3-D Single Point Velocity Meter

Reference Designator
GA02HYPM-WFP03-05-VEL3DL000
Review Status
Review Complete
Note
Velocity data from profilers were run through the automated QC tests, but were not plotted or reviewed visually.
Depth
2,600 to 5,023m
Class
VEL3D (3-D Single Point Velocity Meter)
Make / Model
Falmouth Scientific / ACM-Plus

Dataset Reviews Last processed: 8/1/19, 1:08 PM

QC Check Info
Dep. Preferred Method Stream DD FD SG EG Gaps GD TS Rate (s) Pressure Comp. Time Order Valid Data Missing Data Data Comp. Missing Coords. Review
1 recovered_wfp 245 245 0 0 0 0 2,847,553 1 5021 / 5125 Complete
2 recovered_wfp 356 354 0 0 0 0 2,408,702 1 5023 / 5025 1 1 Complete
3 recovered_wfp 440 422 0 17 0 0 4,267,373 1 5023 / 5016 1 1 Complete
Data Ranges Review Images

Test Notes

  1. no other streams for comparison

Data Coverage

Deployment: 123
100%99%96%

Lat/Lon Differences (km)

Deployment: 123
1 0.00
2 3.540.00
3 0.463.780.00

System Annotations

Metadata Start Date End Date Comment
GA02HYPM
11/16/15, 1:36 PM 1/11/18, 10:09 AM

Deployments 2 and 3: Data were not transmitted via satellite telemetry.

Id: 374 By: lgarzio

GA02HYPM
11/16/15, 1:36 PM 11/4/16, 8:00 PM

Deployment 2: At the initial recovery attempt of this mooring in Nov 2016, it was determined that the mooring had fallen and was not recovered. During the following cruise in Jan 2018, the mooring was successfully recovered on 2018-01-15T09:30:00.

Id: 130 By: lgarzio

Review Notes

Metadata Start Date End Date Comment
GA02HYPM

I submitted a helpdesk question on 11/12/2018 regarding an offset between recovered and telemetered data for all global HYPMs: "There appears to be a substantial offset between data with the same timestamps from recovered_wfp and telemetered methods for all deployments of all global WFP CTDs, and I have included information from two representative deployments of two different profilers as examples. It looks like the values recorded for the first common timestamp are exactly the same, and as the profiler moves along in time the offset between the values recorded for the same timestamp become increasingly more offset. Then, the profiler reaches the end of the profile (either at its shallowest or deepest point), resets, and the pattern begins again. This is most easily seen in the pressure data, but there is an offset for all science parameters.

Examples:
GI02HYPM-WFP02-04-CTDPFL000 deployment 1
GP02HYPM-WFP02-04-CTDPFL000 deployment 3

The *_intersect.csv files attached contain data where recovered and telemetered timestamps intersect. For each timestamp and science parameter there are recorded values (from .nc files downloaded from the system) and the difference. For each parameter, the difference between the values at the bottom and top of the profiler's range are exactly zero, and (particularly for pressure) the differences steadily increase until they are reset at zero at the bottom/top of the profile. This pattern continues throughout the deployment. The plots attached are zoomed in to one upcast and one downcast, and highlight the offset in the data between the two methods."

Redmine 13743

By Lori Garzio, on 8/2/19

GA02HYPM
Deployment: 2
5/23/16, 12:00 AM 11/5/16, 12:00 AM

Modify annotation ID 130 to indicate the time the mooring fell. According to the pressure data from the CTDMO, the mooring began to fall around 5/23/2016. Excluding data from final statistics.

By Lori Garzio, on 1/3/19

New Note