Influence of Ultrasonic Wind Sensor Position on Measurement Accuracy under Full-Scale Conditions

In this study, the air temperature and velocity component means were also computed, as were the fluctuation values of the three component velocities (u, v, and w) and the air temperature (T). The instantaneous velocity can be broken down into its tally of varying and time-averaged contributions using a process known as Reynolds decomposition. The Reynolds decomposition depends on how you define the mean. The results show that the behaviors of the u, v, and w diurnal cycles are anticipated in ABL. The best fit is for air temperature because the correlation coefficient between time and temperature is large. The component fluctuated around zero, and the sum of the fluctuation averages equaled zero. The fluctuation of u was large, which increased because of the initial value of u and because of wind direction and friction velocity.

show abstract

RETRACTED: Comparison of Application of MCM and GUM in Evaluation of Measurement Uncertainty of Photoelectric Cup-Wind Speed Sensor

Wei,

Chong,

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To improve the accuracy of calibration results of photoelectric cup-type wind speed sensors, the GUM method and MCM method were used to evaluate the measurement uncertainty of calibration results under the wind speed measurement system. Firstly, the measurement principle and model of photoelectric cup-type wind speed sensor, GUM and MCM are introduced. Then, the uncertainty of the measurement results is evaluated by GUM and MCM, respectively, and the applicability of the GUM method is verified by MCM. Finally, the application of GUM and MCM in the measurement uncertainty evaluation of photoelectric cup-type wind speed sensors is evaluated comprehensively from the aspects of application scope, operability, and accuracy of evaluation results. The results show that: 1) Compared to the GUM (Based on the LPU method), the uncertainty evaluation results of MCM (Based on the LPD method) are more realistic, reliable, and accurate and have higher evaluation efficiency and stronger operability; 2) By comparing and verifying the evaluation results of GUM and MCM, it was found that the absolute deviations dlow and dhigh exceeded the corresponding numerical tolerances, indicating that the GUM method did not pass the applicability verification;3) The uncertainty evaluation results of MCM and adaptive MCM were consistent, and the number of test samples for adaptive MCM (M = 2×104) is much smaller than the number of MCM test samples for a single batch (M = 106). Therefore, when evaluating the measurement uncertainty of the calibration results of the photoelectric cup-type wind speed sensor, it is recommended to use the MCM method. In addition, to reduce the number of randomly selected test samples, the adaptive MCM method can be prioritized.

show abstract

Influence of Ultrasonic Wind Sensor Position on Measurement Accuracy under Full-Scale Conditions

Cited by 5 publications

References 43 publications

The measurement of axial forces in scaffolding standards

The measurement of axial forces in scaffolding standards

A Study of Turbulent Fluctuation of Three-Component Wind and Air Temperature in the Surface Layer of Baghdad Urban

RETRACTED: Comparison of Application of MCM and GUM in Evaluation of Measurement Uncertainty of Photoelectric Cup-Wind Speed Sensor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About