<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AMT</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Atmospheric Measurement Techniques</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AMT</abbrev-journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Meas. Tech.</abbrev-journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">1867-8548</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>

    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/amt-10-1259-2017</article-id><title-group><article-title>An eddy-covariance system with an innovative vortex intake for measuring
carbon dioxide and water fluxes of ecosystems</article-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Measuring carbon dioxide and water fluxes of ecosystems}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{J. Ma et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Ma</surname><given-names>Jingyong</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4845-9430</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Zha</surname><given-names>Tianshan</given-names></name>
          <email>tianshanzha@bjfu.edu.cn</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Jia</surname><given-names>Xin</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Sargent</surname><given-names>Steve</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Burgon</surname><given-names>Rex</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Bourque</surname><given-names>Charles P.-A.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>Xinhua</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Peng</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Bai</surname><given-names>Yujie</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>Yajuan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University,
Beijing, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Beijing Engineering Research Center of Soil and Water Conservation,
Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Campbell Scientific, Inc., Logan UT, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Management, 28 Dineen Drive,
University of New Brunswick,<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Tianshan Zha (tianshanzha@bjfu.edu.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>30</day><month>March</month><year>2017</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>10</volume>
      <issue>3</issue>
      <fpage>1259</fpage><lpage>1267</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>26</day><month>August</month><year>2016</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>1</day><month>November</month><year>2016</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>1</day><month>March</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>9</day><month>March</month><year>2017</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
<license license-type="open-access">
<license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/</ext-link></license-p>
</license>
</permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017.html">This article is available from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017.html</self-uri>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017.pdf</self-uri>


      <abstract>
    <p>Closed-path eddy-covariance (EC) systems are used to monitor
exchanges of trace gases (e.g., carbon dioxide [CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>], water vapor
[H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O], nitrous oxide and methane) between the atmosphere and biosphere.
Traditional EC-intake systems are equipped with inline filters to prevent
airborne dust particulate from contaminating the optical windows of the
sample cell which causes measurement degradation. The inline filter should
have a fine pore size (1 to 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m is common) to adequately protect
the optics and a large filtration surface area to extend the time before it
clogs. However, the filter must also have minimal internal volume to
preserve good frequency response. This paper reports test results of the
field performance of an EC system (EC155, Campbell Scientific, Inc., Logan
Utah, USA) with a prototype vortex intake replacing the inline filter of a
traditional EC system. The vortex-intake design is based on fluid dynamics
theory. An air sample is drawn into the vortex chamber, where it spins in a
vortex flow. The initially homogenous flow is separated when particle
momentum forces heavier particles to the periphery of the chamber, leaving a
much cleaner airstream at the center. Clean air (75 % of total flow) is
drawn from the center of the vortex chamber, through a tube, to the sample
cell where it is exposed to the optical windows of the gas analyzer. The
remaining 25 % of the flow carries the heavier dust particles away through
a separate bypass tube. An EC155 system measured CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O
fluxes in two urban-forest ecosystems in the megalopolis of Beijing, China.
These sites present a challenge for EC measurements because of the generally
poor air quality which has high concentrations of suspended particulate. The
closed-path EC system with vortex intake significantly reduced maintenance
requirements by preserving optical signal strength and sample-cell pressure
within acceptable ranges for much longer periods. The system with vortex
intake also maintained an excellent frequency response. For example, at the
Badaling site, the amount of system downtime attributed solely to clogged
filters was reduced from 26 % with traditional inline filters to 0 %
with the prototype vortex intake. The use of a vortex intake could extend
the geographical applicability of the EC technique in ecology and allow
investigators to acquire more accurate and continuous measurements of
trace-gas fluxes in a wider range of ecosystems.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>Eddy-covariance (EC) technology provides an opportunity to evaluate the
fluxes of energy, momentum, water vapor, carbon dioxide and other scalars
between the earth's surface and the turbulent atmosphere (Aubinet et al.,
2016; Baldocchi, 2003; Montgomery, 1948). The technology has been widely
used in ecosystem studies worldwide, including forests, grasslands,
agricultural lands and wetlands (e.g., Mitchell et al., 2015; Shoemaker et
al., 2015; Wang et al., 2015; Zha et al., 2010). However, the technology's
use in many urban green-space ecosystems has been challenging because of
polluted air that contaminates the optical windows of the gas analyzer.
Optical signal strength is reduced and gas concentration measurements
degrade as dust and debris are deposited on the optical windows of the
analyzer. This problem occurs in both open-path and closed-path systems.
Using intakes with inline filters in closed-path systems can help keep the
analyzer's windows free of debris for a longer time. However, in
environments with extremely dirty air, inline filters clog
quickly – often in a matter of just days – and require frequent
replacement (Bressi et al., 2013; Hasheminassab et al., 2014; Villalobos et
al., 2015; Yu et al., 2013). Dirty sample air can also contaminate other
parts of the EC system, leading to underestimated fluxes and data gaps (Jia
et al., 2013; Xie et al., 2015).</p>
      <p>With urbanization, urban green spaces are expanding commensurately (Pataki et
al., 2006). Urban green spaces are playing a progressively more important
role in the study of ecosystem carbon balances worldwide (McHale et al.,
2007). To address the challenges associated with urban settings, an improved
EC system capable of operating in polluted, urban environments is needed to
monitor carbon dynamics in urban areas and to evaluate
green-space ecosystem response to environmental change (Pataki et al.,
2006; Xie et al., 2015). Additionally, such improvements should benefit
measurements in other landscapes, particularly for closed-path methane or
nitrous oxide analyzers, which often have stringent filtration requirements
to keep multi-pass sample cells clean. Filter clogging has been noted as a
maintenance issue over a fen (Peltola et al., 2013), agricultural fields and
wetlands (Detto et al., 2011), a dairy farm (Kroon et al., 2007) and a
forest (Eugster et al., 2007).</p>
      <p>The traditional approach for maintaining good trace-gas concentration
measurements in a closed-path EC system is to use an inline filter to clean
sampled air. The inline filter in the original EC155 design is based on a
sintered stainless steel disk, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-inch thick <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1-inch diameter of either 20
or 40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m porosity, mounted in a rubber rain cap. In practice, the
porosity of the filter is chosen for the conditions of the specific site to
minimize the frequency of replacement. Fine-pore filters keep the analyzer
windows clean for a longer time, but clog more quickly. The gas analyzer
sample-cell windows must be cleaned when optical signal strength diminishes
to 80 %, and the filter must be replaced when the pressure drop exceeds 7 kPa. Ideally, the filter pore size is chosen such that the windows become
dirty at approximately the same time that the filter clogs, meaning only a
single visit to the site. Inline filters are a functional solution for
filtering particulate-filled air sufficiently to maintain good measurements.
