Sonic anemometry represents an important technological advance for aeolian studies, fostering better under-
standing of near-surface turbulence and improved methods for estimating shear velocity (u*). Here, we compare
u* estimated from the Law of the Wall approach and from four methods that use 3-D wind vector measurements
from sonic anemometers: double rotation, triple rotation, planar fit, and a newly developed approach based on
invariants of the Reynolds stress tensor. Data were collected over 7.5 months at the Jornada Experimental Range
in the Chihuahuan Desert, southern New Mexico, USA. We used u* estimates from the double rotation method as
a reference for comparing the other methods because of its prevalence in the aeolian literature. On average, u*
estimates from the other three methods are within 5.0 % of estimates from the double rotation approach. Es-
timates from the triple rotation approach were 2.2 % lower on average. Estimates from the planar fit method
were the most similar, within 1.3 % on average. Estimates from the stress tensor approach were 4.9 % larger on
average. We found significant discrepancies, ranging from 14.7 % to 13.7 %, among u* estimated from the Law
of the Wall and the other methods. This underscores the need for careful methodology selection to ensure ac-
curate characterization of boundary layer turbulence.