CRUISE REPORT: IN2015_V01 (Updated Jul 2016) Highlights Cruise Summary Information Section Designation IN2015_V01 (SOTS) Expedition designation (ExpoCodes) 096U20150321 Chief Scientists Dr Tom Trull / CSIRO, Eric Schulz /BOM Dates 2015-03-21 - 2015-03-30 Ship R/V Investigator Ports of call Hobart 46° 40' 1.2" S Geographic Boundaries 141° 34' 7" E 144° 1' 12" E 47° 9' 5" S Stations 3 ctd stations Floats and drifters deployed 2 autonomous profiling floats deployed Moorings deployed or recovered 3 moorings deployed, 1 recovered Contact Information: Professor Thomas Trull Eric Werner Schulz Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems Australian Bureau of Meteorology Cooperative Research Centre Oceanography, Meteorology Hobart, Tasmania Phone: (03) 6226 2988 tom.trull@csiro.au E.Schulz@bom.gov.au Marine National Facility TABLE OF CONTENTS Voyage Summary OBJECTIVES AND BRIEF NARRATIVE OF VOYAGE Scientific objectives 1 Voyage objectives 1 ancillary projects 2 Results 3 Voyage Narrative 4 Summary 6 Principal Investigators 6 Moorings, Bottom Mounted Gear And Drifting Systems 7 Summary Of Measurements And Samples Taken 7 Curation Report 8 Personnel List 8 Marine Crew 9 Acknowledgements 9 Appendices 9 CTD PROCESSING REPORT 1 Summary 12 2 Voyage Details 13 2.1 Title 13 2.2 Principal Investigators 13 2.3 Voyage Objectives 13 2.4 Area of operation 13 3 Processing Notes 13 3.1 Background Information 13 3.2 Pressure and temperature calibration 14 3.3 Conductivity Calibration 14 3.4 Dissolved Oxygen Sensor Calibration 15 3.5 Other sensors 16 3.6 Bad data detection 16 3.7 Averaging 17 4 References 17 HYDROHEMISTRY DATA PROCESS REPORT 1 Itinerary 18 2 Key personnel list 19 3 Summary 19 3.1 Hydrochemistry 19 3.2 Rosette and CTD 19 3.3 Nutrients 19 3.4 Salinities 20 3.5 Dissolved oxygen 20 4 Detailed processing 20 4.1 Procedure 21 4.2 Nutrients 21 4.3 Salinities 23 4.4 Dissolved oxygen 23 4.5 CTD vs Hydro salinities 23 4.6 CTD vs Hydro Oxygens 23 4.7 Plots (see pdf version) 23 4.8 Quality Control 24 4.8.1 Silicate RMNS Chart (see pdf version) 4.8.2 Phosphate RMNS Chart (see pdf version) 4.8.3 NOx RMNS Chart (see pdf version) 4.8.4 Duplicates 24 4.9 Investigation of missing data and actions required 24 5 Appendix 24 5.1 Nutrient Reference Materials 24 5.2 Salinity Reference Material 24 5.3 Go-Ship Specifications 24 5.4 Temperature change over nutrient analyses (see pdf) 25 CCHDO DATA HISTORY NOTES 25 RV Investigator Voyage Summary Voyage # IN2015_VO1 Voyage title: IMOS Southern Ocean Time Series automated moorings for climate and carbon cycle studies southwest of Tasmania Mobilisation: Hobart, Friday, 20 March 2015 Depart: 0900, Hobart, Saturday, 21 March 2015 Return: 0900, Hobart, Monday, 30 March 2015 Demobilisation: Hobart, Monday, 30 March 2015 Voyage Manager: Max McGuire Contact details: max.mcguire@csiro.au Chief Scientist: Tom Trull Affiliation: CSIRO O&A Contact details: tom.trull@csiro.au Co-PI: Eric Schulz Affiliation: Bureau of Contact details: E.Schulz@bom.gov.au Meteorology OBJECTIVES AND BRIEF NARRATIVE OF VOYAGE Scientific objectives The Southern Ocean has a predominant role in the movement of heat and carbon dioxide into the ocean interior moderating Earth's average surface climate. The Southern Ocean Time Series observatory (SOTS) uses a set of three automated mooring to measure these processes under extreme conditions, where they are most intense and have been least studied. The atmosphere-ocean exchanges occur on many timescales, from daily insolation cycles to ocean basin decadal oscillations and thus high frequency observations sustained over many years are required. The current context of anthropogenic forcing of rapid climate change adds urgency to the work. Voyage objectives The primary objective was to deploy a full set of SOTS moorings (SOFS, Pulse, and SAZ) and to obtain ancillary information of the oceanographic conditions at the time of deployment using CTD casts, underway measurements, the Triaxus towed body, and deployment of autonomous profiling "Bio-Argo" floats. Each of the SOTS moorings delivers to specific aspects of the atmosphere-ocean exchanges, with some redundancy: • the Southern Ocean Flux Station (SOFS) focuses on air properties, ocean stratification, waves, and currents. • the Pulse biogeochemistry mooring focuses on processes important to biological CO2 consumption, including net community production from oxygen measurements and nitrate depletion, biomass concentrations from bio-optics and bio-acoustics, and collection of water samples for nutrient and plankton quantification. • the SAZ sediment trap mooring focuses on quantifying the transfer of carbon and other nutrients to the ocean interior by sinking particles, and collecting samples to investigate their ecological controls. Additional water sampling and sensor comparisons against shipboard systems provided quality control and spatial context, which was further augmented by Bio-Argo float and Triaxus towed body deployments, and satellite remote sensing. The voyage also supported several ancillary projects: 1. Composition of phytoplankton, Philip Heraud, Monash University The scientific objectives were to explore the use of spectroscopic techniques characterize phytoplankton elemental and molecular compositions to understand their variability, links to environmental conditions, and roles in biogeochemical cycles. The voyage objective was to obtain samples by filtering the ship's underway seawater supply and Niskin bottle samples collected with the CTD-Rosette system. 2. Properties of Southern Ocean Clouds and Aerosols, Alain Protat, BOM; Melita Keywood, CSIRO The scientific objectives were to characterize cloud and aerosol properties using physical and chemical sensor measurements and sample collections. The voyage objectives are to install and operate cloud radar and aerosol sampling systems. 3. Southern Ocean Carbon Cycling Observations and Modeling (SOCCOM) Lynne Talley, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, and the SOCCOM consortium (www.soccom.org) The overall scientific objectives are to determine the interactions between changing Southern Ocean circulation and stratification and the physical and biological uptake of carbon dioxide and associated ecosystem impacts. The approach was to deploy autonomous profiling floats with new generation sensors in bio-optical sensors for microbial biomass, oxygen sensors to determine ocean ventilation, pH sensors to examine ocean acidification, and nitrate sensors to track biological productivity. The voyage objectives were to deploy 2 autonomous profiling floats, each accompanied by a CTD cast to 2250m. 4. Continuous Plankton Recorder Survey, Anthony Richardson, CSIRO/UQ The voyage objective was to tow a CPR on one leg to provide plankton samples for microscopic identification, as part of the broader collection of samples and characterization of plankton communities in the waters of Australian coastal and regional seas. Priority-ranked list of tasks to achieve the overall objectives (from Voyage Plan): 1. Deploy SOFS-5 meteorology mooring 2. Deploy Pulse-11 biogeochemistry mooring 3. Deploy SAZ-17 sediment trap mooring 4. Recover SAZ-16 sediment trap mooring 5. Do CTDs (2 casts to 2250m) at the SOTS site, including collecting samples for nutrient, oxygen, dissolved inorganic carbon, alkalinity, and particulate matter analyses. 