Journal of

Marine Science
and Engineering

Article
Velocity Calibration of Doppler Current
Profiler Transducers
Marc Le Menn 1, * and Steffen Morvan 2
1 Service Hydrographique et Océanographique de la Marine (Shom), CS 92803, 29228 Brest CEDEX 2, France
2 Ecole Nationale Supérieure de d’Électrotechnique, d’Électronique, d’Informatique, d’Hydraulique et des
Télécommunications (ENSEEIHT), 31000 Toulouse, France; Steffen.morvan@gmail.com
* Correspondence: marc.lemenn@shom.fr




Received: 7 October 2020; Accepted: 26 October 2020; Published: 28 October 2020


Abstract: Doppler current profilers are used in oceanography to measure oceanic circulation but also
in hydrology to calculate the flow of rivers. They allow the retrieval of water mass profiles in terms of
velocity and direction. Direction is obtained via an electronic compass and tilt sensors, while velocity
is obtained by measuring Doppler pulse shifts back-scattered by particles located in water cells
allocated along the instrument’s measurement range. Current meters are usually tested in towing
basins or hydrodynamic channels, but these facilities present limits in terms of the measurement
range, particles concentration and time costs. This paper presents a novel method developed to test
the trueness of these velocity measurements in the laboratory, along with the uncertainty of this test
and the results obtained with current meters and stand-alone profilers. The method is based on the
measurement of the frequency of pulses emitted by each transducer of the instrument independently,
and on the simulation of received echoes by a variable frequency sinusoidal signal.

Keywords: Doppler effect; current meter; profiler; calibration; velocity measurements

1. Introduction
Oceans control a big part of the Earth’s climate through ocean–atmosphere exchanges, phenomena
such as El-Niño or great cycles and oceanic currents. Measuring current is essential to build current
charts useful for navigation, 3D models of oceanic circulation or more recently, to improve the efficiency
of submarine tidal turbines.
Some ten years ago, rotor current meters were replaced by Doppler effect acoustic current meters.
As the marine environment is favorable to acoustic wave propagation, the arrival time of pulses
reflected by particles led to the creation of current profilers. Water-column velocity profiles can be
obtained placing profilers under the hull of oceanographic boats and directed towards the seabed,
or placed in cages deposited on the seabed and directed towards the surface, on mooring cables or
towed from a boat. Their range, which depends on their wavelength, extends from a few meters to
several hundreds of meters, according to the particles concentrations.
Depending on the pulses return times, these profiles are artificially divided into measurement
cells by the instrument’s software, which gives average velocity values per cell, in relation with the
measured Doppler shifts.
For shipmounted instruments, several publications have been written to correct bias of alignment,
sensitivity [1,2], scaling factor [3], and ship velocity measurement [4,5]. For instruments fitted on
mooring cables, a method has been proposed to quantify the influence of mooring line motion
on current measurements [6] and for towed profilers, a publication shows a method to correct
compass bias induced by ship vicinity [7]. In the field of river hydrology, quality assurance tests [8],
laboratory intercomparisons [9] or validation by bottom track in towing basins [10,11] have been

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847; doi:10.3390/jmse8110847 www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse

J. Mar.
Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, x847
FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of
of 13

laboratory intercomparisons [9] or validation by bottom track in towing basins [10,11] have been
proposed.
proposed. In In oceanography,
oceanography, Doppler
Doppler profiler
profiler ranges
ranges generally
generally extend
extend fromfrom approximately
approximately ten ten toto
several
several hundred meters, making controls in towing basins impossible. Moreover, the number of
hundred meters, making controls in towing basins impossible. Moreover, the number of
standalone
standalone instruments
instrumentsused usedin hydrographic
in hydrographic and and
oceanographic centerscenters
oceanographic makes makes
this technique difficult
this technique
to implement. Thus, over the past years, calibrating or simply testing these long
difficult to implement. Thus, over the past years, calibrating or simply testing these long range range instruments has
been an untreated problem.
instruments has been an untreated problem.
At
At Shom,
Shom, aa platform
platform waswas built
built and
and brought
brought into
into service
service in
in 2012,
2012, to
to allow
allow the
the calibration,
calibration, within
within
their
their instrument usage configuration, of the electronic compasses and tilt sensors installed in
instrument usage configuration, of the electronic compasses and tilt sensors installed in current
current
meters
meters and
and current
current profilers
profilers [12–14]. These compasses
[12–14]. These compasses are are used
used to
to retrieve
retrieve the the directions
directions of of profilers
profilers
relative to the magnetic north, their three transducers being used to retrieve
relative to the magnetic north, their three transducers being used to retrieve the direction ofthe direction of currents
currents in
the instrument referential. Compasses can be perturbed by the other instruments
in the instrument referential. Compasses can be perturbed by the other instruments or battery packs or battery packs
mounted
mounted in in cages,
cages, leading
leading to
tomeasurement
measurementerrors errorsthat
thatneed
needtotobebedetermined
determinedand andcorrected.
corrected.Figure
Figure1
shows a signature profiler mounted in a mooring cage, on the calibration platform.
1 shows a signature profiler mounted in a mooring cage, on the calibration platform. It remained It remained to find
to
afind
method to determine the trueness of velocity measurements.
a method to determine the trueness of velocity measurements.

Figure 1. Photo of a Nortek Group Signature profiler (in black) on the compass calibration calibration platform.
platform.
The profiler is mounted in his mooring cage. The assembly is aligned on
The profiler is mounted in his mooring cage. The assembly is aligned on one of the axes one of the axes
of the of the
platform,
platform,
which whichmanually
is turned is turnedfor
manually
headingfor heading calibration.
calibration. It can
It can be tilted forbe
tilttilted for calibration.
sensors tilt sensors calibration.
A reference
A referenceprotractor
numerical numericalisprotractor is usedthe
used to measure to measure
tilt angle.the tilt angle.