However, the maintenance labor can be significant, and either a clogged
filter or dirty windows can disrupt measurements until the analyzer receives maintenance. This maintenance can be required frequently – weekly or even
daily – in conditions with high particulate matter in the ambient air.</p>
      <p>To avoid the frequent replacement of filters in EC systems deployed in urban
environments, an advanced EC system with vortex intake (United States Patent
No. 9 217 692) has been recently developed by Campbell Scientific, Inc.,
Logan, UT, USA. The vortex intake eliminates the need for an inline filter
upstream of the gas analyzer. The first implementation of this design is a
prototype that can be clipped onto an existing EC155 analyzer, replacing the
inline filter (this study). Burgon et al. (2016) reported laboratory test
results for a production version of the EC155 with a vortex intake. A
nitrous oxide EC system with vortex intake was described by Somers and
Sargent (2015), and a long-term trial of this system began in a cornfield in
southern Ontario, Canada, in May 2015 (Brown et al., 2015).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><caption><p>Daily mean air quality index during 2015 in Beijing, China. Air
quality index is stratified into six categories: 0–50 for low, 51–100 for
low to mild, 101–150 for mild, 151–200 for moderate, 201–300 for severe and
&gt; 300 for serious air pollution levels.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p>This study introduces vortex-intake sampling and demonstrates its field
performance with in situ measurements collected in two urban green-space
areas within the megalopolis of Beijing, China. The goals for the new design
were to (1) minimize system maintenance, (2) reduce system downtime due to
clogged filters and (3) maintain high-frequency response. The objective of
this field test was to compare the performance of a prototype vortex-intake
sampling system with that of a traditional system fitted with an inline
filter.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Site description and data collection period</title>
      <p>The study sites are located in Beijing Olympic Forest Park (40.02<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 116.38<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 51 m above mean sea level, AMSL) and Badaling Tree
Farm (40.37<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 115.94<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 535 m a.m.s.l.), Beijing, China.
Beijing's air quality is generally poor, with high concentrations of
suspended particulate in the atmosphere (Fig. 1) and hazy conditions, at
times with visibility &lt; 10 km. Haze is a common problem, particularly
during the winter and spring, stemming from a variety of contributing factors
including home heating, traffic congestion, industrial activity, stable
synoptic conditions and surrounding mountainous topography (e.g., Yang et
al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2016; Zheng et al., 2015).</p>
      <p>The Olympic Forest Park is the largest urban forest park in Asia, with an
area of 680 ha and vegetation coverage of about 90 %. The site is an
ecological conservation and restoration area. The site is dominated by <italic>Pinus tabulaeformis</italic> L.
Other species include <italic>Platycladus orientalis</italic>, <italic>Sophora japonica</italic> L., <italic>Fraxinus chinensis</italic> and
<italic>Ginkgo biloba</italic>, with an understory of <italic>Iris tectorum</italic> and<italic> Dianthus chinensis.</italic> All trees were
tagged and identified by species and trees with a diameter at breast height
(DBH) &gt; 3 cm are being assessed annually. Stand density was
210 trees ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, with a mean tree height of 7.7 m and a mean DBH of 20 cm.
Cover ratio of trees to shrubs was about <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The shrubs were <italic>Prunus davidiana, Amygdalus triloba, Swida alba</italic> and
<italic>Syzygium aromaticum</italic>, with a mean height of 2.8 m  (Xie et al., 2015).</p>
      <p>The Badaling Tree Farm is about 60 km from the downtown core of Beijing.
Local terrain is generally flat and uniform. The study site is composed of
<italic>Acer</italic> <italic>truncatum</italic>, <italic>Koelreuteria paniculata, Fraxinus bungeana, Ailanthus altissima</italic> and
<italic>Pinus tabuliformis</italic>. Stand density was 975 trees ha<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, with a mean tree height of 4 m and a mean DBH of 4.7 cm.
The study site has a sparse herbaceous cover
with no well-defined understory canopy (Jia et al., 2013).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><caption><p>EC155 sample intakes: <bold>(a)</bold> original inline filter and <bold>(b)</bold> prototype
vortex intake (source: Campbell Scientific Inc., Logan UT, USA).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p>Data presented in this study were acquired from field deployment of two EC
systems; one at each of the two sites described above. Both systems were
deployed in 2011 with the original inline filter intakes. Data with the
inline filter design were collected from January 2011 to July 2014 at the
Olympic Park and from January 2011 to September 2014 at Badaling Farm. Both
EC systems were switched to the vortex intake in 2014. Data with vortex
intakes were acquired from July 2014 to December 2015 at Olympic Park and
from September 2014 to December 2015 at the Badaling Farm.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Instrument description</title>
      <p>An EC155 (model EC155, Campbell Scientific, Inc. Logan, UT, USA) is an in
situ, closed-path, mid-infrared absorption gas analyzer (IRGA) that measures
molar mixing ratios of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O at high frequency. The original
EC155 analyzer includes a heated intake tube, inline filter and rain cap
(Fig. 2a). The modified EC155 system includes a prototype vortex chamber and
rain cap in place of the original filter and rain cap (Fig. 2b).</p>
      <p>The vortex intake is a small, lightweight device with no moving parts, and
requires no chemicals to clean the sample air. Its simple design makes it
essentially maintenance free. The vortex assembly (Fig. 2b) consists of a
rain cap and inlet nozzle, a vortex chamber and two outlet ports.
Schematics of both systems are shown in Fig. 3. Unlike a filter, the vortex
intake design is based on fluid and particle dynamics. Sampled air enters
the vortex chamber through a tangent port to induce rotational flow.
