Abstract. In September 2016, 36 spectrometers from 24 institutes measured a number of key atmospheric pollutants for a period of 17 d during the Second Cabauw Intercomparison campaign for Nitrogen Dioxide measuring Instruments (CINDI-2) that took place at Cabauw, the Netherlands (51.97∘ N, 4.93∘ E). We report on the outcome of the formal semi-blind intercomparison exercise, which was held under the umbrella of the Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC) and the European Space Agency (ESA). The three major goals of CINDI-2 were (1) to characterise and better understand the differences between a large number of multi-axis differential optical absorption spectroscopy (MAX-DOAS) and zenith-sky DOAS instruments and analysis methods, (2) to define a robust methodology for performance assessment of all participating instruments, and (3) to contribute to a harmonisation of the measurement settings and retrieval methods. This, in turn, creates the capability to produce consistent high-quality ground-based data sets, which are an essential requirement to generate reliable long-term measurement time series suitable for trend analysis and satellite data validation. The data products investigated during the semi-blind intercomparison are slant columns of nitrogen dioxide (NO2), the oxygen collision complex (O4) and ozone (O3) measured in the UV and visible wavelength region, formaldehyde (HCHO) in the UV spectral region, and NO2 in an additional (smaller) wavelength range in the visible region. The campaign design and implementation processes are discussed in detail including the measurement protocol, calibration procedures and slant column retrieval settings. Strong emphasis was put on the careful alignment and synchronisation of the measurement systems, resulting in a unique set of measurements made under highly comparable air mass conditions. The CINDI-2 data sets were investigated using a regression analysis of the slant columns measured by each instrument and for each of the target data products. The slope and intercept of the regression analysis respectively quantify the mean systematic bias and offset of the individual data sets against the selected reference (which is obtained from the median of either all data sets or a subset), and the rms error provides an estimate of the measurement noise or dispersion. These three criteria are examined and for each of the parameters and each of the data products, performance thresholds are set and applied to all the measurements. The approach presented here has been developed based on heritage from previous intercomparison exercises. It introduces a quantitative assessment of the consistency between all the participating instruments for the MAX-DOAS and zenith-sky DOAS techniques.

Abstract. The differential optical absorption spectroscopy (DOAS) method is a well-known remote sensing technique that is nowadays widely used for measurements of atmospheric trace gases, creating the need for harmonization and characterization efforts. In this study, an intercomparison exercise of DOAS retrieval codes from 17 international groups is presented, focusing on NO 2 slant columns. The study is based on data collected by one instrument during the MultiAxis DOAS Comparison campaign for Aerosols and Trace gases (MAD-CAT) in Mainz, Germany, in summer 2013. As data from the same instrument are used by all groups, the results are free of biases due to instrumental differences, which is in contrast to previous intercomparison exercises.While in general an excellent correlation of NO 2 slant columns between groups of > 99.98 % (noon reference fits) and > 99.2 % (sequential reference fits) for all elevation angles is found, differences between individual retrievals are as large as 8 % for NO 2 slant columns and 100 % for rms residuals in small elevation angles above the horizon.Comprehensive sensitivity studies revealed that absolute slant column differences result predominantly from the choice of the reference spectrum while relative differences originate from the numerical approach for solving the DOAS equation as well as the treatment of the slit function. Furthermore, differences in the implementation of the intensity offset correction were found to produce disagreements for measurements close to sunrise (8-10 % for NO 2 , 80 % for rms residual). The largest effect of ≈ 8 % difference in NO 2 was found to arise from the reference treatment; in particular for fits using a sequential reference. In terms of rms fit residual, the reference treatment has only a minor impact. In contrast, the wavelength calibration as well as the intensity offset correction were found to have the largest impact (up to 80 %) on rms residual while having only a minor impact on retrieved NO 2 slant columns.

