaluated by splitting the time series into flux averaging intervals. This pro-
cedure does partially dampen low frequency contributions as well.
7-26
Section 7. Calculation Reference
For a thorough discussion refer to Moncrieff et al., 2004 and Rannik and Vesala,
1999.
Converting Concentrations or Densities into Mixing Ratios
See "Compensation of density fluctuations" on page4-23 for more inform-
ation.
For closed path gas analyzers, data may be converted to mixing ratios. At this point
in the raw data processing, metadata concerning gas concentrations from closed path
systems are analyzed by EddyPro to autonomously decide whether to perform a
sample-by-sample conversion into mixing ratios (r, moles of gas per mole of dry air).
Expressing gas concentrations as mixing ratios is convenient because this makes it
unnecessary to apply the WPL correction (Webb et al., 1980). It is an alternative
way to account for air density fluctuations resulting from thermal expan-
sion/contraction and concentration/dilution due to water vapor (see Ibrom et al.,
2007b, for example). For a thorough discussion concerning the use of mixing ratios
in closed path instruments, see Burba et al. (2011).
Conversion from mole fractions of any gas (
gas
, moles of gas per mole of wet air)
into mixing ratios is performed according to:
r =
gas i
gas i
,
,
1
1
h o i
2
,
where
h2o,i
is the mole fraction of water vapor and the subscript i is used to stress
that these are instantaneous values (individual data samples).
Conversion of mole densities of any gas (d
gas
, moles of gas per unit of volume) into
mixing ratios is performed according to:
r d =
gas i gas i
v
, ,
1
cell i
h o i
,
2
,
where v
cell,i
(moles of wet air per unit of volume) is the molar volume inside the
cell, evaluated for each data sample.
7-27
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Note: Actual units are handled automatically by EddyPro, as different gas con-
centrations might be measured with different units, due to their very different
ambient concentrations, from the parts per thousand (mmol/mol or ppt) of water
vapor to parts per billion of methane (nmol/mol or ppb).
However, these conversions are not always feasible. In particular, conversion of
mole fractions into mixing ratios is performed if the following conditions hold:
1. The gas was measured by the same instrument that measured water vapor;
2. Water vapor is available as (or convertible into) mole fraction.
Conversion of molar densities into mixing ratios is performed if the following con-
ditions hold:
1. The gas was measured by the same instrument that measured water vapor;
2. Water vapor is available as (or convertible into) mole fraction;
3. Fast cell temperature and pressure readings are available in the raw files.
If any of these conditions do not hold EddyPro applies the density correction fol-
lowing the classic WPL approach.
Note: The conversion is performed before compensating eventual time lags,
because water vapor, as an adsorbing/desorbing scalar, typically shows different
time lags than passive scalars such as carbon dioxide (Ibrom et al., 2007b). The
conversion must be performed using the water vapor concentration that was
present in the cell at the moment the other scalar was measured. Compensating
different time lags prior to the conversion would lead to the use of the wrong
water vapor concentration sample for any given sample of the gas to be con-
verted.
Detecting and Compensating for Time Lags
See "Selecting Advanced Processing Options" on page4-20 for more inform-
ation.
The last step of raw data processing in EddyPro, prior to flux calculation and cor-
rection, regards the compensation of possible time lags between anemometric vari-
ables and variables measured by any other sensor, notably the gas analyzer(s). A
time lag arises for different reasons in closed path and in open path systems.
7-28
Section 7. Calculation Reference
The presence of the intake tube in closed path systems (with the inlet normally
placed very close to the anemometer measuring volume) implies that gas con-
centrations are measured always with a certain delay with respect to the moment air
is sampled. In addition, the residence time of sticky gases, such as H2O, in the
sampling line is a strong function of air relative humidity and temperature. Con-
versely, sonic anemometers measure wind speed and sonic temperature without
detectable delays. In open path systems the delay is due to the physical distance
between the two instruments (gas analyzer and anemometer), which are usually
placed several decimeters or less apart to avoid mutual disturbances. The wind field
takes some time to travel from one to the other, resulting in a certain delay
between the moments the same air parcel is sampled by the two instruments.
It is a common practice to compensate for time lags before calculating covariances
between anemometric variables and gas analyzer measurements. EddyPro provides
four different methods for detecting and compensating time lags, besides the option
of not compensating at all, which speeds up program execution but will almost cer-
tainly lead to systematic flux underestimations.
Constant
In the Raw File Description table, you can enter Nominal time lags for variables
not measured by the master anemometer. In closed path systems, a nominal time
lag can be estimated from the volume of the intake tube and the average flow rate
in the tube. In open path systems, a nominal lag can be computed by considering
the transit time in the space between the instruments, with site-specific typical wind
speeds and directions. Selecting Constant will instruct EddyPro to use such nominal
values as fixed time lags. Using this option makes the program execution faster,
because the automatic time lag detection procedure is avoided. However, this
option is only suitable for closed path systems featuring an active control of the
sampling line flow rate, such that the travel time of air in the tube does not change
as a result of pump fluctuations, filter clogging, or any other reason. Also, this
option is not recommended when measuring sticky gases such as H2O, whose res-
idence time varies according to climatic (RH, T) conditions, on account of sorption
processes occurring at the tube walls (e.g., Runkle et al., 2012).
Note: If you leave the Nominal time lag set to zero, EddyPro will automatically
calculate the most plausible value for you.
7-29
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Covariance Maximization
A certain degree of uncertainty in the control over the flow rate (closed path) and
the variability of wind regimes (open path) suggests an automatic time lag detection
procedure, normally performed for each flux averaging period. Typically the detec-
tion is accomplished via the covariance maximization procedure, consisting in the
determination the time lag that maximizes the covariance of two variables, within a
window of plausible time lags (e.g., Fan et al., 1990):
Cov Cov j w h = ( ) = max
Max
j m M
i
N j
i i j
= , ..,
=1
+
In this equation, N is the total number of samples in the current flux averaging
interval; m and M are the discrete counterparts of the minimum and maximum
plausible time lags, respectively; is the best time lag estimate, and jz is its discrete
counterpart. You can toggle between discrete indices and actual times in seconds by
dividing the formers by the acquisition frequency (f
a
, Hz), e.g., = j
f
a
-1
.
The minimum and maximum plausible time lags are either taken from the Min-
imum time lag and Maximum time lag entered in the Raw File Description
table or, if those are left at zero, automatically calculated by EddyPro.
Covariance maximization with default
Selecting this option, if - during the covariance maximization procedure depicted
above - a maximum is not attained within the plausibility window, a default is used,
either taken as the Nominal time lag in the Raw File Description table or auto-
matically calculated by EddyPro.
Using the covariance maximization procedure (either with or without default), a
plausible time lag window has to be defined with the Minimum and Maximum
time lags, which constitute the end points of the plausibility window. A too nar-
rowed plausible window might lead to frequent use of the default (Covariance max-
imization with default) or either endpoint (Covariance maximization) time lag,
because the actual time lag is often found outside defined plausibility range. This
situation leads to systematic flux underestimations. Conversely, imposing a too
broad plausibility window increases the possibility that unrealistic time lags are
detected, especially when covariances are small and vary erratically with the lag
time. These cases often result in flux overestimations. A trade-off must be reached
between the two contrasting needs.
7-30
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Automatic time lag optimization
EddyPro also provides the possibility of analyzing the actual time lags found in the
available dataset and determining the most suitable Nominal time lag and plaus-
ibility window (Minimum and Maximum time lags). This procedure implies a pre-
processing step, before actually processing raw files, to statistically evaluate the most
likely time lags and their ranges of variations. In this step, raw files are actually
handled in a very similar manner as done later in the raw data processing step (e.g.,
despiking, angle-of-attack correction, detrending, etc.), but the processing stops at the
calculation of the time lag. Here, the Covariance Maximization procedure is
applied, adopting very broad (and user-customizable) time lag windows. Then,
optimal time lags are calculated, in different ways for passive gases (e.g., CO2, CH4)
and for H2O.
Time lag optimization for passive gases
For passive gases, whose time lag is not expected to depend on climatic conditions
or other drivers, the nominal time lag is calculated as the median of all calculated
time lags:
median = ( )
nom i
where, for convenience, i represents all time lags calculated from the available
dataset.
The plausibility window is defined as:
( )
z median = * / 0.6745
min nom i nom
( )
z median = + * / 0.6745
max nom i nom
where z is a user-selectable parameter, that's optimal value was heuristically determ-
ined to be around 1.5.
Note: This assessment must be performed on a dataset long enough for cal-
culating robust statistics. At least 1 month of data is recommended.
7-31
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Note: The dataset used to optimize time lags must refer to a period, in which
the sampling line did not undergo major modifications, such as replacement of
tube or filters, change of the flow rate, etc. In the whole period, time lags are
expected to be stationary.
Time lag optimization for water vapor
The time lag of water vapor is a strong function of relative humidity (and sec-
ondarily, a function of temperature). Thus, for water vapor, nominal time lags and
plausibility windows are assessed for relative humidity classes in the range 0 to
100%. In each class, the same definitions used for passive gases are also used:
median = ( )
nom class i class , ,
( )
z median = * / 0.6745
min class nom class i class nom class , , , ,
( )
z median = + * / 0.6745
max class nom class i class nom class , , , ,
where now the subscript class indicates that a different value is calculated for each
class. Also here z is a user-selectable parameter, with an optimal value is around 1.5.
For each class, a minimum of 30 time lags need be present, for the statistics to be
considered valid. Depending on the length of the dataset, such numerosity may not
be reached for all class. In such cases, EddyPro behaves as follows:
If the first n classes do not have enough numerosity, their time lags (nom-
inal, minimum, and maximum) are set equal to those of class (n + 1);
If the last n classes do not have enough numerosity, their time lags are set to
a linear extrapolation of classes (n
t
n) and (n
t
- n - 1), where n
t
represent
the total number of classes;
If any intermediate class i does not have enough numerosity, its time lags are
set to the average of classes i 1 and (i + 1).
Note: Due to the class sorting, a much longer dataset is needed for water vapor.
A minimum 2 months of raw data are deemed necessary, possibly spanning a
broad range of climatic conditions. A longer dataset (> 6 month) will allow a
more robust optimization.
7-32
Section 7. Calculation Reference
The figure below shows the results of a time lag optimization procedure using 6
months of data. Yellow circles are actual time lags calculated using a very large time
lag window while blue lines are nominal, minimum, and maximum time lags cal-
culated by EddyPro as a function of RH, by means of the time lag optimization pro-
cedure.
Note: During the following phase of raw data processing, the actual nominal,
minimum, and maximum time lags are determined as a function of the current
value of relative humidity.
Calculating Spectra, Cospectra, and Ogives
EddyPro allows calculation and output of most relevant spectra and cospectra.
Namely spectra are available for the three wind components, the sonic temperature
(or the alternative fast temperature reading used in place of sonic temperature, as
applicable) and the gas concentrations/densities. Similarly, cospectra are available
for covariances of w (vertical wind component) and all such variables. In the
remainder of this paragraph we use the wording (co)spectra to refer to both spec-
tra and cospectra.
(Co)spectra are calculated after raw data have been fully processed, including the
compensation of time lags, and are available in two different formats: either full
or binned. Full (co)spectra are calculated for each flux averaging period and con-
tain a number of frequencies equal to half the number of raw records. As an
example, a raw dataset of 18000 records (30 minutes at 10 Hz) will provide (co)spec-
tra specified for 9000 frequencies, linearly distributed between the lower frequency
of 1/(30 minutes) and the maximum frequency (the Nyquist frequency) of (10 Hz)/2.
7-33
Section 7. Calculation Reference
One property of full (co)spectra is that their integration over the entire frequency
range provides the (co)variance of the concerned variables. For details on the deriv-
ation and interpretation of spectra and cospectra refer, for example, to Smith
(1998).
However, the full (co)spectra dataset is difficult to handle because of the size of each
individual (co)spectrum, and difficult to interpret because of the noise that typically
affects the medium and high-frequency ranges. For these reasons, EddyPro also cal-
culates and outputs reduced, or binned (co)spectra. The reduction procedure con-
sists in dividing the frequency range in a user-specified number of exponentially
spaced frequency bins (e.g. 100) and averaging individual (co)spectral values that fall
within each bin. The exponential nature of the size increase of the bins assures that
increasingly more spectral values are averaged as it moves toward higher fre-
quencies, thereby increasingly reducing noise. The figure below shows an example
of a full spectrum and the corresponding binned version.
Calculation of the full (co)spectra involves the following sequence of operations:
1. First, if one selects this option, raw time series are limited to a number of
records equal to the power-of-two closest to the available number of
records for the current flux averaging period. This step guarantees that the
Fourier transforms are performed at the fastest speed possible. If you do
not select this option, all available samples are used, but the computation
slows down.
2. If applicable, statistics (variances and covariances) are now re-evaluated on
the reduced time series and used later for (co)spectra normalization.