6. Do ancillary underway measurements, including clean and trace-clean underway water supply sampling and sensor measurements, meteorological observations, and bio-acoustics using shipboard multi-beam/multi-frequency system. 7. Deploy 2 SOCCOM autonomous profiling floats - 1 at SOTS site, one during transit to or from Hobart to SOTS site. Do a CTD cast to 2250m prior to each deployment 8. Tow MacArtney Triaxus to and/or from SOTS site, and one or more nights while at SOTS site. 9. Tow CPR to and/or from SOTS site Results Amazingly, essentially all planned tasks were fully achieved for the core project and all ancillary projects. This is a huge achievement, made possible by the weather, the capabilities of the ship, and the professionalism of MNF, ASP, and the science project teams. The ability to include ancillary project teams also led to new collaborations, including one featured in our Science Highlights below. There were only two exceptions: 1. commitment to supporting the ancillary cloud radar observations meant that a planned final tow of the Triaxus on the return leg to Hobart could not be fit in ahead of the MNF operational need to dock early in the morning on Monday 30 March 2015. This outcome emphasizes the new challenges that come with the advantages of larger science parties. 2. evaluation of the fidelity of the underway seawater supply for dissolved oxygen sampling by comparison to CTD-Niskin samples was compromised by a blocked intake. There is a need to make intake cleaning a standard procedure, supported by intake pressure measurements being available to the ship crew. Counterbalancing these shortfalls were the completion of activities beyond those in the initial Voyage plan, including: 1. an additional Argo float was deployed for the IMOS Argo facility 2. an additional CTDs was completed to 1500m to collect deep seawater for use by the MNF Hydrochemistry and CSIRO Calibration Facility teams. 3. collection of cloud radar data during a satellite overpass for ancillary project 3. Voyage Narrative Saturday 21 March 2015 Calm water procedures practice After a final lift to re-load the towed body winch following re-certifying it for ancillary use with mooring work, we departed at 0900. We adjusted the compass off Battery Point and proceeded to Adventure Bay for equipment testing and procedure practice. The CTD deployment from the coring boom was difficult but ultimately successful, although sensor logging was not fully successful. Mooring practice work focused on familiarization of crew and project teams with user and ship equipment and procedures for lift of the SOFS float. The practice was very beneficial and revealed the advantages of remote control of the A-frame and winches, but also some limitations. The remote control box is not intuitive, responds slowly, and can easily lead to unwanted and unexpected actuations of the hydraulics. This is an important safety issue and needs attention to resolve it - with a dedicated box for just the winches and A-frame as used in high risk work. Sunday 22 March 2015 Transit and Triaxus Tow During this transit day the mooring deployment procedures were reviewed by the crew, MNF, and science teams. We carried out a very successful first tow of 6 hours of the Triaxus, with successful data collection from all instruments including the newly mounted SUNA nitrate and FIRe variable fluorescence instruments. There remains some work to do to implement logging of all data streams in a uniform way, rather than on an instrument by instrument basis. Late in the tow, one CTD channel was lost, which appears to have resulted from clogging by a salp (as the Triaxus was coated with the remains of many salps when recovered). Development of a shield for the intakes or their reorientation may be required. Some data loss also occurred for the FIRe instrument owing to problems with the project supplied laptop used for its logging. During the Triaxus tow we collected a suite of particle samples from the underway science seawater supply for chemical and biological characterization. Monday 23 March 2015 Deployment of SOFS-5 We made the decision to proceed with deployment of the drogued top end of the mooring at our "Go/No-go" meeting at 0630, but reserved the right to cancel launch of the SOFS-5 surface float if the weather worsened. It lightened and we launched the float at 1200 and recovered its trailing end about 1300. The ship approach to the float was initially on the starboard side, but had to switch to the port side as we came into range for grappling. Reconnection of the line to the ship is difficult on this side because the electrical box on the stern is a severe hindrance and should be relocated (as previously recommended in our IN2014_E04 report). We proceeded to deploy the mooring and released the anchor about 22:20 after a long day on deck. We ran 3-mile repeat weather legs through the night for sensor comparisons between the ship and SOFS-5 mooring instruments. Tuesday 24 March 2015 Spooling on of Pulse-11 We began work at 0800 to spool on the Pulse-11 mooring, while carrying out a CTD cast to 2250m. Sensor display during the downcast was problematic, but correct during the upcast. 22 of 24 Niskins properly closed and were sampled by MNF hydrochemists and the project team for O2, DIC, ALK, salinity, nutrients, pigments, particulate organic carbon, and coccolithophores. Worsening weather precluded the planned tow of the Triaxus, and we carried out triangulation of the SOFS-5 anchor position, and then swath mapping of the Pulse-11 deployment target site and a survey of oceanographic properties to the southeast of SOTS using the underway sensors. We experienced flooding of the main CTD room, Underway laboratory, and Hydrochem laboratory on the northerly leg of this survey when the ship was tilted to starboard, from water upwelling from the scuppers. This presents both safety hazards (slipping in the labs) and science quality issues (dirty conditions in the labs) and needs attention. We held a well-attended SOFS-5 post-deployment discussion which revealed several issues that need attention to improve the safety of the mooring deployment operation. These issues and others raised in the post- deployment meetings held after each deployment and recovery are presented in Appendix 3. Weds 25 March 2015 Deployment of Pulse-11 and overnight Triaxus tow 2 Deck preparations began at 0600, ahead of the Go/No-Go decision meeting and mooring Toolbox held on the bridge at 730. This approach provides experience with working on deck prior to making the decision, as well as an early start on the preparation work. We agreed to proceed in light southeasterly winds and remnant 4m westerly swell, working slowing into the swell in anticipation of a westerly wind change later in the day. Deployment went smoothly, but