Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (186)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = GNSS meteorology

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
15 pages, 5214 KiB  
Article
An Empirical Atmospheric Weighted Average Temperature Enhancement Model in the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau Considering Surface Temperature
by Yi Shen, Peicheng Li, Bingbing Zhang, Tong Wu, Junkuan Zhu, Qing Li and Wang Li
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(23), 4366; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16234366 - 22 Nov 2024
Viewed by 230
Abstract
Atmospheric weighted mean temperature (Tm) is a crucial parameter for retrieving atmospheric precipitation using the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). It plays a significant role in GNSS meteorology research. Although existing empirical models can quickly obtain Tm values for the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau, their [...] Read more.
Atmospheric weighted mean temperature (Tm) is a crucial parameter for retrieving atmospheric precipitation using the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). It plays a significant role in GNSS meteorology research. Although existing empirical models can quickly obtain Tm values for the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau, their accuracy is generally low due to the region’s complex environmental and climatic conditions. To address this issue, this study proposes an enhanced empirical Tm model tailored for the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau. This new model incorporates surface temperature (Ts) data and employs the least squares method to determine model coefficients, thereby improving the accuracy of the Tm empirical model. The research utilizes observational data from 16 radiosonde stations in the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau from 2010 to 2018. By integrating Ts into the Hourly Global Pressure and Temperature (HGPT2) model, we establish the enhanced empirical Tm model, referred to as YGTm. We evaluate the accuracy of the YGTm model using Tm values obtained from the 2019 radiosonde station measurements as a reference. A comparative analysis is conducted against the Bevis model, the HGPT2 model, and the regional linear model LTm. The results indicate that at the modeling stations, the proposed enhanced model improves Tm prediction accuracy by 24.9%, 16.1%, and 22.4% compared to the Bevis, HGPT2, and LTm models, respectively. At non-modeling stations, the accuracy improvements are 26.2%, 17.1% and 24.4%, respectively. Furthermore, the theoretical root mean square error and relative error from using the YGTm model for GNSS water vapor retrieval are 0.27 mm and 0.93%, respectively, both of which outperform the comparative models. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The distribution of radiosonde stations in the Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau region, with red circles representing modeling stations and blue triangles indicating non-modeling stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Scatter plot of Tm and Ts differences.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Evaluation of the bias distribution maps for various Tm models using modeling station data from 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Evaluation of the RMS distribution maps for various Tm models using modeling station data from 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Results of the daily bias and RMS values for four Tm models using modeling station data from 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The bias distribution maps for various Tm models using non-modeling station data from 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The RMS distribution maps for various Tm models using non-modeling station data from 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The theoretical RMS of PWV distribution maps for four Tm models using radiosonde data from 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The theoretical relative error of PWV distribution maps for four Tm models using radiosonde data from 2019.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 6939 KiB  
Article
Methods and Evaluation of AI-Based Meteorological Models for Zenith Tropospheric Delay Prediction
by Si Xiong, Jiamu Mei, Xinchuang Xu, Ziyu Shen and Liangke Huang
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(22), 4231; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16224231 - 13 Nov 2024
Viewed by 454
Abstract
Zenith Tropospheric Delay (ZTD) is a significant error source affecting the accuracy of certain space geodetic measurements. This study evaluates the performance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) based meteorological models, such as Fengwu and Pangu, in estimating real-time ZTD. The results from these AI [...] Read more.
