Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Data Availability
-
DA > 98%
DA < 90%
Data Availability
Station Operators are responsible for ensuring that their stations meet data
availability, data quality and data surety requirements
Stations must also be designed to be as reliable and as resilient as possible
within available resources:
- Data storage and backfilling capabilities included at different levels
- Protection of single points of failure by automatic or semi-automatic back-up systems
- Adequate level of spare equipment available at the station
Data Availability
Except in case of complete station outage, data should be re-transmitted to
the IDC at the end of the outage and stations should fulfil DA requirements
In reality, this is not always the case because:
- Oldest stations have limited storage/backfilling capabilities and would require upgrade
- Minor equipment upgrades or configuration changes are from time to time performed
without testing station capabilities again (as it is done at time of certification/revalidation)
- Data availability includes data quality criteria (burst, constant values, signals with no input
from the sensor no taken into account)
Failure Analysis
Environment: Decrease due to repair of stations that failed under harsh environments
and development and implementation of grounding and lightning protection standards
Failure Analysis
High-level approach tuned to WGB reporting needs and used for verifying
that implemented engineering solutions led to improvements on reliability
Approach limitations:
- Rarely allows highlighting issues that were not
already known through the operation of the network
- Incompleteness of the data outage information
collected in the IMS Reporting System
- Does not include total station downtime due to nonconsideration of data gaps less than a few hours.
Monitoring and understanding of all data gaps including short ones, which can
account for several percent of data availability at the end of a year, is necessary
for fine-tuning station configurations and fulfilling DA requirements
Project for root cause analysis of station data gaps to be
initiated in 2017 with support from Station Operators
Infrasound Technology Workshop, Quito, Ecuador
10
11
12
Station back in Ops in Apr 2016 with higher data quality compared to last 4 years
Infrasound Technology Workshop, Quito, Ecuador
13
14
15
16
17
WGB43 and WGB46 encouraged the PTS to pursue integration of on-site calibration
capability at IMS infrasound stations
Very high stability of the calibration results through time High stability of the method
and of infrasound measurement system responses
I26DE Sensitivity 1 Hz
18
Scope of Pilot Studies: review, comparison and improvement of methods for the testing and
evaluation of infrasound sensors with the long-term objective of refining IMS specifications for
infrasound sensors and achieving metrological traceability for sensor sensitivity
Participants to Study 2: CEA, LANL, SNL, UMiss (Participants), DFM (NMI) and PTS (Coord.)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Feb Oct 2017: Review of results from both Studies with support of
Experts from National Metrology Institutes + Plan way forward
Contract to be established in 2016 with National Metrology Institutes to support the Group with:
- Definition of roadmap to achieve metrological traceability for sensor sensitivity
19
20
Conclusion
Continuous efforts toward completion of the IMS infrasound network with objective
of 90% certified stations by 2019.
Equipment and services support contracts in place or under negotiation for most
station sub-systems, equipment testing and software
21
Muchas Gracias!