Reply to the Comment by Mauder on “How Well Can We Measure the Vertical Wind Speed? Implications for Fluxes of Energy and Mass”

In Kochendorfer et al. (Boundary-Layer Meteorol 145:383–398, 2012 , hereafter K2012) the vertical wind speed measured by a non-orthogonal three-dimensional sonic anemometer was shown to be underestimated by 12 %. Turbulent statistics and eddy-covariance fluxes estimated using were also affected by t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Boundary-layer meteorology 2013-05, Vol.147 (2), p.337-345
Main Authors: Kochendorfer, John, Meyers, Tilden P., Frank, John M., Massman, William J., Heuer, Mark W.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Atmospheric boundary layer
Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution
Atmospheric Sciences
Earth and Environmental Science
Earth Sciences
Meteorology
Reply
Turbulence
Wind
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In Kochendorfer et al. (Boundary-Layer Meteorol 145:383–398, 2012 , hereafter K2012) the vertical wind speed measured by a non-orthogonal three-dimensional sonic anemometer was shown to be underestimated by 12 %. Turbulent statistics and eddy-covariance fluxes estimated using were also affected by this underestimate in . Methodologies used in K2012 are clarified here in response to Mauder’s comment. In addition, further analysis of the K2012 study is presented to help address questions raised in the comment. Specific responses are accompanied with examples of time series, calculated correlation coefficients, and additional explanation of the K2012 methods and assumptions. The discussion and analysis included in the comment and in this response do not affect the validity of the methods or conclusions presented in K2012.
ISSN:0006-8314
1573-1472
DOI:10.1007/s10546-012-9792-8