Zenith Tropospheric Delay (ZTD) is a significant error source affecting the accuracy of certain space geodetic measurements. This study evaluates the performance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) based meteorological models, such as Fengwu and Pangu, in estimating real-time ZTD. The results from these AI models were compared with those obtained from the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), the fifth-generation European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Atmospheric Reanalysis (ERA5), and the third generation of the Global Pressure–Temperature data model (GPT3) to assess their accuracy across different time intervals, seasons, and geographic locations. The findings reveal that AI-driven models, particularly Fengwu, offer higher long-term forecasting accuracy. An analysis of data from 81 stations throughout 2023 indicates that Fengwu’s 7-day ZTD forecast achieved an RMSE of 2.85 cm when compared to GNSS-derived ZTD. However, in oceanic regions and areas with complex climatic dynamics, the Fengwu model exhibited a larger error compared to in other land regions. Additionally, seasonal variations and station altitude were found to influence the accuracy of ZTD predictions, emphasizing the need for detailed modeling in complex climatic zones. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Schematic diagram for obtaining ZTD using the AI meteorological model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic diagram of the Fengwu meteorological model operation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The calculation process schematic diagram.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The schematic diagram for interpolating the interest point’s ZTD.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The schematic map of GNSS station positions where the colors reflect elevation (ellipsoidal height).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Time distribution of the median error between ZTD values calculated by the ERA5, GPT3, Fengwu, and Pangu models and the GNSS-ZTD across 68 groups at 81 global stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>A box plot of the differences between AI-ZTD and the GNSS-ZTD, with each month’s data represented as a separate group.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The RMSE comparison histogram between AI-ZTD and GNSS-ZTD is shown. The data are divided into four height ranges, with the <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis representing different forecast lead times, and each data group is separated by an interval of 6 h. Height units: meters.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>RMSE distribution of the comparison between AI-ZTD and GNSS-ZTD at 81 global stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Global RMSE distribution of the comparison between AI-ZTD and ERA5’s ZTD at a 1° × 1° resolution.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 4160 KiB  
Article
Enhancing Algal Bloom Level Monitoring with CYGNSS and Sentinel-3 Data
by Yan Jia, Zhiyu Xiao, Liwen Yang, Quan Liu, Shuanggen Jin, Yan Lv and Qingyun Yan
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(20), 3915; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16203915 - 21 Oct 2024
Viewed by 884
Abstract
Algal blooms, resulting from the overgrowth of algal plankton in water bodies, pose significant environmental problems and necessitate effective remote sensing methods for monitoring. In recent years, Global Navigation Satellite System–Reflectometry (GNSS-R) has rapidly advanced and made notable contributions to many surface observation [...] Read more.
Algal blooms, resulting from the overgrowth of algal plankton in water bodies, pose significant environmental problems and necessitate effective remote sensing methods for monitoring. In recent years, Global Navigation Satellite System–Reflectometry (GNSS-R) has rapidly advanced and made notable contributions to many surface observation fields, providing new means for identifying algal blooms. Additionally, meteorological parameters such as temperature and wind speed, key factors in the occurrence of algal blooms, can aid in their identification. This paper utilized Cyclone GNSS (CYGNSS) data, Sentinel-3 OLCI data, and ECMWF Re-Analysis-5 meteorological data to retrieve Chlorophyll-a values. Machine learning algorithms were then employed to classify algal blooms for early warning based on Chlorophyll-a concentration. Experiments and validations were conducted from May 2023 to September 2023 in the Hongze Lake region of China. The results indicate that classification and early warning of algal blooms based on CYGNSS data produced reliable results. The ability of CYGNSS data to accurately reflect the severity of algal blooms opens new avenues for environmental monitoring and management. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Latest Advances and Application in the GNSS-R Field)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Distribution of averaged CYGNSS reflection points in the Hongze Lake.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flowchart of the study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Flowchart of MPH to obtain <span class="html-italic">chl_a</span> concentration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Results of <span class="html-italic">chl_a</span> concentration retrieval based on MPH algorithm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The map of retrieved <span class="html-italic">chl_a</span> concentration results and in situ measurements.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Relationship between retrieval results of <span class="html-italic">chl_a</span> concentration on 9 May and 14 May and measured <span class="html-italic">chl_a</span> concentration on May 11.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p><span class="html-italic">chl_a</span> concentration values corresponding to CYGNSS reflection points, the colors (blue to red) represent increasing concentration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Accuracy of predicted <span class="html-italic">chl_a</span> concentration category by XGBoost at 1 KM resolution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Model classification confusion matrix for 2 Classes (<b>a</b>) and 3 Classes (<b>b</b>) classification criterion.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Model classification confusion matrix for 4 Classes (<b>a</b>) and 5 Classes (<b>b</b>) classification criterion.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Model classification confusion matrix of Guangdong local classification criterion.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Accuracy of 5-fold CV of different classification methods at different spatial resolutions.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 6700 KiB  
Article
Analysis of the Response Relationship Between PWV and Meteorological Parameters Using Combined GNSS and ERA5 Data: A Case Study of Typhoon Lekima
by Ying Gao and Xiaolei Wang
Atmosphere 2024, 15(10), 1249; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15101249 - 18 Oct 2024
Viewed by 657
Abstract
Precipitable water vapor (PWV) is a crucial parameter of Earth’s atmosphere, with its spatial and temporal variations significantly impacting Earth’s energy balance and weather patterns. Particularly during meteorological disasters such as typhoons, PWV and other meteorological parameters exhibit dramatic changes. Studying the response [...] Read more.