3. Fourier transform is performed by means of an FFT (Fast Fourier Trans-
form) algorithm.
4. Full (co)spectra can now be calculated and output as selected by the user.
This procedure ensures that (co)spectra are such that their integration provides the
corresponding (co)variances, as stated above.
7-34
Section 7. Calculation Reference
The calculation of binned (co)spectra involves a slightly different sequence of steps:
1. First, if you select this option, raw time series are limited to a number of
records equal to power of two closest to the available number of records
for the current flux averaging period. This step guarantees that the Fourier
transforms are performed at the fastest speed possible.
2. If applicable, statistics (variances and covariances) are now re-evaluated on
the reduced time series and used later for (co)spectra normalization.
3. The reduced time series is now tapered using the selected tapering win-
dow. The tapering, (or windowing) procedure consists in multiplying (in
a scalar sense) the time series with a suitable symmetric function. The
aim, which you can learn in detail in Smith (1998), is to produce a time
series that can be thought of as a part of an infinite periodic time series, to
which the definition of discrete (co)spectra actually applies. Not applying
the tapering procedure to short time series can result in spectral power
overestimation. Kaimal and Kristensen (1991) suggested the use of the
Hamming or the Hann windows. The figure below shows examples of
tapering windows and the effect of their application to a time series. Also
shown are the effects that different windows have on a sample spectrum.
4. The FFT is now applied to tapered time series are and full (co)spectra are
calculated.
5. Full (co)spectra are normalized using relevant (co)variances.
6. Full (co)spectra are finally reduced into the exponentially spaced frequency
base.
7. As a further option, EddyPro calculates and outputs ogives of all (co)spec-
tra. At each given frequency, the ogive is simply the integration of the (co)
spectrum from the current frequency to the Nyquist frequency. It can be
7-35
Section 7. Calculation Reference
thought of as a cumulative (co)spectrum, while its value at the lowest fre-
quency provides the integration of the full (co)spectrum (i.e., the (co)vari-
ance). Ogives can be used to evaluate the suitability of the chosen flux
averaging period.
Figure 7-14. Top left: Shape of tapering windows available in EddyPro. Top right:
Effect of different tapering windows on a sample spectrum. Bottom: Effect (red) of the
Bartlett window on a raw (gray) time series.
Ensemble Averaged Spectra and Cospectra
EddyPro 4 can calculate averaged spectra and cospectra. However, because these
quantities serve different purposes, the procedures for getting spectra and cospectra
are different; also, these quantities are screened, sorted and averaged in different
ways. So, lets have a look at what EddyPro 4 does, why it does so, and what is avail-
able to you after the run.
Ensemble Averaged Spectra of Passive Scalars
Ensemble averaged spectra of CO2, CH4 and a 4th passive gas are created when the
corresponding raw data are available and if the spectral correction method of Horst
(1997) or Ibrom et al. (2007a) was selected. Those correction methods are based
on an in-situ determination of the EC system transfer function, which in EddyPro is
performed as described in Ibrom et al. (2007), evaluating the underestimation of gas
concentration variance via a comparison of the average spectrum of the gas under
consideration, to that of (sonic) temperature, taken as a reference. The procedure
7-36
Section 7. Calculation Reference
involves the selection of high-quality spectra for both gases and temperature, per-
formed on the basis of:
the value of concerned fluxes
the value of skewness and kurtosis of the concerned time series
exclusion based on outranged spectral values
For this procedure, EddyPro uses binned spectra. This is the reason why, when one
of these spectral correction methods is selected, the option All binned spectra and
cospectra in the Output Files page is checked and deactivated: those methods
requires those outputs. Once spectra have been selected as just described, they are
averaged to get the results stored in the output file containing the identifier pass-
ive_gases_ensemble_spectra in its name. Refer to the output file descrip-
tions for more details on the content of this output file.
Ensemble Averaged Spectra of Water Vapor
Water vapor requires a different treatment respect to passive gases, because in
closed-path systems its attenuation is strongly dependent on relative humidity (and
secondary on temperature); for this reason, in addition to the screening procedure
described above for passive gases, EddyPro sorts water vapor spectra into a user-
defined number of relative humidity classes, to assess attenuation of H2O variance
as a function of RH. Thus, you find ensemble averaged water vapor spectra in a sep-
arated output, identified by h2o_ensemble_spectra in the file name. Refer to
the output file descriptions for more details on the content of this output file.
Ensemble Averaged Cospectra Sorted by Time of the Day
Although not directly used for any calculation, EddyPro also calculates ensemble
averaged cospectra of main fluxes (i.e., based on time series of w and gas con-
centrations/densities or temperature). In the output file identified by ensemble_
cospectra_by_time, all available binned cospectra are sorted in 3-hour groups (from
00:00 to 03:00, from 03:00 to 06:00 and so on) so as to provide a daily course of
average cospectral shapes. Before being considered for ensemble averaging, cospec-
tra are screened for quality according to the following soft criteria:
Sensible heat flux is greater than 5 W m
-2
(for all fluxes)
Latent heat flux is greater than 3 W m
-2
(for H
2
O);
Absolute value of CO
2
flux is greater than 2 mol m
-2
s
-1
(for CO
2
);
Absolute value of CH
4
flux is greater than 10
-3
mol m
-2
s
-1
(for CH
4
);
7-37
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Note: These cospectra are presented as function of the natural frequency, extend-
ing in the range defined by the inverse of the flux averaging interval to half the
data acquisition sampling frequency.
Ensemble Averaged Cospectra Sorted by Stability Regime
EddyPro sorts and averages cospectra according to the atmospheric stability regime,
defined by the value of the Monin-Obukhov length L. Ensemble averaged cospectra
are provided for unstable (-650 < L < 0) and stable (0 < L < 1000) stratifications.
Before being considered for ensemble averaging, cospectra are screened for quality.
Cospectra corresponding to stable stratifications are filtered using the same soft cri-
teria described above, while cospectra corresponding to unstable stratifications are
filtered using the flux thresholds entered by the user in the spectral correction con-
figuration page (default values are used if the spectral correction page is not con-
figured; default are visible in the GUI). In addition, EddyPro fits Massmans model
to the ensemble of individual cospectra.
( )
A =
nCo f
w c
f f
f f
( )
0
/
1 + /
wc
p
p
2
1.1667
where n (Hz) is the natural frequency, f = (z-d)* n/U is the normalized frequency
and A
0
, f
p
and are regression parameters. To perform this step, individual cospec-
tra are expressed as a function of the normalized frequency. The overall normalized
frequency range is defined a priori in EddyPro and extends from 1/4h up to 200 Hz.
This is a wide range, which implies that often empty frequency bins are found in
the output file, corresponding to normalized frequency ranges where no actual
cospectral values were found. Finally, in the same output file, identified by the
string ensemble_cospectra_by_stability in the name, ideal Kaimal
cospectra are also found. For the stable regime, this is only a function of the nor-
malized frequency. However, for the stable range, ideal cospectra are also a func-
tion of z/L. Thus EddyPro outputs Kaimal cospectra corresponding two extreme
stable conditions, namely z/L = 0.01 (near neutral stratification) and z/L = 10
(strongly stable stratification).
Calculating Ambient and Cell Statistics
At each relevant step of the raw data processing, statistics are calculated for all avail-
able variables, either sensitive or non-sensitive. Single-variable statistics include
7-38
Section 7. Calculation Reference
average, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis. Relevant covariances are also cal-
culated, notably covariances among vertical wind component w and all other vari-
ables. In particular, covariances between w and ambient scalars such as gas
concentrations or temperatures, used for flux estimates, are calculated after com-
pensation of scalars time lags.
However, when a closed path instrument is used, other covariances might also be
needed for correcting fluxes for the effect of air density fluctuations (Webb et al.,
1980). Namely, for each given gas, the covariances w c
h o 2
and w T
cell
(where
c
h2o
is water vapor concentration expressed in any suitable units) are needed, cal-
culated after compensating c
h2o
and T
cell
using the time lag of the gas under con-
sideration. Here, of course EddyPro checks that water vapor is measured by the
same instrument that measures the concentration of the gas considered. Otherwise,
the covariance w c
h o 2
is not calculated.
If you wish to learn more about accounting for air density fluctuations in closed
path systems, refer to Ibrom et al. (2007b), for example.
Calculating Ambient and Cell Parameters
The time lag compensation is the last step of raw data reduction. Covariances cal-
culated after time lag compensation will be used to calculate uncorrected and cor-
rected fluxes. Before actually calculating fluxes, EddyPro evaluates some key
average ambient variables such as temperature, pressure, and molar volume. The
same quantities are calculated for the cell of each closed path gas analyzer in use (if
any).
Average ambient temperature
In order of priority, ambient temperature (T
a
, K) is calculated as:
1. The average ambient temperature, if ambient temperature is available as a
raw measurement; or
2. The average sonic temperature. In this case, it will be corrected later to
account for effects of ambient humidity (Schotanus et al., 1983).
Average ambient air pressure
In order of priority, ambient pressure (P
a
, Pa) is computed as:
1. The average ambient pressure, if ambient pressure is available as a raw
measurement; or
7-39
Section 7. Calculation Reference
2. The site barometric pressure, calculated based on site altitude as (Camp-
bell and Norman, 1998):
Pa=Pa0e
-Site Altitude/8200
where P
a0
=101.3 kPa.
Average ambient air molar volume
Ambient air molar volume (v
a
, m
3
mol
-1
) is calculated using ambient air tem-
perature and pressure as:
v =
a
T
P
a
a
R
where
= 8.314 R
J mol
-1
K
-1
, the universal gas constant.
Average cell temperature (closed path systems only)
In order of priority, cell temperature (T
c
, K) is calculated as:
1. The average cell temperature, if cell temperature is available as a raw meas-
urement or as calculated in calculating cell temperature, or
2. The average ambient temperature as calculated above.
Average cell pressure (closed path systems only)
In order of priority, cell pressure (P
c
, Pa) is calculated as:
1. The average cell pressure, if cell pressure is available as a raw meas-
urement; or
2. The average ambient pressure as calculated above.
Average cell molar volume (closed path systems only)
Cell air molar volume (v
c
, m
3
mol
-1
) is calculated using cell temperature and pres-
sure as:
v =
c
T
P
c
c
R
where
= 8.314 R
J mol
-1
K
-1
, the universal gas constant.
Calculating Average Gas Concentrations and Densities
After having calculated ambient and cell molar volumes, for each available gas
EddyPro can calculate average concentrations expressed as mole fractions and mix-
ing ratios, as well as average molar densities. The equations used are:
7-40
Section 7. Calculation Reference
r =
gas
gas
1
1
h o 2
r d =
gas gas
v
1
h o 2
where symbols have the usual meaning (see Converting raw gas density to mixing
ratio) used here to indicate mean values, averaged over the flux averaging interval,
and v is either ambient the air molar volume, v
a
, or the cell molar volume v
c
,
depending on whether gases are measured from an open path or a closed path sys-
tem, respectively.
These equations are combined appropriately, depending on the available meas-
urements, to calculate unknowns.
Note: For CH
4
measurements made with the LI-7700 Open Path CH
4
Analyzer,
EddyPro reports mixing ratio and mole fraction values that are corrected for spec-
troscopic effects. It reports average number density values that are not corrected
for spectroscopic effects. Refer to the LI-7700 Instruction Manual for more
information.
Calculating Micrometeorological Variables
Before calculating fluxes, EddyPro calculates an additional set of micro-
meteorological parameters, which are used to calculate corrected fluxes or for
future analysis of calculated fluxes. These are listed and briefly described here.
Molecular weight of wet air (Ma, kg mol
-1
)
Calculated as the sum of molecular weights of dry air and water vapor, weighted by
the water vapor mole fraction:
Ma=Mh2oh2o+Md(1-h2o)
where the subscript d is used for quantities referring to dry air, and where
M
d
=0.02897 kg mol
-1
and M
h2o
=0.01802 kg mol
-1
.
Ambient water vapor mass density (h2o, kg m
-3
)
Calculated form water vapor mole fraction as:
=
h o
M
v
2
h o
h o
a
2
2
7-41
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Water vapor partial pressure (e, Pa)
Calculated from the ideal gas law:
e=
h2o
R
h2o
T
a
where
( )
R M Jkg K = /
h o h o 2 2
1 1
R
, is the water vapor gas constant.
Water vapor partial pressure at saturation (es, Pa)
Calculated after Campbell and Norman (1998) as:
e T e =
s a
T T 8.2 77.345+0.0057 7235
a a
1
(e=2.7182, the base of the exponential function, not the water vapor partial pressure)
Relative humidity (RH, %)
RH is computed according to its definition as:
RH = 100
e
e
s
,
where
( )
R M Jkg K = /
d d
1 1
R
is the dry air gas constant.
Moist air mass density (a, kg m
-3
)
It is given by the sum of dry air and water vapor mass densities:
= +
a d h o 2
.
