Articles | Volume 17, issue 23
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-6913-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-6913-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Analysis of the measurement uncertainty for a 3D wind lidar
Wolf Knöller
Fraunhofer Institute for Physical Measurement Techniques IPM, Georges-Köhler-Allee 301, 79110 Freiburg, Germany
Gholamhossein Bagheri
Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Am Faßberg 17, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
Philipp von Olshausen
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Fraunhofer Institute for Physical Measurement Techniques IPM, Georges-Köhler-Allee 301, 79110 Freiburg, Germany
Michael Wilczek
Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Am Faßberg 17, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
Theoretical Physics I, University of Bayreuth, Universitätsstraße 30, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany
Related authors
No articles found.
Gholamhossein Bagheri, Freja Nordsiek, Oliver Schlenczek, Yewon Kim, Birte Thiede, Venecia Chávez-Medina, Philipp Höhne, Torben Neumann, and Eberhard Bodenschatz
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3456, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3456, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds remain a major source of uncertainty in weather and climate prediction because key processes occur at scales that are difficult to observe. We developed a new airborne measurement system carried by a tethered balloon that directly images individual cloud droplets and their motion. Our field tests demonstrated reliable operation and revealed cloud structure at unprecedented detail, providing a new tool for studying cloud development, rainfall formation, and climate.
Venecia Chávez-Medina, Hossein Khodamoradi, Oliver Schlenczek, Freja Nordsiek, Claudia E. Brunner, Eberhard Bodenschatz, and Gholamhossein Bagheri
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 18, 4263–4278, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-18-4263-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-18-4263-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
During the Pallas Cloud Experiment (PaCE) in northern Finland from September 15 to 28, 2022, detailed measurements of the atmospheric boundary layer, aerosols, and cloud droplets were collected using the Max Planck CloudKite platform, WinDarts, and a ground station. Observations covered altitudes from ground level up to 1.5 km above ground level. This paper presents the dataset, describes the data collection process and structure, and provides guidance for users.
Viet Le, Konstantinos Doulgeris, Mika Komppula, John Backman, Gholamhossein Bagheri, Eberhard Bodenschatz, and David Brus
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-135, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-135, 2026
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Vertical profiles and time series of aerosol particles, cloud droplets, and weather conditions were measured by the Finnish Meteorological Institute airborne payload attached to tethered balloons during the Pallas Cloud Experiment 2022 in Finland. When combined with other datasets collected during the campaign, these measurements will enable integrated analyses and offer a comprehensive view of the atmospheric conditions during the experiment.
Birte Thiede, Oliver Schlenczek, Katja Stieger, Alexander Ecker, Eberhard Bodenschatz, and Gholamhossein Bagheri
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 6291–6314, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-6291-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-6291-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate measurement of cloud particles is crucial for cloud research. While holographic imaging enables detailed analysis of cloud droplet size, shape, and distribution, processing errors remain poorly quantified. To address this, we developed CloudTarget, a patterned photomask that can quantify the detection efficiency and uncertainties. Additionally, our AI-based classification enhances both accuracy and speed, achieving over 90 % precision while accelerating analysis 100-fold.
Birte Thiede, Freja Nordsiek, Yewon Kim, Eberhard Bodenschatz, and Gholamhossein Bagheri
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 5999–6019, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-5999-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-5999-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
HoloTrack is a fully autonomous system designed to capture detailed data on cloud droplets. It combines holographic imaging with environmental sensors to measure droplet size, movement, and surrounding air conditions. The system records hologram pairs to track droplet motion. While it can be used in the lab, it is mainly designed for in-flight use to measure cloud droplets in-situ. This paper presents the instrument’s design and evaluates its performance through testing.