Entrained dust-particle motion is governed by centrifugal force (inertia),
aerodynamic drag and chamber wall impact forces. The high rotational speed
of the vortex flow provides the larger and heavier (relative to air) dust
particles with greater centrifugal force, keeping them close to the chamber
wall and leaving the air in the center of the vortex free of dust. Clean
sample air flows from the vortex center through a tube to the EC155 sample
cell. The dust particles in the air close to the wall of the vortex chamber
are pulled out through the bypass tube. The dirty air passes through a
relatively large (12 mL internal volume) filter (9922-05-DQ, Parker Hannifin
Corp., Mayfield Heights OH, USA) with moderate porosity (25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>m) that
requires only infrequent replacement due to clogging. The filter protects a
flow-control orifice that balances the airflow split such that 6
is sampled and 2 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is
bypassed. The two flows rejoin downstream of the analyzer, then go to the
single, low-power (5 W) vacuum pump. In contrast, the EC55 with the inline
filter has slightly higher flow through the analyzer (7 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Burgon et al. (2016) measured the frequency response of the
EC155 with the inline filter and with the production vortex design using the
impulse response method (Sargent, 2012), showing that the cutoff frequency is
proportional to flow, as expected: 5.1 Hz for the original design at
7 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and 4.3 Hz for the vortex design at 6 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p>For flux determination (covariances), high-frequency wind velocity
measurements are needed. Wind velocities are acquired with a fast-response,
three-dimensional sonic anemometer (CSAT3A; Campbell Scientific, Inc. Logan,
UT, USA). Spatial separation between the EC155 intake and the CSAT3A sample
volume is 15.6 cm.</p>
      <p>At Olympic Forest Park, a 12 m-tall tower is surrounded by uniform forest
cover with a homogeneous fetch of about 600 m in all directions. The EC
instruments were mounted on the tower at a height of 11.5 m from the ground.
The EC instrumentation was installed similarly at the Badaling Tree Farm.
All flux-related data were collected at 10 Hz using a CR3000 data logger
(Campbell Scientific, Inc. Logan, UT, USA). Half-hourly turbulent fluxes
were calculated from the covariance between the fluctuations in the vertical
wind speed and the scalar quantities (Aubinet et al., 2000). Sonic
temperature was corrected for changes in atmospheric humidity and pressure
(Schotanus et al., 1983).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <title>Field tests</title>
      <p>Attenuation of high-frequency fluctuations is one of the systematic errors
in EC measurements, and it is especially important to address it when trace-gas
concentrations are measured with a closed-path analyzer (Aubinet et al.,
2000). The frequency response of a system is defined as a ratio of its
output to its input as a function of the signal frequency. In an ideal
system, the value would be one at all frequencies. In a real system,
fluctuations in CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> or H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O tend to be damped at higher frequencies
due to adding a rain cap, filter and intake tubing to a gas sampling system
(Aubinet et al., 2016). Measuring the frequency response quantifies the loss
of high-frequency information so that a correction may be applied.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><caption><p>Schematics of EC155 sampling systems with <bold>(a)</bold> an original inline
filter and <bold>(b)</bold> vortex intake.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><caption><p>Normalized cospectra of the EC system (EC155) equipped with inline
filter <bold>(a–d)</bold> and vortex intake <bold>(e–h)</bold>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, WC and WH are cospectra of
vertical wind velocity with sonic temperature, CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O.
Cospectra are calculated from high-frequency data at 10 Hz obtained from the
Olympic Park. Data points in the figure are binned averages from means of a
1 h period (12:00–13:00 and 21:00–22:00 Beijing Standard Time) for each
day in January (<bold>a</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux value was 1.88 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; <bold>b</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux value was
0.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
June (<bold>c</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux value was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>15.39 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; <bold>d</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux value was
4.58 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 2014 for the
inline filter-based EC measurements, and in January (<bold>e</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux
value was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; <bold>f</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux value was
0.59 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, June (<bold>g</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux value was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>11.17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>;
<bold>h</bold> CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux value was 1.25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>mol s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 2015 for the vortex-intake measurements.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017-f04.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Differential pressure (blue line), optical signal strength of
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (red line) and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (gray line) of the EC system (EC155)
equipped with vortex intake as compared to an inline filter at the Olympic
Park (op); panels <bold>(a)</bold> and <bold>(b)</bold> are for periods of very hazy conditions,
whereas panels <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(d)</bold> are for periods of low haze.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017-f05.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <p>With this in mind, the frequency response of a closed-path EC system with
vortex intake is compared to one with an inline filter. In situ field
measurement of system frequency response is challenging because the true
signal inputs (scalar variables) are not known a priori. However, it can be
evaluated by comparing the cospectra of the vertical component of wind with
fluctuations of sonic temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mi>W</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the vertical
component of wind and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the sonic temperature) to the cospectra of
the vertical component of wind with fluctuations of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (WC, where C
denotes the mixing ratio of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O (WH, where H denotes
H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O mixing ratio). Analysis of cospectra are based on data from the
Olympic Forest Park over 1 h periods (12:00–13:00 and 21:00–22:00
Beijing Standard Time) averaged daily for the months of January (high
incidence of haze) and June (low incidence of haze) 2014 for the inline
filter-based EC measurements, and January (high incidence of haze) and June
(low incidence of haze) 2015 for the vortex-intake-based measurements. A
fast Fourier transform was applied for each variable's time series,
consisting of about 36 000 data points.</p>
      <p>Decreases in sample-cell differential pressure and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> optical signal
strength indicate when the inline filter needs to be replaced and the
optical windows cleaned. Clogged filters can induce substantial pressure
drops (Aubinet et al., 2016). Generally, the pressure drop in the original
intake assembly is approximately 2.5 kPa at 7 LPM flow without filter. The
filter adds approximately 1 kPa pressure drop when it is clean. This
pressure drop will increase as the filter clogs. The filter should be
replaced before the differential pressure reaches <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>7 kPa.