Dry air heat capacity at constant pressure (cp,d,J kg
-1
K
-1
)
It is calculated as a function of temperature as:
c = 1005 +
p d
T
,
( + 23.12)
3364
a
2
,
where T
a
is expressed in degrees Celsius.
Water vapor heat capacity at constant pressure (cp,h2o, J kg
-1
K
-1
)
It is calculated as a function of temperature and relative humidity as:
c RH RH T RH T = 1859 + 0.13 +
(
0.193 + 5.6 10
)
+
(
10 + 5 10
) p h o a a , 2
3 3 5 2
,
where Ta is expressed in degrees Celsius.
Specific humidity (Q, kg kg
-1
)
It is calculated according to its definition as:
Q =
h o
a
2
.
Refining ambient temperature (Ta, K)
If ambient air temperature was calculated from sonic temperature, it is now cor-
rected for the effect of ambient moisture content (van Dijk, 2004, eq. 3.49):
7-43
Section 7. Calculation Reference
T =
a
T
Q 1 + 0.51
a
.
Otherwise, if ambient air temperature was calculated by averaging raw data of ambi-
ent air temperature, T
a
does not need a correction. In this case, a temperature map-
ping factor (T
map
) is calculated to rescale covariances that involve sonic temperature
fluctuations arising from possible errors in the estimation of the acoustic path
length of the anemometer (van Dijk, 2004):
T T x T x T =
map
T
T
s s map
a
s
where x is any other variable, notably w.
Refinement of cell temperature (Tc, K) (closed path systems only)
Cell temperature is now updated to account for the effect of ambient moisture con-
tent if, in the previous calculation, it was set equal to ambient air temperature.
Recall that this happens only when no temperature reading from inside the cell is
available.
Moist air heat capacity at constant pressure (Cp, J kg
-1
K
-1
)
It is calculated as a function of ambient moisture content as:
c c Q c Q = (1 ) +
p p d p h o , , 2
Evapotranspiration flux, uncorrected: (E0, kg m
-2
s
-1
)
E F M = 10
h o h o 0
3
0,
2 2
where P
0,a
=10
5
Pa, and is the reference pressure.
Monin-Obukhov length (L,m)
Calculated according to its definition as:
7-47
Section 7. Calculation Reference
L =
*
T u
g
p
H
a
c
p
3
0
where =~0.41, and is the von Krmn constant; g=~9.81 m s
-1
, and is the gravity.
Monin-Obukhov stability parameter (, non-dimensional)
is calculated as:
=
h d
L
m
where h
m
is the measurement height above the ground, as measured in the center of
the anemometer measurement volume, and d is the displacement height.
Dynamic temperature (T., K)
Calculated according to its definition (e.g., Foken and Wichura, 1996):
T
*
=
*
w T
u
s
Accounting for Density Fluctuations Induced by Instrument-related Heat
Exchange (LI-7500 only)
See "Add instrument sensible heat components (LI-7500)" on page4-25 for
more information.
When CO2 and H2O molar densities are measured with the an LI-7500 in cold envir-
onments (low temperatures below -10 C), a correction should be applied to account
for the additional instrument-related sensible heat flux, due to instrument surface
heating/cooling. The correction is fully described and tested in literature (Burba et
al., 2008; Grelle and Burba, 2007; Jarvi et al., 2009). EddyPro implements the
correction according to Table 1, Method 4 of Burba et al. (2008), which involves
calculating a corrected sensible heat flux (
H
where the factor 0.15 accounts for the possibility that the heat flux may or may not
enter the instrument path.
7-48
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Additional sensible heat fluxes are calculated according to equations in the same
Table 1 (Nobels (1983) formulation) and the implied surface temperatures are
estimated either with linear equations similar to those in Eqs. 3-8 in Burba et al.
(2008), using slope and offset parameters from Table 3 in the same paper, or with
multiple linear regression relationships between instrument temperatures and con-
trolling factors (Table 2 in Burba et al., 2008). Corrected sensible heat flux is only
used for calculating WPL terms when gas densities are measured by an LI-7500.
Note: In results files and elsewhere, the used and reported sensible heat is the
environmental one (H). We also stress again that this correction does not apply
to data measured with an LI-7500A.
Calculating Multipliers for Spectroscopic Corrections (LI-7700)
When an LI-7700 CH4 analyzer is used, methane fluxes are calculated using Eq. 5.1
of the LI-7700 Instruction Manual. In this equation, which is formulated to highlight
the correction terms for air density fluctuations (Webb et al., 1980), multipliers A,
B, and C are specific of the LI-7700 analyzer, accounting for spectroscopic effects of
temperature, pressure, and water vapor on methane molar density (A), spectroscopic
effects of pressure and water vapor on the latent heat flux (B), and spectroscopic
effects of temperature, pressure and water vapor on sensible heat flux (C). These
multipliers are defined as:
A =
( ) ( )
B P GROUP = 1 + 1 1.46 = 1 + 1 1.46
h o
v e
h o
1
Pe
2 2
( )
C T B = 1 + 1 + ( 1)
h o
a
h o
T
2 2
( )
GROUP B = 1 + 1 + ( 1)
h o h o
2
2 2
where groups of parameters have been conveniently created (GROUP
1
and
GROUP
2
). Refer to LI-7700 Instruction Manual for a detailed description of all para-
meters and variables that appear in these equations. For a description and testing of
the correction please refer to (McDermitt et al., 2010).
The groups
, GROUP
1
and GROUP
2
are functions of air temperature (T
), and
equivalent pressure (P
e
) and tabulated values are available with a resolution of 1 C
7-49
Section 7. Calculation Reference
and 1 kPa, for -50 to 55 C and 50 to 115 kPa. Given actual values of T
and P
e
(the
latter being a function of air pressure and water vapor mole fraction,
h2o
).
EddyPro employs a look-up table (LUT) and performs a bi-linear interpolation to
calculate the best estimates of the three groups. Once the values of
, GROUP
1
and
GROUP
2
have been obtained, multipliers A, B, and C can be calculated according
to equations above, and kept available for the later calculation of methane fluxes.
Note: The multipliers, as a function of air temperature, pressure and water
vapor mole fraction, must be recalculated for each averaging period.
Calculating Spectral Correction Factors
Spectral corrections compensate flux underestimations due to two distinct effects:
Fluxes are calculated on a finite averaging time, implying that longer-term
turbulent contributions are under-sampled at some extent, or completely. In
EddyPro, the correction for these flux losses is referred to as high-pass filtering
correction because the any detrending method acts similar to a high-pass fil-
ter, by attenuating flux contributions in the frequency range close to the
(inverse of the) flux averaging interval.
Instrument and setup limitations that do not allow sampling the full spa-
tiotemporal turbulence fluctuations and necessarily imply some space or
time averaging of smaller eddies, as well as actual dampening of the small-
scale turbulent fluctuations. In EddyPro, the correction for these flux losses
is referred to as low-pass filtering correction.
In EddyPro, spectral corrections for high-pass filtering are implemented after Mon-
crieff et al. (1997). For any given flux, the spectral correction procedure requires a
series of conceptual steps (for a thorough overview of spectral corrections in eddy
covariance see, Ibrom et al. (2007a) and Massman (2004) for example):
1. Calculation or estimation of a reference flux cospectrum, representing the
true spectral content of the investigated flux as it would be measured by a
perfect system;
2. Estimation of the high-pass and low-pass filtering properties implied by the
actual measuring system and the chosen averaging period and detrending
method;
3. Estimation of flux attenuation;
7-50
Section 7. Calculation Reference
4. Calculation of the spectral correction factor and application of the cor-
rection.
In the implemented method, true cospectra estimation (step 1) is performed by
using analytical cospectra formulations, according to Eqs. 12-18 in Moncrieff et al.
(1997), a modification of the Kaimal formulation (Kaimal, 1972). Flux cospectra
(CO
F
) are expressed as a function of the natural frequency, CO
F
(f), and depend
primarily of the considered flux (momentum, sensible heat or gas fluxes), on atmo-
spheric stratification and wind speed and on the measuring height above the can-
opy. For this reason, cospectra must be recalculated at each flux averaging period.
Step 2 is usually performed by specifying a band pass transfer function (TF(f)),
describing how individual flux contributions at each natural frequency are rep-
resented in the measured fluxes, due to the EC system properties and the processing
choices (see the figure below). In the implemented method, the system transfer func-
tion is specified by the superimposition of a set of transfer functions describing indi-
vidual sources of high-frequency or loss-frequency losses. Refer to Appendix A of the
Moncrieff et al. (1997) for the full description of the transfer functions. Such trans-
fer functions depend on the instrumental setup (through the instruments path
lengths, acquisition frequencies, separations etc.) but also on the atmospheric con-
ditions (because some quantities are defined as a function of the average wind
speed), thus they must be recalculated for each flux averaging period.
Figure 7-15. Representation of the transfer function of a band-pass filter (green line),
obtained as the superimposition of the transfer functions of a high-pass (red line) and a
7-51
Section 7. Calculation Reference
low-pass (blue line) filter.
Spectral correction factors are calculated for each averaging period and for each
mass and energy flux. The exact moment in which the correction is applied depends
mainly on the instrument(s) used (open vs. closed path configurations), due to the
interaction with other corrections. This is thoroughly explained in Calculating
Level 1, 2, and 3 Fluxes, and Calculating Fluxes with Open Path Analyzers.
High-pass Filtering Correction
See "Low frequency spectral correction" on page4-26 for more information.
In EddyPro, high-pass filtering correction is applied (if requested) following Mon-
crieff et al. (2004). True flux cospectra estimation (Step 1) is performed by using
analytical cospectra formulations, according to Eqs. 12-18 in Moncrieff et al. (1997),
a modification of the Kaimal formulation (Kaimal, 1972). Cospectra are expressed
as a function of the natural frequency CO
f
(f), and depending primarily of the con-
sidered flux (momentum, sensible heat or gas flux), on atmospheric stratification,
wind speed and the measurement height over the canopy. For this reason, cospectra
must be recalculated for each averaging period.
In Step 2, an analytical formulation is used of the transfer function that describes
the effect of the high-pass filtering procedure (HPTF, high-pass transfer function).
The shape of the HPTF is a function of the selected detrending method (block aver-
aging, linear detrending, running mean or exponential running mean), and the cor-
responding time constant. HPTF formulations are summarized in Table 2.2 of
Moncrieff et al. (2004).
In Step 3, flux attenuation in the low frequency end is estimated by applying the
calculated HPTF to the modeled flux cospectrum. When it is done in the frequency
domain, applying simply means a frequency-wise multiplication. Considering that
a flux is proportional to the integral of the corresponding cospectrum over the
whole frequency range, a high-pass spectral correction factor (HPSCF) can be cal-
culated in Step 4 as:
HPSCF =
CO f df
CO f HPTF f df ( )
f
F
f
F
0
max
0
max
7-52
Section 7. Calculation Reference
where f
max
is the highest frequency, corresponding to the smallest eddies con-
tributing to the true flux.
Low-pass Filtering Correction
See "High frequency spectral correction" on page4-26 for more information.
Three low-pass filtering correction procedures are available in EddyPro, imple-
menting the 4 steps in different ways. The methods are named after the cor-
responding reference publication. The method by Moncrieff et al. (1997) is
referred to as purely analytic, for it makes use of mathematical formulations to
model flux spectral properties and to describe flux attenuations due to the instru-
mental setup. The method by Horst (1997) is analytic in nature, but it is para-
meterized using in situ information. The method by Ibrom et al. (2007), instead, it
mostly based on in situ determinations.
The three methods are briefly described below. Please refer to the original papers
for more in depth information.
Spectral corrections after Moncrieff et al. (1997)
In this method, true cospectra estimation (Step 1) is performed by using analytical
cospectra formulations, again according to Eqs. 12-18 in Moncrieff et al. (1997). Step
2 is performed by specifying a low-pass transfer function (LPTF), which depends on
the EC system characteristics. In the implemented method, the LPTF is specified by
the superimposition of a set of transfer functions describing individual sources of
high-frequency losses. Refer to Appendix A of Moncrieff et al. (1997) for the full
description of the individual transfer functions. Such transfer functions depend on
the instrumental setup (through the instruments path lengths, acquisition fre-
quencies, separations etc.) but also on atmospheric conditions (because some quant-
ities are defined as a function of the average wind speed), thus they must be
recalculated for each flux averaging period.