For rotor current meters, this calibration was performed in open tanks [15,16] or hydrodynamic
channels [17], though generally to maximum velocities included in the range 1–3 m/s. m/s. For Doppler
current
current meters,
meters,the thelow
lowparticle concentration
particle concentration in these facilities
in these is a problem,
facilities and byand
is a problem, takingbyinto account
taking into
the profiling
account range ofrange
the profiling profilers used inused
of profilers oceanography, this method
in oceanography, cannotcannot
this method be applied. It was
be applied. still
It was
possible to carry
still possible out intercomparisons
to carry out intercomparisons at seaatas
seacarried out in
as carried outrivers by Boldt
in rivers by Boldtand Oberg
and Obergin 2015 [18],
in 2015
but
[18],these intercomparisons
but these are expensive,
intercomparisons difficult
are expensive, to organize,
difficult and allow
to organize, andonly allow oneonly
partoneof the velocity
part of the
range
velocityof range
instruments to be tested.
of instruments to beFor riversFor
tested. again, Hening
rivers again,Huang
Hening proposed
Huang in 2018 [19]ina 2018
proposed theoretical
[19] a
and a semiempirical
theoretical model calibrated
and a semiempirical modelon transect on
calibrated datasets,
transectto datasets,
estimate the uncertainty
to estimate of streamflow
the uncertainty of
measurements made by an acoustic
streamflow measurements made by Doppler current
an acoustic profiler current
Doppler (ADCP)profiler
mounted on a moving
(ADCP) mounted platform.
on a
This
movingmethod could be
platform. Thisapplied
method to oceanography
could be applied usingtovessel-mounted
oceanography ADCPs, though it is not adapted
using vessel-mounted ADCPs,
to standalone
though it is notTeledyne
adaptedRD Instruments
to standalone ADCPs RD
Teledyne or equivalent
Instruments instruments
ADCPs or of Nortek group
equivalent called
instruments
AQPs for ‘AQuadopp
of Nortek group calledProfilers’.
AQPs for ‘AQuadopp Profilers’.
The idea came to perfect a test using an acoustic transducer attached to the profiler transducers
and linked
linked to toaafrequency
frequencygenerator.
generator.This
This allows
allows echoes
echoes received
received by the
by the profiler
profiler to betosimulated.
be simulated.The
The exploitation of the Doppler effect formula and of the speeds sensed by the
exploitation of the Doppler effect formula and of the speeds sensed by the instrument has allowed a instrument has allowed
atest
testmethod
method ofof
thethe device’s
device’s measurement
measurement channels
channels to tobebe perfected.
perfected. A calibration
A calibration bedbed remained
remained to
to be
be developed.
developed. ‘Calibration’
‘Calibration’ should
should be taken
be taken herehere asapplication
as the the applicationof theoffirst
thestep
firstofstep
theof the definition
definition given
given in reference
in reference [20], which
[20], which is: “operation
is: “operation that,that,
underunder specified
specified conditions,
conditions, in ainfirst
a first step,
step, establishesa
establishes
arelation
relationbetween
betweenthe thequantity
quantityvalues
valueswith
with measurement
measurement uncertainties
uncertainties provided
provided by measurement
measurement
standards and corresponding indications with associated measurement uncertainties and, in a second
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 3 of 13

standards and corresponding indications with associated measurement uncertainties and, in a second
step, uses this information to establish a relation for obtaining a measurement result from an indication”.
The test bed allows the establishment of a relation between measurement standard values whose
measurement uncertainties are assessed, and values of the transducer under test with associated
measurement uncertainties, to obtain a measurement result. At this time, instead of rigorously applying
the second step of the definition, the calculated uncertainty allows the measured shifts to be qualified
as negligible or not. When they are not negligible, this generally means that the instrument transducer
has suffered a malfunction and must be repaired, preventing the use of the relationship between the
reference values and the values of the transducer under test to correct the measured values.
This method opens the way for quick testing and metrological validation of current profiler
transducers before their use at sea, which was previously impossible. This allows each transducer’s
response to be retrieved and possibly corrected independently, though it does not take into account
any bias related to transducer slope imperfections that could occur due to manufacturing defects.
We consider this error to be constant and corrected by the manufacturer with a custom transformation
matrix if necessary (see Section 2 for further explanations).

2. Operating Principles of Doppler Current Profilers

Current profilers compute velocities (V 1 , V 2 , and V 3 ) obtained by Doppler shift measurements
in their beam axes (radial velocities). The transducers are tilted 20◦ , 25◦ , or 30◦ (angle β). It is thus
possible to calculate velocities (Vx , Vy , and Vz ) in their own referential [21]:

 2 −1 −1 

   3 sin(β) 3 sin(β) 3 sin(β)  
 Vx    V1 
√ −1
 
0 √ 1
  
 V y  =   V2 

(1)
   2 sin(β) 2 sin(β)
 
Vz  V3
  

 1 1 1 
3 cos(β) 3 cos(β) 3 cos(β)

They are equipped with ‘flux-gate’, ‘Hall effect’, or magneto-resistive compasses to retrieve
the amplitude of current components (U, V, and W) in reference to magnetic north (angle Ω),
and considering the magnetic declination, in relation to true north (2). Moreover, their inclination is
corrected due to a tilt sensor measuring roll and pitch angles ψ and θ. According to reference [22],
between 1 and 12 equations can be found to describe a rotation in the three dimensions. The equation
used for the profilers corresponds to Equation (2), in which C = cos and S = sin [23]:
  
 U   Cψ CΩ

(−Sψ Sθ CΩ + Cθ SΩ ) (Sψ Cθ CΩ + Sθ SΩ )  Vx 
    
 V  =  −Cψ CΩ (Sψ Sθ SΩ + Cθ SΩ ) (−Sψ Cθ SΩ + Sθ CΩ )  V y 

(2)
  
 
W Vz
  
−Sψ −Cψ Sθ Cψ Cθ

Speeds (V 1 , V 2 , and V 3 ) are obtained after the detection of echoes resulting from the reflection of
pulses on the successive layers of particles. To improve measurement trueness, pulses are repeated at a
frequency fr . Figure 2 shows the pulse trains transmitted by a Nortek Group 2 MHz AQP.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 4 of 13
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13

Figure 2.
Figure 2. Copy
Copy of an oscilloscope
of an oscilloscope screen showing trains
screen showing trains of pulses transmitted
of pulses transmitted by
by aa profiler
profiler Nortek
Nortek
MHz AQP.
Group 2 MHz AQP.