Additionally, the windows of the analyzer should be cleaned when the optical
signal strength of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> drops below 80 % of the original value.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Summary of field maintenance notes for the EC155 with vortex intake
compared to the EC155 with an inline filter at Olympic Park (op) and
Badaling Farm (bd), Beijing, China. The time range includes periods of both
high and low incidence of haze. Clog period is the number of days for the
differential pressure to reach <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>7 kPa after installing a new filter.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="10">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Site</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Start</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">End</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Intake</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Time</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Number</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Downtime</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Downtime</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Minimum</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Average</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">data</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">data</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">range</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">of maintenance</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">from clogged</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">percent</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">clog period</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">clog period</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(days)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">services</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">intake (days)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">(days)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">(days)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">op</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1/11/13</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31/1/14</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Inline filter</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">184</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">15</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">57</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">31 %</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1/8/13</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31/10/13</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1/11/14</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31/1/15</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Vortex</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">184</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">9</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5 %</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">21</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">46</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1/8/15</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31/10/15</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">bd</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1/11/12</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31/12/12</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Inline filter</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">122</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">7</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">32</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">26 %</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">9</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">20</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1/9/12</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31/10/12</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1/11/14</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31/12/14</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Vortex</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">122</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0 %</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">&gt; 122</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">&gt; 122</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1/9/15</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31/10/15</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p>Differential pressure (blue line), optical signal strength of
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (red line) and CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (gray line) of the EC system (EC155)
equipped with vortex intake as compared to an inline filter at the Badaling
Farm (bd); panels <bold>(a)</bold> and <bold>(b)</bold> are for periods of very hazy conditions,
whereas panels <bold>(c)</bold> and <bold>(d)</bold> are for periods of low haze.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/10/1259/2017/amt-10-1259-2017-f06.jpg"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Frequency response</title>
      <p>Due to damping of high-frequency signals in closed-path systems, gas
cospectra commonly exhibit reduced response at high frequencies, causing flux
loss (Burba et al., 2010; Leuning  and King, 1992). Brach and Lee (Brach et
al., 1981; Lee et al., 2004) found that the cospectrum of vertical wind
velocity with sonic temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is often very close to the ideal
cospectrum. In field experiments, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is often used as a standard to
evaluate whether there is a high-frequency loss for other measured scalars.
To examine the effect of a vortex intake, spectral analysis was applied to
the measurements collected in situ. Ensemble cospectra of vertical wind
velocity with CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (WC) and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O vapor (WH) were compared to those
for the sonic temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for both the inline filter and vortex
intake in different periods (Fig. 4). The normalized cospectra for both
systems were consistent at all frequencies, with no significant
difference (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> &gt; 0.05); thus the frequency response of the EC155 sampling system with
either the inline filter or a vortex intake could not be distinguished from
that of the sonic anemometer. However, the frequency response of a sonic
anemometer depends on horizontal wind speed, and the results in Fig. 4 are
based on data with relatively low wind speed (0.3 to 1.5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The corresponding cutoff frequencies for the sonic anemometer are
2 to 10 Hz (Massman, 2000), which bracket the EC155 cutoff frequencies
measured in the laboratory (5.1 and 4.3 Hz for the inline filter and vortex
intake, respectively, Burgon et al., 2016).</p>
      <p>Closed-path IRGAs with long inlet tubes often show additional high-frequency
damping for H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O due to sorption effects (Goulden et al., 1996; Laubach
and Teichmann, 1996; Leuning and Judd, 1996), which is not apparent in Fig. 4. The EC155 has a very short intake tube (0.6 m), which has been shown to
reduce this effect (Burba et al., 2010; Clement et al., 2009). Ibrom et al. (2007) showed that this sorption effect increased with higher relative humidity,
but Runkle et al. (2012) showed a weaker dependence on relative humidity at
higher temperatures. Figure 4 shows results with relative humidity of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 50 % for all cases except summer evenings (Fig. 4d and h), which had higher
relative humidity (65 %), but also warm temperatures (27 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C).
The water sorption effect is expected to be relatively small for these dry
and warm conditions.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Differential pressure and optical signal strength of CO${}_{{2}}$}?><title>Differential pressure and optical signal strength of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></title>
      <p>Air quality at Olympic Park was mostly poor during the measurement periods,
being worse in winter than in summer. To verify performance of the vortex
intake, we chose periods of high and low incidence of haze to compare the
differential pressure and optical signal strength of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. Figure 5 shows
time series of 3 months for each case. The differential pressure
decreased as the inline filter clogged (Fig. 5a and c), quickly exceeding
the range of the pressure sensor (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>7 kPa), invalidating data until
the filter could be replaced. The differential pressure with the vortex
intake was much more stable than with the inline filter. Over a period of
3 months, the differential pressure with vortex intake exceeded the
pressure sensor range once during very hazy conditions (Fig. 5b). The optical
signal strength of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> with the vortex intake remained above 90 %,
indicating that the optical windows remained free of debris for a substantially
longer time than with the inline filter.</p>
      <p>At the Badaling Farm site, we also chose periods of high and low incidence
of haze to compare differential pressure and optical signal strength of
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. As shown by the differential pressure in Fig. 6a and c, the inline
filter clogged multiple times in a period of 2 months resulting in large
data losses. Pressure drop with the vortex intake (Fig. 6b and d) was
typically about 3 kPa, remaining within the working range for the entire
observation period (2 months). The optical signal strength of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
with vortex intake was higher and more stable than that of the system with
an inline filter.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>Field maintenance</title>
      <p>In order to further verify the performance of the EC155 system with vortex
intake, field maintenance records from the two sites were compared. These
maintenance records included the number of maintenance services; downtime
due to clogged intake filters; and percentage downtime, defined as a ratio
of downtime due to clogged intake to the actual testing-period duration
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 100. Also included are the minimum and average time periods for the
intake filter to clog.</p>
      <p>A summary of field maintenance at Olympic Park and Badaling Farm is shown in
Table 1. The vortex design reduced the number of maintenance services from
15 to 4 at Olympic Park and from 7 to 0 at Badaling Farm. The percentage
downtime at Badaling Farm was reduced from 26 % with the original inline
filter intake to 0 % with the vortex intake. At Olympic Park the
percentage downtime was 31 % for the inline filter and 5 % for vortex
intake. The percentage downtime reflects not just the number of times the
filter was clogged, but also how soon the filter was replaced after it
clogged. The minimum and average clog times, shown in the last two columns
of Table 1, highlight the reduced maintenance requirement of the vortex
intake design. At Olympic Park, the inline filters clogged in as little as
1 day, with an average clog period of just 6 days. The minimum
maintenance interval for the vortex intake was 21 days, with an average of
46 days. At Badaling Farm, inline filters clogged within as few as 9 days
with an average of 20 days, while the vortex-intake design required no
maintenance for an entire period of 122 days.</p>
      <p>Independent of high or low haze cover, the maintenance required for the
vortex-intake EC system was markedly reduced, thus decreasing overall
downtime substantially. Overall, the vortex intake can improve long-term
monitoring of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O fluxes in conditions of high particulate
concentration.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p>The vortex intake significantly reduced maintenance requirements and
downtime for a closed-path eddy-covariance system compared to the original
inline filter design. The vortex intake eliminated the need for an inline
filter in the sample path and kept the sample cell windows clean, preserving
the optical signal strength of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and sustaining an acceptable sample
cell differential pressure over a much longer period. Although the vortex
intake at the Badaling Farm site required no bypass filter replacement
during the study period, the bypass filter at the Olympic Park site clogged,
on average, every 46 days. A follow-up experiment is planned to replace the
bypass filter with a much larger one to try to extend the maintenance
interval even further. There was no significant attenuation of high
frequencies compared to the system with an inline filter. The vortex intake
helped to overcome shortcomings associated with traditional inline filter
systems in extremely polluted conditions. The vortex-intake design extends
the geographical application of the EC technique in ecology and allows
investigators to acquire more accurate and continuous measurements of
trace-gas fluxes in a wider range of ecosystems.</p>
      <p>Our results indicate that the vortex intake works better than an inline
filter in very polluted urban environments. However, the characteristics of
dust differ across ecosystems. Additional long-term studies are therefore
needed to evaluate the vortex-intake performances in a variety of ecosystems
(e.g., forests, grasslands and deserts). Our study tested the system
frequency response at low wind speed above forests, where the frequencies of
turbulent fluctuations tend to be low; thus future studies should verify the
system frequency response in conditions of higher-frequency turbulence.
