Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
An Extensive Comparison of Commercial Pyrheliometers under a Wide Range of Routine Observing Conditions
Show others and affiliations
2011 (English)In: Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, ISSN 0739-0572, E-ISSN 1520-0426, Vol. 28, no 6, 752-766 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In the most comprehensive pyrheliometer comparison known to date, 33 instruments were deployed to measure direct normal solar radiation over a 10-month period in Golden, Colorado. The goal was to determine their performance relative to four electrical-substitution cavity radiometers that were calibrated against the World Radiometric Reference (WRR) that is maintained at the World Radiation Center in Davos, Switzerland. Because of intermittent cabling problems with one of the cavity radiometers, the average of three windowed, electrical-substitution cavity radiometers served as the reference irradiance for 29 test instruments during the 10-month study. To keep the size of this work manageable, comparisons are limited to stable sunny conditions, passing clouds, calm and windy conditions, and hot and cold temperatures. Other variables could have been analyzed, or the conditions analyzed could have employed higher resolution. A more complete study should be possible now that the instruments are identified; note that this analysis was performed without any knowledge on the part of the analyst of the instruments' manufacturers or models. Apart from the windowed cavities that provided the best measurements, two categories of performance emerged during the comparison. All instruments exceeded expectations in that they measured with lower uncertainties than the manufacturers' own specifications. Operational 95% uncertainties for the three classes of instruments, which include the uncertainties of the open cavities used for calibration, were about 0.5%, 0.8%, and 1.4%. The open cavities that were used for calibration of all pyrheliometers have an estimated 95% uncertainty of 0.4%-0.45%, which includes the conservative estimate of 0.3% uncertainty for the WRR.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. Vol. 28, no 6, 752-766 p.
National Category
Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences
Research subject
Remote sensing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:smhi:diva-520DOI: 10.1175/2010JTECHA1518.1ISI: 000291972400002OAI: oai:DiVA.org:smhi-520DiVA: diva2:806038
Available from: 2015-04-17 Created: 2015-04-15 Last updated: 2015-04-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Carlund, Thomas
By organisation
Core Services
In the same journal
Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology
Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 19 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.25.0
|