Precipitable water vapor (PWV) is a crucial parameter of Earth’s atmosphere, with its spatial and temporal variations significantly impacting Earth’s energy balance and weather patterns. Particularly during meteorological disasters such as typhoons, PWV and other meteorological parameters exhibit dramatic changes. Studying the response relationship between PWV and typhoon events, alongside other meteorological parameters, is essential for meteorological and climate analysis and research. To this end, this paper proposes a method for analyzing the response relationship between PWV and meteorological parameters based on Wavelet Coherence (WTC). Specifically, PWV and relevant meteorological parameters were obtained using GNSS and ERA5 data, and the response relationships between PWV and different meteorological parameters before and after typhoon events were studied in time–frequency domain. Considering that many GNSS stations are not equipped with meteorological monitoring equipment, this study interpolated meteorological parameters based on ERA5 data for PWV retrieval. In the experimental section, the accuracy of ERA5 meteorological parameters and the accuracy of PWV retrieval based on ERA5 were first analyzed, verifying the feasibility and effectiveness of this approach. Subsequently, using typhoon Lekima as a case study, data from six GNSS stations affected by the typhoon were selected, and the corresponding PWV was retrieved using ERA5. The WTC method was then employed to analyze the response relationship between PWV and meteorological parameters before and after the typhoon’s arrival. The results show that the correlation characteristics between PWV and pressure can reveal different stages before and after the typhoon passes, while the local characteristics between PWV and temperature better reflect regional precipitation trends. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The phase relationship diagram between series X and Y. The red area represents a positive correlation between X and Y, while the blue area represents a negative correlation. The different directions of the arrows indicate whether X leads or lags behind Y.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Geographic distribution of radiosonde and GNSS stations in China. The green triangle represents the position of radiosonde station, and the red five-pointed star represents the position of GNSS station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Spatial distribution of bias and RMS for pressure, temperature, and weighted mean temperature in China. Figure (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) show the bias for pressure (P in hPa), temperature (T in K), and weighted mean temperature (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> in K), respectively. Figure (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) illustrate the RMS for pressure (P in hPa), temperature (T in K), and weighted mean temperature (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> in K), respectively. The color bars represent the magnitude of bias and RMS across the GNSS stations in the study region.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Spatial distribution of bias and RMS for precipitable water vapor (PWV) at 30 co-located stations. Figure (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) show the bias for PWV calculated without measured meteorological parameters (PWV<sub>G</sub>, in mm) and PWV derived using combined ERA5 data (PWV<sub>R</sub>, in mm), respectively. Figure (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) illustrate the RMS for PWV<sub>G</sub> and PWV<sub>R</sub>, respectively. The color bars represent the magnitude of bias and RMS across the GNSS stations in the study region.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Track of typhoon Lekima and GNSS Stations in two provinces. The blue curve represents the typhoon movement route, and the red triangle represents the GNSS station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Trends in PWV, rainfall, and pressure at GNSS stations during the typhoon. The black bars represent the rainfall (in mm). The blue line indicates the precipitable water vapor (PWV in mm), and the green line shows the pressure (P in hPa). Each subfigure corresponds to different GNSS stations: (<b>a</b>) ZJWZ, (<b>b</b>) ZJJD, (<b>c</b>) ZJZS, (<b>d</b>) SDLY, (<b>e</b>) SDCY, and (<b>f</b>) TAIN.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Wavelet coherence spectrum of PWV and pressure at GNSS stations during the typhoon. The thick contour marks the regions where coherence is significant at the 5% level against red noise. The cone of influence (COI), where edge effects may affect the results, is shaded lighter. Arrows indicate the relative phase relationship: arrows pointing to the right signify in-phase behavior, to the left indicate anti-phase, and upward or downward arrows denote whether PWV lags or leads pressure. Each subfigure corresponds to different GNSS stations: (<b>a</b>) ZJWZ, (<b>b</b>) ZJJD, (<b>c</b>) ZJZS, (<b>d</b>) SDLY, (<b>e</b>) SDCY, and (<b>f</b>) TAIN.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Trends in PWV, rainfall, and temperature at GNSS stations during the typhoon. The black bars represent the rainfall (in mm). The blue line indicates the precipitable water vapor (PWV in mm), and the orange line shows the temperature (T in K). Each subfigure corresponds to different GNSS stations: (<b>a</b>) ZJWZ, (<b>b</b>) ZJJD, (<b>c</b>) ZJZS, (<b>d</b>) SDLY, (<b>e</b>) SDCY, and (<b>f</b>) TAIN.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Wavelet coherence spectrum of PWV and temperature at GNSS stations during the typhoon. The thick contour marks the regions where coherence is significant at the 5% level against red noise. The cone of influence (COI), where edge effects may affect the results, is shaded lighter. Arrows indicate the relative phase relationship: arrows pointing to the right signify in-phase behavior, to the left indicate anti-phase, and upward or downward arrows denote whether PWV lags or leads temperature. Each subfigure corresponds to different GNSS stations: (<b>a</b>) ZJWZ, (<b>b</b>) ZJJD, (<b>c</b>) ZJZS, (<b>d</b>) SDLY, (<b>e</b>) SDCY, and (<b>f</b>) TAIN.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Data processing and result distribution diagram. The green rectangular area is the flowchart of the combined GNSS and ERA5 inversion of PWV, and the purple rectangular area is the summary of the response relationship between PWV and meteorological parameters based on WTC.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 21229 KiB  
Article
The Zenith Total Delay Combination of International GNSS Service Repro3 and the Analysis of Its Precision
by Qiuying Huang, Xiaoming Wang, Haobo Li, Jinglei Zhang, Zhaowei Han, Dingyi Liu, Yaping Li and Hongxin Zhang
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(20), 3885; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16203885 - 18 Oct 2024
Viewed by 992
Abstract
Currently, ground-based global navigation satellite system (GNSS) techniques have become widely recognized as a reliable and effective tool for atmospheric monitoring, enabling the retrieval of zenith total delay (ZTD) and precipitable water vapor (PWV) for meteorological and climate research. The International GNSS Service [...] Read more.
