LAST CHANGED : 2023/12/17 CRUISE NAME(S) : FKt230812 CRUISE DATES : 2023/08/16 to 2023/09/11 SHIP NAME : Falkor (too) PORTS : Balboa, Panama to Puerto Ayora, Galapagos, Ecuador CHIEF SCIENTIST : Roxanne Beinart DATABASE NAME : a_ftoo DATA FILES : ftoo2023_192_07109.raw to ftoo2023_208_64800.raw STATUS : to do done ------ ----------- averaged [ X ] at sea loaded [ X ] NOTE: heading correction instrument exists NOTE: time-dependent heading corrections applied IN the ensembles (see cal/rotate/ens_hcorr.ang) check heading correction [ X ] calibration [ X ] edited [ X ] re-check heading correction [ X ] check editing [ X ] figures [ X ] INSTRUMENT : ec150 ACQUISITION : PROGRAM : uhdas PROCESSING: : python LOGGING : PARAMETERS : BT : bottom track mode (on or off) SI : sampling interval or averaging period for ensemble (sec) NB : number of bins BL : bin length (m) TD : transducer depth (m) BK : blanking length (m) HO : heading offset applied by DAS (deg) HB : heading bias (deg) CRPH : compensation for roll-pitch-heading, 1:on, 0:off) yy/mm/dd hh:mm:ss BT SI NB BL TD BK HO HB CRPH 2023/07/22 17:29:46 off 300 62 8 7 9 45.00 0.00 0001 HEADING : PRIMARY : heading from gyro1 CORRECTION : heading correction from seapath NOTE: time-dependent heading corrections applied IN the ensembles (see cal/rotate/ens_hcorr.ang) POSITIONS : gps positions from posmv_gps CALIBRATION : (check original processing parameters) (1) transducer alignment original transducer alignment: 45 additional rotation -0.11 final transducer angle is: (original transducer angle) - (rotate_angle) 45 - (-.11) = 45.11 (2) scale factor original scale factor 1 additional scale factor 1.003 (3) ADCP (dx=starboard, dy=fwd) meters from GPS xducer_dx xducer_dy original 0 0 correction 0 0 final offset 0 0 final = original + corrections COMMENTS : The cruise came in 2 parts because a problem with EK80 zmq datagram resulted in inconsistent file size, and processing failed at that point. Only part 1 was salvagable for ec150fm Gaps in heading correction required patch_hcorr.py to be run. PROCESSOR : J. Hummon --- final processing parameters from dbinfo.txt ---------- # written 2023/08/16 18:03:00 # this file contains CODAS quick_adcp.py info #name, value pairs #-------------------- ## (determined from "sonar"): model = ec ## (determined from "sonar"): frequency = 150 ## (determined from "sonar"): instname = ec150 ## (determined from "sonar"): pingtype = fm beamangle 30.0 cruisename FKt230812 datatype uhdas dbname a_ftoo ens_len 300 fixfile a_ftoo.gps frequency 150 hcorr_inst seapath instname ec150 model ec pingtype fm proc_engine python ref_method refsm refuv_smoothwin 3 refuv_source uvship sonar ec150fm txy_file a_ftoo.gps xducer_dx 0 xducer_dy 0 yearbase 2023 ================================================== POST PROCESSING STEPS: ================================================== -------------------------- ### 1. Check visual oddities -------------------------- ec150fm_part1 2023/08/16 18:02:51 to 2023/08/26 00:28:25 ### Run this: (to look for gaps in the cruise track) plot_nav.py nav/a*.agt ### Run this: (to look for gaps in the heading correction, examine the character of ### the watertrack and bottom track calibration, etc figview.py ### Run this: (looking for missing heading correction values or missing positions) dataviewer.py ### Run this: (to interpolate for missing heading correction fixes) cd cal/rotate patch_hcorr.py cd ../.. --------------------- ### 2. ADCP calibration --------------------- # Insufficient calibration data. # Use recommended values: # amp phase dx dy # ec150 1.003 -0.11 0 0 (posmv) quick_adcp.py --steps2rerun rotate:navsteps:calib --rotate_angle -0.11 --rotate_amplitude 1.003 --auto ------------------- ### 3. Editing points ------------------- ### Run this: (to go through the dataset and edit out bad values) dataviewer.py -e # Dday 228.52: 4 sequential profiles that conflict with each other. Not clear # why. Perhaps uvship could fix. Fairly shallow here, so strong currents and # eddies are possible. -------------------------------------------------- ### 4. Re-check heading correction and other figures ### Run this: (Is there anything strange with any of the figures?) figview.py # Test uvship algorithm cd .. cp -a ec150fm ec150fm\_nouvship cd ec150fm quick_adcp.py --steps2rerun navsteps:calib --refuv_source uvship --auto dataviewer.py -c . ../ec150fm_nouvship # Changes are pretty subtle. On a couple of occasions it seemed to help a bit, # so I'll keep it, but there's really very little difference. -------------------------------------------------------------- ### 5. Check edited, calibrated dataset against original dataset -------------------------------------------------------------- ### Run this: (Has this corrected the problems in the original?) dataviewer.py -c . ../ec150fm.orig ### Run this to compare this sonar with another sonar (after both are finished) dataviewer.py -c . ../os38bb # When the ship is on station, the differences between the sonars are pretty # clearly due to resolution differences--horizontal stripes