Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) --
General Oceanographic Questions
FAQs have been organized into the following categories:
General oceanographic questions (this page) |
- What is the difference between psu and ppt?
- Is the salinity calculated by Sea-Bird valid above 42 psu?
- Does Sea-Bird software output Practical Salinity (psu) or Absolute Salinity?
- What is the difference between IPTS-68 and ITS-90?
- What is the difference between initial accuracy and resolution?
- Why is sound velocity (SV) computed from a CTD better than sound velocity from direct measuring instruments?
- Which algorithm for calculating sound velocity (SV) from CTD data should I use?
- What is hydrostatic head effect?
- How can I find the density of seawater at different temperatures and/or salinities?
- What is the cause of conductivity drift?
- Does it matter whether you use natural or artificial seawater for calibrations? Which does Sea-Bird use?
- Where can I purchase standard seawater?
- Why is my CTD data showing hysteresis?
Our Glossary page is another good source of information.
The numeric difference between psu and ppt is small; both indicate ocean salinity.
The modern oceanographic definition of salinity is the Practical Salinity Scale of 1978 (PSS-78). It yields a practical salinity from new equations, smooth expansions of conductivity ratio, which were carefully fit to the real salinity of diluted North Atlantic seawater. The numeric unit from PSS-78 is psu (practical salinity unit) and is distinct from the previous physical quantity ppt (kg salt per kg water in parts per thousand). The primary motivation for psu was consistency; it focused on a trace to a primary conductivity standard (K15) and recognition that ocean ion ratios were not identical. Salinometer work was plagued by an inconsistent standard and the ppt equations included ion ratios from different oceans. So, the trade was a consistent standard and equation that works for a single ion mix instead of exact salinity in other ocean basins. G. Siedler and H. Peters highlighted where PSS-78 and EOS-80 formulas deviate from real salinity and density (e.g., Baltic Sea is difficult, but the deep Pacific has EOS-80 deviations of up to 0.02 kg/m3, implying salinity errors of order 0.02 psu).
The modern oceanographic definition of salinity is the Practical Salinity Scale of 1978 (PSS-78). By definition, PSS-78 is valid only in the range of 2 to 42 psu. Sea-Bird uses the PSS-78 algorithm in our software, without regard to those limitations on the valid range.
Unesco technical papers in marine science 62 "Salinity and density of seawater: Tables for high salinities (42 to 50)" provides a method for calculating salinity in the higher range (Click here to access this paper via Unesco's website).
In June 2009, a new Thermodynamic Equation of State of Seawater, referred to as TEOS-10, was adopted by the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research and the International Association of Physical Sciences of the Ocean Working Group 127. The new equation incorporates a more accurate representation of salinity known as Absolute Salinity. Application Note 90 discusses this new equation, and Sea-Bird's plans for implementation.
ITS-90 is the new (as of 1990) temperature scale; IPTS-68 was the previous standard. The differences are related to redefining certain triple points and other melt or freeze cells that are used as the fundamental standards for temperature. Over the oceanographic ranges of temperature, a linear approximation is used to convert:
IPTS-68 = 1.00024 * ITS-90
The difference is small, but at WOCE levels it is significant.
Note: Salinity, density, and sound velocity are still defined in terms of IPTS-68 temperature. Sea-Bird’s software uses IPTS-68 temperature to calculate these derived parameters, regardless of which temperature scale you select for outputting or plotting temperature.
Application Note 42: ITS-90 Temperature Scale provides a more detailed description.
Upon receipt of an instrument, the initial accuracy is the accuracy when comparing to a known standard. Resolution is the smallest amount of change that a sensor can see.
Direct SV probes measure the time (flight time) required for a sound pulse to travel over a fixed length, using a high-speed clock to measure time. The clock starts when the pulse is emitted, and stops when the pulse is received. Theoretically, you only need to know the length of the path (and the frequency of the clock ‑ an easy matter) to compute SV. SV is calculated as:
SV = length of acoustic path / flight time.
For a typical acoustic path of 0.1 m, a flight time of 67 microseconds is expected for SV = 1492 m/s.
Two problems associated with direct SV probes are:
The fact is that in designing a direct path SV probe, the determination of length by ruler is only good to 5 or 10% (approximately 100 m/s equivalent uncertainty in SV). The actual determination of SV response therefore must be made in a calibration bath (using a CTD as a reference!), which is how all SV probes are calibrated.