speed V
The maximum measurable speed Vmax
max depends onffrrand
dependson andon
onthe
thewavelength λ:
wavelengthλ:
±Vmax = fr λ/4 (3)
±Vmax = fr λ/4 (3)
Zedel and Hay (2010) explain that “measurements can be made at a prescribed range by
Zedel and
considering theHay
time (2010) explain
elapsed since that “measurements
a sound can be made[24].
pulse is transmitted” at a prescribed range
It means that by considering
fr determines the
the time elapsed
maximum since
profiling a sound
range rmax, pulse is transmitted”
at which a target can[24].
be detected that fr determines
It meanswithout ambiguity the maximum
concerning its
profiling
position: range r max , at which a target can be detected without ambiguity concerning its position:
rmax = c/(2 fr)
rmax = c/(2 fr ) (4)
(4)
c is the speed of sound. Relationships (3) and (4) lead to expressing the range–velocity ambiguity
c is the speed of sound. Relationships (3) and (4) lead to expressing the range–velocity ambiguity
relationship [25] as follows:
relationship [25] as follows:
Vmax=r±c
Vmax rmax max = ±c λ/8
λ/8 (5)
(5)
To overcome
To overcome the the limits
limits imposed
imposed by by Equation
Equation (5),
(5), various
various techniques
techniques have
have been
been developed,
developed, based based
on the
on the processing
processing of of emitted
emitted and
and received
received signals.
signals.
Thus, conventional
Thus, conventional profilers
profilers areare called
called ‘incoherent’
‘incoherent’ or or ‘narrowband’
‘narrowband’ because
because the
the received
received echoes
echoes
from two
from two different
different pulses
pulses are
are not
not correlated.
correlated. Echoes
Echoes are
are measured
measured continuously, allowing the
continuously, allowing the size
size of
of
measurement cells in the water column to be determined, considering the value of
measurement cells in the water column to be determined, considering the value of c and the duration tp c and the duration
tp of
of pulses.
pulses. The
The lowest
lowest uncertainty
uncertainty that
that cancanbebe obtained
obtained forfor
thethe measurements
measurements ofof
(V(V 1, V2, V3) is limited
1 , V 2 , V 3 ) is limited
by the
by the standard
standard deviation
deviation of
of the
the Doppler
Doppler noisenoise σδ , ,which
whichisisinversely
inverselyproportional
proportionalto tottpp.. This
This noise
noise is
is
generated by the random displacement of particles, the multiple echoes and the
generated by the random displacement of particles, the multiple echoes and the detection limits of the detection limits of
the instrument
instrument electronics.
electronics. To decrease
To decrease the uncertainty,
the uncertainty, it is necessary
it is necessary to multiply
to multiply the number the of number
pulses of
n.
pulses n. The uncertainty on V ’s, i ∈ {1, 2, 3}, can be reduced
The uncertainty on Vi ’s, i ∈ {1, 2, 3}, can be reduced statistically:
i statistically:
= σδ (6)
σV = √ √ (6)
n
Another solution is to increase the value of tp, but this leads a reduction in spatial resolution. In
orderAnother solution
to overcome is to increase
this ambiguity, ‘pulse-to-pulse tp , but this
the value of coherent’ orleads
‘pulseacoherent’
reductionprofilers
in spatial
wereresolution.
created.
In order
Their to overcome principle
measurement this ambiguity,
relies ‘pulse-to-pulse coherent’
on series of coherent or ‘pulse
pulses coded coherent’ profilers
in phase. were
In order to created.
extract
Their measurement principle relies on series of coherent pulses coded in phase.
the signal from the noise, the autocovariance function of these pulses is calculated [26]: In order to extract the
signal from the noise, the autocovariance function of =these
R(τ) pulses
C(t) C*(t + τ)is calculated [26]: (7)
C(t) is the signal received after theR(τ) = C(t)of
emission C*(t
two+ τ)
successive pulses and C*(t) is its complex (7)
conjugated expression. To improve the extraction, the autocovariance is assessed from the reception
of MC(t) is the signal
sequences of tworeceived afterofthe
pulses and theemission
average of
of two successive
M functions R(τ)pulses MostC*(t)
[27]. and is its
often, thecomplex
average
conjugated
Doppler frequency characterizing the Doppler shift fi (i ∈ {1, 2, 3}) is extracted from the phase ϕof
expression. To improve the extraction, the autocovariance is assessed from the reception ∈
[−π, +π] of this average autocovariance function. If f0 is the emitted frequency, the measured radial
velocity is obtained by the relationship:
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 5 of 13

M sequences of two pulses and of the average of M functions R(τ) [27]. Most often, the average Doppler
frequency characterizing the Doppler shift δfi (i ∈ {1, 2, 3}) is extracted from the phase φ ∈ [−π, +π] of
J. Mar.
this Sci. Eng. 2020,
average 8, x FOR PEERfunction.
autocovariance REVIEW If f 0 is the emitted frequency, the measured radial velocity
5 of 13
is
obtained by the relationship:
Vi = ±δf
Vi =i c/(2
± fi fc/(2
0 ) f0) (8)
(8)
According to the Teledyne RD Instrument technical note [28], if ttll is the time corresponding to
RD Instrument
pulses going there
there and
and back,
back, we
we have 2π ifi == φ/t
have 2πδf The expression
ϕ/tl . The expression of the velocity becomes:

Vi = ±φVc/(4
i = ±ϕ c/(4 π f0 tl)
π f 0 tl ) (9)
(9)

3. Perfecting of
3. Perfecting of the
the Method
Method
Beyond
Beyond the the complexity
complexity of of the
the signal
signal treatment
treatment performed
performed by by profilers, required in
profilers, required in noisy
noisy
environments that can be found according to particle loads of oceanic
environments that can be found according to particle loads of oceanic profiles, from a metrological profiles, from a metrological
point
point ofof view
view it it is
is important
important to to know
know and and to to master
master thethe possible
possible drift
drift in
in the
the frequency
frequency or or phase
phase of of
measurements. This drift is conditioned by the quality of the instrument’s
measurements. This drift is conditioned by the quality of the instrument’s oscillator and transducer oscillator and transducer
hardware.
hardware. Therefore,
Therefore, itit is is necessary
necessary to to be
be able
able to
to compare
compare the frequencyff00 emitted
the frequency emitted by
by the
the profiler
profiler and
and
the frequencies f 0 ± δf i resulting from Doppler shifts, to reference frequencies.
the frequencies f0 ± fi resulting from Doppler shifts, to reference frequencies. In fact, the software In fact, the software
developed
developed by by thethe manufacturers
manufacturers only only gives
gives access
access to to the
the calculated velocities V
calculated velocities or to
Vii or to referenced
referenced
velocities (V x , V y , V z ) or
velocities (Vx, Vy, Vz) or (U, V, W). (U, V, W).
In
In aatechnical
technical note note[29],[29],
the Teledyne
the TeledyneRD Instruments
RD Instrumentsmanufacturer proposes fitting
manufacturer proposesa hydrophone
fitting a
on the transducers of its current meters to verify and adjust
hydrophone on the transducers of its current meters to verify and adjust their electronictheir electronic gain. Thus, thegain.
idea Thus,
arose
to
theuse thisarose
idea kindto of use
hydrophone
this kindtoofsimulate
hydrophoneecho reception,
to simulate and to link
echo it to a Rigol
reception, and toDSG3060 frequency
link it to a Rigol
generator. Figure 3 shows a RDI hydrophone on two kinds
DSG3060 frequency generator. Figure 3 shows a RDI hydrophone on two kinds of profilers. of profilers. Transducer–hydrophone
contact is made by siliconecontact gel vacuum grease TM ) of a relative density 1.0, in order to achieve
Transducer–hydrophone is made by (Bluesil
silicone gel vacuum grease (Bluesil TM) of a relative
airtightness.
density 1.0, in order to achieve airtightness. The test bedtheis temperature
The test bed is located in a laboratory where located in aislaboratory
not controlledwhere by the
air
conditioning, but where the temperature is however stable on the
temperature is not controlled by air conditioning, but where the temperature is however stable on short term during measurements.
On
the the
shortlong
termterm vary of ±1 ◦ C around
it canmeasurements.
during On the long 21 ◦ C.term it can vary of ±1 °C around 21 °C.