Alina Sylvia Waltraud Reininger, Daria Tatsii, Taraprasad Bhowmick, Gholamhossein Bagheri, and Andreas Stohl
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 25, 10691–10705, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-10691-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-25-10691-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Microplastics are transported over large distances in the atmosphere, but the shape-dependence of their atmospheric transport lacks investigation. We conducted laboratory experiments and atmospheric transport simulations to study the settling of commercially sold microplastics. We found that films settle up to 74 % slower and travel up to ~ 4x further than volume-equivalent spheres. Our work emphasizes the role of the atmosphere as a transport medium for commercial microplastics such as glitter.
Simon Thivet, Gholamhossein Bagheri, Przemyslaw M. Kornatowski, Allan Fries, Jonathan Lemus, Riccardo Simionato, Carolina Díaz-Vecino, Eduardo Rossi, Taishi Yamada, Simona Scollo, and Costanza Bonadonna
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 2803–2824, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-2803-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-2803-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This work presents an innovative way of sampling and analyzing volcanic clouds using an unoccupied aircraft system (UAS). The UAS can reach hazardous environments to sample volcanic particles and measure in situ key parameters, such as the atmospheric concentration of volcanic aerosols and gases. Acquired data bridge the gap between the existing approaches of ground sampling and remote sensing, thereby contributing to the understanding of volcanic cloud dispersion and impact.
Viet Le, Konstantinos Matthaios Doulgeris, Mika Komppula, John Backman, Gholamhossein Bagheri, Eberhard Bodenschatz, and David Brus
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-148, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-148, 2025
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
This manuscript presents datasets collected during the Pallas Cloud Experiment in northern Finland during the autumn of 2022. We provide an overview of the payload that measured meteorological, cloud, and aerosol properties, and was deployed on tethered balloon systems across 21 flights. Additionally, we describe the datasets obtained, including details of the instruments on the payload.
Oliver Schlenczek, Freja Nordsiek, Claudia E. Brunner, Venecia Chávez-Medina, Birte Thiede, Eberhard Bodenschatz, and Gholamhossein Bagheri
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-112, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-112, 2025
Revised manuscript accepted for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
During the Pallas Cloud Experiment (PaCE) in Finland (Sept. 19–26, 2022), the Advanced Max Planck CloudKite instrument (MPCK+) gathered turbulence, wind shear, and cloud data from 0–1200 m. Flights lasted 1.5–3 hours, capturing droplet concentrations and size distributions at high resolution (<10 m spacing). The dataset aids studies of Arctic boundary layer clouds above freezing temperatures. This paper details the data collection, structure, and user guidelines.
Marcel Schröder, Tobias Bätge, Eberhard Bodenschatz, Michael Wilczek, and Gholamhossein Bagheri
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 627–657, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-627-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-627-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The rate at which energy is dissipated in a turbulent flow is an extremely important quantity. In the atmosphere, it is usually measured by recording a velocity time at a specific location. Our goal is to understand how best to estimate the dissipation rate from such data based on various available methods. Our reference for evaluating the performance of the different methods is data generated with direct numerical simulations and in highly controlled laboratory setups.
