% 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{Fahey:185574,
author = {Fahey, D. W. and Gao, R.-S. and Möhler, O. and Saathoff,
H. and Schiller, C. and Ebert, V. and Krämer, M. and Peter,
T. and Amarouche, N. and Avallone, L. M. and Bauer, R. and
Bozóki, Z. and Christensen, L. E. and Davis, S. M. and
Durry, G. and Dyroff, C. and Herman, R. L. and Hunsmann, S.
and Khaykin, S. M. and Mackrodt, P. and Meyer, J. and Smith,
J. B. and Spelten, N. and Troy, R. F. and Vömel, H. and
Wagner, S. and Wienhold, F. G.},
title = {{T}he {A}qua{VIT}-1 intercomparison of atmospheric water
vapor measurement techniques},
journal = {Atmospheric measurement techniques},
volume = {7},
number = {9},
issn = {1867-8548},
address = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
publisher = {Copernicus},
reportid = {FZJ-2014-07000},
pages = {3177 - 3213},
year = {2014},
abstract = {The AquaVIT-1 intercomparison of atmospheric water vapor
measurement techniques was conducted at the aerosol and
cloud simulation chamber AIDA (Aerosol Interaction and
Dynamics in the Atmosphere) at the Karlsruhe Institute of
Technology, Germany, in October 2007. The overall objective
was to intercompare state-of-the-art and prototype
atmospheric hygrometers with each other and with independent
humidity standards under controlled conditions. This
activity was conducted as a blind intercomparison with
coordination by selected referees. The effort was motivated
by persistent discrepancies found in atmospheric
measurements involving multiple instruments operating on
research aircraft and balloon platforms, particularly in the
upper troposphere and lower stratosphere, where water vapor
reaches its lowest atmospheric values (less than 10 ppm).
With the AIDA chamber volume of 84 m3, multiple instruments
analyzed air with a common water vapor mixing ratio, by
extracting air into instrument flow systems, by locating
instruments inside the chamber, or by sampling the chamber
volume optically. The intercomparison was successfully
conducted over 10 days during which pressure, temperature,
and mixing ratio were systematically varied (50 to 500 hPa,
185 to 243 K, and 0.3 to 152 ppm). In the absence of an
accepted reference instrument, the absolute accuracy of the
instruments was not established. To evaluate the
intercomparison, the reference value was taken to be the
ensemble mean of a core subset of the measurements. For
these core instruments, the agreement between 10 and 150 ppm
of water vapor is considered good with variation about the
reference value of about $±10\%$ (±1σ). In the region of
most interest between 1 and 10 ppm, the core subset
agreement is fair with variation about the reference value
of $±20\%$ (±1σ). The upper limit of precision was also
derived for each instrument from the reported data. The
implication for atmospheric measurements is that the
substantially larger differences observed during in-flight
intercomparisons stem from other factors associated with the
moving platforms or the non-laboratory environment. The
success of AquaVIT-1 provides a template for future
intercomparison efforts with water vapor or other species
that are focused on improving the analytical quality of
atmospheric measurements on moving platforms.},
cin = {IEK-7},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-7-20101013},
pnm = {234 - Composition and Dynamics of the Upper Troposphere and
Stratosphere (POF2-234)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF2-234},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000343119600026},
doi = {10.5194/amt-7-3177-2014},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/185574},
}