Abstract. We present the inter-comparison of delta slant column densities (SCDs) and vertical profiles of nitrous acid (HONO) derived from measurements of different multi-axis differential optical absorption spectroscopy (MAX-DOAS) instruments and using different inversion algorithms during the Second Cabauw Inter-comparison campaign for Nitrogen Dioxide measuring Instruments (CINDI-2) in September 2016 at Cabauw, the Netherlands (51.97∘ N, 4.93∘ E). The HONO vertical profiles, vertical column densities (VCDs), and near-surface volume mixing ratios are compared between different MAX-DOAS instruments and profile inversion algorithms for the first time. Systematic and random discrepancies of the HONO results are derived from the comparisons of all data sets against their median values. Systematic discrepancies of HONO delta SCDs are observed in the range of ±0.3×1015 molec. cm−2, which is half of the typical random discrepancy of 0.6×1015 molec. cm−2. For a typical high HONO delta SCD of 2×1015 molec. cm−2, the relative systematic and random discrepancies are about 15 % and 30 %, respectively. The inter-comparison of HONO profiles shows that both systematic and random discrepancies of HONO VCDs and near-surface volume mixing ratios (VMRs) are mostly in the range of ∼±0.5×1014 molec. cm−2 and ∼±0.1 ppb (typically ∼20 %). Further we find that the discrepancies of the retrieved HONO profiles are dominated by discrepancies of the HONO delta SCDs. The profile retrievals only contribute to the discrepancies of the HONO profiles by ∼5 %. However, some data sets with substantially larger discrepancies than the typical values indicate that inappropriate implementations of profile inversion algorithms and configurations of radiative transfer models in the profile retrievals can also be an important uncertainty source. In addition, estimations of measurement uncertainties of HONO dSCDs, which can significantly impact profile retrievals using the optimal estimation method, need to consider not only DOAS fit errors, but also atmospheric variability, especially for an instrument with a DOAS fit error lower than ∼3×1014 molec. cm−2. The MAX-DOAS results during the CINDI-2 campaign indicate that the peak HONO levels (e.g. near-surface VMRs of ∼0.4 ppb) often appeared in the early morning and below 0.2 km. The near-surface VMRs retrieved from the MAX-DOAS observations are compared with those measured using a co-located long-path DOAS instrument. The systematic differences are smaller than 0.15 and 0.07 ppb during early morning and around noon, respectively. Since true HONO values at high altitudes are not known in the absence of real measurements, in order to evaluate the abilities of profile inversion algorithms to respond to different HONO profile shapes, we performed sensitivity studies using synthetic HONO delta SCDs simulated by a radiative transfer model with assumed HONO profiles. The tests indicate that the profile inversion algorithms based on the optimal estimation method with proper configurations can reproduce the different HONO profile shapes well. Therefore we conclude that the features of HONO accumulated near the surface derived from MAX-DOAS measurements are expected to represent the ambient HONO profiles well.

No abstract

Abstract. In September 2016, 36 spectrometers from 24 institutes measured a number of key atmospheric pollutants for a period of 17 days during the Second Cabauw Intercomparison campaign for Nitrogen Dioxide measuring Instruments (CINDI-2) that took place at Cabauw, The Netherlands (51.97° N, 4.93° E). We report on the outcome of the formal semi-blind intercomparison exercise, which was held under the umbrella of the Network for the Detection of Atmospheric Composition Change (NDACC) and the European Space Agency (ESA). The three major goals of CINDI-2 were to characterise and better understand the differences between a large number of Multi-AXis Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy (MAX-DOAS) and zenith-sky DOAS instruments and analysis methods, to discuss the performance of the various types of instruments and to contribute to a harmonisation of the measurement settings and retrieval methods. This, in turn, creates the capability to produce consistent high-quality ground-based data sets, which are an essential requirement to generate reliable long-term measurement time series suitable for trend analysis and satellite data validation. The data products investigated during the semi-blind intercomparison are slant columns of nitrogen dioxide (NO2), the oxygen dimer (O4) and ozone (O3) measured in the UV and visible wavelength region, formaldehyde (HCHO) in the UV spectral region and NO2 in an additional (smaller) wavelength range in the visible. The campaign design and implementation processes are discussed in detail including the measurement protocol, calibration procedures and slant column retrieval settings. Strong emphasis was put on the careful alignment and synchronisation of the measurement systems, resulting in an unprecedented set of measurements made under highly comparable air mass conditions. The CINDI-2 data sets were investigated using a regression analysis of the slant columns measured by each instrument and for each of the target data products. The slope and intercept of the regression analysis respectively quantify the mean systematic bias and offset of the individual data sets against the reference, and the RMS error provides an estimate of the measurement noise or dispersion. These three criteria are examined and for each of the parameters and each of the data products, performance thresholds are set and applied to all the measurements. The approach presented here has been developed based on heritage from previous intercomparison exercises. It introduces a quantitative assessment of the measurement performance of all the participating instruments for the MAX-DOAS and zenith-sky DOAS techniques.