Figure 3. RDI
RDI hydrophone
hydrophone on
on the transducer
transducer ofof a Nortek 600 kHz profiler (on the left) and on the
Workhorse RDI
transducer of a Workhorse RDI profiler
profiler(on
(onthe
theright).
right).

As current
currentmeters
metersand profilers
and profilers possess different
possess active surfaces
different and emitting
active surfaces and frequencies, according
emitting frequencies,
to the typeto
according ofthe
instrument, it was necessary
type of instrument, it wastonecessary
use threetokinds of plane
use three hydrophone.
kinds The first, called
of plane hydrophone. The
RDI, has anRDI,
first, called active an actived diameter
hasdiameter of 27 mm. Its27
d of bandpass is between
mm. Its bandpass is 400 and 600
between 400kHz. ForkHz.
and 600 the second,
For the
called
second, UB-tr7
calledfrom the company
UB-tr7 from the Ubertone, it is of 7 mm.
company Ubertone, it isItsofbandpass
7 mm. Its is between
bandpass1 is
and 3 MHz.1Due
between andto3
the
MHz. small
Due transducer diameter
to the small of some
transducer Nortekof
diameter profilers, a thirdprofilers,
some Nortek hydrophone withhydrophone
a third a diameter of 3 cma
with
was acquired:
diameter of 3 cmRESON TC3027 centered
was acquired: RESON on 1 MHz.
TC3027 centered on 1 MHz.
Considering the frequency f 00 of of the
the sinusoidal
sinusoidal signal
signal transmitted
transmitted in in the pulses emitted by the
profiler,
profiler, from
from relationship
relationship (8)
(8) itit is
is possible
possible to to determine
determine aa frequency
frequency variation
variation range
range corresponding
corresponding
to its variation range in velocity. It is also possible to determine an increment step δffss, knowing the
resolution in velocity v of the instrument. The generator is therefore adjusted to transmit a variable
sinusoidal frequency f0 ± k fs, the value of k allowing to explore the velocity range.
When the transducer of the profiler is used as a receiver, it sees this signal as an echo. When
used as a transmitter, the pulses reflect on the hydrophone but they cannot be detected as their time
of arrival is within the blanking distance. The blanking distance corresponds to the time required by
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 6 of 13

resolution in velocity δv of the instrument. The generator is therefore adjusted to transmit a variable
sinusoidal frequency f 0 ± kδfs , the value of k allowing to explore the velocity range.
When the transducer of the profiler is used as a receiver, it sees this signal as an echo. When used as
a transmitter, the pulses reflect on the hydrophone but they cannot be detected as their time of arrival is
within the blanking distance. The blanking distance corresponds to the time required by the profiler to
stop pulse transmission and to switch the transducer to the receiver mode. When the hydrophone does
not cover the entire surface of the transducer, one part of the sound wave propagates through air and can
be reflected by any objects on its trajectory. The difference between the impedance of the piezo-electrical
transducer (which is very high) and that of the air (which is very low), however, results in nearly
99% of pulse energy being reflected to the interface. The other part, along with pulses transmitted
by the profiler’s other transducers, can increase the detection noise according to the wavelength of
the instrument. All this equipment is remote controlled by a program developed using LabVIEW©
software. It automates testing by decoding the messages from different profiler models, to determine
and change their configuration, to extract speed values and to drive the frequency generator.
Using a frequency generator allows the adaptation of the power of the signal heard by the profiler.
It can be adjusted to optimize the noise of the measured speeds, taking into account the saturation of
the measurement channel. It is also possible to extract the amplitude of the signal (in count) received
by each beam, from the messages sent by the instrument. By observing count changes over the long
term, it could be possible to monitor changes in current meter sensitivity and then to prevent drift of
its amplification hardware.
Relationship (8) includes the speed of sound c. When the instrument is used in situ, the user can
directly set its value in the software, if measured by a sound velocity sensor, or he can use a relation of
calculation based on temperature and pressure measurements made by the profiler (salinity must be
determined by another instrument or another method). The issue arose of determining this value in
the case of this measurement bed. The value of c was fixed to obtain the broadest possible range of
velocities, by staying compatible with the speeds of sound in the ocean. The value 1525 m/s was chosen
to obtain profiler responses in the range of ±6 m/s (except for the Nortek versions called DeepWater
where fr is different and leads phase wrapping). This value is programmed in the instrument and in
the LabVIEW program to calculate a reference velocity Vref . It is important that the device under test
(DUT) and the LabVIEW program contains the same value of c to see the same speed variations for
given frequency variations.
Calibration consists in calculating a speed deviation δv from the Doppler effect formula, such that:

c δ fre f − δ fi
!
δv = Vre f − Vi = (10)
2 f0

with δfref = kδfs . δfi is defined by relationship (8), i being the index of the instrument’s transducer.

4. Speed Measurement and Calibration Uncertainties

Current meter oscillators can drift over time and with temperature variations. In order to use
relationships (8) and (10), an initial problem arises with the determination of f 0 . The manufacturer
Nortek indicates in its documentation that a given number of parameters used in the calculations of
velocities have fixed values in the instrument. Transducer frequency f 0 is one of such fixed values.
It also indicates that the accuracy of measured velocities should be 1% of the measured value ±5 mm/s.
This accuracy was probably deliberately underestimated by the manufacturer due to a lack of knowledge
of sound velocity in the medium at the time of measurements, the influence of this one being close to
1% of the measured velocities. It is therefore, a maximum tolerance.
By the calculation of the derivative of Vi versus f 0 from relationship (8), we can see that the relative
variations of f 0 are proportional to the relative variations of Vi . For example, an f 0 error of 0.1% would
correspond to an error of 3 mm/s for a speed of 3 m/s. This also corresponds to 400 Hz for a profiler
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 7 of 13

at 400 kHz and 2000 Hz for a 2 MHz profiler. According to the measurements made with the Shom
profilers, the deviations in f 0 are generally inferior to 0.02%. The influence of the accurate knowledge
of its value is therefore negligible for the calculation of Vi .
The combined uncertainty on speed deviations δv has been assessed following the method of the
guide for uncertainty measurement (GUM) edited by the BIPM [30]. As the variables in relationship (10)
are independent from each other, the combined standard uncertainty uδv of the deviations in velocities
obtained during the calibration, consist in the quadratic sum’s calculation of the partial derivative
of each variable multiplied by their estimated uncertainty. The partial derivatives represent in fact,
the sensitivity of each variable, and therefore the weight of each variable, to the variations of the output
quantity δv. That gives the following relationship:
!2 !2 !2
2 ∂δv ∂δv ∂δv
uδv = u2δ f re f + 2
uδ f i + u2f 0 (11)
δ fre f δ fi δ f0

where we consider that c is a constant whose value is given for the calculation. This consideration
is justified by the fact that for this test, c is a numerical value programmed in the DUT and the
LabVIEW program. uδ f re f is the uncertainty of the reference frequency, uδ f i the uncertainty of the
Doppler measurement made by the instrument, and uδ f 0 the uncertainty of the emitted frequency.
Relationship (11) gives:
!2  !2
c δv