Cited articles
Bagheri, G., Nordsiek, F., Schlenczek, O., and Bodenschatz, E.: Cloudkite: an airborne platform for resolving clouds, in: EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, 8–13 April 2018. Vienna, Austria, EGU2018-8821, 2018. a
Bauer, P., Thorpe, A., and Brunet, G.: The quiet revolution of numerical weather prediction, Nature, 525, 47–55, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14956, 2015. a
Bertens, A. C. M.: Experimental investigation of Cloud droplet dynamics at the research station Schneefernerhaus, PhD thesis, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, https://doi.org/10.53846/goediss-8925, 2021. a, b, c
Bingöl, F., Mann, J., and Foussekis, D.: Conically scanning lidar error in complex terrain, Meteorol. Z., 18, 189–195, https://doi.org/10.1127/0941-2948/2009/0368, 2009. a
Bodenschatz, E., Malinowski, S. P., Shaw, R. A., and Stratmann, F.: Can We Understand Clouds Without Turbulence?, Science, 327, 970–971, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1185138, 2010. a
Bony, S., Stevens, B., Frierson, D. M. W., Jakob, C., Kageyama, M., Pincus, R., Shepherd, T. G., Sherwood, S. C., Siebesma, A. P., Sobel, A. H., Watanabe, M., and Webb, M. J.: Clouds, circulation and climate sensitivity, Nat. Geosci., 8, 261–268, https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2398, 2015. a
Calif, R.: PDF models and synthetic model for the wind speed fluctuations based on the resolution of Langevin equation, Appl. Energ., 99, 173–182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.05.007, 2012. a
Davy, R.: The climatology of the atmospheric boundary layer in contemporary global climate models, J. Climate, 31, 9151–9173, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0498.1, 2018. a
Fuertes, F. C., Iungo, G. V., and Porté-Agel, F.: 3D turbulence measurements using three synchronous wind lidars: Validation against sonic anemometry, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 31, 1549–1556, 2014. a
Garratt, J. R.: Review: the atmospheric boundary layer, Earth Sci. Rev., 37, 89–134, https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-8252(94)90026-4, 1994. a
Hill, C.: Coherent focused lidars for Doppler sensing of aerosols and wind, Remote Sens., 10, 466, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10030466, 2018. a
Holtom, T. C. and Brooms, A. C.: Error propagation analysis for a static convergent beam triple LIDAR, Appl. Numer. Math., 150, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2019.08.020, 2020. a
Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology: JCGM 100: Evaluation of Measurement Data – Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, Tech. rep., JCGM, 2008. a
Kloeden, P. E. and Platen, E.: Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations, Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-12616-5, 1992. a
Knoop, S., Bosveld, F. C., de Haij, M. J., and Apituley, A.: A 2-year intercomparison of continuous-wave focusing wind lidar and tall mast wind measurements at Cabauw, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 2219–2235, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-2219-2021, 2021. a
Kumer, V. M., Reuder, J., Dorninger, M., Zauner, R., and Grubišić, V.: Turbulent kinetic energy estimates from profiling wind LiDAR measurements and their potential for wind energy applications, Renew. Energ., 99, 898–910, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.07.014, 2016. a
Lundquist, J. K., Churchfield, M. J., Lee, S., and Clifton, A.: Quantifying error of lidar and sodar Doppler beam swinging measurements of wind turbine wakes using computational fluid dynamics, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 907–920, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-907-2015, 2015. a