strengthening south-east winds forced us to head south of the initial deployment target, and into water depths greater than that acceptable for the mooring design. With the mooring streaming astern we then towed back towards the alternate Pulse-11 site and deployed in acceptable water depth. Overnight we mapped bathymetry while moving east to cross into a warm-core eddy feature in preparation for deployment of and sampling by the Triaxus the next day. Thurs 26 March 2015 Spooling on of SAZ-17 We began spooling at 0800 and simultaneously carried out CTD-7, followed by deployment of the Argo float Hull 6381i and SOCCOM Float 8514 while underway at 1 knot. We then lined up 1 hour south of the CTD for our Triaxus tow to the west, but electrical faults precluded deployment and we carried out another CTD cast to collect water for the hydrochemistry and calibration labs. After tracing the fault to high current draw by the FIRe instrument in unusual start-up configuration, we proceeded with the Triaxus tow overnight with ancillary underway sampling. We held the Pulse-11 post-deployment debriefing (the main outcome was to note that operations for deployment of the 'string-of-pearls' floats at the top of the s-tether would be much easier with the netd rum winch relocated to the deck). Friday 27 March 2015 Deployment of SAZ-17 mooring We recovered the Triaxus just before 0600. The left lower tail cone was missing on recovery and appears to have vibrated free owing to failure of the adhesive connection between its mounting tangs and the main fuselage. The failure was disappointing but not crucial as data collection was not interrupted and control and operation of the Triaxus unchanged. Salps had again affected CTD channels to some extent during the tow (loss of secondary oxygen). We then deployed the SAZ-17 mooring. This went very smoothly and was completed by mid-afternoon, allowing us to hold a post-deployment briefing (no issues arose), complete another CTD to 2250m, and launch the second and final SOCCOM float. We then proceeded to triangulate the SAZ-17 mooring and successfully verify acoustic communication with the SAZ-16 mooring. We spent the night swath mapping, before setting up 1 mile downstream of the SAZ-16 anchor to be ready for recovery. Saturday 28 March 2015 Recovery of SAZ-16 mooring After our formal Go decision at 0630, we released the mooring at 0710 (first light). The mast was sighted approximately 20 minutes later, and was grappled on the port stern quarter. The mast and first pack of 16 glass floats had tangled and were recovered together. All equipment was recovered in good condition, with full sample returns from all four sediment traps. The final two float packs had also tangled and were again recovered together. We held a post-deployment discussion with all involved, which raised no concerns and emphasized that things went particularly smoothly as a result of increased familiarity with ship systems and mooring procedures by the crew. We remained in the SOTS region until 2100 in anticipation of an arriving storm front with clouds that could be simultaneously surveyed from the ship cloud radar and from above by a satellite overpass. We then departed towards Hobart towing the CPR. Sunday 29 March 2015 Triaxus survey of persistent anti-cyclonic eddy The planned survey was cancelled to meet MNF operational needs. The CPR tow was continued until retrieval at the Tasmanian shelf edge. Summary The main success of the voyage was the re-establishment of the Southern Ocean Time Series observatory, via the deployment of the SOFS-5, Pulse-11, and SAZ-17 moorings, along with the recovery of the SAZ-16 mooring. Sample analyses for the recovered SAZ-16 sediment traps will be performed throughout 2015. Tele-metered observations are already live to the internet from the Southern Ocean Flux Station mooring. Observations from the Pulse biogeochemistry and SAZ sediment trap moorings will be available 1-year after their recovery in April 2015. The work was done safely, efficiently, and with 100% completion using new procedures, new personnel, and the new RV Investigator. Triangulated anchor depths and positions for the SOTS moorings: SOFS-5: 4664m 46.6670S 142.0732 E Pulse-11: 4240m 46.9405S 142.3261 E SAZ-17: 4502m 46.8249S 141.6559 E While these mooring deployments were the main focus, the voyage also achieved an amazing variety of additional scientific results, including via new collaborations with the ancillary projects. A selection of these are presented in the Scientific Highlights section. Principal Investigators A. Eric Schulz, BOM, E.Schu lz@bom.gov.au B. Tom Trull, ACECRC/CSIRO, Tom.Trull@csiro.au C. Melita Keywood, CSIRO, Melita.Keywood@csiro.au D. Alain Protat, BOM, A.Protat@bom.gov.au E. Philip Heraud Monash phil.heraud@monash.edu Moorings, Bottom Mounted Gear And Drifting Systems APPROXIMATE POSITION Item PI LATITUDE LONGITUDE DATA No deg min N/S deg min E/W TYPE DESCRIPTION ---- -- -------------- -------------- --------- ---------------------------- M02, M06, Deployed SOFS-5 air-sea flux 1 A 46 40.02 S 142 4.38 E M90,H71, mooring, for recovery in DOl, H90, April 2016 H17, H21 2 B 46 56.43 S 142 19.566 E H90 Deployed Pulse-11 biogeochemistry mooring, for recovery in April 2016 3 B 46 49.494 S 141 39.354 E H90 Deployed SAZ-17 sediment trap mooring, for recovery in April 2016 4 B 46 47.603 S 141 49.392 E H90 Recovered SAZ-16 sediment trap mooring, deployed in 5 B 47 09.5 S 144 01.12 E H90 May 2013 6 B 47 8.58 S 144 0.56 E H90 Argo profiling float Hull SOCCOM profiling float ID 6 B 46 50.66 S 141 34.007 E H90 8514 SOCCOM profiling float ID 9315 Summary Of Measurements And Samples Taken Item DATA No. PI NO UNITS TYPE DESCRIPTION ---- -- --- ------- ---- ----------------------------------------------- 3 CTD casts to 2250m with T,S,O2,phytoplankton fluorescence, particle backscatter, and beam attenuation sensors, sampled at 24 depths for 1 B 1 cast H10 analyses of nutrients, salinity, DIC, alkalinity, dissolved oxygen ; and particulate organic carbon and pigments at the top 6 depths Continuous monitoring of underway seawater 2 A 700 miles H71 supply for temperature salinity for study of physical heat and mass flux Continuous monitoring of incoming short and 3 A 700 miles M02 long-wave radiation for heat fluxes Continuous monitoring of routine meteorological 4 A 700 miles M06 observations (wind, ait temperature, humidity and pressure) for heat, mass and momentum fluxes 5 A 700 miles M90 Continuous monitoring of precipitation for mass fluxes Underway Water Samples for particulate organic 6 B 50 samples H10 carbon, biogenic silica, spectroscopic and pigment analyses Curation Report Item No. DESCRIPTION 1 Water and particle samples collected from the CTD and underway system are returned to CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research for chemical analyses and then discarded following quarantine protocols. TRACK CHART See figure below GENERAL OCEAN AREA(S) Southern Ocean - Indian Sector SPECIFIC AREAS Subantarctic Zone southwest of Tasmania Personnel List 1. Max McGuire MNF Voyage Manager 2. Steve