Side-by-side comparisons of vortex and inline filter designs would also be
of value, particularly with the inclusion of IRGAs from other manufacturers
and analyzers for other trace gases such as nitrous oxide or methane.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p>All data can be found in the Supplement.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p><bold>The Supplement related to this article is available online at <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-1259-2017-supplement" xlink:title="zip">doi:10.5194/amt-10-1259-2017-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</bold></p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p>The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The research was supported by grants from National Natural Science
Foundation of China (NSFC; 31670710, 31670708, 31361130340, 31270755) and
the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Proj. no. 2015ZCQ-SB-02). The US–China Carbon Consortium (USCCC) supported this
work via helpful discussions and the exchange of ideas. The authors
acknowledge Karen Wolfe for technical writing and editing support, Campbell
Scientific, Inc. Logan, UT, USA and Wenqing Hu and Xiaojie Zhen, BTS,
Beijing, China. We are grateful to Cai Ren and Cai Zhang for their
assistance with the field measurements and instrumentation maintenance. We
also would like to thank anonymous reviewers and the editors for their
constructive comments on this manuscript.
<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: C. Ammann<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: M. Aubinet and two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Aubinet, M., Grelle, A., Ibrom, A., Rannik, Ü., Moncrieff, J., Foken,
T., Kowalski, A. S., Martin, P. H., Berbigier, P., Bernhofer, Ch., Clement,
R., Elbers, J., Granier, A., Grünwald, T., Morgenstern, K., Pilegaard,
K., Rebmann, C., Snijders, W., Valentini, R., and Vesala, T.: Estimates of
the Annual Net Carbon and Water Exchange of Forests: The EUROFLUX
Methodology, Adv. Ecol. Res., 30, 113–175, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Aubinet, M., Joly, L., Loustau, D., De Ligne, A., Chopin, H., Cousin, J., Chauvin, N., Decarpenterie, T.,
and Gross, P.: Dimensioning IRGA gas sampling systems: laboratory and field experiments, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 1361–1367, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-1361-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-9-1361-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Baldocchi, D. D.: Assessing the eddy covariance technique for evaluating
carbon dioxide exchange rates of ecosystems: past, present and future,
Glob. Change Biol., 9, 479–492, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Brach, E. J., Desjardins, R. L., and St. Amour, G. T.: Open path CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
analyzer, J. Phys. E Sci. Instrum., 14, 1415-1419, 1981.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Bressi, M., Sciare, J., Ghersi, V., Bonnaire, N., Nicolas, J. B., Petit, J.-E., Moukhtar, S., Rosso, A.,
Mihalopoulos, N., and Féron, A.: A one-year comprehensive chemical characterisation of fine aerosol (PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>)
at urban, suburban and rural background sites in the region of Paris (France), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 7825–7844, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7825-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-7825-2013</ext-link>,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Brown, S., Sargent, S., Machado, P., Freemantle, V., Carvalho de Sena
Rabelo, L., and Wagner-Riddle, C.: Comparison of N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O fluxes measured
using flux-gradient, eddy-covariance, and chamber methods from an
agricultural site, AGU Fall Meeting 2015, Poster B11B-0426, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Burba, G. G., Mcdermitt, D. K., Anderson, D. J., Furtaw, M. D., and Eckles,
R. D.: Novel design of an enclosed CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>/H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O gas analyser for eddy
covariance flux measurements, Tellus B., 62, 743–748, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Burgon, R., Sargent, S., and Conrad, B.: Performance evaluation of an
innovative sampling system for closed path eddy covariance measurements, AMS
32nd Conference on Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, Poster 140,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Clement, R. J., Burba, G. G., Grelle, A., Anderson, D. J., and Moncrieff, J.
B.: Improved trace gas flux estimation through IRGA sampling optimization,
Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 149, 623–638, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Detto, M., Verfaillie, J., Anderson, F., Xu, L., and Baldocchi, D.:
Comparing laser-based open- and closed-path gas analyzers to measure methane
fluxes using the eddy covariance method, Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 151
1312–1324, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Eugster, W., Zeyer, K., Zeeman, M., Michna, P., Zingg, A., Buchmann, N., and Emmenegger, L.: Methodical
study of nitrous oxide eddy covariance measurements using quantum cascade laser spectrometery over a Swiss forest,
Biogeosciences, 4, 927–939, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/bg-4-927-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-4-927-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Goulden, M. L., Munger, J. W., Fan, S.-M., Daube, B. C., and Wofsy, S. C.:
Measurements of carbon sequestration by long term eddy covariance: methods
and a critical evaluation of accuracy, Glob. Change Biol., 2, 169–182,
1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Hasheminassab, S., Daher, N., Ostro, B. D., and Sioutas, C.: Long-term
source apportionment of ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in the Los
Angeles Basin: A focus on emissions reduction from vehicular sources,
Environ. Pollut., 193, 54–64, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Ibrom, A., Dellwik, E., Flyvbjerg, H., Jensen, N. O., and Pilegaard, K.:
Strong low-pass filtering effects on water vapour flux measurements with
closed-path eddy correlation systems, Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 147,
140–156, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Jia, X., Zha, T. S., Wu, B., Zhang, Y. Q., Chen, W. J., Wang, X. P., Yu, H.