Pauscher, L., Vasiljevic, N., Callies, D., Lea, G., Mann, J., Klaas, T., Hieronimus, J., Gottschall, J., Schwesig, A., Kühn, M., and Courtney, M.: An inter-comparison study of multi- and DBS lidar measurements in complex terrain, Remote Sens., 8, 782, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8090782, 2016. a
Pena, A., Eds, C. B. H., Bischoff, O., Frandsen, S. T., Mann, J., and Trujillo, J. J.: Remote Sensing for Wind Energy, Tech. Rep. DTU Wind Energy-E-Report-0029(EN), Technical University of Denmark, ISBN 978-87-92896-41-4, 2013. a
Pope, S. B.: Simple models of turbulent flows, Phys. Fluids, 23, 011301, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3531744, 2011. a, b
Quan, J., Tie, X., Zhang, Q., Liu, Q., Li, X., Gao, Y., and Zhao, D.: Characteristics of heavy aerosol pollution during the 2012–2013 winter in Beijing, China, Atmos. Environ., 88, 83–89, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.01.058, 2014. a
Risken, H.: The Fokker–Planck Equation: Methods of Solution and Applications, Springer, ISBN 978-0387504988, 1989. a
Sathe, A., Banta, R. M., Pauscher, L., Vogstad, K., Schlipf, D., and Wylie, S.: Estimating Turbulence Statistics and Parameters from Ground- and Nacelle-Based Lidar Measurements, Tech. Rep. October, DTU Wind Energy, ISBN 9788793278356, 2015. a
Schlipf, D., Rettenmeier, A., and Haizmann, F.: Model Based Wind Vector Field Reconstruction from LIDAR Data, Proceedings of the 11th German Wind Energy Conference DEWEK, 7–8 November 2012, Bremen, Germany, 2–5, http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/opus/volltexte/2013/8431/ (last access: 20 November 2024), 2012. a
Schlipf, D., Koch, M., and Raach, S.: Modeling Uncertainties of Wind Field Reconstruction Using Lidar, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1452, 012088, https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1452/1/012088, 2020. a, b, c
Schröder, M.: Cloud Microphysics Investigations with the Cloudkite Laboratory, Phd thesis, Georg-August University Göttingen, Göttingen, https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000D-06A7-0 (last access: 20 November 2024), 2023. a
Schröder, M., Nordsiek, F., Schlenczek, O., Ibañez Landeta, A., Güttler, J., Bagheri, G., and Bodenschatz, E.: Airborne Atmospheric Measurements with the Max Planck CloudKites, EGU General Assembly 2021, online, 19–30 April 2021, EGU21-11608, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu21-11608, 2021. a
Stevens, B., Bony, S., Farrell, D., Ament, F., Blyth, A., Fairall, C., Karstensen, J., Quinn, P. K., Speich, S., Acquistapace, C., Aemisegger, F., Albright, A. L., Bellenger, H., Bodenschatz, E., Caesar, K.-A., Chewitt-Lucas, R., de Boer, G., Delanoë, J., Denby, L., Ewald, F., Fildier, B., Forde, M., George, G., Gross, S., Hagen, M., Hausold, A., Heywood, K. J., Hirsch, L., Jacob, M., Jansen, F., Kinne, S., Klocke, D., Kölling, T., Konow, H., Lothon, M., Mohr, W., Naumann, A. K., Nuijens, L., Olivier, L., Pincus, R., Pöhlker, M., Reverdin, G., Roberts, G., Schnitt, S., Schulz, H., Siebesma, A. P., Stephan, C. C., Sullivan, P., Touzé-Peiffer, L., Vial, J., Vogel, R., Zuidema, P., Alexander, N., Alves, L., Arixi, S., Asmath, H., Bagheri, G., Baier, K., Bailey, A., Baranowski, D., Baron, A., Barrau, S., Barrett, P. A., Batier, F., Behrendt, A., Bendinger, A., Beucher, F., Bigorre, S., Blades, E., Blossey, P., Bock, O., Böing, S., Bosser, P., Bourras, D., Bouruet-Aubertot, P., Bower, K., Branellec, P., Branger, H., Brennek, M., Brewer, A., Brilouet, P.-E., Brügmann, B., Buehler, S. A., Burke, E., Burton, R., Calmer, R., Canonici, J.-C., Carton, X., Cato Jr., G., Charles, J. A., Chazette, P., Chen, Y., Chilinski, M. T., Choularton, T., Chuang, P., Clarke, S., Coe, H., Cornet, C., Coutris, P., Couvreux, F., Crewell, S., Cronin, T., Cui, Z., Cuypers, Y., Daley, A., Damerell, G. M., Dauhut, T., Deneke, H., Desbios, J.