Engineering topics

Houston, Adam

Publications and source records attributed to Houston, Adam.

7 records

DOE OSTI2024

Evaluation and Intercomparison of Small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems Used for Atmospheric Research

Abstract Small uncrewed aircraft systems (sUAS) are regularly being used to conduct atmospheric research and are starting to be used as a data source for informing weather models through data assimilation. However, only a limited number of studies have been conducted to evaluate the performance of these systems and assess their ability to replicate measurements from more traditional sensors such as radiosondes and towers. In the current work, we use data collected in central Oklahoma over a 2-week period to offer insight into the performance of five different sUAS platforms and associated sensors in measuring key weather data. This includes data from three rotary-wing and two fixed-wing sUAS and included two commercially available systems and three university-developed research systems. Flight data were compared to regular radiosondes launched at the flight location, tower observations, and intercompared with data from other sUAS platforms. All platforms were shown to measure atmospheric state with reasonable accuracy, though there were some consistent biases detected for individual platforms. This information can be used to inform future studies using these platforms and is currently being used to provide estimated error covariances as required in support of assimilation of sUAS data into weather forecasting systems.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Near-Cloud Atmospheric Ingredients for Deep Convection Initiation

A lack of routine environmental observations located near deepening cumulus congestus clouds limits verification of important theorized and simulated updraft–environment interaction processes occurring during deep convection initiation (CI). We analyze radiosonde profiles collected during several hundred CI events near a mountain range in central Argentina during the CACTI field campaign. Statistical analyses illustrate environmental conditions supporting radar-observed CI outcomes that span a spectrum of convective cell depths, widths, and durations, as well as events lacking precipitating convection. Tested environmental factors include a large variety of sounding-derived measurements of CAPE, CIN, moisture, terrain-relative winds, vertical shear, and lifted parcel properties, with supplemental model reanalysis of background larger-scale vertical motion. CAPE and CIN metrics do not consistently differentiate CI success from failure. Only a few environmental factors contain consistent monotonic relationships among the spectrum of cloud depths achieved during CI: (i) the depth and strength of background ascent, and (ii) the component of low-level flow oriented parallel to the ridgeline. These metrics suggest that the ability of the surrounding flow to lift parcels to their LFC and terrain-modified flow are consistently relevant processes for CI. Low- to midlevel relative humidity strongly discriminated between CI and non-CI events, likely reflecting entrainment-driven dilution processes. However, we could not confidently conclude that relative humidity similarly discriminated robust from marginal CI events. Circumstantial evidence was found linking cell width, an important cloud property governing the probability of CI, to LCL height, boundary layer depth, depth and magnitude of the CIN layer, and ambient wind shear.

Storm environments↗

DOE OSTI2021

S0 Uncrewed Aircraft System Measurement Characterization Field Campaign Report

The lower atmosphere contributes directly to the modulation of weather and climate. Understanding the importance of this part of the atmosphere, scientists have worked to improve the representation of the atmospheric boundary layer in numerical prediction tools. Such work depends upon information from observing systems, including remote sensors, weather balloons, and research aircraft. Recent years have seen significant advances in uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) for atmospheric research. Those efforts have provided new perspectives on atmospheric and surface conditions, particularly from smaller UAS (sUAS) platforms. This field campaign included collection of data using several sUAS, and comparing the sUAS data to those from different observing facilities at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility’s Southern Great Plains (SGP) observatory in Oklahoma. Over the course of one week, the Black Swift Technologies and University of Nebraska teams conducted flights for the sole purpose of system evaluation and intercomparison. In addition, these teams conducted joint flight operations at the Marshall, Oklahoma Mesonet site alongside teams from the University of Colorado, University of Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State University to collect additional data for side-by-side comparison. Platforms operated by Black Swift Technologies and the University of Nebraska under this project included one fixed-wing and two rotary-wing platforms, as well as an instrumented surface vehicle. These include the Black Swift Technologies S0 UAS, the University of Nebraska M600 UAS, a University of Nebraska-operated Meteomatics Meteodrone UAS, and the University of Nebraska CoMeT (Combined Mesonet and Tracker) vehicle. Additional details on all of these platforms can be found in de Boer et al. (in prep). In total, 95 sUAS flights were conducted for a combined total of 18.6 flight hours. The S0 was operated both to the south and north of the SGP 60 m tower, while the M600 and Meteodrone were operated directly to the east of the tower. Weather conditions were generally good, with moderate winds. Flights were conducted both to follow the extra radiosondes that were launched as part of this campaign, as well as to conduct extended statistical sampling at tower instrument heights. The later flights also provided data for statistical platform intercomparison.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

UNL M600P data

These data were collected a DJI M600-P hexcopter UAS operated by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. The M600-P includes housings, described by Islam et al. (2019), for the temperature/humidity sensors. Data were collected via profiles to ~120 m AGL along with loiters near 60 m AGL.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Combined Mesonet and Tracker