Thomas MNF SIT electronics support 3. Will Ponsonby MNF SIT electronics support 4. Pamela Brodie MNF DAP computing support 5. Steve Van Graase MNF DAP computing support 6. Bernadette Heaney MNF GSM support 7. Mark Rayner MNF Hydrochemist 8. Christine Rees MNF Hydrochemist 9. Brett Muir MNF Triaxus support 10. Tom Trull CSIRO-ACE Chief Scientist 11. Eric Schulz BOM Co-Chief Scientist 12. Peter Jansen IMOS-UTAS Mooring Managing Engineer 13. Jim LaDuke CSIRO Mooring deck work 14. Jamie Derrick CSIRO Mooring Technical Supervisor 15. Abe Passmore ACE-UTAS Sediment traps 16. Rob Newham UTAS Honours student 17. Alice della Penna UTAS-UParis PhD student 18. Phillip Heraud Monash Univ Phytoplankton composition 19. Olivia Sackett Monash Univ Phytoplankton composition 20. Katerina Petrou Monash/UTS Phytoplankton composition 21. Alain Protat BOM Clouds study leader 22. Ken Glasson BOM Radar instrument specialist 23. Melita Keywood CSIRO Aerosol measurements 24. Jason Ward CSIRO Aerosol measurements 25. Natasha Henschke UNSW LOPC instrument specialist 26. Henrique RapizoGomes Swinburne SOFS wave/turbulence 27. Phil De Boer CSIRO Mooring Technical Supervisor 28. Brandon Beneford EEC Weather radar 29. Emily O'Brien AMC FRMS fatigue management study Marine Crew Name Role ------------------- ----------------------- Mike Watson Master Gurmukh Ngra Chief Mate Adrian Koolhof Second Mate Andrew Roebuck Third Mate Ian Mortimer Chief Engineer Mark Ellicott First Engineer Michael Sinclair Second Engineer Damian Wright Third Engineer John Curran Electrical Engineer Cassandra Rowse Chief Caterer Emma Lade Caterer Rebecca Lee Chief Cook Matthew Gardiner Cook Graham McDougall Chief Integrated Rating Jarod Ellis Integrated Rating Christopher Dorling Integrated Rating Paul Langford Integrated Rating Peter Taylor Integrated Rating Matthew McNeill Integrated Rating Darren Capon Integrated Rating Acknowledgements We are grateful to the MNF and ASP for ship access prior to the mobilization day, and for excellent support at sea. Superb preparation of our mooring equipment included major contributions from shoreside team members Danny McLaughlin, Darren Moore, Stephen Bray, Diana Davies, and Andreas Marouchos. We thank the directors of the MNF, IMOS, and the ACE CRC (Ron Plaschke, Tim Moltmann, and Tony Worby, respectively) for support of SOTS. Signature Your name Thomas W Trull Title Chief Scientist Signature (see pdf version) Date: 30 March 2015 Appendix 1 SOTS Mooring Diagrams (see .pdf version) Appendix 2 Post Mooring Deployment De-briefing Notes Appendix 3 Photos Appendix 2 Recommendations from mooring de-briefings Recommendations requiring MNF and ASP actions The hand-held control box for the winches and A-frame is difficult to use. Serious mistakes were made such as operating the wrong winches and operating them in the wrong direction. A simpler control box is needed. Lighting on deck is insufficient - winch drivers struggled to see hand signals from the Bosun and the positions of mooring lines and components. Gimballed down lights on the A-frame to illuminate the mooring, and more deck lights to eliminate shadowing, (including under the overhanging Gilson winch platform) are needed. Relocation of the electrical box on the port stern rail is needed, to allow for clear lines of site and clear passage of mooring pick-up and tagging lines. Relocation of the netdrum winch from the O2 deck to a portable mount on the main deck is needed to allow it to be used for mooring work. A charting tool is needed that can add waypoints in the operations room that can be viewed on the bridge, preferably with bathymetry available as an overlay for targeting anchor locations. Access to the port side of the a-frame is congested by the a-frame hydraulics blocking the escape route from the rear of the vessel; they should be relocated. Recommendations for project team for 2016 SOTS voyage SOFS-5 Anchor (and preferably all anchors) needs to be loaded on port side - to avoid having to move it past the mooring wire. SOFS-5 Deck Rails should be mounted further to port. Pulse mooring small instruments should be provided with tear-away tags to speed up ondeck recording of serial numbers as they are mounted. Provide water proof paper for note taker Appendix 3 Photos New procedure for controlled sediment trap launch. The trap is held in-line between the winch (line to left) and mooring (line to right entering the sea), and lifted out of its deckcradle via a bridle using the new hoist mounted on the A-frame. Two tag lines to pullies on the A-frame allow it to be controlled until it is aft of the ship and released via the quickrelease trigger line (held by hand). The Technical Supervisor (white helmet in left foreground) is providing a hand signal to the deck winch driver (out of photo to left). The Bosun (orange helmet facing camera) is overseeing the operation. The crewman in the the foreground (in white helmet with back to camera) is an IR operating the waist-belt mounted portable controls for the the A-frame and the A-frame mounted hoist. A simpler control box would allow this to be done while still keeping an eye on the equipment and associated risks. Photo by Eric Schulz, BOM. SOTS team: Jamie, Phil, James, Max, Pete, Paul, Peter, Chris, Abe, Graeme, Tom Not in Photo: deck crew: Jarod, Darren, Matt; Bridge officer: Mike, Adrian, Gurmukh, Andrew Operations Cameras and Event Logging: Emily, Natasha, Steve Marine National Facility RV Investigator CTD Processing Report Voyage # IN2015_V01 Voyage title IMOS Moorings Depart: Hobart, 0910 Saturday, 21 March 2015 Return: Hobart 0900 Tuesday, 30 March 2015 Report compiled by: Steven Van Graas & Pamela Brodie 1 SUMMARY These notes relate to the production of quality controlled, calibrated CTD data from RV Investigator voyage 1N2015_V01, from 21 Mar 2015 - 30 Mar 2015. Data for 3 deployments were acquired using the Seabird SBE911 CTD 21, fitted with 24 ten litre bottles on the rosette sampler. Sea-Bird- supplied calibration factors were used to compute the pressures and preliminary conductivity values. CSIRO -supplied calibrations were applied to the temperature data. The data were subjected to automated OC to remove spikes and out-of-range values. The final conductivity calibration was based on a single deployment grouping. The final calibration from the primary sensor had a standard deviation (S.D) of 0.0015 PSU, within our target of 'better than 0.002 PSU'. The standard product of ldbar binned averaged were produced using data from the primary sensors. The dissolved oxygen data calibration fit had a S.D. of 0.45uM. The agreement between the CTD and bottle data was good. The Fluorometer, the Wet Labs Transmissometer, and the Biospherical Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) sensor were also installed on the auxiliary A/D channels of the CTD. Complications regarding the acquisition software caused the deployment numbers recorded with the casts to be different to the actual cast being recorded. Cast 1 was recorded as deployment 5, cast 2 recorded as deployment 7, and cast 3 recorded as deployment 9. To avoid ambiguity the deployment numbers recorded by the acquisition software, not the actual cast, will be referred to throughout the report. 