Currently, ground-based global navigation satellite system (GNSS) techniques have become widely recognized as a reliable and effective tool for atmospheric monitoring, enabling the retrieval of zenith total delay (ZTD) and precipitable water vapor (PWV) for meteorological and climate research. The International GNSS Service analysis centers (ACs) have initiated their third reprocessing campaign, known as IGS Repro3. In this campaign, six ACs conducted a homogeneous reprocessing of the ZTD time series spanning the period from 1994 to 2022. This paper primarily focuses on ZTD products. First, the data processing strategies and station conditions of six ACs were compared and analyzed. Then, formal errors within the data were examined, followed by the implementation of quality control processes. Second, a combination method is proposed and applied to generate the final ZTD products. The resulting combined series was compared with the time series submitted by the six ACs, revealing a mean bias of 0.03 mm and a mean root mean square value of 3.02 mm. Finally, the time series submitted by the six ACs and the combined series were compared with VLBI data, radiosonde data, and ERA5 data. In comparison, the combined solution performs better than most individual analysis centers, demonstrating higher quality. Therefore, the advanced method proposed in this study and the generated high-quality dataset have considerable implications for further advancing GNSS atmospheric sensing and offer valuable insights for climate modeling and prediction. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Geographic distribution of the 1331 stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Temporal evolution of the daily station count processed by each AC.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Flowchart for the combination of GNSS-derived ZTD estimates from different ACs.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Box plots of the formal error values of the ZTD estimated by each AC.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Before (<b>a</b>) and after (<b>b</b>) quality control, median formal errors of ZTD are estimated in daily AC solutions. All time series were smoothed by a Savitzky–Golay filter with a window size of 1 year. The numbers in the legends represent the means of the time series of daily median formal errors over the period, in mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Weekly weight plot for each AC (the red line represents the date when selective availability was discontinued).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Combined ZTD results for AREQ (<b>a</b>) and NKLG (<b>b</b>) on 6 January 2011.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Pie chart of station status statistics.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Geographic distribution of the 212 stations (stations with a data completion rate higher than 50%, a time span longer than 15 years, and the involvement of at least three different ACs for data processing).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>RMS difference in individual AC ZTD solutions with respect to the combined solution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>RMS difference in the GRAZ station’s individual AC ZTD solutions with respect to the combined solution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Geographical distribution of the mean differences between the individual AC ZTD solutions and the combined solution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Geographical distribution of the RMS differences between the individual AC ZTD solutions and the combined solution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Geographical distribution of the STD differences between the individual AC ZTD solutions and the combined solution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Bias and STD between GNSS ZTD and ERA5 ZTD (the red line represents a third-degree polynomial fit applied to the STD values across different latitudes).</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Geographic distribution of VLBI and radiosonde stations.</p>
Full article ">
31 pages, 7057 KiB  
Article
Local Gravity and Geoid Improvements around the Gavdos Satellite Altimetry Cal/Val Site
by Georgios S. Vergos, Ilias N. Tziavos, Stelios Mertikas, Dimitrios Piretzidis, Xenofon Frantzis and Craig Donlon
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(17), 3243; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16173243 - 1 Sep 2024
Viewed by 1232
Abstract
The isle of Gavdos, and its wider area, is one of the few places worldwide where the calibration and validation of altimetric satellites has been carried out during the last, more than, two decades using dedicated techniques at sea and on land. The [...] Read more.
