4.6 Article

Accuracy of tropospheric and stratospheric water vapor measurements by the cryogenic frost point hygrometer:: Instrumental details and observations

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES
Volume 112, Issue D8, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2006JD007224

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

[1] The cryogenic frost point hygrometer (CFH), currently built at the University of Colorado, is a new balloon borne hygrometer, which is capable of continuously measuring water vapor between the surface and the middle stratosphere. The design is loosely based on the old NOAA/CMDL frost point hygrometer, with improved accuracy and a number of significant new features that overcome some limitations of the older instrument. The measurement uncertainty of the new instrument depends on altitude and ranges between less than 4% in the tropical lower troposphere to no more than 10% in the middle stratosphere at 28 km. In the tropopause region the uncertainty is less than 9%. This instrument is used routinely at several sites for validation of satellite measurements and process studies in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere region. It has proved to be particularly well suited for dehydration observations in the tropical upper troposphere, because the effects of cloud contamination have been significantly reduced. Results of this instrument are compared with the old NOAA/CMDL hygrometer, the Russian Fluorescent Lyman Alpha Stratospheric Hygrometer, the Vaisala RS92, the AURA/MLS satellite instrument, a cloud lidar, the NOAA/CSD frost point hygrometer and the Harvard Lyman-alpha hygrometer, both of the later instruments flown on board the NASAWB-57F high-altitude research aircraft. These comparisons demonstrate the level of accuracy of tropospheric and stratospheric water vapor measurements made by this instrument and point to areas where more research and development are needed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available