In Step 3, flux attenuation in the high frequency end is estimated by applying the
calculated LPTF to the estimated true flux cospectrum. Considering that the flux is
given by the integration of the cospectrum over the whole frequency range, a low-
pass spectral correction factor (LPSCF) can be calculated in Step 4 as:
7-53
Section 7. Calculation Reference
LPSCF =
CO f df
CO f LPTF f df ( )
f
F
f
F
0
max
0
max
More accurately, when the method by Moncrieff et al. (1997) is selected for the low-
pass filtering correction, a band-pass transfer function (BPTF) is calculated by mul-
tiplication of the HPTF and the LPTF. This BPTF is then applied to the analytic
cospectra, to derive a Band Pass Spectral Correction (BPSCF) factor according to:
BPSCF =
CO f df
CO f BPTF f df ( )
f
F
f
F
0
max
0
max
The fractional flux loss F/F is given by:
= = = 1
F
F
F F
F
CO f df CO f BPTF f df
CO f df
SCF
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
1
true
true meas
true
f
F
f
F
f
F
0
max
0
max
0
max
where F
true
is the "true" flux (not affected by spectral attenuations) and F
meas
is the
measured, or uncorrected flux.
Spectral corrections after Massman (2000, 2001)
The method described by Massman (2000) and refined in Massman (2001) is
based on the work of Moore (1986) and Horst (1997) and provides a simple cor-
rection formula based on the description of individual sources of flux losses as first-
order filters and on the analytical formulation of cospectra by Horst (1997). The
application of the method requires the calculation of the time constants associated
to the first-order filters that describe the physical phenomenon, and whose ana-
lytical expression are detailed in Massman (2000, Table 1). The actual correction for-
mulas are detailed in Massman (2001, Table 1), which refined Table 2 in the
previous paper.
Note that the correction contains a modifier (last term in the second equation of
Table 1 in Massman, 2001) for gas instruments with a time response of <0.3 seconds.
The time response of the gas instruments is calculated on-the-fly by EddyPro as part
of the method, so the modifier is applied only if appropriate.
All parameter needed in the correction are available to or are calculated by
EddyPro, so there is no need of users input to apply the method, with one only
7-54
Section 7. Calculation Reference
exception for closed-path gas analyzers: the tube parameter (), that quantifies the
attenuation of a gas in a tube flow and that is a function of the gas itself and of the
tube Reynolds number. This parameter is calculated by EddyPro via a linear inter-
polation of the values provided in Massman (1991, Table 1), starting from the
actual Reynolds number calculated for the current sampling line (i.e., starting from
the provided tube geometry and flow rate). Table 1 in Massman (1991) details the
value of for CO2, H2O, CH4, N2O and O3, so the correction can only be applied
for those gases.
In summary Massmans correction is applicable to all open-path systems and to
closed-path systems limited to measurements and fluxes of CO2, H2O, CH4, N2O
and O3.
Spectral corrections after Horst (1997)
This method is also based on an analytic formulation for the high frequency spec-
tral losses and of the flux cospectra. However, here the integrals are solved ana-
lytically to derive a simple equation for the flux attenuation (Eq. 11 in Horst, 1997):
LPSCF = =
F
T n u z
1
1
1 + (2 / )
meas
true m c
a
where
c
is the time constant of the filter implied by the EC system, is a stability
dependent constant, z is the measuring height above the canopy,
u
is the averaging
wind speed at that height and n
m
is the (normalized) frequency at which the cospec-
trum attains its maximum (peak frequency),
n f z u = /
. The time constant
c
is
linked to the transfer function cut-off frequency f
c
(the frequency at which the func-
tion reduces the power by a factor of 2) by the relation: f 2 = 1 /
c
c
. The original
paper provides parameterizations for and n
m
, while the average wind speed is a
standard result provided by EddyPro. The time constant, however, is assessed in
EddyPro using the procedure described in the following section. In particular, for
water vapor fluxes measured with closed path systems, the time constant is assessed
as a function of relative humidity, as described hereafter.
Spectral corrections after Ibrom et al. (2007)
This method is specifically suited for correcting water vapor fluxes measured with
closed path systems, where relative humidity (RH) was recognized to play a non neg-
ligible role in determining H2O signal attenuation and therefore flux under-
estimation, specifically in the high frequency range. However, with the proper
7-55
Section 7. Calculation Reference
adjustments made in EddyPro, the method can also be used for passive gases insens-
itive to RH, such as CO2, CH4 and others, as well as for open path analyzers.
In the first step, assuming spectral similarity (De Ligne et al., 2010; Massman,
2000), sonic temperature spectra (S
Ts
), considered as unaffected by spectral atten-
uations at high frequencies and after application of an opportune normalization,
are used as a proxy for the unattenuated gas concentration spectra.
The estimation of system filtering characteristics (Step 2) is based on the in situ
determination of the system cut-off frequency, assuming that the Eddy Covariance
system acts on the true gas spectra (S) as a low-pass filter, in such a way that meas-
ured spectra (S
m
) are attenuated at the high frequency end. Mathematically, such
effect is described with a first-order recursive, infinite impulse response (IIR) filter.
The discrete Fourier transform (H
IIR
) of the amplitude of such filter is well approx-
imated by the Lorentzian:
( )
( )
H f f = =
IIR
c
S f
S f
f f
( )
( )
1
1 + /
m
c
2
where f (Hz) is the natural frequency and f
c
(Hz) is the transfer function cut-off fre-
quency. The latter is proportional to the inverse of the filter time constant (
c
, s),
f = 2
c
c
1
, and provides a quantification of amplitude attenuation of fluctuations.
This filter shape was proven suitable for describing the filtering properties of EC sys-
tems featuring very long (50 m, Hollinger et al., 1999; Ibrom et al., 2007) and
long (7m, Mammarella et al., 2009) sampling lines.
Note: Following Ibrom et al. (2007), cut-off frequencies are assessed by fitting the
IIR function (with f
c
being the fitting parameter) to the ratio of ensemble gas
spectra to ensemble temperature. EddyPro uses all "high quality" spectra avail-
able in the dataset to calculate such ensemble spectra. The criteria for selecting
high quality spectra are as follows:
High enough fluxes: too low fluxes may be a sign of not well developed tur-
bulent conditions, in which scalar spectra may not be well characterized,
Low enough skewness and kurtosis: too large skewness or kurtosis are often
associated to sharp variations occurring in the time series, which could be
the consequence of faulty measurements and could compromise the res-
ulting spectra,
7-56
Section 7. Calculation Reference
A low enough number of missing values: in EddyPro, spikes and missing val-
ues are replaced by linear interpolation before the spectral analysis. This oper-
ation has a minimal impact on the resulting spectra. However, if too many
(> 10%) samples are replaced by linear interpolation, the resulting spectra are
ignored in the spectral assessment.
For H2O measured by closed path systems, in order to uncover the increasing atten-
uation as RH increases, cut-off frequencies must be determined for different RH
regimes. As suggested by Ibrom et al., EddyPro determines f
c
for nine classes in the
range 5% < RH < 95% and fits an exponential function to the resulting RH/f
c
pairs:
( )
f RH E RH E RH E ( ) = exp + +
c
1
2
2 3
where E
1
, E
2
, and E
3
are regression parameters.
For open path systems, where a dependency on RH is not expected, the procedure is
applied in a slightly different way. By an algorithmic point of view, EddyPro still
calculates an f
c
for each RH class, but then it averages these values and analytically
parameterizes the above equation by setting E
1
and E
2
to zero and E
3
to the nat-
ural logarithm of the average f
c
. This way, the above relation between the cut-off fre-
quency and RH can safely be used also for open path systems, basically providing
the same cut-off frequency for each RH.
For passive gases, instead, a unique cut-off frequency is assessed for the whole data-
set, without consideration for RH, for neither open nor closed path systems.
Once cut-off frequencies have been assessed, the low-pass spectral correction factor
(Step 4) is calculated using the parameterization:
LFSCF = + 1
d U
d f +
c
1
2
where U is the average wind speed and d
1
and d
2
are site-specific parameters to be
determined using collected turbulence data. The actual procedure, which makes use
of degraded temperature time series, is described in details in the original paper.
This spectral correction scheme only deals with flux attenuations induced by atten-
uation of the scalar spectra. Other sources of flux underestimation to be considered
are intrinsic to the instrument deployment. Among them, relevant flux losses might
come from the physical separation between the anemometer and the gas analyzer
sampling volumes. While streamwise sensor displacement can be accounted for by
7-57
Section 7. Calculation Reference
compensating scalar time lags (assuming Taylors hypothesis of frozen turbulence),
we suggest applying a further correction factor to account for any crosswind and/or
vertical displacement, following the procedure proposed by Horst and Lenschow
(2009, Eqs. 1618 and 2830): These are multiplicative factors, that are applied after
fluxes have been partially corrected with the method proposed here. Find more
details here.
The method of Ibrom et al. (2007) is deemed applicable for a vast range of EC
setups, spanning open-path to closed-path setups deployed of rough forest canopies.
However, due to the need for a relatively large dataset for the assessment of spectral
attenuations (Steps 1-3), we suggest using this method when at least 1-2 months of
raw data are available from an EC setup that did not undergo major modifications,
such as replacement of sampling line components or significant displacement of the
sensors relative to each other.
Spectral corrections after Fratini et al. (2012)
In this method, Steps 1-3 are identical to those described here for the method of
Ibrom et al. (2007). The calculation of spectral correction factors (Step 4) is per-
formed in different ways for small and large fluxes, where the threshold
between small and large fluxes can be specified by the user.
1. For small fluxes the method of Ibrom et al. (2007) is applied, i.e. the low-
pass correction factor is calculated using the model:
LFSCF = + 1
d U
d f +
c
1
2
However, refer to section 2.3 and Appendix A in Fratini et al. (2012) for
subtle differences in the parameterization of the model and how they
improve it.
2. For large fluxes, refining and simplifying the approach described by
Hollinger et al. (1999), low-pass spectral correction factors (LPSCF), for
each flux averaging interval are calculated using the following equation:
( )
LPSCF =
CO f d f
f H d f
( )
f
f
H
f
f
IIR f f
c
min
max
min
max
where CO
H
is the current sensible heat (H, W m-2) cospectrum. The value
of the cut-off frequency in the denominator is calculated from:
7-58
Section 7. Calculation Reference
( )
f RH E RH E RH E ( ) = exp + +
c
1
2
2 3
as in Ibrom et al. (2007), using the current value of RH.
Similar to the method of Ibrom et al. (2007), this method only corrects flux atten-
uations induced by attenuation of the scalar spectra. Potential further losses due to
instrument separation can be corrected following the method of Horst and
Lenschow (2009) as described elsewhere. See "Correction for spectral losses due
to physical instrument separation" on page 7-59
In addition, cospectra of sensible heat used in this method as a reference for gas flux
cospectra, can be preliminary corrected for the (normally small) attenuations
induced by the anemometer's limited response time and finite averaging volume, as
well as for the high-pass filtering effects due to the finite flux averaging interval and
dependent on the detrending method, as described here. See "High-pass Filtering
Correction" on page 7-52
The method of Fratini et al. (2012) is deemed applicable for a vast range of EC
setups, from open-path systems over rough forests canopies to closed-path setups
deployed close to smooth surfaces. However, due to the need of a relatively large
dataset for the assessment of spectral attenuations (Steps 1-3), we suggest using this
method when at least 1-2 months of raw data are available from an EC setup that
did not undergo major modifications such as replacement of sampling line com-
ponents, or significant displacement of the sensors relative to each other. In any
case, we recommend using this method for correcting H2O and latent heat fluxes
from closed path systems, specifically if deployed low over a relatively smooth sur-
face, as if could be the case in agricultural or oceanic applications.
Correction for spectral losses due to physical instrument separation
Being designed to correct spectral losses in closed-path systems (specifically for water
vapor), the methods of Ibrom et al. (2007) and Fratini et al. (2012) do not nat-
ively account for losses due to spatial separation of the instruments (anemometer
and gas analyzer), because this source of spectral losses is minor and can be safely
neglected when compared to losses in the sampling lines. For open-path systems,
however, spectral losses due to instrument separations are relatively more important
(especially for systems placed low over smooth surfaces). EddyPro allows you to
account for these losses by applying the correction method proposed by Horst and
Lenschow (2009), when the methods of Ibrom et al. (2007) and Fratini et al.
(2012) are selected. Horst and Lenschow (2009) describe 3 correction terms to
account for along-wind, crosswind and vertical separations. Note that losses for any
7-59
Section 7. Calculation Reference
along-wind separation are largely compensated by the procedure of time lag com-
pensation, if this is applied.
Thus, the method is available in two versions:
Along-wind, crosswind and vertical: suggested when the time lag com-
pensation procedure is not applied.
Only crosswind and vertical: suggested when the time lag compensation pro-
cedure is applied.
The correction procedure is based on the following formulation for the dependency
of the flux (F(r)) as a function of the distance between the instruments (r), Eq. 13 in
the original paper:
( ) ( )
F r F k r = exp
m 0
where F
0
is the unattenuated flux for r=0, and k
m
=2n
m
/z is the wavenumber at the
peak of the wavenumber-weighted cospectrum, kCo(k), n
m
= f
m
z/U, f
m
is the fre-
quency at the peak of the cospectrum, and U is the wind speed.
This formulation is then specified in the along-wind, crosswind, and vertical sep-
arations. Please refer to Horst and Lenschow (2009) for further details.