2 VOYAGE DETAILS 2.1 Title IMOS Southern Ocean time series automated moorings for climate and carbon cycle studies southwest of Tasmania. 2.2 Principal Investigators Dr Tom Trull and Dr Eric Schulz. 2.3 Voyage Objectives The scientific objectives for 1N2015_V01 were outlined in the Voyage Plan. For further details, refer to the Voyage Plan and/or summary which can be viewed on the CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research web site. 2.4 Area of operation FIGURE 1: Area of operation for IN2015_V01 3 PROCESSING NOTES 3.1 Background Information The data for this voyage were acquired with the CSIRO CTD unit 21, a Seabird SBE911 with dual conductivity and temperature sensors. The CTD was additionally fitted with SBE43 dissolved oxygen sensors, Fluorometer, Transmissometer and PAR sensors. These sensors are described in Table 1 below. TABLE 1: CTD Sensor configuration on 1N2015_VO1 Serial A/D Calibration Calibration Description Sensor No. Date Source ------------------------ ------------------- -------- --- ----------- ----------- Pressure Digiquartz 410K-134 858/P380 P 17/3/2015 CSIRO 3153 P - dbar Primary Temperature Seabird SBE3pIus 4722 TO 27/2/2015 CSIRO 3109T Secondary Temperature Seabird SBE3pIus 4522 Ti 27/2/2015 CSIRO 3106T Primary Conductivity Seabird SBE4C 3868 CO 26/2/2015 CSIRO 3102C Secondary Conductivity Seabird SBE4C 3168 Cl 26/2/2015 CSIRO 3098C Primary Dissolved Oxygen SBE43 1794 A0 11/2/2015 CSIRO 3055D0 Transmissometer C-Star25cm CST1421 Al 18/6/2014 Wet Labs PAR QCP2300 70111 A2 23/8/2013 Manuf. Cal. Fluorometer FLBBRTD 3698 A4 23/9/2014 Scattering FLBBRTD 3698 A5 23/9/2014 Water samples were collected using a Seabird SBE32, 24-bottle rosette sampler. Sampling was from 24 ten litre bottles which were fitted to the frame. There were 3 deployments. The raw CTD data were converted to scientific units and written to netCDF format files for processing using the Matlab-based, procCTD package. This procCTD application is described in the procCTD Procedures Manual (Beattie, 2010). The procCTD software was used to apply automated OC and preliminary processing to the data. This included spike removal, identification of water entry and exit times, conductivity sensor lag corrections and the determination of the pressure offsets. It also loaded the hydrology data and computed the matching CTD sample burst data. The automatically determined pressure offsets and in-water points were inspected. The bottle sample data were used to compute final conductivity and dissolved oxygen calibrations. These were applied to the data, after which files of binned 1dB averaged data were produced. 3.2 Pressure and temperature calibration The pressure offsets are plotted in Figure 2 below. The 'crosses' refer to initial out-of-water values and the 'diamonds' the final out-of-water values. Due to software issues there were no out-of-water values captured for the start of deployment 5. FIGURE 2: CTD pressure offsets The difference between the primary and secondary temperature sensors at the bottle sampling depths is plotted below. Most deployments plot within ±1 m°C of zero - outliers result from sampling in regions of high vertical temperature gradient as supported by the similarity between the temperature and conductivity difference shown in figure 5. This indicates neither sensor has drifted significantly from its calibration. FIGURE 3: Mean difference between primary and secondary temperature sensors 3.3 Conductivity Calibration Discrepancies and possible sampling problems between bottle and CTD salinities for the primary conductivity sensor would show in Figure 4, the plot of calibrated (CTD - Bottle) salinity below. The calibration was based upon the sample data for 59 of the total of 70 samples taken during deployments (the outliers marked in Figure 4 below with the red and magenta diamonds are excluded from the calibration). FIGURE 4: CTD -bottle salinity plot. The plot of calibrated mean (primary - secondary) downcast conductivities at the bottle sampling depths for all deployments in Figure 5 shows that the calibrated conductivity cell responses corresponded well. FIGURE 5: Mean difference between primary and secondary conductivity sensors The final result for the primary conductivity sensor was - Scale Factor (a1) 0.99939667 wrt. Manufacturer's calibration Offset (a0) 0.0010603624 ditto Calibration S.D. (Sal) 0.001494 PSU The calibration using the secondary conductivity sensor was - Scale Factor (a1) 0.99950285 wrt. Manufacturer's calibration Offset (a0) 0.0010507233 ditto Calibration S.D. (Sal) 0.0021734 PSU This is a good calibration. We normally aim for a S.D. of 0.002 psu for 'typical' oceanographic voyages. The above calibration factors were applied to all deployments. Data from the primary conductivity and temperature sensors were used to produce the averaged salinities. 3.4 Dissolved Oxygen Sensor Calibration 3.4.1 SBE calibration procedure Sea-Bird (2OiOa) describes the SBE43 as "a polarographic membrane oxygen sensor having a single output signal of O to +5 volts, which is proportional to the temperature-compensated current flow occurring when oxygen is reacted inside the membrane. A Sea-Bird CTD that is equipped with an SBE43 oxygen sensor records this voltage for later conversion to oxygen concentration, using a modified version of the algorithm by Owens and Millard (1985)". Calibration involves performing a linear regression, as per Sea-Bird (2010b) to produce new estimates of the calibration coefficients Soc and Voffset. These new coefficients are used, along with the other, manufacturer-supplied coefficients, to derive oxygen concentrations from the sensor voltages. Results Deeper casts (>I 000m) are known to be affected by pressure-induced hysteresis with this sensor. This is corrected automatically within procCTD using the method discussed by SeaBird (2010c). There is a small mismatch between downcast and upcast dissolved oxygen due to the response time of the sensor. No correction for the sensor lag effect has been applied. A single calibration group was used with the associated 5BE43 up-cast data to compute the new Soc and Voffset coefficients. The plot below is of CTD - bottle oxygen differences for both upcast and downcast data (red indicates 'bad' data; + for upcast and square for downcast). FIGURE 7: (SBE43 - Bottle) Oxygen Difference with upcast CTD data The old and new Soc and Voffset values for DO sensors are listed in Table 2 below. The Soc value is a linear slope scaling coefficient; Voffset is the fixed sensor voltage at zero oxygen. As expected, over time, the increasing Soc scale factors show the 5BE43 sensor is losing sensitivity. The calibrations were applied for each sensor and the averaged files were created using the result from the primary sensor, as there was no secondary Oxygen sensor present. TABLE 2: Dissolved oxygen calibrations Manufacturer's primary Manufacturer's secondary calibration of sensor calibration of sensor