Q., and He, G. M.: Temperature response of soil respiration in a Chinese
pine plantation: hysteresis and seasonal vs. diel Q<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Plos One, 8,
e57858, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057858" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1371/journal.pone.0057858</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Kroon, P. S., Hensen, A., Jonker, H. J. J., Zahniser, M. S., van't Veen, W. H., and Vermeulen, A. T.: Suitability of
quantum cascade laser spectroscopy for CH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and N<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O eddy covariance flux measurements, Biogeosciences, 4, 715–728, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/bg-4-715-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-4-715-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Laubach, J. and Teichmann, U.: Measuring energy budget components by eddy
correlation: Data corrections and application over low vegetation, Contrib.
Atmos. Phys., 69, 307–320, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, X., Massman, W. J., and Law, B. E.: Handbook of Micrometeorology: A
Guide for Surface Flux Measurement and Analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Leuning, R. and Judd, M. J.: The relative merits of open- and closed-path
analysers for measurement of eddy fluxes, Glob. Change Biol., 2, 241–253,
1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Leuning, R. and King, K. M.: Comparison of eddy-covariance measurements of
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes by open- and closed-path CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> analysers, Bound.-Lay.
Meteorol., 59, 297–311, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Massman, W. J.: A simple method for estimating frequency response corrections
for eddy covariance systems, Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 104, 185–198, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
McHale, M. R., McPherson, E. G., and Burke, I. C.: The potential of urban
tree plantings to be cost effective in carbon credit markets, Urban For. Urban Gree., 6, 49–60, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Mitchell, S. R., Emanuel, R. E., and Mcglynn, B. L.: Land-atmosphere carbon
and water flux relationships to vapor pressure deficit, soil moisture, and
stream flow, Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 208, 108–117, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Montgomery, R. B.: Vertical Eddy Flux of Heat in the Atmosphere, J. Atmos.
Sci., 5, 265–274, 1948.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Pataki, D. E., Alig, R. J., Fung, A. S., Golubiewski, N. E., Kennedy, C. A.,
McPherson, E. G., Nowak, D. J., Pouyat, R. V., and Romero Lankao, P.: Urban
ecosystems and the North American carbon cycle, Glob. Change Biol., 12,
2092–2102, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Peltola, O., Mammarella, I., Haapanala, S., Burba, G., and Vesala, T.: Field intercomparison of four methane gas
analyzers suitable for eddy covariance flux measurements, Biogeosciences, 10, 3749–3765, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-3749-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-10-3749-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Runkle, B. R., Wille, C., Gažovič, M., and Kutzbach, L.: Attenuation
correction procedures for water vapour fluxes from closed-path
eddy-covariance systems, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 142, 401–423, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Sargent, S.: Quantifying Frequency Response of a Low-power, Closed-path
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O Eddy-covariance System, available at:
<uri>http://s.campbellsci.com/documents/us/technical-papers/cpec200_frequency_response.pdf</uri>
(last access: 28 March 2017), 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Schotanus, P., Nieuwstadt, F. T. M., and De Bruin, H. A. R.: Temperature
measurement with a sonic anemometer and its application to heat and moisture
fluxes, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 26, 81–93, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Shoemaker, W. B., Anderson, F., Barr, J. G., Graham, S. L., and Botkin, D. B.: Carbon exchange between the
atmosphere and subtropical forested cypress and pine wetlands, Biogeosciences, 12, 2285–2300, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2285-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-12-2285-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Somers, J. and Sargent, S.: A Novel Low-Power, High-Performance,
Zero-Maintenance Closed-Path Trace Gas Eddy Covariance System with No Water
Vapor Dilution or Spectroscopic Corrections, AGU Fall Meeting 2015, Poster
B33C-0668, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Villalobos, A. M., Barraza, F., Jorquera, H., and Schauer, J. J.: Chemical
speciation and source apportionment of fine particulate matter in Santiago,
Chile, 2013, Sci. Total Environ., 512–513, 133–142, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, Y., Hu, C., Dong, W., Li, X., Zhang, Y., Qin, S., and Oenema, O.:
Carbon budget of a winter-wheat and summer-maize rotation cropland in the
North China Plain, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 206, 33–45, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Xie, J., Jia, X., He, G., Zhou, C., Yu, H., Wu, Y., Bourque, C., Liu, H.,
and Zha, T.: Environmental control over seasonal variation in carbon fluxes
of an urban temperate forest ecosystem, Landscape Urban Plan., 142, 63–70,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Yang, Y., Liu, X., Qu, Y., Wang, J., An, J., Zhang, Y., and Zhang, F.:
Formation mechanism of continuous extreme haze episodes in the megacity
Beijing, China, in January 2013, Atmos. Res., 155, 192–203, 2015.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, L. D., Wang, G. F., Zhang, R. J., Zhang, L. M., Song, Y., Wu, B. B., Li,
X. F., An, K., and Chu, J. H.: Characterization and Source Apportionment of
PM2.5 in an Urban Environment in Beijing, Aerosol. Air Qual. Res., 13,
574–583, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Zha, T., Barr, A. G., van der Kamp, G., Black, T. A., McCaughey, J. H., and
Flanagan, L. B.: Interannual variation of evapotranspiration from forest and
grassland ecosystems in western canada in relation to drought, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 150, 1476–1484, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Huang, W., Cai, T., Fang, D., Wang, Y., Song, J., Hu, M. and
Zhang, Y.: Concentrations and chemical compositions of fine particles (PM)
during haze and non-haze days in Beijing, Atmos. Res., 174, 62–69, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Zheng, G. J., Duan, F. K., Su, H., Ma, Y. L., Cheng, Y., Zheng, B., Zhang, Q., Huang, T.,
Kimoto, T., Chang, D., Pöschl, U., Cheng, Y. F., and He, K. B.: Exploring the severe winter haze in Beijing:
the impact of synoptic weather, regional transport and heterogeneous reactions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 2969–2983, <ext-link xlink:href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2969-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-15-2969-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list><app-group content-type="float"><app><title/>

    </app></app-group></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>An eddy-covariance system with an innovative vortex intake for measuring carbon dioxide and water fluxes of ecosystems</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p class="p">Closed-path eddy-covariance (EC) systems are used to monitor
exchanges of trace gases (e.g., carbon dioxide [CO<sub>2</sub>], water vapor
[H<sub>2</sub>O], nitrous oxide and methane) between the atmosphere and biosphere.