2 2 2
uδv = uδ f re f + uδ f i + u2f 0 (12)
2 f0 f0
In relationship (12), uδ f i can be assessed by taking into account the maximum tolerance given by
the manufacturer. From relationship (8) we can write:

2uvi f0
uδ f i = (13)
c
uvi is the uncertainty of the velocity given by the transducer i. Expression (12) becomes:
!2 !2
2 c δv
uδv = u2δ f re f + u2vi + u2f 0 (14)
2 f0 f0

As explained in Section 5, it was necessary to measure f 0 accurately in order to eliminate any

errors relating to the principle of the Doppler shift measurement test. Thus, uf0 represents the
standard uncertainty of its measurement with a frequency meter. uf0 has been evaluated to be 0.5 Hz.
As the numbers given by the manufacturer concerning measurement accuracy are considered as a
maximum tolerance, uvi was assessed by dividing them by the square root of 3, according to the rules of
reference [30]. Despite this division, calculations show that this source of uncertainty largely dominates
all the others.

5. Results Obtained
During the tests, profilers are programmed with an integration time of 1 s, a minimum blanking
distance and only one measurement cell to reduce the test duration. As echo reception is not disrupted
by the noise inherent to in situ conditions of use, profilers are used in the narrowband mode.
During the initial measurements, the central frequency transmitted by the generator was set to
the frequency that the profilers were supposed to emit: 400 kHz, 600 kHz, 1 MHz, or 2 MHz according
to their type. It appeared that the deviation curves we obtained systematically displayed slopes and
offsets that varied according to the instrument.
To dispel any doubts concerning the origin of these shifts, measurements were made by
progressively varying the frequency f 0 transmitted by the generator in order to observe its influence
on the offsets. As was noticeable, the hydrophone was used as a receiver and connected to a digital
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 8 of 13

oscilloscope. A fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the digitized signal revealed frequency shifts of a few
hertz to a few tenths of hertz depending on the instrument, and it allowed the accurate measurement
of pulse frequencies emitted by the profilers. Figure 4 shows the result of the FFT performed on pulses
transmitted by a Nortek Group 2 MHz AQD.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13

2.00 × 106
2.00 x 106
1.99 × 106 2.01 × 106
1.99 x 106 2.01 x 106

Frequency (Hz××10
Frequency(Hz 106)6)

Figure 4.4. Zoom

Zoomononthe 2 MHz
the peak
2 MHz obtained
peak by the
obtained by fast
the Fourier transform
fast Fourier (FFT) of
transform a pulse
(FFT) of atrain emitted
pulse train
by a Nortek Group AQD.
emitted by a Nortek Group AQD.
In fact, though the influence of the accurate knowledge of f0 on the velocity calculation is
In
In fact,
fact,though
though thethe
influence of the
influence ofaccurate knowledge
the accurate of f 0 onof
knowledge thef0velocity
on the calculation is negligible,
velocity calculation is
negligible, during this test it is necessary to determine it accurately in order to assess the
during this test
negligible, it is necessary
during this test toit determine
is necessaryit accurately in orderittoaccurately
to determine assess the measurement
in order to trueness
assess the of
measurement trueness of the Doppler shifts made by the instrument.
the Doppler shifts
measurement madeofby
trueness the
the instrument.
Doppler shifts made by the instrument.
Figure 5 shows the result obtained on profiler # 8691 after adjustment of the frequency
Figure 5 shows the result obtained
Figure 5 shows the result obtained on profiler # 8691 after
on profiler # 8691adjustment of the frequency
after adjustment of thetransmitted
frequency
transmitted by the generator, on the frequency of the instrument under test. The very low values of
by the generator,
transmitted by theongenerator,
the frequency
on theoffrequency
the instrument
of the under test. under
instrument The verytest.low
Thevalues of measured
very low values of
measured errors (<0.002 m/s) show the accuracy that can be obtained with this test. Concerning
errors (<0.002 m/s) show the accuracy that can be obtained with this test.
measured errors (<0.002 m/s) show the accuracy that can be obtained with this test. ConcerningConcerning Shom’s stock
Shom’s stock of current meters and profilers, most of those that work well, give answers of this type
of current meters and profilers, most of those that work well, give answers of
Shom’s stock of current meters and profilers, most of those that work well, give answers of this type this type and of this
and of this amplitude. Error dashes represent the expanded uncertainty of the calibration obtained
amplitude.
and of this Error dashesError
amplitude. represent
dashes therepresent
expandedthe uncertainty
expandedof the calibration
uncertainty of the obtained withobtained
calibration relation
with relation (14) and expressed with a coverage factor of 2.
(14) and expressed with a coverage factor of 2.
with relation (14) and expressed with a coverage factor of 2.

Errors transducer #1 AQP 400 kHz # 8691. 11/12/2018

Errors transducer #1 AQP 400 kHz # 8691. 11/12/2018
0.050
0.050
0.040
0.040
0.030
Vref-V1 (m/s)

0.030
0.020
Vref-V1 (m/s)

0.020
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.000
-0.010
-0.010
-0.020
-0.020
-0.030
-0.030
-0.040
-0.040
-0.050
-0.050 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
-6 -4 -2 0
Vref (m/s) 2 4 6
Vref (m/s)

Figure 5. After measurement of its frequency, AQP # 8691 presents very small shifts. The slope and
5. After measurement of its frequency,
Figure 5. frequency, AQP
AQP ## 8691
8691 presents
presents very
very small
small shifts.
shifts. The slope
slope and
and
intercept of the best linear fit (black line) are: −18 × 10−5 ± 3 × 10−5 and 3 × 10−4 ± 1 × 10−4 m/s. Error
−5−5
−18××1010 ± 3± ×3 10
intercept of the best linear fit (black line) are: −18 −5 −5
× 10andand
3 × 310× 10
−4 −4
± 1 ×±101 ×m/s.
−4 −4
10 Error
m/s.
dashes represent the expanded uncertainty of measurements.
dashes
Error represent
dashes the expanded
represent uncertainty
the expanded of measurements.
uncertainty of measurements.
The test procedure was modified to take into account the frequency shifts of the profiler’s
The
The test
test procedure
procedure was
was modified
modified to
to take
take into
into account
account the
the frequency
frequency shifts
shifts of
of the
the profiler’s
profiler’s
oscillators. A high-speed digitizer NI USB 5132 was acquired. In order to warrant its stability and
oscillators. A
A high-speed
high-speed digitizer
digitizer NI USB 5132 was acquired. In order to warrant its stability and
and
accuracy in frequency, it was linked to an external Epsilon NTP (Network Time Protocol) clock by
accuracy in frequency, it was linked to an external Epsilon NTP (Network Time Protocol) clock by
TEMEX Telecom, containing a voltage-controlled oscillator (OCXO at 10 MHz), synchronized to a
TEMEX Telecom, containing a voltage-controlled oscillator (OCXO−12at 10 MHz), synchronized to a
GPS signal via an antenna. The resulting average accuracy is ±2 × 10 at 10 MHz over 24 h. GPS time
GPS signal via an antenna. The resulting average accuracy is ±2 × 10−12 at 10 MHz over 24 h. GPS time
and frequencies are references directly linking the measurements to the system of units [31]. Figure
and frequencies are references directly linking the measurements to the system of units [31]. Figure
6 describes the relationships between the principal elements of the calibration bed.
6 describes the relationships between the principal elements of the calibration bed.
About 123 instruments were tested between June 2018 and July 2020 and this test bed allowed
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 9 of 13