primary sensor calibration secondary sensor calibration ------------ -------------- ----------- ---------------- ----------- Voffset -0.49151738 -0.46500549 N/A N/A Soc 0.50939087 0.51282073 N/A N/A Fit SD (uM) 0.4474 N/A N/A 3.5 Other sensors The Biospherical PAR sensor was also used for all deployments. The output is a nominal O-5 volts. This data channel has been included in the output files for all deployments. Clearly, time of day and environmental factors such as sea state and cloud cover impact on these readings. If most or all of the values for a deployment are near zero it indicates a night-time cast. In deployments where the PAR profiles have sub-surface maxima the CTD may have been shaded by the ship. 3.6 Bad data detection The limits for each sensor are configured in the CAP the CTD acquisition software and are written to the netCDF scan file. Typical limits used for the sensor range and maximum second difference are in Table 3 below. The rejection rate is recorded in the procCTD processing log file. TABLE 3: Sensor limits for bad data detection Sensor Range min Range max Max Second Duff ------------ --------- --------- --------------- temperature -2 40 0.05 conductivity -0.01 7 0.01 oxygen -1 500 0.5 fluorometer 0 100 0.5 3.7 Averaging The calibrated data were 'filtered' to remove pressure reversals and binned into the standard product of 1 dbar averaged netCDF files. The binned values were calculated by applying a linear, least-squares fit as a function of pressure to the sensor data for each bin, using this to interpolate the value for the bin mid-point. This method is used to avoid possible biases which would result from averaging with respect to time. Each binned parameter is assigned a QC flag. Our quality control flagging scheme is described in Pender (2000). The QC Flag for each bin is estimated from the values for the bin components. The QC Flag for derived quantities, such as Salinity and Dissolved Oxygen are taken to be the worst of the estimates for the parameters from which they are derived. 4 References Beattie, R.D., 2010: procCTD CTD Processing Procedures Manual. http://www.marine.csiro au/dpg/opsDocs/procCTD.pdf Trull, T., 2015: The RV Investigator. Voyage Plan 1N2015_V01 http://www.cmar.csiro.au/datacentre/process/data_files/cruise_docs/ Investigator/in2015_v0l_plan.pdf Pender, L., 2000: Data Quality Control Flags. http://www.cmar.csiro.au/datacentre/ext_docs/DataQualityControlFlags.pdf Sea-Bird Electronics Inc., 2010a: Application Note No 64: SBE 43 Dissolved Oxygen Sensor -- Background Information, Deployment Recommendations, and Cleaning and Storage. http://www seabird.comlpdf_ documents/ApplicationNotes/appnote64Feb10.pdf Sea-Bird Electronics Inc., 2010b: Application Note No 64-2: SBE 43 Dissolved Oxygen Sensor Calibration and data Corrections using Winkler Titrations. http://www.seabird.comlpdf_documents/ApplicationNotes/Appnote64-2Feb10.pdf Sea-Bird Electronics Inc., 2010c: Application Note No 64-3: SBE 43 Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Sensor - Hysteresis Corrections. http ://www.seabird.comlpdf_ documents/ApplicationNotes/ Appnote64-3Feb10.pdf RV INVESTIGATOR HYDROCHEMISTRY DATA PROCESS REPORT Voyage: 1N2015_V01 Chief Scientist: Dr Tom Trull Voyage title: IMOS Southern ocean times series Report compiled by: Rayner and Rees 1 ITINERARY Mobilise Date Hobart 19-20 March 2015 Depart Date Depart Hobart 21 March 2015 Hobart Arrive Date Arrive Hobart 30 March 2015 Hobart Demobilise Date Hobart 30-31 March 2015 2 KEY PERSONNEL LIST Name Role Organisation -------------- --------------- ------------ Dr Tom Trull Chief Scientist SIMS - UNSW Max McGuire Voyage Manager CSIRO Christine Rees Hydrochemist CSIRO Mark Rayner Hydrochemist CSIRO 3 SUMMARY 3.1 Hydrochemistry Analysis Sampled -------------------------------------- ------- Salinity (Guildline Salinometer) 86 Dissolved Oxygen (automated titration) 73 Nutrients (AA3) 70 3.2 Rosette and CTD • 4 CTD stations were completed with a 24 bottle rosette (10 L). 3.3 Nutrients Details --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HyPro Vrsion 3.20 Instrument AA3 Software Seal AACE 6.10 Methods AA3 Analysis Methods internal manual Nutrients anaylsed Silicate Phosphate NOx Concentration range 140 µmol/L 3 µmol/L 35.0 µmol/L 1.4 µmol/L 2 µmol/L Method Detection 0.2 µmol/L 0.02 µmol/L 0.02 µmol/L 0.02 µmol/L 0.02 µmol/L Limit (M DL) Matrix Corrections N N N Analyst(s) Christine Rees & Mark Rayner Lab Temperature (±1°C) Variable, 19.0 - 24.0°C Reference Material RMNS - BW (Appendix 5.1) Sampling Container type Sample tube: polypropylene, lid: High density polyethylene Sample Storage ≤2 hrs at room temperature Pre-processing of None Samples Comments The temperature was logged using a temperature/humidity logger QP6013 (Jaycar) placed on the deck of the chemistry module. See appendix 5.4 3.4 Salinities Details --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HyPro Version 3.20 Instrument Guildline Autosal Laboratory Salinometer 8400(B) - SN 71613 Software Osil Methods Hydrochemistry Operations Manual + Quick Reference Manual Accuracy ± 0.001 salinity units Analyst(s) Mark Rayner, Lab Temperature 21.0 -23.8°C (±0.5°C) Reference Material Osil IAPSO - Batch P157 Sampling Container type Old sample bottles, duplicate sample taken in new salt bottles Sample Storage Samples held in Salt Room for 24 hrs before analysis within ~48 hrs Comments Salinometer was set-up and worked well. The Osil software was used to collect data. Files were exported into excel and uploaded into HyPro for processing. The cast number is posted edited into the data file under the Sample ID column. 3.5 Dissolved oxygen Details --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HyPro Version 3.20 Instrument Automated Photometric Oxygen system Software SCRIPPS Methods SCRIPPS Accuracy 0.01 ml/L + 0.5% Analyst(s) Christine Rees Lab Temperature (±1°C) Variable, 19.0 - 24.0°C Sample Container type Glass Erlenmeyer flask with glass stopper. Sample Storage Samples analysed within ~48 hrs Comments There were some issues with communication between the dosimat and computer, software freezing, and the software picking the incorrect file to obtain the Thiosulphate Normality as well as the calibrated flask volumes. Further work is required to sort this file issue out. There was also issues with obtaining a good blank during the second analyses 4 DETAILED PROCESSING Oxygen and salinity data where imported into Hypro. There was no evidence of any outliers or bad data points required to be flagged in Hypro. All nutrient data was processed starting from Aace and Hypro version 3.20. 