Title: Combined Mesonet and Trackers (UNL Mobile Mesonets) Authors University of Nebraska PI: Adam Houston, UNL Professor (ahouston2@unl.edu) Mailing Address: 126 Bessey Hall P.O. Box 880340 Lincoln, NE 68588-0340 CoMeT Overview The University of Nebraska-Lincoln operates three Combined Mesonet and Tracker (CoMeTs). CoMeTs are Ford Explorers (model years 2015, 2017, and 2019) with forward-mounted suites of meteorological sensors and dual moonroofs, combining the capability of a mobile mesonet to collect near-surface observations with the capability of an unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) tracker vehicle, which enables an observer in the second row of seats to see the aircraft and maintain compliance with Federal Aviation Administration policies on UAS operation. The CoMeTs collect observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155A, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass (Barbieri et al. 2019). The HMP155A and 109SS-L thermistor are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). This list of sensors is also included in the CoMeT data file metadata. Manufacturer specifications for these instruments are given in Table 1 of Hanft and Houston (2018). The reported measured quantities are summarized below.CoMeT-3 was funded through an equipment allocation included in the NSF TORUS award (AGS-1824649). Instrument Description The specific sensors included on each CoMeT are summarized in the table at the end of this section. In general each CoMeT collects observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210 barometer with a Gill pressure port, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, position using a Garmin 19x HVS receiver, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass. The HMP155 and 109SS are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). Fast temperature and corrected RH measurements (using sensors housed within the U-tube) have a time constant of 10-12 s based on data collected across a temperature and RH shock during the CLOUD-MAP 2017 calibration/validation tests on June 26, 2017. Vehicle speed was < 10 kts for this test. CoMeT-1 CoMeT-2 CoMeT-3 Slow Temperature Slow RH Vaisala HMP155A-L20-PT Part #: 22280-7 Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Fast temperature Campbell Scientific 109SS-L20-PT Part #: 21448-3 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-109 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-150 Pressure Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Wind RM Young 05103-L20-PT Part #: 18435-310 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 GPS Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Compass KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 Logger Campbell Scientific CR6-NA-XT-SW Part #: 28385-9 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Data Collection and Real-Time Processing The reported measured quantities are summarized in the table below. Quantity Units Source Epoch time Seconds GPS Latitude and longitude Degrees GPS Altitude m GPS Pressure hPa PTB210 Temperature (fast) deg C 109SS-L Temperature (slow) deg C HMP155 RH (slow) % HMP155 Vehicle speed m/s GPS Vehicle heading deg C-100 and GPS In addition to the measured variables, several derived variables are calculated. Corrected/fast relative humidity (%) Relative humidity is adjusted to the fast temperature following Richardson et al. (1998) and Houston et al. (2016). Water vapor mixing ratio (g/kg) Dew point temperature (°C) Potential temperature (Kelvin) Virtual potential temperature (Kelvin) Equivalent potential temperature (Kelvin) Regular intercomparisons between all three CoMeTs were performed during TORUS 2019. Comparisons were also conducted between CoMeT-1 and CoMeT-2 during LAPSE-RATE (2018) on 14 July. In these intercomparisons, the vehicles were parked adjacent to each other aligned perpendicular to (and facing into) the wind. To minimize engine heating effects, intercomparisons were only conducted when the wind speed was >10 kts. Data Format Original data files for each deployment are saved as text files and then converted to NetCDF. NetCDF versions have units that are CF compliant and may not match the original units in the txt files. The naming convention for the NetCDF files is as follows: UNL.CoMeT3.{deployment date YYYYMMDD}.{start time of observation collection in UTC HHMM}.L2.{post-processing codes}.cdf example: UNL.CoMeT3.20190627.1931.L2.g1.f1.cdf Post-processing codes are included to track modifications to the raw data. These codes are closely connected to error flags associated with each record. Each letter corresponds to a particular instrument: g: GPS p: Barometer tf: Fast temperature ts: Slow temperature rh: Relative humidity f: Compass w: Wind monitor a: All instruments Each number corresponds to a particular post-processing action described more below. Measured and derived variables are included in the following table. Variable Heading Standard Name Units time Time seconds since 00:00:00, 01-01-1970 Alt Altitude meters lat Latitude degrees north lon Longitude degrees east fast_temp Air Temperature kelvin slow_temp Air Temperature kelvin pressure Air Pressure pascals logger_RH Relative Humidity percent calc_corr_RH Relative Humidity percent wind_speed Wind Speed meters per second wind_dir Wind From Direction degrees vehicle_dir Vehicle Direction degrees dewpoint Dew Point Temperature kelvin mixing_ratio Humidity Mixing Ratio g/g theta Air Potential Temperature kelvin theta_v Virtual Potential Temperature kelvin theta_e Equivalent Potential Temperature Kelvin error_flag The error_flag variable is a string that matches the post-processing codes listed above. All instruments will have an associated code, but will have a “0” if the datum is unchanged from the initial processed value. Error Codes The following table summarizes the error codes for data collected before 2020: Error Code Relevant CoMeT Description g1 1,2,3 Exact correction. GPS position and time reprocessed from raw data g2 1 As far as we can tell this is an exact correction to an error in the GPS time. During the correct time periods the time suddenly went backwards ~250s and stayed at this offset for 750s when it corrected itself. The offset was applied to the “time warp” period. p1 2 Approximate correction. Hole in the pressure tube connecting the pressure port to the barometer. Resulted in erroneously low air pressure measurements when the vehicle was in motion. Derived variables recalculated (dew point temperature [e depends on qv and p], water vapor mixing ratio, potential temperature, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) a1 3 Exact correction. Missing data reprocessed from raw data a2 1 Bug fix to bias correction for ts1, ts2, and rh1: water vapor mixing ratio was off by a factor of 10 and virtual potential temperature was wrong because of this. f1 3 No correction, missing data. Fluxgate compass inoperable. Wind speed and direction calculated using GPS-derived vehicle heading instead. rh1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.7% removed from relative humidity. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +0.6 K removed from slow temperature. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts2 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.0 K removed. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) References Bolton, D., 1980: The Computation of Equivalent Potential Temperature. Mon. Wea. Rev., 108, 1046–1053, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1980)108<1046:TCOEPT>2.0.CO;2. Hanft, W., and A. L. Houston, 2018: An Observational and Modeling Study of Mesoscale Air Masses with High Theta-E. Mon. Wea. Rev., 146, 2503–2524, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-17-0389.1.Wexler Houston, A. L., R. J. Laurence III, T. W. Nichols, S. Waugh, B. Argrow, and C. L. Ziegler, 2016: Intercomparison of unmanned aircraft-borne and mobile mesonet atmospheric sensors. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 33, 1569-1582, doi: 10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0178.1. Lowe, P. R., 1977: An Approximating Polynomial for the Computation of Saturation Vapor Pressure. J. Applied Meteorology, 16, 100–103. Richardson, S. J., S. E. Frederickson, F. V. Brock, and J. A. Brotzge, 1998: Combination temperature and relative humidity probes: Avoiding large air temperature errors and associated relative humidity errors. Preprints, 10th Symp. On Meteorological Observations and Instrumentation, Phoenix, AZ, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 278–283. Waugh, S., and S. E. Frederickson, 2010: An improved aspirated temperature system for mobile meteorological observations, especially in severe weather. 25th Conf. on Severe Local Storms, Denver, CO, Amer. Meteor. Soc., P5.2. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/25SLS/techprogram/paper_176205.htm.]

