Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 59, Issue 3, pp 297–311

Comparison of eddy-covariance measurements of CO2 fluxes by open- and closed-path CO2 analysers

  • R. Leuning
  • K. M. King
Article

Abstract

Eddy fluxes of CO2 estimated using a sonic anemometer and a closed-path analyser were, on average, 16% lower than those obtained with the same anemometer and an adjacent open-path CO2 analyser. Covariances between vertical windspeed and CO2 density from the closed-path analyser were calculated using data points for CO2 that were delayed relative to anemometer data by the time required for a parcel of air to travel from the tube inlet to the CO2 sensor. Air flow in the intake tube was laminar. Densities of CO2 that had been corrected for spurious fluctuations arising from fluctuations in temperature and humidity were used in the flux calculations. Corrections for the cross-sensitivity of CO2 analysers to water vapour were also incorporated. Spectral analysis of the corrected CO2 signal from the closed-path analyser showed that damping of fluctuations in the sampling tube at frequencies f > 0.1 Hz caused the apparent loss in flux. The measured losses can be predicted accurately using theory that describes the damping of oscillations in a sampling tube. High-frequency response of the closed-path system can be improved substantially by ensuring turbulent flow in the tube, using a combination of high volumetric flow rate and small tube diameter. The analysis of attenuation of turbulent fluctuations in flow through tubes is applicable to the measurement of fluxes of other minor atmospheric constituents using the eddy covariance method.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Coppin, P. A. and Taylor, K. J.: 1983, ‘A Three Component Sonic Anemometer/ Thermometer System for General Micrometeorological Research’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 27, 27–42.Google Scholar
  2. Kaimal, J. C., Wyngaard, J. C., Izumi, Y. and Coté, O. R.: 1972, ‘Spectral Characteristics of Surface-Layer Turbulence’, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 98, 563–589.Google Scholar
  3. Lenschow, D. H. and Raupach, M. R.: 1991, ‘The Attenuation of Fluctuations in Scalar Concentrations through Sampling Tubes’, J. Geophys. Res. 96, 15259–15268.Google Scholar
  4. Leuning, R. and Moncrieff, J.: 1990, ‘Eddy-Covariance CO2 Flux Measurements Using Open- and Closed-Path CO2 Analysers: Corrections for Analyser Water Vapour Sensitivity and Damping of Fluctuations in Air Sampling Tubes’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 53, 63–76.Google Scholar
  5. Leuning, R., Denmead, O. T., Lang, A. R. G. and Ohtaki, E.: 1982, ‘Effects of Heat and Water Vapor Transport on Eddy Covariance Measurement of CO2 Fluxes’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 23, 209–222.Google Scholar
  6. Moore, C. J.: 1986, ‘Frequency Response Corrections for Eddy Correlation Systems’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 37, 17–35.Google Scholar
  7. Parkinson, K. J.: 1971, ‘Carbon Dioxide Infra-red Gas Analysis’, J. Exp. Bot. 22, 169–176.Google Scholar
  8. Philip, J. R.: 1963a, ‘The Theory of Dispersal During Laminar Flow in Tubes. I’, Aust. J. Phys. 16, 287–299.Google Scholar
  9. Philip, J. R.: 1963b, ‘The Theory of Dispersal During Laminar Flow in Tubes. II’, Aust. J. Phys. 16, 300–310.Google Scholar
  10. Philip, J. R.: 1963c, ‘The Damping of a Fluctuating Concentration by Continuous Sampling through a Tube’, Aust. J. Phys. 16, 454–463.Google Scholar
  11. Taylor, G. I.: 1953, ‘Dispersion of Soluble Matter in Solvent Flowing Slowly through a Tube’, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 219, 186–203.Google Scholar
  12. Taylor, G. I.: 1954, ‘The Dispersion of Matter in Turbulent Flow through a Pipe’, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 223, 446–468.Google Scholar
  13. Webb, E. K., Pearman, G. I. and Leuning, R.: 1980, ‘Correction of Flux Measurements for Density Effects due to Heat and Water Vapour Transfer’, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 106, 85–100.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Leuning
    • 1
  • K. M. King
    • 2
  1. 1.CSIRO Centre for Environmental MechanicsCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Land Resource ScienceUniversity of GuelphGuelphCanada

Personalised recommendations