accuracy in frequency, it was linked to an external Epsilon NTP (Network Time Protocol) clock by
TEMEX Telecom, containing a voltage-controlled oscillator (OCXO at 10 MHz), synchronized to a GPS
signal via an antenna. The resulting average accuracy is ±2 × 10−12 at 10 MHz over 24 h. GPS time
and frequencies are references directly linking the measurements to the system of units [31]. Figure 6
describes the relationships between the principal elements of the calibration bed.

Figure 6. Calibration bed diagram. The hydrophone (in black) is first connected to the NI USB
5132 digitizer whose sampling rate is controlled by an EPSILON NTP clock and a GPS receiver.
After obtaining the FFT, it is connected to the frequency generator. Everything is controlled by a
Labview © program.

About 123 instruments were tested between June 2018 and July 2020 and this test bed allowed
faults to be detected on some of them. Table 1 gives statistics of some faults. The line ‘AQD’ includes
current meters 200 m, 2000 m, 3000 m, and 6000 m. The line ‘AQP’ includes 400 kHz, 600 kHz, and 1 and
2 MHz. Tested AWACS (Acoustic Waves And Current profiler) are 600 kHz and 1 MHz. Workhorse
are ADCPs 300 kHz. The detected defaults are generally minor and the instruments continued to be
used except for two of them where at least one transducer was out-of-order (see the text below).

Table 1. Table summarizing the main faults detected, the number of tests per type of instrument and
the corresponding percentages. The faults detected are generally minor except for 2 instruments.

0.01 < Noise Non-Linearity Offset >

nb Tested Slope # 1 Out-of-Order
< 0.05 m/s Default 0.01 m/s
AQD 65 5 2 3 1 0
AQP 44 4 0 2 0 2
AWAC 7 2 0 0 0 0
Workhorse 7 4 0 0 0 0
Total 123 15 2 5 1 2
% 12.2 1.6 4.1 0.8 1.6

Figures 7 and 8 give examples of noisy transducers found during tests. The origin of this noise
is undetermined. Some other transducers present small offsets like in Figure 8, others present small
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 10 of 13

non-linearities as in Figure 9. One was found out-of-order and another one with a response completely
out of tolerances, as shown in Figure 10. Concerning this AQP, its transducer #2 was also out of order,
though its transducer #3 was in good working order. This defect could probably have been detected by
a towing tank test because of its impact on the calculation of Vx , Vy , and Vz , though the origin of this
fault
J. Mar.and the2020,
Sci. Eng. small8, xfaults in Figures
FOR PEER REVIEW7–9 could not have been detected with this accuracy, due10toofthe
13
J. Mar.
global Sci. Eng.
testEng. 2020,
aspect 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 13
J. Mar. Sci. 2020,of
8, xthis
FORmethod.
PEER REVIEW 10 of 13
Errors transducer #3 AQP 1 MHz #9454. 23/11/2018

0.050 Errors transducer #3 AQP 1 MHz #9454. 23/11/2018

Errors transducer #3 AQP 1 MHz #9454. 23/11/2018
0.040
0.050
0.050
0.030
0.040
(m/s)(m/s)

0.040
0.020
0.030
0.030
0.010
0.020
Vref-V3
(m/s)

0.020
0.000
0.010
Vref-V3

0.010
-0.010
Vref-V3

0.000
0.000
-0.020
-0.010
-0.010
-0.030
-0.020
-0.020
-0.040
-0.030
-0.030
-0.050
-0.040
-0.040
-0.050 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
-0.050 -6 -4 -2 Vref (m/s)
0 2 4 6
-6 -4 -2 0
Vref (m/s) 2 4 6
Vref (m/s)
Figure 7. Example of a noisy AQP transducer. The slope and intercept of the best linear fit (black line)
Figure
are: −187.7. Example
×Example of
10−5 ± 3 ×of10aaa−5noisy
noisy 3AQP
and AQP transducer.
−4 ± 1 × 10−4 The
× 10transducer. m/s.slope
The and intercept
noise displaysof the best linear fit (black
of line)
Figure
Figure 7. Example of noisy AQP transducer. The slope and intercept
and intercept ofathe
of standard
the best deviation
bestlinear
linear fit(black
fit (black 0.005
line)
line)
are:
m/s. −18 × 10−5
−5 ± 3 × 10 −5 and
−5 3 × 10 −4 ± 1
−4 × 10−4 m/s.
−4 The noise displays a standard deviation of 0.005
are:−18
are: −18 ×× 10 ±±33××1010 and
−5 −5 and × 10± 1 ±
3 ×310 −4 1 × 10
× 10 −4 m/s.noise
m/s. The The noise displays
displays a standard
a standard deviation
deviation of 0.005 of
m/s.
0.005
m/s. m/s.