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Meteodrone data

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) Meteodrone (model SSE MM-641) is a small (1.1 kg GTOW, ~40 cm across) hexcopter UAS manufactured by Meteomatics. Maximum endurance is approximately 30 min and estimated maximum operating altitude of 1500 m. Profiles can be executed at ascent/descent rates up to 10 m/s. The Meteodrone is capable of measuring temperature, relative humidity, wind velocity and GPS position time-stamped with GPS time. Temperature and dual relative humidity sensors are shielded from solar exposure by a housing with a vertically oriented air intake and hoirizontal exhaust. Sensor aspiration is driven by rotorwash across the horizontal exhaust. In its current configuration data are recorded only when executing vertical profiles. Attitude and position are updated at a data rate of 20 Hz while meteorological observations are updated at 10 Hz.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Data generated during the 2018 LAPSE-RATE campaign: an introduction and overview

Unmanned aircraft systems (UASs) offer innovative capabilities for providing new perspectives on the atmosphere, and therefore atmospheric scientists are rapidly expanding their use, particularly for studying the planetary boundary layer. In support of this expansion, from 14 to 20 July 2018 the International Society for Atmospheric Research using Remotely piloted Aircraft (ISARRA) hosted a community flight week, dubbed the Lower Atmospheric Profiling Studies at Elevation – a Remotely-piloted Aircraft Team Experiment (LAPSE-RATE; de Boer et al., 2020a). This field campaign spanned a 1-week deployment to Colorado's San Luis Valley, involving over 100 students, scientists, engineers, pilots, and outreach coordinators. These groups conducted intensive field operations using unmanned aircraft and ground-based assets to develop comprehensive datasets spanning a variety of scientific objectives, including a total of nearly 1300 research flights totaling over 250 flight hours. This article introduces this campaign and lays the groundwork for a special issue on the LAPSE-RATE project. The remainder of the special issue provides detailed overviews of the datasets collected and the platforms used to collect them. All of the datasets covered by this special issue have been uploaded to a LAPSE-RATE community set up at the Zenodo data archive (https://zenodo.org/communities/lapse-rate/, last access: 3 December 2020).

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