4.1 Procedure The procedure for data processing is outline in Figure 1. Figure 1: The process above shows the data trail procedure from the initial data generated to output via HyPro for reporting. Nutrients: Peak evaluation: HyPro: Data collected in Window Raw data imported Seal AACE 6.10 determination and for peak analysis, software anomolies recorded calculations and QC (excel) Salinity: HyPro: Excel file exported Data collected in from Osil and Excel file is imported Osil software deployment numbers for reporting added Dissolved Oxygen: Oxygen Sheet Macro: HyPro: Data is collected in .CSV file is imported .CSV file is imported SCRIPPS software to perform calcs for for reporting HyPro 4.2 Nutrients • Silicate, phosphate and Nitrate + Nitrite analysis was carried out during the voyage. The AA3 was set up with a master file lN2015_V01 (24 sample tray protocol) the AA3 worked well producing high quality data. AACE files were sent directly to the lN2015_V01 current directory where they were then copied into the SEAL program file directory on the processing computer. • All runs have a corresponding AA3 Run_ Analysis _Worksheet file & AA3_Processing_Worksheet file to assist in characterising data. • The final slk and chd file produced from AACE were copied into Hypro directory for calculation of nutrient concentrations. Hypro uses the median of the peak window to calculate the concentration of each peak. • During the voyage analysis run nutOO4 had a high MDL for silicate and phosphate. Further processing determined that the high MDL is most likely an artefact of the baseline shifting during the analysis of the MDL's. Phosphate RMNS at the end of the run also changed from 2% to 3%. Comparison of the surface silicate samples with the other analysis runs indicated they were also higher. The silicate samples were repeated from refrigerated samples the next day. Comparison of phosphate samples indicated that the results from nutOO4 were OK. The repeated run nutOO5 results had an improved MDL for silicate and the surface samples were of similar concentrations to the other analyses. The silicate results from nutOO5 were the reported concentrations to the chief scientist on board. Further investigation is required into why analysis run nutOO4 had a lower than normal precision. • Files for this voyage - nutOOl - 006. Details Silicate Phosphate Nitrate + Nitrite Ammonia Nitrite -------------------------- --------- --------- --------- ------- ------- Data Reported as µM 1^(-1) µM 1^(-1) µM 1^(-1) N/A N/A Calibration Curve degree >0.9995 >0.9995 >0.9995 Forced through zero? N N N # of points in Calibration 5 or 6 5 5 Matrix Correction Y Y Y Blank Correction N N N Carryover Correction Y Y Y Baseline Correction Y Y Y Drift Correction Y Y Y Data Adj for RMNS N N N Medium of Standards LNSW Medium of Blank 18.2 Q MQ Proportion of samples in 10% duplicate? Table 1: Nutrient data processing details Nitrate + File Silicate Phosphate Nitrite Nitrite Ammonia Run Type ---------------- --------------- --------- --------- ------- ------- ------------- IN2015_v0lnut00l x x x Set-up Char. Peak window 50-105 50-100 60-105 RMNS ≤2% ≤2% ≤2% Comments Peak Period Moved in AACE IN2015_v0lnut002 x x x Testing file Peak window 50-105 50-100 60-105 exporting, Cd RMNS ≤1% ≤2% ≤2% column & Comments Peak Period sample needle Moved in AACE, position baseline noisy forced IN2015_v0lnut003 x x x CTD5 Peak window 50-105 50-100 60-105 3 samples ran RMNS ≤1% ≤1% ≤1% in duplicate Comments Baseline Peak Period noisy forced Moved in AACE IN2015_v0lnut004 x x x CTD7 Peak window 50-105 50-100 60-105 3 samples ran RMNS ≤1% ≤2% ≤1% in duplicate Comments New pump New pump New pump tubes, very tubes tubes high MDL. IN2015_v0lnut005 x CTD-Silicate Peak window 50-105 repeat of RMNS ≤1% deployment 7 Comments Peak Period Moved in AACE INZ015_v0lnut006 x CTD9 Peak window 50-105 50-100 60-105 3 samples ran RMNS ≤1% ≤2% ≤1% in duplicate Comments Baseline slight noise, New reagents except tartaric acid 4.3 Salinities • Files for this voyage - sal00l, sal003 sal004; in addition; samples for a storage experiment T-0 were also analysed (16). • Salinity data was collected using Osil software. • Lab temperature stable. Bath set at 24°C. Lab temperature and bath temperature was measured before both analyses, both temperature were suitable for analyses to proceed. 4.4 Dissolved oxygen • The DO system was problematic with a number of issues; com port identification, software freezing, communication with the dosimats, the program picking the incorrect thiosulphate normality and difficulties in obtaining a good blank reading (during second calibration). To try and correct the blank readings the following was performed; both burettes flushed, detector windows cleaned, bath cleaned, thiosulphate dispensing tip re-orientated and only one flask #225 was used. To correct the program from picking the incorrect thiosulphate normality was difficult to resolve, as we are not sure which file it was reading. We managed to get it to select the right concentration (not sure how) in the end. Communication between the dosimats and computer were resolved by following the written protocol. • Comparison between the underway samples and the CTD surface samples indicated there was a problem with the dissolved oxygen results for the oxy00l-003 files. Further investigation by plotting the dissolved oxygen results against the CTD results indicated there was an offset between these results, with the filesoxy00l-003 having incorrect oxygen concentrations. Investigation found that the programme was using the incorrect volumes for calculating the concentration of dissolved oxygen. This problem has been resolved by placing a new copy of the volume file into the directory. The oxygen data was re-calculated using the correct flask volumes in Hypro. • Files for this voyage - oxy00l - 003. Plus oxy099 for 3 underway samples. 4.5 CTD vs Hydro Salinities The following plots can be viewed in the following location (Mark to add in link). 4.6 CTD vs Hydro Oxygens These plots can be viewed in the following location (Mark to add in link) 4.7 Plots (see pdf version) All waterfall plots consist of good data, without any outliers. This indicates there wasn't any leakage from the Niskin bottles. 4.8 Quality Control 4.8.1 Silicate RMNS Chart 4.8.2 Phosphate RMNS Chart 4.8.3 NOx RMNS Chart 4.8.4 Duplicates File Silicate Phosphate Nitrate + Nitrite Ammonia Nitrite ----------------- -------- --------- --------- ------- ------- Duplicates within 0.70 µM 0.02 µM 0.175 µM N/A N/A limit 1N2015_v0lnut00l x x x 1N2015_v0lnut002 x x x 1N2015_v0lnut003 x x x 1N2015_v0lnut004 x x x 1N2015_v0lnut00S x x x 1N2015_v0lnut006 x x x 4.9 Investigation of missing data and actions required Deployment RP Analysis Reason for removal Action taken ---------- -- -------- --------------------------- --------------------- #5 4 N/A Niskin bottle did not close Samples not collected #5 7 N/A Leaking Niskin bottle Samples not collected 5 APPENDIX 5.1 Nutrient Reference Materials RMNS NOx NO2 PO4 SiO4 ---- ------ ----- ----- ------- BT 19.069 0.482 1.327 43.03 BF 41.388 0.02 3.114 157.932 CA 20.552 0.072 1.434 36.864 BU 4.052 0.07 0.381 21.517 BV 36.234 0.055 2.574 103.835 BW 25.089 0.052 1.593 60.518 BY 0.022 0.008 0.04 1.833 5.2 Salinity Reference Material Batch No: P 157 K15 = 0.99985, use by date 15th May 2017. 