% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Deshler:1450,
author = {Deshler, T. and Mercer, J.L. and Smit, H. G. J. and Stubi,
R. and Levrat, G. and Johnson, B. J. and Oltmans, S. J. and
Kivi, R. and Thompson, A. M. and Witte, J. and Davies, J.
and Schmidlin, F. J. and Brothers, G. and Sasaki, T.},
title = {{A}tmospheric comparison of electrochemical cell
ozonesondes from different manufacturers, and with different
cathode solution strenghts: {T}he {B}alloon {E}xperiment on
{S}tandards for {O}zonesondes},
journal = {Journal of geophysical research / Atmospheres},
volume = {113},
issn = {0022-1406},
address = {Washington, DC},
publisher = {Union},
reportid = {PreJuSER-1450},
pages = {1 - 17},
year = {2008},
note = {Record converted from VDB: 12.11.2012},
abstract = {A balloon flight to compare 18 ozonesondes with an ozone
photometer and with ozone column measurements from Dobson
and Brewer spectrophotometers was completed in April 2004.
The core experiment consisted of 12 electrochemical
concentration cell ozonesondes, 6 from Science Pump
Corporation (SP) and 6 from ENSCI Corporation (ES), prepared
with cathode solution concentrations of $0.5\%$ KI (half
buffer) and $1.0\%$ KI (full buffer). Auxiliary ozonesondes
consisted of two electrochemical concentration cell sondes
with $2.0\%$ KI (no buffer), two reconditioned sondes, and
two Japanese-KC96 sondes. Precision of each group of
similarly prepared ozonesondes was $<2-3\%.$ The six
ozonesondes prepared according to the manufacturer's
recommendations (SP, $1.0\%$ KI, ES $0.5\%$ KI)
overestimated the photometer measurements by $5-10\%$ in the
stratosphere, but provided ozone columns in good agreement
with the ground-based spectrophotometer measurements. This
is consistent with the difference (similar to $5\%)$ in
ozone photometer and column measurements observed during the
experiment. Using cathode cell concentrations of $1.0\%$ KI
for ES sondes caused overestimates of the photometer by
$10-15\%$ and of ozone column by $5-10\%.$ In contrast,
$0.5\%$ KI in SP sondes led to good agreement with the
photometer, but underestimates of ozone column. The KC96
sondes underestimated the photometer measurements by about
$5-15\%$ at air pressures above 30 hPa. Agreement was within
$5\%$ at lower pressures. Diluting the solution
concentration and the buffers from $1.0\%$ to $0.5\%$ KI
causes an approximately linear pressure-dependent decrease
in ozone for both SP and ES sondes, ratio (0.5 KI/1.0 KI) =
0.9 + 0.024* log(10)(Pressure).},
keywords = {J (WoSType)},
cin = {ICG-2},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB791},
pnm = {Atmosphäre und Klima},
pid = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK406},
shelfmark = {Meteorology $\&$ Atmospheric Sciences},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000253715900004},
doi = {10.1029/2007JD008975},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1450},
}