-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Drifts 08/16: barometer altitude analysis #53
Comments
that doesn't seem to fit the real altitude very well ... |
Drifts 16: difference between altitudes: barometric vs. TAWOK, I see. Indeed, it looks quite off, but I think it can be explained partly. First, the difference in altitude is mainly caused by the offset of the barometric formula. It assumes the 0 m seal level altitude at 1013.25 hPa at 15 °C, while TAW reference is based on the old measurements of the average low tide in Oostende. So expect to find an offset. Secondly, once this offset is taken into account, I expect that if TAW is high, barometric altitude will also be high, and vice versa. In other words, there should be linear relationship between the two. And this is more or less what I find: The slope is 0.86, while ideally it should be 1. The offset is -32.6 m. Actually, I would expect a perfect straight line with a slope of 1, so these outlying cases all must have their reasons. Part of the reason for the errors is that we need a very long timeseries (+4 years) to be able to reduce the error to +/-10 m (cf. Drifts 15). Take BAOL015X_72527. According to barometric formula computed on the median, it should be around -84.6m below sealevel. In reality it is at 28.3m TAW. We adjust the barometric formula with offset -32.6 and slope 0.86, which results in: -8.3m. The absolute difference between -8.3m and -84.6m is 76.3m. Since for this barometer we have 4420 (12h interval) observations, we expect to make an error of approximately 17m based on the barometric formula. But the error of 76.3m is 4.5x higher (= relative error), which makes this barometer a big suspect. The reason for such a large relative error is the fact that it is drifting for quite some time, as we can determine from #51. Here is a list of suspects with relative errors > 1.5:
I have placed an asterisk to the ones that do not seem to drift according to #51. Here they are: So although these barometers do not drift, their median pressures seem to be way off from what we expect, so I would advise to double-check them. Here is also the full dataset and a visualization of the relative errors: |
This analysis is mainly for detection of possible anomalous average (median) values of barometers using height information. I.e. if the calculated height based on barometric formula doesn't comply with the real height of the barometer, then there is a problem somewhere.
Here is a comparison of all the barometers (filter
PRESSURE_VALUE < 1100 AND PRESSURE_VALUE > 975
) with altitudes included with the name on the y-axis.Zoom-in the plot for better view.
Here is the same plot without the vertical lines.
Here also the csv-file which might be used for comparison.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: