% 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}, }