Direct SV probes are often marketed on the principle that the measurement is based only on fundamental physical values of length and time. That is true in theory, but the practice is a different story! Direct SV probe manufacturers do not know the length (or the time) ‑ they just fit the probe response to CTD-computed SV.
There is a place for direct SV probes. Having been calibrated in water against a CTD, they do a competent job of measuring SV in other liquids. They will go on working in oil, petrol, milk, beer, etc. ‑ liquids in which CTD measurements have no meaning.
Sea-Bird real-time data acquisition (Seasave V7) and data processing (SBE Data Processing) software supports calculation of Chen-Millero, Del Grosso, and Wilson sound velocities. The algorithms, as implemented in our software, are provided in the software documentation, which is available via the software Help files or in an Appendix in the software manuals. To download the software and/or manuals, go to Software Descriptions and Revisions.
The Hydrographic Society published Special Publication No. 34 in 1993, "A Comparison Between Algorithms for the Speed of Sound in Seawater", comparing a number of sound velocity algorithms. The report recommends using the Chen-Millero algorithm for water depths less than 1000 meters and the Del Grosso algorithm for water depths greater than 1000 meters, and recommends that the Wilson algorithm should not be used. Click here to access the report via the Hydrographic Society's website.
This effect is not the oceanography adiabatic temperature gradient, but rather the effect of pressure on the triple-point-of-water (TPW) (pressure effect on the phase point). It is unfortunate that oceanographers and metrologists have a common terminology for 2 different physical effects.
The adiabatic lapse rate (oceanography hydrostatic head effect) for pure water (+0.010 C, +6.11 mbar) is -0.3059 microK/cm. The pressure effect on the TPW is -7.3 microK/cm and does not require the presence of all 3 phases (i.e., applies to ice/water interface only). The reason the adiabatic lapse rate does not affect measurements in the TPW cell is because the water at the inner edge of the ice mantle and the water surrounding the thermometer sheath does not convect. This motionless water therefore comes into thermal equilibrium with the vertical temperature gradient at the ice interface (the metrology hydrostatic head effect).
SBE Data Processing includes a module called SeacalcW. SeacalcW can calculate density, sound velocity, and a number of other parameters for a given user input of pressure, temperature, and conductivity (or salinity). You can download SBE Data Processing from our FTP page.
Conductivity cells drift primarily as a function of cell fouling. There are several sources of the fouling:
See Application Note 2D: Instructions for Care and Cleaning of Conductivity Cells for rinsing, cleaning, and storage procedures.
Because of the nature of fouling, the total cell drift may not be linear. It exhibits rapid small shifts (especially if related to oil fouling) on top of a base line drift. It is important to take water samples to document the behavior. Application Note 31: Computing Temperature and Conductivity Slope and Offset Correction Coefficients from Laboratory Calibrations and Salinity Bottle Samples discusses how to correct the data.
For SBE 4 conductivity calibrations, Sea-Bird uses natural seawater that has been carefully collected, stored, UV irradiated, and filtered. Artificial seawater is not adequate if calibration errors are to be kept below 0.010 psu.
The primary difference between natural and artificial seawater is the behavior of conductivity versus temperature. The practical salinity scale 1978 equations include a term rt. This term is expanded into a fourth order equation that describes the variation of conductivity versus temperature for a sample of constant salinity. The equation’s coefficients are derived by fitting to natural seawater samples. Artificial seawater does not have the same conductivity versus temperature characteristic, providing incorrect coefficients and causing a slope error in the calibration.
For calibrations of conductivity sensors other than the SBE 4, Sea-Bird uses artificial seawater (NaCl solution). However, we place an SBE 4 conductivity sensor in each bath, providing a standard for reference to the natural seawater calibration. This allows us to correct errors in the coefficients and slope introduced with the artificial seawater calibration.
For calibration of temperature sensors, Sea-Bird uses artificial seawater (NaCl solution).
IAPSO standard seawater is available in 250 ml vials. For more information and purchase inquiry, e-mail osil@oceanscientific.co.uk.
The difference between downcast and upcast is most likely related to package wake. When the CTD is mounted under a large water sampler, the variation can be on the order of 5 to 8 meters. This is due to the shadowing of the CTD sensors by the water sampler.
Last modified: 05 Nov 2010
Sea-Bird Home Phone: (+1) 425-643-9866 Fax: (+1) 425-643-9954 E-mail: seabird@seabird.com