The isle of Gavdos, and its wider area, is one of the few places worldwide where the calibration and validation of altimetric satellites has been carried out during the last, more than, two decades using dedicated techniques at sea and on land. The sea-surface calibration employed for the determination of the bias in the satellite altimeter’s sea-surface height relies on the use of a gravimetric geoid in collocation with data from tide gauges, permanent global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers, as well as meteorological and oceanographic sensors. Hence, a high-accuracy and high-resolution gravimetric geoid model in the vicinity of Gavdos and its surrounding area is of vital importance. The existence of such a geoid model resides in the availability of reliable, in terms of accuracy, and dense, in terms of spatial resolution, gravity data. The isle of Gavdos presents varying topographic characteristics with heights larger than 400 m within small spatial distances of ~7 km. The small size of the island and the significant bathymetric variations in its surrounding marine regions make the determination of the gravity field and the geoid a challenging task. Given the above, the objective of the present work was two-fold. First, to collect new land gravity data over the isle of Gavdos in order to complete the existing database and cover parts of the island where voids existed. Relative gravity campaigns have been designed to cover as homogenously as possible the entire island of Gavdos and especially areas where the topographic gradient is large. The second focus was on the determination of a high-resolution, 1×1, and high-accuracy gravimetric geoid for the wider Gavdos area, which will support activities on the determination of the absolute altimetric bias. The relative gravity campaigns have been designed and carried out employing a CG5 relative gravity meter along with geodetic grade GNSS receivers to determine the geodetic position of the acquired observations. Geoid determination has been based on the newly acquired and historical gravity data, GNSS/Leveling observations, and topography and bathymetry databases for the region. The modeling was based on the well-known remove–compute–restore (RCR) method, employing least-squares collocation (LSC) and fast Fourier transform (FFT) methods for the evaluation of the Stokes’ integral. Modeling of the long wavelength contribution has been based on EIGEN6c4 and XGM2019e global geopotential models (GGMs), while for the contribution of the topography, the residual terrain model correction has been employed using both the classical, space domain, and spectral approaches. From the results achieved, the final geoid model accuracy reached the ±1–3 cm level, while in terms of the absolute differences to the GNSS/Leveling data per baseline length, 28.4% of the differences were below the 1cmSij [km] level and 55.2% below the 2cmSij [km]. The latter improved drastically to 52.8% and 81.1%, respectively, after deterministic fit to GNSS/Leveling data, while in terms of the relative differences, the final geoid reaches relative uncertainties of 11.58 ppm (±1.2 cm) for baselines as short as 0–10 km, which improves to 10.63 ppm (±1.1 cm) after the fit. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The gravity database to be used for the geoid determination over Crete and Gavdos.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The compiled land and marine gravity data for the gravimetric geoid determination over Gavdos.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Distribution of the available GNSS/Leveling data (red triangles) for the gravimetric geoid validation over Crete and Gavdos.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Original (<b>top left</b>), reduced to EIGEN6c4 d/o 2190 (<b>top right</b>), classical RTM contribution (<b>bottom left</b>) and residual field to EIGEN6c4 d/o 2190 and classical RTM (<b>bottom right</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Empirical covariance functions of the residual gravity anomaly fields after reduction to EIGEN6c4 (d/o 1000 and 2190), XGM2019e (d/o 2190) and the removal of RTM effects with the classic (RF) and spectral (HK) approach.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The final 1D-FFT gravimetric geoid model (EIGEN6c4 to d/o 2190 and classical RTM effects), its differences to the GNSS/Leveling data and the propagated geoid errors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The final LSC (area wide) gravimetric geoid model (<b>top left</b>), associated error (<b>top right</b>), its differences to the GNSS/Leveling data (<b>bottom left</b>) and differences to the 1D-FFT geoid (<b>bottom right</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Relative differences in the original 1D-FFT gravimetric (circles) and fitted with the third-order polynomial (squares) geoid (<b>left</b>) and the original LSC gravimetric (circles) and fitted with the third-order polynomial (squares) geoid (<b>right</b>).</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 5101 KiB  
Article
Atmospheric Water Vapor Variability over Houston: Continuous GNSS Tomography in the Year of Hurricane Harvey (2017)
by Pedro Mateus, João Catalão, Rui Fernandes and Pedro M. A. Miranda
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(17), 3205; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16173205 - 30 Aug 2024
Viewed by 623
Abstract
This study evaluates the capability of an unconstrained tomographic algorithm to capture 3D water vapor density variability throughout 2017 in Houston, U.S. The algorithm relies solely on Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) observations and does not require an initial guess or other specific [...] Read more.
