SGP/EBBR/E13 - Wind direction failure

The EBBR wind direction was stuck at 135 degrees; this reading indicates a failure of the 
sensor electronics.

• Wind direction (relative to true north)(mv_wind_d)

• vector wind speed(res_ws)
• wind direction (relative to true north)(wind_d)
• standard deviation of wind direction (sigma theta)(sigma_wd)

• standard deviation of wind direction (sigma theta)(sigma_wd)
• wind direction (relative to true north)(wind_d)
• vector wind speed(res_ws)

SGP/EBBR/E20 - Wind Direction 50 Degrees High

The wind direction was offset high about 50 degrees.

• wind direction (relative to true north)(wind_d)

• Wind direction (relative to true north)(mv_wind_d)

• wind direction (relative to true north)(wind_d)

SGP/EBBR/E18 - Soil Heat Flow #4 Offscale Low; Sensible and Latent Heat Flux Sometimes 
Incorrect

Soil heat flow #4 was sometimes lower than the lower limit imposed in the EBBR 
programming; sensible and latent heat flux were therefore deemed to be suspect during those times.  
The cause of the low values is not clear, but the values are not reasonable for the 
vegetation type at EF18.

• 5 cm soil heat flow corrected for soil moisture content, site 4(c_shf4)
• 5 cm soil heat flow, site 4(shf4)
• latent heat flux(e)
• soil heat flow, site 1(g1)
• h(h)
• soil heat flow, site 4(g4)
• average surface soil heat flow(ave_shf)

• Soil heat flow 4(mv_hft4)

SGP/EBBR/E2 - Net Radiation and Fluxes Incorrect

The net radiometer was tipped 37 degrees eastward, resulting in apparent
solar noon being 2.5 hours early.  The net radiation error results in incorrect sensible 
and latent heat fluxes.

• h(h)
• latent heat flux(e)
• net radiation(q)

• Net radiation(mv_q)

• net radiation(q)

SGP/EBBR/E19 - Sensible and latent heat flux and net radiation incorrect

Net radiation was too large, resulting in sensible and latent heat fluxes being too large. 
 The cause of the problem is unknown.

• net radiation(q)

• Net radiation(mv_q)

• h(h)
• latent heat flux(e)
• net radiation(q)

SGP/EBBR/E2 - AEM Ventilator Dangling - Sensible and Latent Heat Fluxes Incorrect

The right AEM ventilator unit with temperature and humidity sensors inside was dangling 
from the AEM.  Therefore, the gradients of temperature and relative humidity and thus 
sensible and latent heat flux are suspect for this period.  Often, the fluxes look reasonable.

• Right air temperature(tair_r)
• Temperature of right humidity sensor chamber(rr_thum_r)
• Right relative humidity(mv_hum_r)

• Temperature of the top humidity chamber(thum_top)
• top air temperature(tair_top)
• top vapor pressure(vp_top)
• Top humidity(hum_top)
• Temperature of bottom humidity sensor chamber(thum_bot)
• Bottom humidity(hum_bot)
• bottom air temperature(tair_bot)
• bottom vapor pressure(vp_bot)

• Temperature of bottom humidity sensor chamber(thum_bot)
• top air temperature(tair_top)
• bottom vapor pressure(vp_bot)
• bottom air temperature(tair_bot)
• latent heat flux(e)
• h(h)
• ratio of sensible/latent heat fluxes (Bowen ratio)(bowen)
• Bottom humidity(hum_bot)
• top vapor pressure(vp_top)
• Temperature of the top humidity chamber(thum_top)
• Top humidity(hum_top)

SGP/EBBR/E15 - Water in dome

There was water in the bottom dome of the net radiometer.

Net radiation, and sensible and latent heat fluxes were 
incorrect during the period.

• Net radiation(mv_q)

• net radiation(q)
• latent heat flux(e)
• h(h)

• net radiation(q)

SGP/EBBR/E15 - Soil Heat Flow #4 Incorrect

Soil heat flux #4 produced too large a soil heat flow at times, resulting in it exceeding 
the qc check limit and causing sensible and latent heat fluxes to be incorrect.

• Soil heat flow 4(mv_hft4)

• latent heat flux(e)
• 5 cm soil heat flow, site 4(shf4)
• 5 cm soil heat flow corrected for soil moisture content, site 4(c_shf4)
• average surface soil heat flow(ave_shf)
• soil heat flow, site 4(g4)
• h(h)

SGP/EBBR/E18 - SHF #4 Measurements Too Low; Sensible and Latent Heat Fluxes Suspect

Soil heat flow #4 was replaced at the beginning of this period.  However, the soil heat 
flow measurements from that sensor were sometimes still lower than the lower limit imposed 
in the EBBR programming; sensible and latent heat flux were therefore deemed to be 
suspect during those times.  The cause of the low values could not be determined, but the 
values are not reasonable for the vegetation type at EF18.  

To remedy the situation, the soil heat flow sensor calibration was changed so that the 
sensor provided measurements that resembled the other four soil heat flow sensor 
measurements.

Soil heat flow measurements have been reasonable since the calibration change.

• 5 cm soil heat flow corrected for soil moisture content, site 4(c_shf4)
• 5 cm soil heat flow, site 4(shf4)
• latent heat flux(e)
• h(h)
• soil heat flow, site 4(g4)
• average surface soil heat flow(ave_shf)

• Soil heat flow 4(mv_hft4)

SGP/EBBR/E20 - Wind Direction Incorrect

The wind direction differed from the co-located SMOS by 50 deg during part of the stated 
period and the electronics had failed completely resulting in a constant 135 degrees for 
the following dates and times:
08/15 0230-0430, 0830-1530 and 09/03 0200-0300, 0500 - 09/10 2230.

Sensible and latent heat fluxes were not affected by this problem.

• standard deviation of wind direction (sigma theta)(sigma_wd)
• wind direction (relative to true north)(wind_d)
• vector wind speed(res_ws)

• Wind direction (relative to true north)(mv_wind_d)

• wind direction (relative to true north)(wind_d)
• vector wind speed(res_ws)
• standard deviation of wind direction (sigma theta)(sigma_wd)