Traditional EC-intake systems are equipped with inline filters to prevent
airborne dust particulate from contaminating the optical windows of the
sample cell which causes measurement degradation. The inline filter should
have a fine pore size (1 to 20 µm is common) to adequately protect
the optics and a large filtration surface area to extend the time before it
clogs. However, the filter must also have minimal internal volume to
preserve good frequency response. This paper reports test results of the
field performance of an EC system (EC155, Campbell Scientific, Inc., Logan
Utah, USA) with a prototype vortex intake replacing the inline filter of a
traditional EC system. The vortex-intake design is based on fluid dynamics
theory. An air sample is drawn into the vortex chamber, where it spins in a
vortex flow. The initially homogenous flow is separated when particle
momentum forces heavier particles to the periphery of the chamber, leaving a
much cleaner airstream at the center. Clean air (75 % of total flow) is
drawn from the center of the vortex chamber, through a tube, to the sample
cell where it is exposed to the optical windows of the gas analyzer. The
remaining 25 % of the flow carries the heavier dust particles away through
a separate bypass tube. An EC155 system measured CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub>O
fluxes in two urban-forest ecosystems in the megalopolis of Beijing, China.
These sites present a challenge for EC measurements because of the generally
poor air quality which has high concentrations of suspended particulate. The
closed-path EC system with vortex intake significantly reduced maintenance
requirements by preserving optical signal strength and sample-cell pressure
within acceptable ranges for much longer periods. The system with vortex
intake also maintained an excellent frequency response. For example, at the
Badaling site, the amount of system downtime attributed solely to clogged
filters was reduced from 26 % with traditional inline filters to 0 %
with the prototype vortex intake. The use of a vortex intake could extend
the geographical applicability of the EC technique in ecology and allow
investigators to acquire more accurate and continuous measurements of
trace-gas fluxes in a wider range of ecosystems.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Aubinet, M., Grelle, A., Ibrom, A., Rannik, Ü., Moncrieff, J., Foken,
T., Kowalski, A. S., Martin, P. H., Berbigier, P., Bernhofer, Ch., Clement,
R., Elbers, J., Granier, A., Grünwald, T., Morgenstern, K., Pilegaard,
K., Rebmann, C., Snijders, W., Valentini, R., and Vesala, T.: Estimates of
the Annual Net Carbon and Water Exchange of Forests: The EUROFLUX
Methodology, Adv. Ecol. Res., 30, 113–175, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Aubinet, M., Joly, L., Loustau, D., De Ligne, A., Chopin, H., Cousin, J., Chauvin, N., Decarpenterie, T.,
and Gross, P.: Dimensioning IRGA gas sampling systems: laboratory and field experiments, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 1361–1367, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-1361-2016" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/amt-9-1361-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Baldocchi, D. D.: Assessing the eddy covariance technique for evaluating
carbon dioxide exchange rates of ecosystems: past, present and future,
Glob. Change Biol., 9, 479–492, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Brach, E. J., Desjardins, R. L., and St. Amour, G. T.: Open path CO<sub>2</sub>
analyzer, J. Phys. E Sci. Instrum., 14, 1415-1419, 1981.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bressi, M., Sciare, J., Ghersi, V., Bonnaire, N., Nicolas, J. B., Petit, J.-E., Moukhtar, S., Rosso, A.,
Mihalopoulos, N., and Féron, A.: A one-year comprehensive chemical characterisation of fine aerosol (PM<sub>2. 5</sub>)
at urban, suburban and rural background sites in the region of Paris (France), Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 7825–7844, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-7825-2013" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-13-7825-2013</a>,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Brown, S., Sargent, S., Machado, P., Freemantle, V., Carvalho de Sena
Rabelo, L., and Wagner-Riddle, C.: Comparison of N<sub>2</sub>O fluxes measured
using flux-gradient, eddy-covariance, and chamber methods from an
agricultural site, AGU Fall Meeting 2015, Poster B11B-0426, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Burba, G. G., Mcdermitt, D. K., Anderson, D. J., Furtaw, M. D., and Eckles,
R. D.: Novel design of an enclosed CO<sub>2</sub>/H<sub>2</sub>O gas analyser for eddy
covariance flux measurements, Tellus B., 62, 743–748, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Burgon, R., Sargent, S., and Conrad, B.: Performance evaluation of an
innovative sampling system for closed path eddy covariance measurements, AMS
32nd Conference on Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, Poster 140,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Clement, R. J., Burba, G. G., Grelle, A., Anderson, D. J., and Moncrieff, J.
B.: Improved trace gas flux estimation through IRGA sampling optimization,
Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 149, 623–638, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Detto, M., Verfaillie, J., Anderson, F., Xu, L., and Baldocchi, D.:
Comparing laser-based open- and closed-path gas analyzers to measure methane
fluxes using the eddy covariance method, Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 151
1312–1324, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Eugster, W., Zeyer, K., Zeeman, M., Michna, P., Zingg, A., Buchmann, N., and Emmenegger, L.: Methodical
study of nitrous oxide eddy covariance measurements using quantum cascade laser spectrometery over a Swiss forest,
Biogeosciences, 4, 927–939, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/bg-4-927-2007" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/bg-4-927-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Goulden, M. L., Munger, J. W., Fan, S.-M., Daube, B. C., and Wofsy, S. C.:
Measurements of carbon sequestration by long term eddy covariance: methods
and a critical evaluation of accuracy, Glob. Change Biol., 2, 169–182,
1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Hasheminassab, S., Daher, N., Ostro, B. D., and Sioutas, C.: Long-term
source apportionment of ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in the Los
Angeles Basin: A focus on emissions reduction from vehicular sources,
Environ. Pollut., 193, 54–64, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Ibrom, A., Dellwik, E., Flyvbjerg, H., Jensen, N. O., and Pilegaard, K.:
Strong low-pass filtering effects on water vapour flux measurements with
closed-path eddy correlation systems, Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 147,
140–156, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Jia, X., Zha, T. S., Wu, B., Zhang, Y. Q., Chen, W. J., Wang, X. P., Yu, H.
