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 8/8/19

Deployments 4 and 5 don't have deployment depths defined in asset management.

By Lori Garzio, on 1/3/19

Data are unreasonable. According to asset management, the instrument was deployed at 150m but pressure values are recorded around 280 dbar. Conductivity, salinity, and density are also unreasonable. Temperature in degrees Celsius appear to be reasonable for a CTD deployed at 280 dbar. The L0 data products (conductivity, pressure and temperature in counts) are in a similar range to those from other deployments.

By Lori Garzio, on 1/2/19

Excluding data from the beginning of deployment 2 from the final statistics as the mooring was recovered and re-deployed (annotation ID 580)

By Lori Garzio, on 1/3/19

Conductivity dropped substantially for several weeks (this affects salinity and density). Temperature and pressure don't appear to be affected. Excluding data from final statistics. Data should be annotated to alert users of the issue.

By Lori Garzio, on 1/3/19

Conductivity dropped substantially (this affects salinity and density) then gradually returned to resemble the data that were recorded before the issue. Temperature and pressure don't appear to be affected. Excluding data from final statistics. Data should be annotated to alert users of the issue.

By Lori Garzio, on 1/3/19

Conductivity (and salinity and density) dropped suddenly for approx. 24 hours, then returned to reasonable values. Excluding data from final statistics.

By Lori Garzio, on 1/3/19

The mooring was deployed 9 - 10 km from the location of the previous 4 deployments of this mooring. If this location is correct, the platform should be annotated to inform the users as to why the deployment location changed.

By Lori Garzio, on 1/2/19

Conductivity (and salinity and density) dropped suddenly for several hours, then returned to reasonable values. Excluding data from final statistics.

By Lori Garzio, on 1/3/19