-P., Dörner, S., Donner, S., Douet, V., Drushka, K., Dütsch, M., Ehrlich, A., Emanuel, K., Emmanouilidis, A., Etienne, J.-C., Etienne-Leblanc, S., Faure, G., Feingold, G., Ferrero, L., Fix, A., Flamant, C., Flatau, P. J., Foltz, G. R., Forster, L., Furtuna, I., Gadian, A., Galewsky, J., Gallagher, M., Gallimore, P., Gaston, C., Gentemann, C., Geyskens, N., Giez, A., Gollop, J., Gouirand, I., Gourbeyre, C., de Graaf, D., de Groot, G. E., Grosz, R., Güttler, J., Gutleben, M., Hall, K., Harris, G., Helfer, K. C., Henze, D., Herbert, C., Holanda, B., Ibanez-Landeta, A., Intrieri, J., Iyer, S., Julien, F., Kalesse, H., Kazil, J., Kellman, A., Kidane, A. T., Kirchner, U., Klingebiel, M., Körner, M., Kremper, L. A., Kretzschmar, J., Krüger, O., Kumala, W., Kurz, A., L'Hégaret, P., Labaste, M., Lachlan-Cope, T., Laing, A., Landschützer, P., Lang, T., Lange, D., Lange, I., Laplace, C., Lavik, G., Laxenaire, R., Le Bihan, C., Leandro, M., Lefevre, N., Lena, M., Lenschow, D., Li, Q., Lloyd, G., Los, S., Losi, N., Lovell, O., Luneau, C., Makuch, P., Malinowski, S., Manta, G., Marinou, E., Marsden, N., Masson, S., Maury, N., Mayer, B., Mayers-Als, M., Mazel, C., McGeary, W., McWilliams, J. C., Mech, M., Mehlmann, M., Meroni, A. N., Mieslinger, T., Minikin, A., Minnett, P., Möller, G., Morfa Avalos, Y., Muller, C., Musat, I., Napoli, A., Neuberger, A., Noisel, C., Noone, D., Nordsiek, F., Nowak, J. L., Oswald, L., Parker, D. J., Peck, C., Person, R., Philippi, M., Plueddemann, A., Pöhlker, C., Pörtge, V., Pöschl, U., Pologne, L., Posyniak, M., Prange, M., Quiñones Meléndez, E., Radtke, J., Ramage, K., Reimann, J., Renault, L., Reus, K., Reyes, A., Ribbe, J., Ringel, M., Ritschel, M., Rocha, C. B., Rochetin, N., Röttenbacher, J., Rollo, C., Royer, H., Sadoulet, P., Saffin, L., Sandiford, S., Sandu, I., Schäfer, M., Schemann, V., Schirmacher, I., Schlenczek, O., Schmidt, J., Schröder, M., Schwarzenboeck, A., Sealy, A., Senff, C. J., Serikov, I., Shohan, S., Siddle, E., Smirnov, A., Späth, F., Spooner, B., Stolla, M. K., Szkółka, W., de Szoeke, S. P., Tarot, S., Tetoni, E., Thompson, E., Thomson, J., Tomassini, L., Totems, J., Ubele, A. A., Villiger, L., von Arx, J., Wagner, T., Walther, A., Webber, B., Wendisch, M., Whitehall, S., Wiltshire, A., Wing, A. A., Wirth, M., Wiskandt, J., Wolf, K., Worbes, L., Wright, E., Wulfmeyer, V., Young, S., Zhang, C., Zhang, D., Ziemen, F., Zinner, T., and Zöger, M.: EUREC4A, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4067–4119, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4067-2021, 2021. a, b, c, d, e
Uhlenbeck, G. E. and Ornstein, L. S.: On the Theory of the Brownian Motion, Phys. Rev., 36, 823–841, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.36.823, 1930. a
Wilhelm, P., Eggert, M., Hornig, J., and Oertel, S.: High spatial and temporal resolution bistatic wind lidar, Appl. Sci., 11, 7602, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11167602, 2021. a
Wyngaard, J. C.: Turbulence in the Atmosphere, Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840524, 2010. a
Zárate-Miñano, R., Anghel, M., and Milano, F.: Continuous wind speed models based on stochastic differential equations, Appl. Energ., 104, 42–49, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.10.064, 2013. a, b
Short summary
Three-dimensional (3D) wind velocity measurements are of major importance for the characterization of atmospheric turbulence. This paper presents a detailed study of the measurement uncertainty of a three-beam wind lidar designed for mounting on airborne platforms. Considering the geometrical constraints, the analysis provides quantitative estimates for the measurement uncertainty of all components of the 3D wind vector. As a result, we propose optimized post-processing for error reduction.
Three-dimensional (3D) wind velocity measurements are of major importance for the...