Errors transducteur #1 AQD 2000 m #2693. 03/03/2020

Errors transducteur #1 AQD 2000 m #2693. 03/03/2020
0.025 Errors transducteur #1 AQD 2000 m #2693. 03/03/2020
0.025
0.02
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.015
0.01
0.005
(m/s)

0.01
0.005
(m/s)

0
0.005
(m/s)

-0.0050
f-V1

0
f-V1

-0.005
-0.01
f-V1
Vre

-0.005
-0.01
Vre

-0.015
-0.01
Vre

-0.015
-0.02
-0.015
-0.02
-0.025
-0.02
-0.025 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-0.025 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 Vre f (m/s)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Vre f (m/s)
Vre f (m/s)
Figure 8. 8. Example of ofananAQD
AQD2000 2000m mpresenting an average offset ofof0.003 m/s and noise with a
Figure 8. Example
Figure Example of an AQD 2000 m presentingan
presenting anaverage
averageoffset offsetof 0.003
0.003 m/s
m/s and
and noise
noise with
with a
Figure 8.deviation
standard Example of of 0.002
an AQD m/s. 2000
The m presenting
slope and an average
intercept of theoffset
best of 0.003
linear fit m/s andline)
(black noise
are:with
−3.9a×
astandard
standarddeviation
deviationofof 0.002
0.002 m/s. m/s.
TheTheslopeslope
and and intercept
intercept of theofbestthelinear
best linear fit (black
fit (black line)
line) are: −3.9are:
×
standard
10 −4 ± 2.7−4×deviation
10 −4 and of−40.002 m/s.
−4 ± The slope and −4
intercept of theis best linear to fit
±2(black line) are: −3.9 ×
× 10−28 ×× 10 3310
×× −4
10 −4 m/s.
−3.9
10−4 ×± 10
2.7 ×± 2.7
10 −4 and −28and −28
10 −4 ±× 10 −4 × 10The
± 3m/s. The test The
m/s.
test range
range test
is limited
range
limited is to
limited
±2 m/s because
±2
to because
m/s ofphase
phase
m/s because
of of
10 −4 ± 2.7 × 10−4 and −28 × 10−4 ± 3 × 10−4 m/s. The test range is limited to ±2 m/s because of phase
wrapping led
phase
wrapping ledby
wrapping the
byled different
theby pulse
the different
different repetition
pulse pulse rate
repetition
repetition ofrate
rate of thisofinstrument.
this instrument.
this instrument.
wrapping led by the different pulse repetition rate of this instrument.

Errors transducer #3 AQD 2000 m #2300. 29/11/2018

Errors transducer #3 AQD 2000 m #2300. 29/11/2018
Errors transducer #3 AQD 2000 m #2300. 29/11/2018
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
(m/s)

0.01
(m/s)

0.01
(m/s)
Vref-V3

0.00
Vref-V3

0.00
Vref-V3

0.00
-0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.02
-0.02
-0.02
-0.03
-0.03
-0.03 -2
-2 -1.5
-1.5 -1
-1 -0.5 0 0.5
0.5 11 1.5
1.5 22
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Vref (m/s)
Vref (m/s)

Figure9.9.Example
Figure Example of
of aa deep-water
deep-water AQD transducer
transducer with
with aa small non-linearity.
small non-linearity.
non-linearity.
Figure 9. Example of a deep-water AQD transducer with a small non-linearity.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 11 of 13
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 13

Errors transducer #1 AQP 600 kHz #8112. 04/12/2018

0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00

Vref-V1 (m/s)
-0.10
-0.20
-0.30
-0.40
-0.50
-0.60
-0.70
-0.80
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Vref (m/s)

Figure 10. Example of an out-of-order AQP transducer.

transducer. The response is non-linear and the amplitude
errors is
of errors is of
of 0.80
0.80 m/s.
m/s.

6. Conclusions
6. Conclusions
Current
Current profilers
profilers are
are currently
currently usedused inin large
large numbers
numbers by by organizations
organizations making
making oceanographic
oceanographic
measurements,
measurements, but they have been the subject of too few metrological controls, particularly due
but they have been the subject of too few metrological controls, particularly due to
to
their measuring range and because of the complexity of their
their measuring range and because of the complexity of their operating algorithms.operating algorithms.
The
The method
method perfected,
perfected, along
along with
with the
the software
software developed,
developed, allows
allows the
the logging
logging and and calibration
calibration of
of
most of current meters and profilers manufactured by Nortek AS and RD
most of current meters and profilers manufactured by Nortek AS and RD Instruments. Associated Instruments. Associated with
the
withcompass
the compasscalibration platform,
calibration this test
platform, bed
this allows
test complete
bed allows controlcontrol
complete of the sensors fitted tofitted
of the sensors current
to
meters and current profilers.
current meters and current profilers.
It
It also
alsoimproved
improvedour ourknowledge
knowledge of of
profilers, allowing
profilers, allowingus inusparticular to state
in particular that the
to state thatvelocity range
the velocity
given
range given in the documentation depends on the speed of sound through the medium. Itus
in the documentation depends on the speed of sound through the medium. It also allowed to
also
state thatus
allowed thetomeasurements
state that the of the Doppler effect
measurements of theare generally
Doppler highly
effect arereliable.
generally The in situreliable.
highly measurement
The in
of uncertainty depends, first and foremost, on the determination of
situ measurement of uncertainty depends, first and foremost, on the determination of the the speed of sound and onspeed
particle
of
concentrations
sound and on particlealong the profiling range
concentrations of beams.
along Sound velocity
the profiling range ofisbeams.
generally
Sound poorly known
velocity in places
is generally
where
poorlythe knownprofilers are used
in places whereand over
the the whole
profilers trajectory
are used of pulses.
and over Particle
the whole concentrations
trajectory of pulses. are also
Particle
poorly known over the sound range of the instruments, but the high
concentrations are also poorly known over the sound range of the instruments, but the high sensitivity of their transducers,
the accuracy
sensitivity ofof the transducers,
their Doppler shiftthe measurements
accuracy of the andDoppler
the complexity of the signal and
shift measurements computation made
the complexity
by their software provide sufficiently accurate current speed measurements
of the signal computation made by their software provide sufficiently accurate current speed if their transducers can be
shown to function properly using a calibration bed.
measurements if their transducers can be shown to function properly using a calibration bed.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, writing—original draft preparation, writing—review
Author
and Contributions:
editing, Conceptualization,
M.L.M.; software, methodology,
validation, S.M. writing—original
All authors draft preparation,
have read and agreed writing—review
to the published version of
andmanuscript.
the editing, M.L.M.; software, validation, S.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the
manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Funding: This research
Acknowledgments: received
Authors no externalAndré
acknowledge funding.
Lusven, Alexandre Léon from SHOM and Sophie Bravo for
their technical support.
Acknowledgments: Authors acknowledge André Lusven, Alexandre Léon from SHOM and Sophie Bravo for
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
their technical support.
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
publish
Conflictstheofresults.
Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
Glossary
publish the results.
β transducer slope angle
λGlossary wavelength
Ω angle of heading
β transducer slope angle
Ψ angle of roll
λ wavelength
σδ standard deviation of the Doppler noise
Ω angle of heading
σV standard deviation or uncertainty of velocity Vi
Ψ angle of roll
θ angle of pitch
σδ standard deviation of the Doppler noise
σV standard deviation or uncertainty of velocity Vi
θ angle of pitch
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 12 of 13