of positive and # negative differences in regions of high vertical shear and little # disagreement in low shear occasions. However, there is clearly a problem # when the ship is steaming: the forward velocities of the two sonars differ # enough to be obvious. It appears that the transducer angles are consistent # with each other, but the scale factor is a problem. dataviewer.py -c ../wh300 . # This is much the same as the comparison with the os38bb; good agreement on # station, obvious biases while steaming. Again, angle seems fine; it's the # scale factor that's inconsistent. # (Comparing the os38bb with the wh300 appears to show significant disagreements # in transducer angle as well as scale factor. However, the os38bb resolution # is so coarse compared with the wh300 that the significance of the comparison # is suspect.) ### Attempt quantitative comparisons of reference layer velocities ### using plot_reflayer.py --plotfp --zrange $MIN:$MAX $SONAR1 $SONAR2 ### plot_reflayer.py --plotfp --zrange 30:90 ../wh300 ../ec150fm ======> NOTE ABOUT CALIBRATIONS <======= If there was a reason to apply a calibration to ec150fm for it to better match wh300, these are APPROXIMATE values to use. Use these as if they came from cal/watertrk or cal/botmtrk. scale factor:f 0.994 to ec150fm rotation angle: 0.08deg to ec150fm ================ plot_reflayer.py --plotfp --zrange 40:200 ../os38bb ../ec150fm ======> NOTE ABOUT CALIBRATIONS <======= If there was a reason to apply a calibration to ec150fm for it to better match os38bb, these are APPROXIMATE values to use. Use these as if they came from cal/watertrk or cal/botmtrk. scale factor:f 0.993 to ec150fm rotation angle: 0.00deg to ec150fm ================ plot_reflayer.py --plotfp --zrange 40:90 ..os38bb ../wh300 zrange is 40:90 parts is ['40', '90'] ======> NOTE ABOUT CALIBRATIONS <======= If there was a reason to apply a calibration to wh300 for it to better match os38bb, these are APPROXIMATE values to use. Use these as if they came from cal/watertrk or cal/botmtrk. scale factor:f 0.996 to wh300 rotation angle: -0.21deg to wh300 ================ # Unfortunately, it does not appear to be possible to come up with a # combination of scale factors and transducer that is justifiable and # would get all of the instruments to agree in this cruise and the others # with the same sonars on the same ship. It could be that there is # a depth-dependent scale factor, or that there simply isn't enough data # and the statistics are poor, or that my choice of comparison depths is # not optimal. # In summary, it appear that the transducer angle is close to correct for # all of the sonars but that there are unresolved problems with scale # factors. ### Final cleanup: Because this is a new instrument, we did not realize ### the original depths were too deep by one bin. A specialized program ### was used to correct this ("depth_change_ec"). A log of this change ### is appended to the end of this file. ------------------------- ### 6. Make plots and files ------------------------- mkdir webpy cp ../wh300/webpy/sectinfo.txt webpy quick_web.py --redo --cruisename FKt230812 ------------------------- ### Run this to extract matlab files ### DO NOT do this; current directory is incompatible with these calls ##quick_adcp.py --steps2rerun matfiles --auto ### Run this to extract a netCDF file adcp_nc.py adcpdb contour/ec150fm FKt230812 ec150fm --ship_name "Falkor (too)" ### Run this to check the headers ncdump -h contour/ec150fm.nc |egrep '(cruise_id|sonar|platform|yearbase)' ######################################### FKt230812_ec150fm_depth_change.log ../FKt230812/ec150fm/adcpdb/a_ftoo 227.75198 block = 0 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 4.2 228.88713 block = 1 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 4.2 229.92882 block = 2 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 4.2 230.97047 block = 3 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 4.2 232.01213 block = 4 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 4.2 233.05381 block = 5 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 4.2 233.59807 block = 6 ,bin = 7.9, blank = 8.7 237.00024 block = 7 ,bin = 7.9, blank = 8.7 237.00563 block = 8 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 4.2 237.01973 block = 9 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 4.2 ../FKt230812/ec150fm/adcpdb/a_ftoo 227.75198 block = 0 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 0.2 228.88713 block = 1 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 0.2 229.92882 block = 2 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 0.2 230.97047 block = 3 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 0.2 232.01213 block = 4 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 0.2 233.05381 block = 5 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 0.2 233.59807 block = 6 ,bin = 7.9, blank = 0.7 237.00024 block = 7 ,bin = 7.9, blank = 0.7 237.00563 block = 8 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 0.2 237.01973 block = 9 ,bin = 3.9, blank = 0.2