5.3 Go-Ship Specifications Salinity Accuracy of 0.001 is possible with AutosalTM salinometers and concomitant attention to methodology, e.g., monitoring Standard Sea Water. Accuracy with respect to one particular batch of Standard Sea Water can be achieved at better than 0.001 PSS-78. Autosal precision is better than 0.001 PSS-78. High precision of approximately 0.0002 PSS-78 is possible following the methods of Kawano (this manual) with great care and experience. Air temperature stability of ± 1°C is very important and should be recorded.1 O2 Target accuracy is that 2 sigma should be less than 0.5% of the highest concentration found in the ocean. Precision or reproducibility (2 sigma) is 0.08% of the highest concentration found in the ocean. SiO2 Approximately 1-3% accuracy†, 2 and 0.2% precision, full-scale. PO4 Approximately 1-2% accuracy†, 2 and 0.4% precision, full scale. NO3 Approximately 1% accuracy† 2 and 0.2% precision full scale 5.4 Temperature change over nutrient analyses (figs.) CCHDO DATA HISTORY NOTES: Data History File Online Carolina Berys IN2015_v01_Voyage Summary_FINAL 20150407.pdf (download) #997e4 *Date:* 2016-06-15 *Current Status:* unprocessed File Online Carolina Berys 096U20150321.exc.csv (download) #3f8e4 *Date:* 2016-06-15 *Current Status:* unprocessed File Merge SEE 09IN20150321_ct1.zip (download) #d7328 *Date:* 2016-06-15 *Current Status:* merged File Merge SEE 09IN20150321_nc_ctd.zip (download) #1c127 *Date:* 2016-06-15 *Current Status:* merged Updated CTD exchange and netcdf formats SEE *Date:* 2016-06-15 *Data Type:* CTD *Action:* Website Update *Note:* SOTS 2015 096U20150321 processing - CTD/update - CTDPRS,CTDTMP,CTDSAL,CTDOXY,XMISS,PAR,FLUOR 2016-06-16 SEE Submission filename submitted by date id -------------------- ------------- ---------- ----- 09IN20150321_ct1.zip update 2016-06-15 12218 Changes ------- 09IN20150321_ct1.zip - Changed ship code from IN to 6U. - Added cruise information to the header comments: # Changed Ship code from IN to 6U for the R/V Investigator # Data source: Tom Trull 9/17/15 # DATES: 20150321 - 20150330 # SHIP: R/V Investigator # Cruise: Southern Ocean Time Series - SOTS; IN2015_V01 # Region: SE Indian # DATES: 20150321 - 20150330 # Chief Scientist: Tom Trull # Supported by the Australian Commonwealth Cooperative Research Centre Program (T. Trull ACE Carbon RP2.1) and the Australian Marine National Facility (T. Trull, IN2015_V01 voyage award) # 3 stations with 24 place 10L Rosette # SOCCOM Biogeochemical floats deployed by Tom Trull # Sta WMO_ID Lat Lon Date U.W.ID # 7 5904470 -47.1284 143.9814 20150325 8514 # 9 Deployed, but never responded 9315 # Supported by NSF Award PLR-1425989 to J.L. Sarmiento et al. # Hydro/CTD: Who - Tom Trull; Status - final Conversion ---------- file converted from software ----------------------- -------------------- ----------------------- 096U20150321_nc_ctd.zip 096U20150321_ct1.zip hydro 0.8.2-47-g3c55cd3 Updated Files Manifest ---------------------- file stamp ----------------------- ----------------- 096U20150321_ct1.zip 20160616CCHSIOSEE 096U20150321_nc_ctd.zip 20160616CCHSIOSEE :Updated parameters: no parameters updated opened in JOA with no apparent problems: 096U20150321_ct1.zip 096U20150321_nc_ctd.zip opened in ODV with no apparent problems: 096U20150321_ct1.zip File Submission Robert Key 096U20150321.exc.csv (download) #3f8e4 *Date:* 2016-06-09 *Current Status:* unprocessed *Notes* Robert Key Ship code changed from IN to 6U in all instances of EXPOCODE. Old name added as alias in header File Submission Robert Key IN2015_v01_Voyage Summary_FINAL 20150407.pdf (download) #997e4 *Date:* 2016-06-06 *Current Status:* unprocessed *Notes* Originator's summary cruise report. Downloaded from http://mnf.csiro.au/~/media/Files/Voyage-plans-and-summaries/Investigator/ Voyage%20Plans%20summaries/2015/IN2015_v01_Voyage%20Summary_FINAL%2020150407.ashx File Merge SEE 09IN20150321_ct1.zip (download) #bf181 *Date:* 2016-05-10 *Current Status:* merged File Merge SEE 09IN20150321_nc_ctd.zip (download) #baf04 *Date:* 2016-05-10 *Current Status:* merged Updated CTD exchange and netcdf formats SEE *Date:* 2016-05-10 *Data Type:* CTD *Action:* Website Update *Note:* SOTS 2015 09IN20150321 processing - CTD/merge - CTDPRS,CTDTMP,CTDSAL,CTDOXY,XMISS,PAR,FLUOR 2016-05-10 SEE Submission filename submitted by date id -------------------- ------------- ---------- ----- 09IN20150321_ct1.zip 12096 Changes ------- 09IN20150321_ct1.zip - removed SCATT and SCATT_FLAG_W from files, as data are bad. Conversion ---------- file converted from software ----------------------- -------------------- ----------------------- 09IN20150321_nc_ctd.zip 09IN20150321_ct1.zip hydro 0.8.2-47-g3c55cd3 Updated Files Manifest ---------------------- file stamp ----------------------- ----------------- 09IN20150321_ct1.zip 20160510CCHSIOSEE 09IN20150321_nc_ctd.zip 20160510CCHSIOSEE :Updated parameters: CTDPRS,CTDTMP,CTDSAL,CTDOXY,XMISS,PAR,FLUOR opened in JOA with no apparent problems: 09IN20150321_ct1.zip 09IN20150321_nc_ctd.zip opened in ODV with no apparent problems: 09IN20150321_ct1.zip File Online Carolina Berys in2015_v01CTD_nc.zip (download) #a1a46 *Date:* 2016-02-11 *Current Status:* merged File Merge SEE in2015_v01CTD_nc.zip (download) #a1a46 *Date:* 2016-02-08 *Current Status:* merged CTD exchange and netcdf formats online SEE *Date:* 2016-02-08 *Data Type:* CTD *Action:* Website Update *Note:* SOTS 2015 09IN20150321 processing - CTD/merge - CTDPRS,CTDTMP,CTDSAL,CTDOXY,XMISS,PAR,FLUOR,SCATT 2016-02-08 SEE Submission filename submitted by date id -------------------- ------------- ---------- ----- in2015_v01CTD_nc.zip CSIRO via SEE 2016-02-08 12095 Changes ------- in2015_v01CTD_nc.zip - reformatted CSIRO netcdf format to Exchange format - CTDSAL: changed Parameter units from 1e-3 to PSS-78 - XMISS: changed Parameter name transmissometer to XMISS, and changed units from % to %TRANS - CTDOXY: converted values from UMOL/L to UMOL/KG - ALL CASTNO assigned to 1 by CCHDO - added comments Conversion ---------- file converted from software ----------------------- -------------------- ----------------------- 09IN20150321_nc_ctd.zip 09IN20150321_ct1.zip hydro 0.8.2-47-g3c55cd3 Updated Files Manifest ---------------------- file stamp ----------------------- ----------------- 09IN20150321_ct1.zip 20160208CCHSIOSEE 09IN20150321_nc_ctd.zip 20160208CCHSIOSEE :Updated parameters: CTDPRS,CTDTMP,CTDSAL,CTDOXY,XMISS,PAR,FLUOR,SCATT opened in JOA with no apparent problems: 09IN20150321_ct1.zip 09IN20150321_nc_ctd.zip opened in ODV with no apparent problems: 09IN20150321_ct1.zip File Submission SEE in2015_v01CTD_nc.zip (download) #a1a46 *Date:* 2016-02-05 *Current Status:* merged *Notes* SOTS cruise EXPOCODE 09IN20150321 from CSIRO Marine Research, via SEE files created July 23, 2015 File Submission Robert M. Key IN2015_v0_CTD_ProcessingReport.pdf (download) #ccc77 *Date:* 2015-12-16 *Current Status:* unprocessed *Notes* 09IN20150321 SOCCOM cruise Note this file has 3 new pigments. New names alert was sent in separate e- mail File Submission Robert M. Key IN2015_v01_HYDROCHEM_ProcessingReport_v1.0.pdf (download) #8b3d5 *Date:* 2015-12-16 *Current Status:* unprocessed *Notes* 09IN20150321 SOCCOM cruise Note this file has 3 new pigments. New names alert was sent in separate e- mail