This study evaluates the capability of an unconstrained tomographic algorithm to capture 3D water vapor density variability throughout 2017 in Houston, U.S. The algorithm relies solely on Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) observations and does not require an initial guess or other specific constraints regarding water vapor density variability within the tomographic domain. The test domain, featuring 9 km horizontal, 500 m vertical, and 30 min temporal resolutions, yielded remarkable results when compared to data retrieved from the ECMWF Reanalysis v5 (ERA5), regional Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF) data, and GNSS-Radio Occultation (RO). For the first time, a time series of Precipitable Water Vapor maps derived from the Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) technique was used to validate the spatially integrated water vapor computed by GNSS tomography. Tomographic results clearly indicate the passage of Hurricane Harvey, with integrated water vapor peaking at 60 kg/m2 and increased humidity at altitudes up to 7.5 km. Our findings suggest that GNSS tomography holds promise as a reliable source of atmospheric water vapor data for various applications. Future enhancements may arise from denser and multi-constellation networks. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Environmental Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>GNSS tomographic 2D grid over Houston city (TX, USA). Blue triangles display the location of GPS stations used in the tomographic process, and red triangles are the stations used to obtain the absolute and calibrated InSAR PWV maps used to evaluate the tomographic solution spatial variability. The rectangles display the two footprints of Sentinel-1 used (ascending and descending orbits). The background colormap represents the elevation. The red dashed line indicates the vertical cross-section location used further on. The black line is the best track (determined by the National Hurricane Center) of Hurricane Harvey from 26 August to 29 August 2017 (hours in UTC).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>TOMO-, WRF-, and ERA5-PWV derived values at the GNSS station’s location versus the PWV estimated from GNSS observations. The black line corresponds to the perfect fit. Legend indicates the correlation and the RMSE in kg/m<sup>2</sup> (within []).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Temporal series of the average PWV over the topography domain. (<b>a</b>) Averaged WRF-, ERA5-, and TOMO-PWV; the green stars represent the PWV derived from RO. The vertical dashed lines delimit the month of August; (<b>b</b>) zoom over August. Date in month/day format.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Vertical profiles of TOMO, ERA5, and WRF assessed against 30 available GNSS-RO observations: (<b>a</b>) average water vapor density; (<b>b</b>) RMSE; (<b>c</b>) BIAS; and (<b>d</b>) temporal correlation coefficient.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>PWV maps for 29 August around 00:30 UTC (at the end of Hurricane Harvey’s passage over the Houston area): (<b>a</b>) estimated using the interferometric phase (ascending orbit); (<b>b</b>) simulated by WRF model; (<b>c</b>) derived from ERA5 reanalysis; and (<b>d</b>) obtained via GNSS tomography (area corresponding to the TOMO footprint, black rectangle in (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>)). The dotted rectangle corresponds to the InSAR footprint in ascending orbit.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>TOMO and models temporal evaluation using InSAR PWV maps as the “ground truth”. (<b>a</b>) mean RMSE; (<b>b</b>) mean BIAS; and (<b>c</b>) mean correlation coefficient. Before applying the statistical metrics, a spatial bilinear resampling method (that uses the distance-weighted average of the four nearest pixel values to estimate a new pixel value) was performed to attain the TOMO spatial resolution (9 km).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Spatial evaluation using InSAR PWV maps. (<b>a</b>) Spatial RMSE for WRF; (<b>b</b>) for ERA5; and (<b>c</b>) for TOMO. (<b>d</b>) Skill score (SS) taking InSAR as “ground true”, WRF as first model, and TOMO as second; and (<b>e</b>) the same as before, but with ERA5 as the first model. The mean correlation and RMSE in kg/m<sup>2</sup> are within [].</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Hovmöller diagram of water vapor density profiles every 30 min. (<b>a</b>) WRF; (<b>b</b>) ERA5; and (<b>c</b>) TOMO solution. Averaged over the tomographic domain.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>An example of a vertical cross-section of the tomographic inversion for 22 August at 00:00 UTC (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>), corresponding to the beginning of the hurricane’s passage over Houston, and for 28th at 00:00 UTC (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) during Harvey near peak intensity over Houston. The cross-section corresponds to the southeast–northwest red dashed line in <a href="#remotesensing-16-03205-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>. (<b>a</b>,<b>d</b>) WRF; (<b>b</b>,<b>e</b>) ERA5; and (<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>) TOMO solution.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 9590 KiB  
Article
The Evaluation of Rainfall Forecasting in a Global Navigation Satellite System-Assisted Numerical Weather Prediction Model
by Hongwu Guo, Yongjie Ma, Zufeng Li, Qingzhi Zhao and Yuan Zhai
Atmosphere 2024, 15(8), 992; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15080992 - 17 Aug 2024
Viewed by 961
Abstract
Accurate water vapor information is crucial for improving the quality of numerical weather forecasting. Previous studies have incorporated tropospheric water vapor data obtained from a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) into numerical weather models to enhance the accuracy and reliability of rainfall forecasts. [...] Read more.