Note: When the methods of Horst (1997) or Ibrom et al. (2007) are selected
for the low-pass filtering correction, the band-pass spectral correction is applied
by first correcting for the high-pass filtering effects (multiplication of uncorrected
fluxes by HPSCF) and then multiplying by LPSCF. Rigorously speaking, this pro-
cedure is not correct because according to the definition of the band pass cor-
rection factor, the multiplication with the LPTF and the HPTF are not
commutative with the integral operator. However, the error introduced by this
procedure is deemed negligible in most occasions.
Calculating Fluxes Level 1, 2, and 3 (Corrected Fluxes)
Calculating corrected fluxes in EddyPro involves the application of the following
corrections:
Correction of any covariance (and related fluxes) that include sonic tem-
perature, for the effects of humidity on air estimation via the sonic tem-
perature. This correction was firstly described in Schotanus et al. (1983) and
7-60
Section 7. Calculation Reference
is applied in EddyPro according to the revision described in van Dijk et al.
(2004, eq. 3.53):
w T w T Q w T T w Q = 0.51 0.51
a s s s
where the covariance
w Q
(m s
-1
) is calculated from the evapotranspiration flux
(E, kg m
-2
s
-1
):
w Q =
E
a
.
Correction of gas fluxes for air density fluctuation effects, henceforth referred
to as the WPL term (Webb et al., 1980). The correction is applied in dif-
ferent ways for open path and closed path systems, as explained later in this
section.
Correction for high-frequency and low-frequency spectral attenuations, using
correction factors from Calculating Spectral Correction Factors.
Off-season uptake correction, using corrected sensible heat flux as calculated
in the Calculating Off-season Uptake Correction section (applies only to the
LI-7500).
Spectroscopic correction using multipliers calculated in the Calculating LI-
7700 Multipliers section.
The order of application of these corrections varies, depending on the gas analyzer
type (open or closed path) and on how many gas analyzers were used. Hereafter we
describe the corrections in the order in which they appear in a series of common
cases.
Calculating Turbulent Fluxes for a System Composed of an LI-7500 and
LI-7700
The common example of an open path eddy covariance systems is a station
equipped with an anemometer, LI-7500 or LI-7500A, and LI-7700.
In this case, corrected fluxes are calculated from uncorrected (fluxes as ) according to
the following procedure:
Level 1 Fluxes: Application of Spectral Corrections
Spectral corrections are applied first to open path fluxes. This is because sensible
and latent heat fluxes used in the WPL (or air density fluctuation) correction are the
7-61
Section 7. Calculation Reference
environmental ones, those actually present in the atmosphere and affecting meas-
urements of molar densities in open path analyzers. These are best estimated by
compensating uncorrected fluxes for spectral losses. However, sensible heat flux is
not yet corrected here (explained later). Therefore, at level 1 we have:
F
1,gas
= F
0,gas
SCF
w,gas
where the subscript 'gas' indicates that it is applied to all gases. Latent heat and
evapotranspiration fluxes are spectrally corrected using the correction factor cal-
culated for water vapor:
LE
1
= LE
0
SCF
w,h2o
E
1
= E
0
SCF
w,h2o
Furthermore, uncorrected momentum flux and friction velocity are corrected using
the relevant spectral correction factor:
T
1
= T
0
SCF
u,w
u
*1
= u
*0
SCF
u,w
Level 2 and 3 Fluxes
As a first step after spectral correction, evapotranspiration flux E is corrected with
the WPL term, following the formulation proposed in Webb et al. (1980, eq. 42b):
( )
E E = 1 + + (1 + )
H
c T
2 1
a
p
w
a
1
where =M
d
/M
h2o
, and
H H
1
where =0.51, and then it is spectrally corrected to get the first fully corrected flux:
H
3
= H
2
SCF
w,Ts
Now that sensible heat is fully corrected, evapotranspiration flux is corrected again,
adding the WPL terms with the revised H:
E E = (1 + ) + (1 + )
H
c T
3 1
a
p
w
a
3
where, again, H
3
contains the additional sensible heat contributions in an LI-7500 is
used. Water vapor and latent heat fluxes are easily refined:
F E M = 10
h o h o 3, 3
3
2 2
LE
3
= E
3
Now that evapotranspiration and sensible heat fluxes are fully corrected, fluxes of
other gases such as carbon dioxide and methane can be corrected for air density fluc-
tuations, according to Webb et al. (1980 eq. 44). For carbon dioxide, we get:
F A F B E C = + + 1 +
ch ch NO WPL
d
H
c
d
T
2, 1, _
ch
d a
p
ch
a
4 4
4 3 4
In the event that methane fluxes are computed with data from an open path instru-
ment other than the LI-7700, EddyPro automatically sets the multipliers A, B, and
C to unity.
Note: The evapotranspiration flux needed for this formulation is not corrected
for the WPL term (but is corrected for spectral attenuations). In the present case,
of water vapor measured with an open path analyzer:
E E =
NO WPL _ 1
Finally, corrected fluxes (Level 3) of CO2 and CH4, in systems with open path instru-
ments, coincide with fluxes at Level 2, which thus provide the most accurate flux
estimate available with EddyPro.
7-63
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Calculating Turbulent Fluxes for a System Composed of an LI-7200 and
LI-7700
In this situation, corrected fluxes are calculated from uncorrected (fluxes as F0) with
the following procedure:
Level 1 Fluxes: Application of Spectral Corrections
As a first step, uncorrected methane fluxes from the LI-7700 are corrected for spec-
tral attenuation, as explained in Calculating Fluxes for Open Path Analyzers:
F
1,ch4
= F
0,ch4
SCF
w,ch4
Momentum flux and friction velocity are also spectrally corrected at Level 1, sim-
ilarly:
T
1
= T
0
SCF
u,w
u
*1
= u
*0
SCF
u,w
Fluxes from the LI-7200 are not spectrally corrected at this stage, because the applic-
ation of correction for air density fluctuation effects to concentrations calculated
with closed path systems requires using uncorrected fluxes.
Level 2 and 3 Fluxes
Whenever possible, air density fluctuation effects in closed path systems are
addressed by converting raw gas concentration measurements into mixing ratios (see
Converting to Mixing Ratios). However, when this is not possible due to unavail-
ability of necessary raw information, the correction is implemented following the
WPL approach, as refined by Ibrom et al. (2007b). As a first step, evapo-
transpiration flux is corrected for the WPL term using the formulation proposed in
Webb et al. (1980, eq. 42b), properly modified to account for the fact that the rel-
evant sensible heat flux is measured inside the cell of the LI-7200 (and not in ambi-
ent conditions):
E E = (1 + ) + 1 + (1 + )
w T
T
w
w P
P
w
2 1
c
c
c
c
where
w T
c
and
w P
c
are covariances of w and cell temperature pressure
respectively, evaluated after dislodging the cell temperature time series using the
time lag of CO
2
. If covariance
w T
c
or
w P
c
are not available, they are
7-64
Section 7. Calculation Reference
assumed negligible and E
1
is corrected only for the dilution term due to water
vapor:
E
2
= (1 + )E
1
Fully corrected (level 3) evapotranspiration flux can now be calculated from E2 by
applying the proper spectral correction factor:
E
3
= E
2
SCF
w,h2o
Fully corrected latent heat and water vapor flux can now be calculated:
F
3,h2o
= E
3
10
3
M
h2o
LE
3
= E
3
Now, ambient sensible heat flux is corrected for humidity effects following van
Dijk et al. (2004), revising Schotanus et al. (1983) as explained in Calculating
Fluxes Level 1 2 and 3.
H H c T Q w T = +
a
p s
E
s 2 1
a
2
Then it is spectrally corrected to get fully corrected sensible heat flux:
H
3
= H
2
SCF
w,Ts
Next, level 2 CO2 flux is calculated by applying the correction for air density fluc-
tuations. EddyPro uses a formulation similar to Webb et al. (1980 eq. 24), where,
however, sensible heat flux and latent heat flux are evaluated in the cell and using
the time lag of CO2:
F F d d d = + + (1 + ) 1 +
co
v
v
co
E
co
H
c T
co
w P
P
co 2, 1,
c
a
cell
w
cell
a
p c
c
c
2 2 2 2 2
where E
cell
and H
cell
are calculated as:
E w d M =
cell h o
co
h o
_
2
2
2
H c w T =
cell
a
p c
co _
2
7-65
Section 7. Calculation Reference
and the subscript _co
2
indicates that covariances are evaluated at time lags of CO
2
.
The factor vc/va is needed to compute ambient quantities from cell quantities.
Methane fluxes are evaluated similarly to in a manner similar to fluxes for the LI-
7500 and LI-7700 analyzers:
F A F B E C = + + 1 +
ch ch NO WPL
d
H
c
d
T
2, 1, _
ch
d a
p
ch
a
4 4
4 3 4
where now, the spectrally corrected, not-WPL-corrected evapotranspiration flux is
calculated as:
E E SCF =
NO WPL w h o _ 1 ,
2
.
Finally, CO2 fluxes are corrected for spectral attenuations:
F F SCF =
co co w co 3, 2, ,
2 2 2
,
X c d * =
NN% contribution (m):
x X h = *
*
NN NN m
u
% %
0.8
w
,
X L c d * =
NN NN % %
The second equation is used to provide the offset distance (NN = 1) and the 10% to
90% distances. In these equations, parameters c and d are calculated using Eqs. 13 to
16 in Kljun et al. (2004) (where the roughness length enters as a parameter). The dis-
tance L'
1
is tabulated for each percentage between 0 and 95% (see Figure A1 in the
referenced paper). All other quantities are routinely calculated by EddyPro.
The footprint parameterization is valid only in certain ranges of micro-
meteorological conditions, well specified in the Kljun et al. (2004). In particular,
the model is claimed to be valid if the following conditions hold:
The measurement height is lower than the boundary layer height;
The terrain is dynamically homogeneous;
The stability parameter is in the range of: -200<<1 ;
The friction velocity is larger than a specific threshold: u.0.2 m s-1;
The measurement height is larger than 1 m: hm 1m.
EddyPro checks for the last three of these conditions and switches to the 'Kormann
and Meixner' model (see later), if either condition is not met.
Footprint model from Kormann and Meixner (2001)
This is a crosswind integrated model based on the solution of the two dimensional
advection-diffusion equation given, e.g., by van Ulden (1978) for power-law profiles
1
The FORTRAN source code for this calculation, along with the tabulated values of L, were shared by
the main author of the model, Natascha Kljun, for being embedded into ECO2S, and subsequently,
EddyPro. We gratefully acknowledge Dr. Kljun for this contribution.
7-68
Section 7. Calculation Reference
in wind velocity and eddy diffusivity. Contributing distances are calculated accord-
ing to (Eq. 21 in the original paper):
f e =
x x
x
1
( )
/
1+
where x is the distance from the location of the anemometer measured in the wind
direction, =(z) is a flux length scale that depends on the height above the ground
z, is a dimensionless model constant and () is the gamma function.
The equation is actually used to calculate x, given the fraction of the flux con-
tribution of interest (10%, 30%, etc.).
The equation for the peak distance is explicitly derived by the authors (Eq. 22), by
merely finding the maximum from the former equation:
x =
peak
1 +
.
Footprint model from Hsieh et al. (2000)
This is a crosswind integrated model based on the former model of Gash (1986) and
on simulations with a Lagrangian stochastic model. Contributing distances are cal-
culated according to (Eq. 17 in the original paper):
( )
f Dz L Dz L = exp
x z
k x
u
P
P
k x
u
P
P
,
1 1 1 1
2 2 2
where, again, x and z are the upwind distance from the measuring location and the
measuring height, L is the Monin-Obukhov length and k, D, P, z
u
are model-specific
parameters.
Similar to Kormann and Meixner (2001), the equation above is actually used to cal-
culate x, given the fraction of the flux contribution of interest (10%, 30%, etc.).
The equation for the peak distance is explicitly derived by the authors (Eq. 19), by
merely finding the maximum from the former equation:
x =
peak
Dz L
k 2
u
P P 1
2
.
Flux Quality Flags for Micrometeorological Tests
See "Quality check" on page4-25 for more information.
7-69
Section 7. Calculation Reference
Quality flags are calculated for all fluxes (sensible and latent heat, momentum and
gas fluxes). The final flags provided on output files are based on a combination of
partial flags calculated as a result of two tests, widely adopted and thoroughly
described in literature (see Foken et al., 2004; Foken and Wichura, 1996; Gck-
ede et al., 2008).
The two tests are known as the steady state test and the developed turbulent con-
ditions test. For details on the two methods refer to the cited literature. In
EddyPro, each test provides a flag ranging from 1 (best) to 9 (poorest). The two
flags are then combined into a unique flag, depending on the selected flagging
policy:
Mauder and Foken 2004: policy described in the documentation of the TK2
Eddy Covariance software that also constituted the standard of the Car-
boEurope IP project and is widely adopted. Here, the combined flag attains
the value 0 for best quality fluxes, 1 for fluxes suitable for general ana-
lysis such as annual budgets and 2 for fluxes that should be discarded from
the results dataset.