φ phase of the signal, ∈ [−π, + π]

c speed of sound
d active diameter of hydrophone
C(t) signal received after emission of two successive pulses
C*(t) complex conjugated of C(t)
f0 central frequency of emitted pulses
fr repetition frequency of pulses
δfi Doppler shift for transducer i
δfs frequency increment or step of frequency
δfref generated frequency shift
δv velocity deviation of the device under test (DUT)
k number of steps allowing to explore the velocity range of the DUT
tl time corresponding to pulses going there and back
rmax maximum profiling range
R(τ) auto-covariance function
tp pulse duration
u letter used to refer to standard uncertainty
Vi radial velocity measured by transducer i, i ∈ {1, 2, 3}
Vmax maximum measurable velocity
Vref calculated reference velocity
V1 , V2 , V3 velocities measured on the axes of transducers 1, 2 and 3
Vx , Vy , Vz velocities calculated in the instrument referential (x, y, z)
U, V, W components of current referenced to the magnetic North

References
1. Joyce, T.M. On in situ “calibration” of shipboard ADCP. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 1989, 6, 169–172. [CrossRef]
2. Trump, C.L. Calculation of ADCP alignment offsets using single-beam velocity and depth data. J. Atmos.
Ocean. Technol. 1997, 14, 1252–1255. [CrossRef]
3. Pollard, R.; Read, J. A method for calibrating shipmounted acoustic Doppler profilers and the limitations of
Gyro compasses. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 1989, 6, 859–865. [CrossRef]
4. Trump, C.L.; Marmorino, G.O. Calibrating a gyrocompass using ADCP and DGPS data. J. Atmos.
Ocean. Technol. 1997, 14, 211–214. [CrossRef]
5. Pierce, S.D.; Barth, J.A.; Smith, R.L. Improving acoustic Doppler current profiler accuracy with wide-area
differential GPS and adaptive smoothing of ship velocity. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 1999, 16, 591–596.
[CrossRef]
6. Langlois, G.; Maze, R. Influence of mooring line motion on current measurements. Deep-Sea Res. 1990, 37,
1363–1374. [CrossRef]
7. Munchow, A.; Coughran, C.S.; Hendershott, M.C.; Winant, C.D. Performance and calibration of an acoustic
Doppler current profiler towed below the surface. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 1995, 12, 435–444. [CrossRef]
8. Armstrong, B.; Fulford, J.; Thibodeaux, K. Quality assurance testing of acoustic Doppler current profiler
transform matrices. In Proceedings of the IEEE/OES 11th Current, Waves and Turbulence Measurement,
St. Petersburg, FL, USA, 2–6 March 2015. [CrossRef]
9. Le Coz, J.; Blanquart, B.; Pobanz, K.; Dramais, G.; Pierrefeu, G.; Hauet, A.; Despax, A. Estimating
the uncertainty of streamgauging techniques using in situ collaborative interlaboratory experiments.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2016, 142, 7. [CrossRef]
10. Oberg, K.A.; Mueller, D.S. Validation of streamflow measurements made with acoustic Doppler current
profilers. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2007, 133, 1421–1432. [CrossRef]
11. Shih, H.H.; Payton, C.; Sprenke, J.; Mero, T. Towing Basin Speed Calibration of Acoustic Doppler Current
Profiling Instruments. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Water Resource Engineering and Water
Resources Planning and Management, Minneapolis, MI, USA, 30 July–2 August 2000. [CrossRef]
12. Le Menn, M.; Pacaud, L. Calibration of currentmeters in direction: Results obtained on a stock of instruments
with a new calibration platform. In Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Metrology, Paris,
France, 21–24 September 2015. [CrossRef]
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 847 13 of 13

13. Le Menn, M.; Lusven, A.; Bongiovanni, E.; Le Dû, P.; Rouxel, D.; Lucas, S.; Pacaud, L. Current profilers and
currentmeters compass and tilt sensors errors and calibration. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2014, 25, 085801. [CrossRef]
14. Le Menn, M.; Le Goff, M. A method for absolute calibration of compasses. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2007, 18,
1614–1621. [CrossRef]
15. International Organization for Standardization. Assessment of Uncertainty in the Calibration and Use of Flow
Measurement Devices—Part 1: Linear Calibration Relationship; International Organization for Standardization:
Geneva, Switzerland, 1997; pp. 7066–7071.
16. International Organization for Standardization. Hydrometry—Calibration of Current Meters in Straight Open
Tanks; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007; p. 3455.
17. Camnasio, E.; Orsi, E. Calibration Method of Current Meters. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2011, 137, 386–392. [CrossRef]
18. Boldt, J.A.; Oberg, K.A. Validation of streamflow measurements made with M9 and RiverRay acoustic
Doppler current profilers. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2015, 142, 2. [CrossRef]
19. Huang, H. Estimating uncertainty of streamflow measurements with moving-boat acoustic Doppler current
profilers. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2018, 63, 3. [CrossRef]
20. JCGM 200:2012. International Vocabulary of Metrology—Basic and General Concepts and Associated Terms, 3rd ed.;
BIPM: Saint-Cloud, France, 2012.
21. Cabrera, R.; Huhta, C.; Lohrmann, A. A new acoustic Doppler Current Profiler for Shallow Water.
In Proceedings of the MTS/IEEE Conference, Oceans’95, Monterey, CA, USA, 9–12 October 1995; Volume 3,
pp. 9–12. [CrossRef]
22. Wertz, J.R. Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control; Kluwer Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1978.
[CrossRef]
23. Alderson, S.G.; Cunningham, S.A. Velocity errors in acoustic Doppler current profiler measurements due to
platform attitude variations and their effect on volume transport estimates. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 1999,
16, 96–106. [CrossRef]
24. Zedel, L.; Hay, A.E. Resolving velocity ambiguity in multifrequency, pulse-to-pulse coherent Doppler sonar.
J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 2010, 35, 847–851. [CrossRef]
25. Lhermitte, R.; Serafin, R. Pulse-to-pulse coherent Doppler sonar signal processing techniques. J. Atmos.
Ocean. Technol. 1984, 1, 293–308. [CrossRef]
26. Dillon, J.; Zedel, L.; Hay, A.E. Simultaneous Velocity Ambiguity Resolution and Noise Suppression for
Multifrequency Coherent Doppler Sonar. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 2012, 29, 450–463. [CrossRef]
27. Lohrmann, A.; Hackett, B.; Roed, L.P. High resolution measurements of turbulence, velocity and stress using
a pulse-to-pulse coherent sonar. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 1990, 7, 19–37. [CrossRef]
28. RD Instruments. Field Service Technical Paper 001 (FST-001), Broadband ADCP Advanced Principles of Operation;
RD Instruments: San Diego, CA, USA, 1996.
29. RD Instruments. Technical Note FST 004; RD Instruments: San Diego, CA, USA, 1999.
30. JCGM 100:2008. Evaluation of Measurement Data—Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement; BIPM:
Saint-Cloud, France, 2008.
31. Le Menn, M. Instrumentation and Metrology in Oceanography; ISTE: London, UK; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken,
NJ, USA, 2012; pp. 38–42. [CrossRef]

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).