Accurate water vapor information is crucial for improving the quality of numerical weather forecasting. Previous studies have incorporated tropospheric water vapor data obtained from a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) into numerical weather models to enhance the accuracy and reliability of rainfall forecasts. However, research on evaluating forecast accuracy for different rainfall levels and the development of corresponding forecasting platforms is lacking. This study develops and establishes a rainfall forecasting platform supported by the GNSS-assisted weather research and forecasting (WRF) model, quantitatively assessing the effect of GNSS precipitable water vapor (PWV) on the accuracy of WRF model forecasts for light rain (LR), moderate rain (MR), heavy rain (HR), and torrential rain (TR). Three schemes are designed and tested using data from seven ground meteorological stations in Xi’an City, China, in 2021. The results show that assimilating GNSS PWV significantly improves the forecast accuracy of the WRF model for different rainfall levels, with the root mean square error (RMSE) improvement rates of 8%, 15%, 19%, and 25% for LR, MR, HR, and TR, respectively. Additionally, the RMSE of rainfall forecasts demonstrates a decreasing trend with increasing magnitudes of assimilated PWV, particularly effective in the range of [50, 55) mm where the lowest RMSE is 3.58 mm. Moreover, GNSS-assisted numerical weather model shows improvements in statistical forecasting indexes such as probability of detection (POD), false alarm rate (FAR), threat score (TS), and equitable threat score (ETS) across all rainfall intensities, with notable improvements in the forecasts of HR and TR. These results confirm the high precision, visualization capabilities, and robustness of the developed rainfall forecasting platform. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Characteristics of Extreme Climate Events over China)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study area and station distribution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flow chart of GNSS-assisted WRF model rainfall forecast platform experiment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) Comparison of RS PWV and GNSS PWV long time series in Shaanxi Province in 2021; (<b>b</b>) RS PWV and GNSS PWV scatter density map.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Hourly RMSE of rainfall forecast results for Schemes 2 and 3, compared to WRF no-data-assimilation scheme (Scheme 1), at 1 h to 24 h after data assimilation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of 12 h accumulated rainfall forecast results for (<b>a</b>) scheme 1, (<b>b</b>) scheme 2, (<b>c</b>) scheme 3 on 00 to 12 UTC 18 August 2021, as well as (<b>d</b>) the observed data from meteorological stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparison of (<b>a</b>) RMSE and (<b>b</b>) bias statistical results of rainfall forecasts with different schemes at seven meteorological stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparison of the forecast accuracy of (<b>a</b>) LR, (<b>b</b>) MR, (<b>c</b>) HR and (<b>d</b>) TR rainfall levels in different schemes (Taylor statistical chart).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparison of (<b>a</b>) POD, (<b>b</b>) FAR, (<b>c</b>) TS, and (<b>d</b>) ETS for different rainfall levels of three schemes in 2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>RMSE improvement rate of different rainfall levels in Schemes 2 and 3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>RMSE comparison of GNSS PWV magnitude with WRF model for rainfall in different schemes of forecast results.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 11534 KiB  
Article
Investigating Different Interpolation Methods for High-Accuracy VTEC Analysis in Ionospheric Research
by Serkan Doğanalp and İrem Köz
Atmosphere 2024, 15(8), 986; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15080986 - 17 Aug 2024
Viewed by 738
Abstract
The dynamic structure of the ionosphere and its changes play an important role in comprehending the natural cycle by linking earth sciences and space sciences. Ionosphere research includes a variety of fields like meteorology, radio wave reflection from the atmosphere, atmospheric anomaly detection, [...] Read more.