Q., and He, G. M.: Temperature response of soil respiration in a Chinese
pine plantation: hysteresis and seasonal vs. diel Q<sub>10</sub>, Plos One, 8,
e57858, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057858" target="_blank">doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057858</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Kroon, P. S., Hensen, A., Jonker, H. J. J., Zahniser, M. S., van't Veen, W. H., and Vermeulen, A. T.: Suitability of
quantum cascade laser spectroscopy for CH<sub>4</sub> and N<sub>2</sub>O eddy covariance flux measurements, Biogeosciences, 4, 715–728, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/bg-4-715-2007" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/bg-4-715-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Laubach, J. and Teichmann, U.: Measuring energy budget components by eddy
correlation: Data corrections and application over low vegetation, Contrib.
Atmos. Phys., 69, 307–320, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Lee, X., Massman, W. J., and Law, B. E.: Handbook of Micrometeorology: A
Guide for Surface Flux Measurement and Analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Leuning, R. and Judd, M. J.: The relative merits of open- and closed-path
analysers for measurement of eddy fluxes, Glob. Change Biol., 2, 241–253,
1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Leuning, R. and King, K. M.: Comparison of eddy-covariance measurements of
CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes by open- and closed-path CO<sub>2</sub> analysers, Bound.-Lay.
Meteorol., 59, 297–311, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Massman, W. J.: A simple method for estimating frequency response corrections
for eddy covariance systems, Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 104, 185–198, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
McHale, M. R., McPherson, E. G., and Burke, I. C.: The potential of urban
tree plantings to be cost effective in carbon credit markets, Urban For. Urban Gree., 6, 49–60, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Mitchell, S. R., Emanuel, R. E., and Mcglynn, B. L.: Land-atmosphere carbon
and water flux relationships to vapor pressure deficit, soil moisture, and
stream flow, Agr. Forest. Meteorol., 208, 108–117, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Montgomery, R. B.: Vertical Eddy Flux of Heat in the Atmosphere, J. Atmos.
Sci., 5, 265–274, 1948.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Pataki, D. E., Alig, R. J., Fung, A. S., Golubiewski, N. E., Kennedy, C. A.,
McPherson, E. G., Nowak, D. J., Pouyat, R. V., and Romero Lankao, P.: Urban
ecosystems and the North American carbon cycle, Glob. Change Biol., 12,
2092–2102, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Peltola, O., Mammarella, I., Haapanala, S., Burba, G., and Vesala, T.: Field intercomparison of four methane gas
analyzers suitable for eddy covariance flux measurements, Biogeosciences, 10, 3749–3765, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-3749-2013" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/bg-10-3749-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Runkle, B. R., Wille, C., Gažovič, M., and Kutzbach, L.: Attenuation
correction procedures for water vapour fluxes from closed-path
eddy-covariance systems, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 142, 401–423, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Sargent, S.: Quantifying Frequency Response of a Low-power, Closed-path
CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub>O Eddy-covariance System, available at:
<a href="http://s.campbellsci.com/documents/us/technical-papers/cpec200_frequency_response.pdf" target="_blank">http://s.campbellsci.com/documents/us/technical-papers/cpec200_frequency_response.pdf</a>
(last access: 28 March 2017), 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Schotanus, P., Nieuwstadt, F. T. M., and De Bruin, H. A. R.: Temperature
measurement with a sonic anemometer and its application to heat and moisture
fluxes, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 26, 81–93, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Shoemaker, W. B., Anderson, F., Barr, J. G., Graham, S. L., and Botkin, D. B.: Carbon exchange between the
atmosphere and subtropical forested cypress and pine wetlands, Biogeosciences, 12, 2285–2300, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-2285-2015" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/bg-12-2285-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Somers, J. and Sargent, S.: A Novel Low-Power, High-Performance,
Zero-Maintenance Closed-Path Trace Gas Eddy Covariance System with No Water
Vapor Dilution or Spectroscopic Corrections, AGU Fall Meeting 2015, Poster
B33C-0668, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Villalobos, A. M., Barraza, F., Jorquera, H., and Schauer, J. J.: Chemical
speciation and source apportionment of fine particulate matter in Santiago,
Chile, 2013, Sci. Total Environ., 512–513, 133–142, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, Y., Hu, C., Dong, W., Li, X., Zhang, Y., Qin, S., and Oenema, O.:
Carbon budget of a winter-wheat and summer-maize rotation cropland in the
North China Plain, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 206, 33–45, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Xie, J., Jia, X., He, G., Zhou, C., Yu, H., Wu, Y., Bourque, C., Liu, H.,
and Zha, T.: Environmental control over seasonal variation in carbon fluxes
of an urban temperate forest ecosystem, Landscape Urban Plan., 142, 63–70,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, Y., Liu, X., Qu, Y., Wang, J., An, J., Zhang, Y., and Zhang, F.:
Formation mechanism of continuous extreme haze episodes in the megacity
Beijing, China, in January 2013, Atmos. Res., 155, 192–203, 2015.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, L. D., Wang, G. F., Zhang, R. J., Zhang, L. M., Song, Y., Wu, B. B., Li,
X. F., An, K., and Chu, J. H.: Characterization and Source Apportionment of
PM2.5 in an Urban Environment in Beijing, Aerosol. Air Qual. Res., 13,
574–583, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Zha, T., Barr, A. G., van der Kamp, G., Black, T. A., McCaughey, J. H., and
Flanagan, L. B.: Interannual variation of evapotranspiration from forest and
grassland ecosystems in western canada in relation to drought, Agr. Forest
Meteorol., 150, 1476–1484, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Y., Huang, W., Cai, T., Fang, D., Wang, Y., Song, J., Hu, M. and
Zhang, Y.: Concentrations and chemical compositions of fine particles (PM)
during haze and non-haze days in Beijing, Atmos. Res., 174, 62–69, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Zheng, G. J., Duan, F. K., Su, H., Ma, Y. L., Cheng, Y., Zheng, B., Zhang, Q., Huang, T.,
Kimoto, T., Chang, D., Pöschl, U., Cheng, Y. F., and He, K. B.: Exploring the severe winter haze in Beijing:
the impact of synoptic weather, regional transport and heterogeneous reactions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 2969–2983, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-2969-2015" target="_blank">doi:10.5194/acp-15-2969-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