Foken 2003: A system based on 9 quality grades. 0 is best, 9 is worst. The
system of Mauder and Foken (2004) and of Gckede et al. (2006) are based
on a rearrangement of this system.
Gckede et al., 2006: A system based on 5 quality grades. 0 is best, 5 is
worst.
7-70
Section 7. Calculation Reference
A References
Note: References are linked to the original publication when possible.
Arya, S. P. 1998. Introduction to Micrometeorology. San Diego, Academic Press.
Aubinet, M., B. Chermanne, M. Vandenhaute, B. Longdoz, M. Yernaux and E.
Laitat. 2001. Long term carbon dioxide exchange above a mixed forest in the Bel-
gian Ardennes. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 108: 293-315.
Billesbach, D. 2011. Estimating uncertainties in individual eddy covariance flux
measurements: A comparison of methods and a proposed new method. Agri-
cultural and Forest Meteorology, 151: 394-405.
Burba, G. G., D. Mc Dermitt, A. Grelle, D. J. Anderson, and L. Xu. 2008. Address-
ing the influence of instrument surface heat exchange on the measurements of
CO2 flux from open-path gas analyzers. Global Change Biology, 14:18541876.
Burba, G., A. Schmidt, R. L. Scott, T. Nakai, J. Kathilankal, G. Fratini, C. Han-
son, B. Law, D. K. McDermitt, R. Eckles, M. Furtaw, and M. Velgersdyk. 2012.
Calculating CO
2
and H
2
O eddy covariance fluxes from an enclosed gas analyzer
using an instantaneous mixing ratio. Global Change Biology, 18: 385-399.
Campbell, G. S. and J. M. Norman. 1998. Introduction to Environmental Bio-
physics. New York, Springer Science.
De Ligne, A. B. Heinesch, and M. Aubinet. 2010. New Transfer Functions for
Correcting Turbulent Water Vapour Fluxes. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 137:
205-221.
Fan, S. M., Wofsy, S. C., Bakwin, P. S., Jacob, D. J. and Fitzjarrald, D. R. 1990.
Atmosphere-biosphere exchange of CO
2
and O
3
in the Central Amazon Forest.
Journal of Geophysical Research, 95: 16851-16864.
Finkelstein, P. L., and P. F. Sims. 2001. Sampling error in eddy correlation flux
measurements. Journal of Geophysical Research, 106: 3503-3509.
8-1
Finnigan, J.J., R. Clement, Y. Mahli, R. Leuning, H.A. Cleugh. 2003. A re-eval-
uation of long-term flux measurement techniques. Part I: averaging and coordin-
ate rotation, Boundary-Layer Meteorology 107: 148.
Foken, T. and B. Wichura. 1996. Tools for quality assessment of surface-based
flux measurements. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 78: 83-105.
Foken, T., M. Gockede, M. Mauder, L. Mahrt, B. D. Amiro, and J. W. Munger.
2004. Edited by X. Lee, et al. Post-field quality control, in Handbook of micro-
meteorology: A guide for surface flux measurements, Dordrecht: Kluwer Aca-
demic, 81-108.
Fratini, F., A. Ibrom, N. Arriga, G. Burba, D. Papale. 2012. Relative humidity
effects of water vapour fluxes measured with closed-path eddy-covariance systems
with short sampling lines. Agriculture and Forest Meteorology, 165: 53-63.
Gash, J. H. C. 1986. A note on estimating the effect of a limited fetch on micro-
meteorological evaporation measurements. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 35:
409-413.
Gash, J. H. C. and A. D. Culf. 1996. Applying linear de-trend to eddy correlation
data in real time. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 79: 301-306.
Gckede, M, T. Markkanen, B. H. Charlotte, T. Foken. 2006. Update of a foot-
print-based approach for the characterisation of complex measurement sites,
Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 118: 635655.
Gckede, M., T. Foken, M. Aubinet, M. Aurela, J. Banza, and co-authors. 2008.
Quality control of CarboEurope flux data - Part 1: Coupling footprint analyses
with flux data quality assessment to evaluate sites in forest ecosystems.
Biogeosciences, 5: 433-450.
Grelle, A. and G. Burba. 2007. Fine-wire thermometer to correct CO
2
fluxes by
open-path analyzers for artificial density fluctuations. Agricultural and Forest
Meteorology, 147: 48-57.
Hollinger, D. Y., S. M. Goltz, E. A. Davidson, J. T. Lee, K. Tu, H. T. Valentine.
1999. Seasonal patterns and environmental control of carbon dioxide and water
vapour exchange in an ecotonal boreal forest. Global Change Biology: 5, 891
902.
8-2
Appendix A. References
Horst, T. W. 1997. A simple formula for attenuation of eddy fluxes measured
with first-order-response scalar sensors. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 82: 219-
233.
Horst, T. W. and D. H. Lenschow. 2009. Attenuation of scalar fluxes measured
with spatially-displaced sensors. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 130: 275-300.
Hsieh, Cheng-I, G. Katul, and T. Chi. 2000. An approximate analytical model
for footprint estimation of scalar fluxes in thermally stratified atmospheric flows.
Advances in Water Resources, 23: 765-772.
Ibrom, A., E. Dellwik, H. Flyvbjerg, N. O. Jensen, and K. Pilegaard. 2007a.
Strong low-pass filtering effects on water vapor flux measurements with closed-
path eddy correlation systems, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 147:140-
156.
Ibrom, A., E. Dellwik, S. E. Larse, and K. Pilegaard. 2007b. On the use of the
Webb-Pearman-Leuning theory for closed-path eddy correlation measurements,
Tellus Series B-Chemical and Physical Meteorology, 59:937-946.
Jackson, P. S. 1981. On the displacement height in the logarithmic velocity pro-
file. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 11: 15-25.
Jarvi, L., I. Mammarella, W. Eugster, A. Ibrom, E. Siivola, and co-authors. 2009.
Comparison of net CO
2
fluxes measured with open- and closed-path infrared gas
analyzers in an urban complex environment. Boreal Environment Research, 14:
499-514.
Kormann, R. and F. X. Meixner. 2001. An analytical footprint model for non-
neutral stratification. Boundary-Layer Meteoroogy, 99:207224.
Kaimal, J. C., J. C. Wyngaard, Y. lzumi, and O. R. Cot. 1972. Spectral char-
acteristics of surface-layer turbulence. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteor-
ological Society, 98: 563-589.
Kaimal J.C. and L. Kristensen. 1991. Time series tapering for short data samples,
Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 57: 187-194.
Kljun, N., P. Calanca, M. W. Rotach, and H. P. Schmid. 2004. A simple para-
meterisation for flux footprint predictions. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 112:
503-523.
Kochendorfer J., T. P. Meyers, J. Frank, W. J. Massman, M. W. Heuer. 2012.
8-3
Appendix A. References
How well can we measure the vertical wind speed? Implications for fluxes of
energy and mass. Boundary-Layer Meteorology 145: 383-398.
Lee, X., J. Finnigan, and K. T. Paw U. 2004. Coordinate systems and flux bias
error, in Handbook of micrometeorology: a guide for surface flux meas-
urements, eds. X., Lee, W. J. Massman, and B. E. Law. Dordrecht, The Neth-
erlands: Kluwer Academic, 33-66.
Liu, H., G. Peters, and T. Foken. 2001. New equations for sonic temperature vari-
ance and buoyancy heat flux with an omnidirectional sonic anemometer,
Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 100: 459-468.
Mammarella, I., S. Launiainen, T. Gronholm, and P. Keronen, J. Pumpanen, .
Rannik, and T. Vesala. 2009. Relative humidity effect on the high-frequency
attenuation of water vapor flux measured by a closed-path eddy covariance sys-
tem. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 26: 1856-1866.
Mann, J. and D. H. Lenschow. 1994. Errors in airborne flux measurements.
Journal of Geophysical Research, 99: 519-526.
Massman, W. J. 1991. The attenuation of concentration fluctuations in tur-
bulent flow through a tube. Journal of Geophysical Research, 96: 15269-15273.
Massman, W. J. 2000. A simple method for estimating frequency response cor-
rections for eddy covariance systems. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 104:
185-198.
Massman, W. J. 2001. Reply to comment by Rannik on "A simple method for
estimating frequency response corrections for eddy covariance systems." Agri-
cultural and Forest Meteorology, 107: 247-251.
Massman, W. J. 2004. Concerning the measurement of atmospheric trace gas
fluxes with open- and closed-path eddy covariance system: The WPL terms and
spectral attenuation, in Handbook of micrometeorology: a guide for surface flux
measurements, eds. Lee, X., W. J. Massman and B. E. Law. Dordrecht, The Neth-
erlands: Kluwer Academic, 133-160.
Mauder M. 2013. A comment on "How well can we measure the vertical wind
speed? Implications for fluxes of energy and mass" by Kochendorfer et al. Bound-
ary-Layer Meteorology 147: 329-335.
8-4
Appendix A. References
Mauder, M. and T. Foken. 2006. Impact of post-field data processing on eddy cov-
ariance flux estimates and energy balance closure. Meteorologische Zeitschrift,
15: 597-609.
McDermitt, D., G. Burba, L. Xu, T. Anderson, A. Komissarov, and co-authors.
2010. A new low-power, open-path instrument for measuring methane flux by
eddy covariance. Applied Physics B: Lasers and Optics, 102: 391-405.
McMillen, R. T. 1988. An eddy correlation technique with extended applicability
to non-simple terrain. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 43: 231-245.
Moncrieff, J. B., J. M. Massheder, H. de Bruin, J. Ebers, T. Friborg, B. Heu-
sinkveld, P. Kabat, S. Scott, H. Soegaard, and A. Verhoef. 1997. A system to meas-
ure surface fluxes of momentum, sensible heat, water vapor and carbon dioxide.
Journal of Hydrology, 188-189: 589-611.
Moncrieff, J. B., R. Clement, J. Finnigan, and T. Meyers. 2004. Averaging,
detrending and filtering of eddy covariance time series, in Handbook of micro-
meteorology: a guide for surface flux measurements, eds. Lee, X., W. J. Massman
and B. E. Law. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 7-31.
Moore, C. J. 1986. Frequency response corrections for eddy correlation systems.
Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 37: 17-35.
Nakai, T., M. K. van der Molen, J. H. C. Gash, and Y. Kodama. 2006. Correction
of sonic anemometer angle of attack errors. Agricultural and Forest Meteor-
ology, 136: 19-30.
Nakai, T., K. Shimoyama. 2012. Ultrasonic anemometer angle of attack errors
under turbulent conditions. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 18: 162-163.
Rannik, . and T. Vesala. 1999. Autoregressive filtering versus linear detrending
in estimation of fluxes by the eddy covariance method. Boundary-Layer Meteor-
ology, 91: 258-280.
Runkle, B. K., C. Wille, M. Gaovi and L. Kutzbach. 2012. Attenuation Cor-
rection Procedures for Water Vapour Fluxes from Closed-Path Eddy-Covariance
Systems. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 142:1-23.
Schotanus, P., F. Nieuwstadt, and H. de Bruin. 1983. Temperature measurement
with a sonic anemometer and its application to heat and moisture fluxes, Bound-
ary-Layer Meteorology, 26:8193.
8-5
Appendix A. References
Smith, S. W. 1997. The scientist and engineer's guide to digital signal pro-
cessing. USA: California Technical Publishing.
Stull, R. B. 1988. An Introduction to Boundary-Layer Meteorology. Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Tanner, B. D., E. Swiatek, J. P. Greene. 1993. Density fluctuations and use of the
krypton hygrometer in surface flux measurements, in: Management of Irrig-
ation and Drainage Systems: Integrated Perspectives, eds. R. G. Allen. American
Society of Civil Engineers. New York. pp. 945-952.
van der Molen, M. K. J. H. C. Gash, and J. A. Elbers. 2004. Sonic anemometer
(co)sine response and flux measurement: II. The effect of introducing an angle
of attack dependent calibration. Agricultural and Forest Meterology, 122: 95-109.
van Dijk, A., W. Kohsiek, H. de Bruin. 2003. Oxygen Sensitivity of Krypton and
Lyman- Hygrometers, Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 20,
pp. 143-151.
van Dijk, A., A. F. Moene, and H. A. R. de Bruin. 2004. The principles of surface
flux physics: Theory, practice and description of the ECPack library. Meteor-
ology and Air Quality Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Neth-
erlands, 99 pp.
Vickers, D. and L. Mahrt. 1997. Quality control and flux sampling problems for
tower and aircraft data. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 14:
512-526.
Webb, E. K., G. I. Pearman, and R. Leuning. 1980. Correction of flux meas-
urements for density effects due to heat and water vapor transfer. Quarterly
Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 106: 85100.
