2007
DOI: 10.1175/jtech1898.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Field Results from a Second-Generation Ocean/Lake Surface Contact Heat Flux, Solar Irradiance, and Temperature Measurement Instrument—The Multisensor Float

Abstract: This paper describes results from two field programs that support development of a wave-following surface contact multisensor float (MSF) designed to simultaneously measure net surface heat flux, net solar irradiance, and water temperature. The results reported herein compare measurements from a secondgeneration design (circa 1998) against directly measured radiative fluxes as well as turbulent fluxes derived using both eddy correlation and bulk aerodynamic methods. The reference flux data are collected using … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure compares the MEP model predicted E and H (in broken red), according to equations and using the observed R n and T s , with the fluxes data (in solid blue) for Lake Råksjö. Conductive layer of cool skin is expected to prevail during this period of time as wind speed (Figure a) was significantly weaker than 15 m s −1 threshold [e.g., Boyle , ]. Figure shows that the MEP‐modeled fluxes agree with the data qualitatively.…”
Section: Model Testmentioning
confidence: 68%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Figure compares the MEP model predicted E and H (in broken red), according to equations and using the observed R n and T s , with the fluxes data (in solid blue) for Lake Råksjö. Conductive layer of cool skin is expected to prevail during this period of time as wind speed (Figure a) was significantly weaker than 15 m s −1 threshold [e.g., Boyle , ]. Figure shows that the MEP‐modeled fluxes agree with the data qualitatively.…”
Section: Model Testmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…Since heat transfer near a material surface is due to either molecular or turbulent diffusion, the corresponding thermal inertia parameters need to be parameterized accordingly. Previous observational studies [e.g., Khundzhua et al , ] have confirmed that under common meteorological conditions (e.g., wind speed <15m s −1 [e.g., Boyle , ]), a thin water layer referred to as cool skin exists next to the water‐atmosphere interface where heat transfer is through thermal conduction [ Fairall et al , ]. In this study, the MEP model is formulated for the case of cool skin so that the corresponding thermal inertia parameter only depends on the physical property of (still) liquid water.…”
Section: Model Formulationmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The skin temperature is usually lower than the bulk water temperature because the bodies of water lose energy at the surface layer, a thin layer with a thickness of the order of several millimetres. According to Boyle (2007), DT generally lies between (0.28C and  (18C, but it has been recorded below (28C (e.g. Garrett et al, 2001;Harris and Kotamarthi, 2005).…”
Section: Measurements Meteorological Conditions and Water Turbiditymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that I s the thermal inertia of bulk medium, a physical property of the medium material. For water‐body, I s either a material property of liquid water when a “cool skin” exists on the top of water surface (Boyle, 2007) under weak to moderate wind. Under the condition of strong wind, material property α in I s replaced by an eddy‐diffusivity to characterize the effect of turbulence on heat transfer in the water boundary layer, for example, (Cronin et al., 2015).…”
Section: Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%