development of amsu-a fundamental cdr’scics.umd.edu/.../amsu_fcdr_meng_aug2010.pdf · 21 summary...
TRANSCRIPT
Development of AMSU-A Fundamental CDR’s
Huan Meng1, Wenze Yang2, Ralph Ferraro1
1NOAA/NESDIS/STAR/CoRP/Satellite Climate Studies Branch2NOAA Corporate Institute for Climate and Satellites
2
Background: Part of a project supported by the NOAA Climate Data
Record (CDR) program Goals:
Develop Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A and –B (AMSU-A/-B) and Microwave Humidity Sounder (MHS) FCDR’s for “window” and water vapor channelsAMSU-A: 23.8, 31.4, 50.3, 89.0 GHzAMSU-B/MHS: 89, 150/157; 183+1, 183+3, 183+7/190.3
GHzDevelop TCDR’s for hydrological products (rain, snow,
etc.) Source Data
NOAA-15,16,17,18,19 & MetOp-A L1B data
Overview
3
AMSU-A Sensors Polar orbiting; cross track scan with 30 FOVs; 48
km at nadir; “mixed” polarizations POES Satellites (carry AMSU-A, -B/MHS):
=> NOAA-17 Channels 3 & 15 only have 1 year record=> NOAA-15 with large geolocation error since March 2010
4
AMSU-A SDR Biases Across scan asymmetryChanges over orbit (ASC/DSC)Changes over life of sensor
Warm target contamination (Zou et al., to be submitted)Orbital drift + Sun heatingInstrument (nonlinear) calibration error
Reflector emission Orbital decay Diurnal drift Antenna pattern (sidelobe) effect Geolocation error Pre-launch calibration offsetNo SI-traceable standards
5
Challenges Corrections of known biases (last slide) Metadata (sensor degradation, satellite
maneuver, etc.), data QC Impacts from both surface and atmosphere
6
Data collectionAMSU L1B data (1998 – present)AMSU L2 data (2000 – present)ECMWF Interim (1998 – 2008)PATMOS-x cloud data (NOAA-15 & -18 2007 - 2009,
soon to be complete)
MetadataMSPPS, legacy project logNOAA/NESDIS/OSDPD, operational collection
Asymmetry characterization
Progress(since April 2010)
7
AMSU-A Tb across scan asymmetryNOAA-18 Ascending Tb
AMSU-A Asymmetry (1/3)
Bia
s
Asymmetry
8
Impact of Tb asymmetry on productsAMSU-A Asymmetry (2/3)
9
Possible CausesReflector misalignmentBias in polarization vector orientationSidelobe effectsAsymmetric atmosphere and surface
CharacterizationComparison with CRTM simulationsClear sky, over tropical and sub-tropical oceans (40N –
40S) Cloud screening approaches
AMSU L2 cloud productsPATMOS-x (AVHRR) cloud probabilityERA Interim cloud probability
AMSU-A Asymmetry (3/3)
10
Asymmetry Characterization – L2 (1/5) “Clear Sky” Definition
L2 products: MSPPS AMSU-A Cloud Liquid Water (CLW) and AMSU-B/MHS Ice Water Path (IWP)
Clear-sky is identified when CLW = 0.0 and IWP = 0
11
AMSU-A 1b raw count
Ta
Tb
Clear sky AMSU-A FOV determined by L2 productsOver tropical/subtropical oceans
ERA Interim T, q, O3 profiles; ERA interim SST, 10m U & V;
AMSU-A LZA, scan angle
Tb
Compare collocated Tb’s with same atmospheric condition for each beam position
CRTM
Asymmetry Characterization – L2 (2/5) Procedure
12
Oceans40 S – 40 NClear sky
Jan & Apr 2008NOAA-18
ASC/DSC Nodes
Small discrepancies between ASC and DES nodes Channel-1 and -15 Asc Tb < Des TbNOAA-18 is a PM satellite, Asc Tb < Des Tb
Asymmetry Characterization – L2 (3/5) Observed Tb
13
ASC and DES discrepancies mostly towards limb Ch-1 asymmetry is basically linear, bias (-1K, 0.6K) Ch-2 has double peak, bias (-0.9K, 0.6K) Ch-3 has concave shape, bias (0K, 2.9K) Ch-15 is basically linear, bias (-1.1K, 0.3K)
Asymmetry Characterization – L2 (4/5) Tb Bias and Asymmetry
14
All channels show asymmetry seasonality Consistent asymmetry patterns Ch-1 and -15 show the largest seasonality, up to 1K Dec is upper bound and Aug is lower bound for most channels
Asymmetry Characterization – L2 (5/5) Asymmetry Seasonality
15
PATMOS-x (AVHRR) cloud cover: 0.1 deg grid Each AMSU-A FOV covers 14 to 100+ PATMOS-x pixels. Clear-sky is identified when every PATMOS-x pixel within the
FOV is less than a certain cloud probability threshold Two thresholds are used: 10% and 50%
Cloud probability ≤ 50%, NOAA-18, 06/21/2008ASC DES
Asymmetry Characterization – PATMOS-x (1/2) “Clear Sky” Definition
More cloud in DES than in ASC
16
Asymmetry Characterization – PATMOS-x (2/2) Results
Similarities to L2 approach Observed ASC Tb < DES Tb Across scan asymmetry patterns Seasonality, Dec upper bound and Aug lower bound.
Differences Asymmetry magnitudes Less linearity in ch-1 and -15 Less agreement between ASC and DES Tb
Impact of cloud probability threshold:
17
Asymmetry Characterization – ERA (1/2) “Clear Sky” Definition
ERA Interim clouds High cloud (> 6.38 km) Mid-cloud Low cloud (< 1.78 km)
Clear skyWhen cloud cover probability is 0 at all three levels
Collocation of AMSU-A and ERA Interim ERA Interim has 0.703 deg spatial and 6-hr temporal
resolutions Nearest neighbor in space and linear interpolation in time
18
Asymmetry Characterization – ERA (2/2) Results
Similarity to L2 approachAcross scan asymmetry patterns
Differences Observed ASC Tb > DES Tb
Asymmetry magnitudes Less linearity in ch-1 and -15 Less agreement between ASC and DES Tb
Seasonality, Apr upper bound and Jul lower bound.
19
All show consistent across scan asymmetry patterns Different bias magnitudes
Asymmetry ComparisonNOAA-18, 2008, ASC
20
Next Steps Correction of asymmetryBetter understanding of the various cloud data sets,
achieve better agreement in asymmetry pattern with the different approaches
Stratify data by SST and wind to remove asymmetry caused by heterogeneous surface
Analyze reflector misalignment and polarization issues and correct the corresponding biases by adjusting scan angle
Inter-satellite calibrationSNODouble difference techniqueVicarious calibration
21
Summary AMSU-A Tb measurements suffer from many bias sources
such as warm target contamination and across scan asymmetry.
CRTM and three cloud screening methods were used to analyze the across scan asymmetry. They show similar Tb
asymmetry patterns but different magnitudes.
Cloud screening method plays a critical role in characterizing the across scan asymmetry of AMSU-A Tb. More study is required to achieve better agreement in asymmetry patterns obtained with the different approaches.
SNO, DDT, and/or vicarious calibration will be used to perform inter-satellite calibration in the near future.