Wilczak, J. M., S. P. Oncley, and S. A. Stage. 2001. Sonic anemometer tilt cor-
rection algorithms. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 99: 127-150.
WindMaster and WindMaster Pro User Manual, Issue 5 1561-PS-0001. 2009.
Gill Instruments.
8-6
Appendix A. References
Glossary
A
Absolute Limits Test
Assesses whether each variable attains, at least once in the current time series, a value
that is outside a user-defined plausible range.
Acquisition Frequency
The number of samples per second (Hz) recorded by the eddy covariance system. Some-
times called Update Rate (LI-7500A/LI-7200) or Output Rate (LI-7700).
Advanced Mode
An EddyPro run mode that enables many advanced processing options for atypical sites
and comparison of methods.
Altitude
The elevation above sea level of the site (m).
Amplitude Resolution Test
A statistical test that detects records with weak variance (weak winds and stable con-
ditions), in which the amplitude resolution of the recorded data may not be sufficient
to capture the fluctuations, by assessing whether the number of different values each
variable takes throughout the time series covers its range of variation with sufficient
homogeneity.
Angle of Attack
The angle that the wind vector forms with respect to the horizontal plane of the sonic
anemometer (the one defined by the U and V components). It is positive if the vertical
wind component is negative, i.e. the wind goes in the downward direction. Angles-of-
attack that are different from zero are thought to lead a distortion of the wind field due
to interaction with the anemometers transducers. Flow distortion corrections address
this issue for some anemometer models.
9-1
Angle of Attack Correction
Correction for the flow distortion due to the interaction between the wind flow and the
anemometers structures (e.g., transducers). Corrections are available for post-mounted
Gill Instruments sonic anemometer such as R3 and WindMaster. The relevance of this
effect of c-clamp anemometer models is debated (Kochendorfer et al. 2012; Mauder,
2013).
Angle of Attack Test
Calculates sample-wise angle of attacks throughout the current flux averaging period,
and flags it if the percentage of angles of attack exceeding a user-defined range is bey-
ond a (user-defined) threshold.
ASCII File
A format for raw eddy covariance data. Data are most commonly stored in a column-
wise fashion, and columns are usually separated by commas, tabs, semicolons or blank
spaces. ASCII files are human-readable using any text editor and can feature a header
stating the variable meanings and their units.
Axis Rotation for Tilt Correction
Method for compensating anemometer tilt with respect to local streamlines.
B
Biomet Data
Shorthand for biological and meteorological data. May include slow, accurate meas-
urements of air properties (temperature, pressure, water content, etc.), radiation com-
ponents (direct, indirect, reflected, and sorted in spectral bands), soil and vegetation
properties (biomass, water content, temperature, water and carbon flux, LAI, etc.). A few
of these measurements can be used to improve flux computation, or to calculate other
flux contributions such as storage fluxes, advection fluxes, soil fluxes.
C
Canopy Height
The height (m) of the canopy above the ground at eddy covariance site.
9-2
Glossary
Covariance Maximization
Procedure to estimate time lags between two time series. In eddy covariance, it is most
commonly used to estimate time lags between vertical wind speed and other variables.
It is based on the assumption that any setup limitation (physical separations, sampling
lines, etc) reduces the correlation between time series, that would be observed in the
environment. In a cross-correlation analysis between vertical wind speed and a variable,
the time lag for which the resulting covariance is maximal is taken to be the timelag
for that variable. The procedure is performed for all possible time lags in a in a time lag
plausibility window.
Cut-off Frequency
In eddy-covariance, the term is most often used to quantify the spectral features of an
eddy flux system. The larger the cut-off frequency, the greater the ability of the system to
measure flux contributions occurring at small spatial scales (small eddies). Typical real-
istic values range 0.1 to 5-8 Hz. Open-path systems tend to have higher cut-offs than
closed-path systems, due to attenuations of high-frequency fluctuations of gas con-
centrations resulting from the sampling line. Shorter sampling lines mitigate the prob-
lem. EddyPro can calculate your systems cut-off if you dont know how to estimate it.
D
Detrending
Refers to the operation of establishing and removing a trend in raw (high-frequency)
time series before calculating turbulent fluctuations. Using the block average pro-
cedure, no detrending is performed, and any instantaneous variation with respect to the
global mean of a variable (evaluated over the flux averaging interval) is considered as a
turbulent fluctuations. On the contrary, linear detrending and (exponential) running
mean methods remove a trend before evaluating fluctuations. With the latter methods,
the trend can be modulated to follow the time series more or less closely, by respectively
reducing or increasing the methods time constant.
Discontinuities Test
To detect discontinuities that lead to semi-permanent changes, as opposed to sharp
changes associated with smaller-scale fluctuations.
9-3
Glossary
Displacement Height
The height at which the wind speed would go to zero if the logarithmic wind profile
was maintained from the outer flow all the way down to the surface (also known as
zero plane displacement height).
Double Rotation
Aligns the x-axis of the anemometer to the current mean streamlines, nullifying the ver-
tical and crosswind components.
Drop-outs Test
Attempts to detect (relatively) short periods in which the time series sticks to some
value that is statistically different from the average value calculated over the whole
period.
Dynamic Metadata File
For EC datasets not in the GHG format, the dynamic metadata file can be used to
provide EddyPro with information concerning time-varying site, station, and instru-
mentation parameters, such as changing canopy height and roughness length, or instru-
ment separations and height. A dynamic metadata file can also be used with GHG files,
in case these do not contain accurate information (e.g. if a changing canopy height was
not updated in the GHG software during data collection).
E
Eastward Separation
East/west distance between the CO2/H2O Analyzer and the reference anemometer; pos-
itive values if east and negative values if west of the anemometer.
Embedded Biomet File
File containing Biomet data collected with LI-CORs biomet system and included
(embedded) in the GHG files. Each GHG file contains all eddy-covariance and biomet
measurement corresponding to a specific time period, and can be automatically pro-
cessed in EddyPro, to refine computation of turbulent fluxes.
9-4
Glossary
Express Mode
A setting in EddyPro that uses commonly-accepted settings that should apply to most
well-designed eddy covariance setups.
External Biomet File(s)
For users of Biomet systems other than the LI-COR system, EddyPro allows the usage of
Biomet data in flux computation. Data must be included in one or more external files
with a prescribed CSV format, which can then be loaded in EddyPro.
Extinction coefficient in oxygen Ko
In Krypton or Lyman-a hygrometers, the extinction coefficients for oxygen of the hygro-
meters, associated with the third-order Taylor expansion of the LambertBeer law
around reference conditions.
Extinction coefficient in water Kw
In Krypton or Lyman-a hygrometers, the extinction coefficients for water vapor of the
hygrometers, associated with the third-order Taylor expansion of the LambertBeer law
around reference conditions.
F
Fast Fourier Transform
Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is used for the frequency domain analysis (spectra and co-
spectra) of the time series data.
Flux Averaging Interval
Time span over which fluxes and all other results are calculated. Most typical is 30
minutes, but longer or shorter averaging intervals may be needed in specific conditions
(see Finnigan et al. 2003). You can look into the ogives output by EddyPro to determine
the most appropriate averaging interval for a given site. The flux averaging interval does
not need to match the duration of the collected raw files.
Footprint Estimation
Flux crosswind-integrated footprints are distances from the tower contributing 10%,
30%, 50%, 70% and 90% to measured fluxes.
9-5
Glossary
G
Gain Value
The gain (slope) of the linear relation between input and output units.
Generic Binary File
Raw eddy covariance data can be efficiently stored in a plain binary format. EddyPro can
handle generic binary files (both little and big endian) as long as the length of binary
words used to store each variable is constant throughout the file. Binary files are not
human-readable and, although they are fast to import for processing, do not constitute a
robust way of storing eddy covariance data, unless they are accompanied by appropriate
metadata.
GHG File
A custom LI-COR file format that includes complete eddy covariance data sets and
denoted by a .ghg file extension. At a minimum, GHG files contain a raw, high-fre-
quency data file (extension .data) and the paired metadata file (extension .metadata). If a
biomet system was part of the EC setup, GHG files can also contain a file with biomet
data (ending in -biomet.data) and the paired metadata file (ending in -biomet_
metadata). All files are stored in ASCII text format.
GHG Software
The name of the desktop and embedded software on LI-COR LI-7500As and LI-7200s;
used to log .ghg files.
H
Height
Under instruments tab in the metadata file editor; the distance between the ground and
the sample path of the sensor (m).
High-pass Filtering Effects
Applies a correction for flux spectral losses in the low frequency range, due to the finite
averaging time and dependent on the detrending method selected.
9-6
Glossary
I
Ignore
In the metadata file editor, tells EddyPro to ignore a variable.
Input Unit
Related to re-scaling a variable in the metadata file editor, this specifies the input units.
L
Linear Scaling
Used to rescale values (from voltage, for example) to meaningful units (such as m/s).
Longitudinal Path Length (anemometer)
Distance between a pair of anemometer transducers.
Longitudinal Path Length (gas analyzer)
The path length of the gas analyzer sample volume.
Low-pass Filtering
Applies a correction for flux spectral losses in the high frequency range.
M
Magnetic Declination
The angle between magnetic (uncorrected compass) North and geographic (true). This
angle changes slightly over time, according to variations of the earths magnetic field.
Based on Latitude, Longitude and date, EddyPro can retrieve the magnetic declination
at your site from the dedicated NOAA web-service.
Maximum Time Lag
The maximum expected time lag for the current variable, with respect to anemometric
measurements.
9-7
Glossary
Measurment Type
The description of the concentration measurement (either Molar/Mass density, Mole
fraction, or Mixing ratio).
Metadata File
The metadata file (extension .metadata) contains all meta information relevant to the
collected raw data and necessary to process it appropriately. Metadata include site, sta-
tion and instrumentation description, as well as meaning and units of all variables avail-
able in the corresponding data files. For maximal robustness, each EC raw data file
should be accompanied by its own metadata, as is the case with GHG files.
Minimum Time Lag
The minimum expected time lag for the current variable, with respect to anemometric
measurements.
N
Nominal Time Lag
The expected (nominal) time lag of the variable, with respect to the measurements of
the sonic anemometer.
North Alignment
For Gill sonic anemometers, this specifies whether the U wind component is aligned to
the North spar of the anemometer (the spar marked with an N or a notch) or with the
transducer closest to it. There is an offset of 30 degress between the two. For most mod-
els, wind components V and W will be perpendicular to U in a right handed coordinate
system.
North Offset
The anemometer's yaw offset with respect to local magnetic North (positive eastward).
Magnetic North is the direction in which the north end of a compass needle or other
freely suspended magnet will point in response to the earth's magnetic field.
North Reference
The North to which EddyPro should refer the wind direction. It can be magnetic (the
direction that the north end of a compass needle points in response to the earth's
9-8
Glossary
magnetic field) or geographic (the direction along the earth's surface towards the geo-
graphic North Pole). The difference between the two is the magnetic declination.
Northward Separation
North/south distance between the CO2/H2O Analyzer and the reference anemometer;
positive values if north and negative values if south of the anemometer.
Numeric (yes/no)
Specifies whether a variable is purely numeric or not.
O
Offset
The offset (y-axis intercept) of the linear relation between input and output units.
Output Directory
The directory in the file system where your flux results will be written.
Output ID
An identifier in the name of the output file that specifies the results of a project.
Output Unit
The units of values that are rescaled using the linear scaling feature.
P
Planar Fit
Aligns the anemometer coordinate system to local streamlines assessed on a long time
period (e.g., 2 weeks or more). Can be performed sector-wise, meaning that different
rotation angles are calculated for different wind sectors.
Planar Fit with no Velocity Bias
Similar to classic planar fit, but assumes that the any bias in the measurement of ver-
tical wind is compensated, and forces the fitting plane to pass through the origin (that
is, such that if average u and v are zero, also average w is zero).
9-9
Glossary
R
Random Uncertainty
Uncertainty is a quantification of the precision of a measurement. Sources of uncer-
tainties can be traced to biogeochemical (source/sink), transport, and instrument
factors. Random uncertainties due to sampling errors are a consequence of the limited
number of independent samples that contribute substantially to a flux during any fixed
sampling period (Finkelstein and Sims, 2001). Contrary to systematic uncertainties,
which introduce a bias into the resulting fluxes and shall be minimized by accurate
experimental design and instrument deployment, random uncertainties do not intro-
duce a bias, rather, they reduce our confidence that the reported number is the true
value (Billesbach, 2011).
Roughness Length
The height at which wind speed is zero (indicated by z0).
S
Skewness and Kurtosis Test
Excessive skewness and kurtosis may help detect periods of instrument malfunction.
Third and forth order moments are calculated on the whole time series and variables
are flagged if their values exceed user-selected thresholds.
SLT File
A format for raw eddy covariance data, often created by or used in conjunction with the
EdiRe/EdiSol or EddySoft software packages. It is a fixed-length binary format, with or
without a binary header describing the file content. EddyPro can handle both types of
SLT files, but you must specify whether it is associated to EdiRe/EdiSol or to EddySoft.
Spectral Correction Factor
Multiplicative factors (typically > 1) used to correct tentative flux estimates for flux
losses that can occur at both low and high frequencies. Spectral correction factors are
calculated for each flux based on a spectral correction scheme. EddyPro supports dif-
ferent schemes, to suit different EC setups. Depending on the type of gas analyzer
9-10
Glossary
deployed, spectral corrections must be applied to fluxes before (open-path) or after
(closed-path) consideration of WPL effects.
Spectral Corrections
Procedure to calculate spectral correction factors. In EddyPro, we distinguish between
analytic and in-situ methods. Analytic methods do not require analysis of (co)spectral
features derived from the data and are easy to implement, fast to perform and robust.
However, they may underestimate spectral attenuations, especially for closed-path sys-
tems. In-situ methods are more appropriate to closed-path systems, but they require long
(e.g., >1 month) datasets to analyze spectra features or raw time series, estimate cut-off
frequencies and compute correction factors. In-situ methods, involving non-linear
regressions, may also fail in certain conditions.
Spike Count/Removal
A statistical technique that detects the number of spikes in each time series and
removes them based upon your settings.
Steadiness of Horizontal Wind Test
Assesses whether the along-wind and crosswind components of the wind vector
undergo a systematic reduction (or increase) throughout the file.
T
Time Lag
In eddy-covariance, the term time lag refers to the time misalignment between dif-
ferent high-frequency time series. Time lags arise due to physical distances between
instruments, to electronic delays and, in closed-path setups, to the passage of air
through sampling lines.
Time Lag Compensation
Procedure to compensate for time lags between anemometric measurements and any
other high frequency measurements included in the raw files, notably those used for
fluxes. In EddyPro time lags can be ignored, set to a contestant value, calculated with
the automatic procedure called covariance maximization, or optimized by means of the
time lag optimization procedure.
9-11
Glossary
Time Lag Optimization
Time lags of water vapor in closed-path systems often depend on relative humidity (and
secondarily on air temperature), on account of enhanced sorption processes occurring
at the walls of the sampling line when RH increases. The time lag optimization pro-
cedure consists of automatically defining the most appropriate time lag plausibility win-
dow and nominal time lag for water vapor for a specified number of relative humidity
classes. The time lag optimization can also be used to derive plausibility windows for
passive gases, as a special case.
Time Lag Plausibility Window
The range of physically plausible time lags, within which the actual time is expected to
fall. Within this window, the nominal time lag is the time lag of maximal likelihood,
the one that is expected to occur most often. The minimum and maximum of the plaus-
ibility window, as well as the nominal time lags, are automatically calculated by
EddyPro if not explicitly provided, with algorithms that depend on whether the EC sys-
tem is open- or closed-path. The covariance maximization procedure (when requested)
is applied only within the time lag plausibility window.
Time Lags Test
Flags the scalar time series if the maximal w-covariances, determined via the covariance
maximization procedure and evaluated over a predefined time-lag window, are too dif-
ferent from those calculated for the user-suggested time lags. That is, the mismatch
between fluxes calculated with the expected time lags and with the actual time lags is
too large.
Time Response (anemometer)
Time response of the anemometer; its inverse defines the maximum frequency of the
atmospheric turbulence that the instrument is able to resolve. Consult the anem-
ometers specifications or user manual.
Time Response (gas analyzer)
Time response of the gas analyzer; its inverse defines the maximum frequency of the
atmospheric turbulent concentration fluctuations that the instrument is able to resolve.
Consult the analyzers specifications or user manual.
9-12
Glossary
TOB1 File
A format for raw eddy covariance data, often used for storing data obtained from Camp-
bell Scientific dataloggers. It is a fixed-length binary format, featuring a ASCII (read-
able) header stating the collected variables, their units, and numerical format.
Transversal Path Length (anemometer)
Distance transverse to a pair of transducers on the anemometer.
Transversal Path Length (gas analyzer)
Path length in the distance orthagonal to the longitudinal path length.
Triple Rotation
Double rotations plus a third rotation that nullifies the cross-stream stress. Not suitable
in situations where the cross-stream stress is not expected to vanish, e.g., over water sur-
faces.
Tube Diameter
For closed path gas analyzer, the diameter of the intake tube (cm).
Tube Length
For closed path gas analyzers, this specifies the length (cm) of the intake tube.
V
Vertical Separation
Vertical distance between the CO2/H2O Analyzer and the reference anemometer; this
value is negative if the center of the analyzer sample volume (LI-7500A, LI-7700) or
intake tube inlet (LI-7200) is below the center of the reference anemometer sample
volume and positive if the gas sample is above.
W
WPL Terms
Refers to the flux contributions arising because of air compressibility. Gas analyzers
measure gas density (i.e., mole or mass of gas per volume of air). However, volume of
air can change due to fluctuations of (primarily) air temperature, pressure and water
9-13
Glossary
vapor concentration. Such fluctuations must be taken into account when computing
fluxes, either by converting gas measurements into dry mole fraction (if possible), or by
adding compensation terms developed by Webb et al. (1980) for open-path setups and
by Ibrom et al. (2007) for closed-path setups. Select the most appropriate method in
EddyPros interface. If you select unsuitable WPL options, EddyPro will figure that out
and automatically switch to the most appropriate WPL strategy, depending on the avail-
able measurements.
9-14
Glossary
Index
10-1
A
Absolute limits 2-39
Acquisition frequency 2-9
Advanced Eddy Covariance Flux Pro-
cessing 3-33
Air properties 5-11
Air termperature 2-20
Alternative metadata file 6-13
Altitude 2-9
AmeriFlux output 2-41, 5-18
Amplitude resolution 2-38
Anemometer info 2-10
Angle of attack
statistical tests 2-39
Angle of attack correction 2-22,
4-20, 6-16, 7-21
ASCII files 4-3
Axes alignment 6-16
Axis rotation for tilt correction 2-23,
4-21, 7-22
B
Beginning of dataset 6-14
Biomet Data 2-8, 4-14
external 4-15
format 4-15
Block averaging 2-26
C
Canopy height 2-10
Citations 8-1
Compensation for density fluc-
tuations 4-23, 7-27, 7-62, 7-64
Computing fluxes 4-1
Conversion 2-16
Conversion type 6-21
Correcting sonic temperature for
humidity 7-43
Correlation 2-27
Covariances 5-12
Crosswind correction 2-20, 2-23
D
Dataset Selection 4-10
declination SeeMagnetic declin-
ation
Delay 2-16, 6-21
Density fluctuations,
compensating 7-38
Despiking 7-9
Detect dataset dates 2-18
Detrending 7-26, 7-50
Detrending method SeeTurbulent
fluctuations
Discontinuities 2-39
Displacement height 2-10, 6-15
Drop-outs 2-39
E
Eastward separation 2-12, 6-17
gas analyzer 2-13
Eastward Separation 3-21, 3-24
Eddy Covariance
CH4 Log Values 3-25
CO2/H2O Log Values 3-22
EddyPro
learning 1-3
Ending date 2-19
Ending time 2-19
Error codes 4-41
Ethernet Cable
connection 3-4, 3-26
Exit code 4-41
Exponential running mean 2-26
Express processing settings 7-1
F
FFT 2-31
Field separator character 2-17
File description info 2-14
File duration 2-9
Filtering
high pass 7-26, 7-50
Flag 2-21, 2-32, 7-70
about 6-27
Flow distortion correction 6-16
Flow rate 2-13
Flux averaging interval 2-19
Flux footprint 5-12
Footprint 2-32, 4-26, 5-12, 7-66
Full output 2-41, 5-10
G
Gain-offset conversion 2-16, 6-21
Gas analyzer info 2-13
Gas concentration, densities, and time
lags 5-11
GHG data 4-2
GHG Europe output format 2-41,
5-18
GHG file format 6-2
GPS Format 3-13
H
Head correction 6-16
Height
anemometer 2-11
gas analyzer 2-13
High-pass filtering 2-33, 7-26, 7-50,
7-52
Humidity
anemometer temperature 7-43
I
In-situ Spectral Corrections 3-33
Input units 2-16
Installing FluxPro 1-3
Instrument sensible heat 4-25
Instruments 2-10
Intake tube diameter 2-13
Intake tube flow rate 2-13
Intake tube length 2-13
Introduction 1-1
IP Address
SMARTFlux 3-37
K
Krypton hygrometer 2-14
L
Latitude and longitude 2-10
LI-7700
connecting 3-23
LI-COR file format 6-2
Linear conversion 2-16, 2-16
10-2
Index
Linear detrending 2-26
Logging Data 3-11
Low-pass filtering 2-34, 7-53
M
Magnetic declination 2-20, 6-25
Manufacturer
anemometer 2-11
gas analyzer 2-13
Master sonic 2-20
Maximum time lag 2-16
Measurement type
gas concentrations 2-16
Menus 2-1
Metadata 2-5, 2-7
anemometer info 2-10
editing in FluxPro 2-8
gas analyzer info 2-13
instruments 2-10
raw file description 2-14
station 2-9
use alternative 6-13
Minimum time lag 2-16
Missing sample allowance 2-19
Mixing ratio 2-30
Model
anemometer 2-11
gas analyzer 2-13
N
Nominal time lag 2-16
Nominal tube flow rate 2-13
Non-sensitive variables 6-19
North alignment 2-11
North offset 6-16
North reference 2-19
Northward separation 6-17
gas analyzer 2-13
Northward Separation 3-21, 3-24
Number of header rows 2-17
O
Offset 6-16
Ouput ID 2-19
Output directory 2-19
Output files
about 5-1
air properties 5-11
AmeriFlux 5-18
concentrations 5-11
covariances 5-12
custom variables 5-13
densities 5-11
features 5-2
file information 5-10
fluxes 5-12
footprint 5-12
full output 5-10
GHG Europe 5-18
rotation angles 5-11
stats 5-18
time lags 5-11
time structure 5-1
turbulance 5-11
unrotated wind 5-11
variables 5-13
variances 5-12
P
Path length
anemometer 2-12
gas analyzer 2-14
Planar fit 6-23
Planar Fit 3-33
Previous output directory 2-19
Processing data 4-1, 4-2, 4-3
Program failed 4-41
10-3
Index
Project
ID 2-5
title 2-5
Q
Quality check 2-32, 4-25, 7-70
R
Random Uncertainty
Estimation 2-40
Raw data directory 2-18
Raw file description 2-14
Raw file name format 2-19, 6-1
Raw file type
ASCII 2-5
Binary 2-6
ghg 2-5
SLT 2-7
TOB1 2-6
References 8-1
Reset button 2-10
Rich output SeeFull output
Rotation angles 5-11
Roughness length 2-10, 6-15
Running mean 2-26
S
Sample intake tube diameter 2-13
Sample intake tube length 2-13
Save
metadata file 2-10
Scaling factor 2-16
Gain 2-16
Offset 2-16
Select items 2-20
Sensitive variables 6-19
Sensor separation 6-17
Sensor Separation 3-21, 3-21, 3-24,
3-25
Settings
configuring 4-10
Shorthand 5-13
Site information 2-5, 2-7
Skewness and Kurtosis 2-39
SMARTFlux
configuration file 3-27
connecting 3-4
IP Address 3-37
Software version 2-13
Sonic Anemometer
scaling 3-17
Spectral corrections 2-35, 7-50
high frequency 4-26
High frequency 2-34
low frequency 4-26
Low frequency 2-33
Spectral Corrections 3-33
Spike count and removal 2-38, 7-9
Starting date 2-18
Starting time 2-18
Station 2-9
Statistical screening 7-9
Steadiness of horizontal wind 2-40
subset 2-18
T
Tapering window 4-25
Time constant 2-26
Time lag 2-16, 2-27, 2-39, 6-21, 7-28
compensation 4-22
maximum 2-16
minimum 2-16
Time response
anemometer 2-12
gas analyzer 2-14
Time stamp 6-14
Time structure of output 5-1
Timelag 3-33
10-4
Index
Timestamp refers to 2-9
TOA files 4-3
TOB1 files 4-3
Toolbars 2-4
Tube diameter 2-13
Tube length 2-13
Turbulance 5-11
Turbulent fluctuations 2-26, 4-22
calculating 7-60
U
Unrotated wind 5-11
USB Logging 3-11
V
Variable 2-15
Variables
output 5-13
sensitive and non-sensitive 6-19
Variances 5-12
Vertical separation 2-12, 6-17
gas analyzer 2-14
Vertical Separation 3-21, 3-25
W
Webb, Pearman, Leuning 2-30, 7-27,
7-38, 7-62, 7-64
Wind data format 2-11
Wind rotation angles 5-11
Wind speed offset 2-22, 4-20
WPL 7-27, 7-38, 7-62, 7-64
Z
Zero-full scale conversion 2-16, 6-21
Zero plane displacement height 6-15
10-5
Index
10-6