The dynamic structure of the ionosphere and its changes play an important role in comprehending the natural cycle by linking earth sciences and space sciences. Ionosphere research includes a variety of fields like meteorology, radio wave reflection from the atmosphere, atmospheric anomaly detection, the impact on GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite Systems) signals, the exploration of earthquake precursors, and the formation of the northern lights. To gain further insight into this layer and to monitor variations in the total electron content (TEC), ionospheric maps are created using a variety of data sources, including satellite sensors, GNSS data, and ionosonde data. In these maps, data deficiencies are addressed by using interpolation methods. The objective of this study was to obtain high-accuracy VTEC (Vertical Total Electron Content) information to analyze TEC anomalies as precursors to earthquakes. We propose an innovative approach: employing alternative mathematical surfaces for VTEC calculations, leading to enhanced change analytical interpretation for anomaly detections. Within the scope of the application, the second-degree polynomial method, kriging (point and block model), the radial basis multiquadric, and the thin plate spline (TPS) methods were implemented as interpolation methods. During a 49-day period, the TEC values were computed at three different IGS stations, generating 1176 hourly grids for each interpolation model. As reference data, the ionospheric maps produced by the CODE (Center for Orbit Determination in Europe) Analysis Center were used. This study’s findings showed that, based on statistical values, the TPS model offered more accurate results than other methods. Additionally, it has been observed that the peak values in TEC calculations based on polynomial surfaces are eliminated in TPSs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Upper Atmosphere)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Demonstration of IPPs [<a href="#B13-atmosphere-15-00986" class="html-bibr">13</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison between CODE IONEX file with polynomial, KrigingP, KrigingB, MQ, TPS for WHIT station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison between CODE IONEX file with polynomial, KrigingP, KrigingB, MQ, TPS for DRAO station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison between CODE IONEX file with polynomial, KrigingP, KrigingB, MQ, TPS for MKEA station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The differences between TEC values of interpolation methods and CODEIONEX reference data for WHIT station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The differences between TEC values of interpolation methods and CODEIONEX reference data for DRAO station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The differences between TEC values of interpolation methods and CODEIONEX reference data for MKEA station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Anomaly graphs of WHIT stations using polynomial interpolation (<b>top</b>) and thin plate spline interpolation (<b>bottom</b>) methods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Anomaly graphs of DRAO stations using polynomial interpolation (<b>top</b>) and thin plate spline interpolation (<b>bottom</b>) methods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Anomaly graphs of MKEA stations using polynomial interpolation (<b>top</b>) and thin plate spline interpolation (<b>bottom</b>) methods.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 7014 KiB  
Article
A GRNN-Based Model for ERA5 PWV Adjustment with GNSS Observations Considering Seasonal and Geographic Variations
by Haoyun Pang, Lulu Zhang, Wen Liu, Xin Wang, Yuefeng Wang and Liangke Huang
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(13), 2424; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16132424 - 1 Jul 2024
Viewed by 901
Abstract
Precipitation water vapor (PWV) is an important parameter in numerical weather forecasting and climate research. However, existing PWV adjustment models lack comprehensive consideration of seasonal and geographic factors. This study utilized the General Regression Neural Network (GRNN) algorithm and Global Navigation Satellite System [...] Read more.
Precipitation water vapor (PWV) is an important parameter in numerical weather forecasting and climate research. However, existing PWV adjustment models lack comprehensive consideration of seasonal and geographic factors. This study utilized the General Regression Neural Network (GRNN) algorithm and Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) PWV in China to construct and evaluate European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Atmospheric Reanalysis (ERA5) PWV adjustment models for various seasons and subregions based on meteorological parameters (GMPW model) and non-meteorological parameters (GFPW model). A linear model (GLPW model) was established for model accuracy comparison. The results show that: (1) taking GNSS PWV as a reference, the Bias and root mean square error (RMSE) of the GLPW, GFPW, and GMPW models are about 0/1 mm, which better weakens the systematic error of ERA5 PWV. The overall Bias of the GLPW, GFPW, and GMPW models in the Northwest (NWC), North China (NC), Tibetan Plateau (TP), and South China (SC) subregions is approximately 0 mm after adjustment. The adjusted overall RMSE of the GLPW, GFPW, and GMPW models of the four subregions are 0.81/0.71/0.62 mm, 1.15/0.95/0.77 mm, 1.66/1.26/1.05 mm, and 2.11/1.35/0.96 mm, respectively. (2) The accuracy of the three models is tested using GNSS PWV, which is not involved in the modeling. The adjusted overall RMSE of the GLPW, GFPW, and GMPW models in the four subregions are 0.89/0.85/0.83 mm, 1.61/1.58/1.27 mm, 2.11/1.75/1.68 mm and 3.65/2.48/1.79 mm, respectively. As a result, the GFPW and GMPW models have better accuracy in adjusting ERA5 PWV than the linear model GLPW. Therefore, the GFPW and GMPW models can effectively contribute to water vapor monitoring and the integration of multiple PWV datasets. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Distribution of 339 GNSS and MET sites and four subregions in China from 2016 to 2018.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Cross-correlations among the GNSS PWV, ERA5 PWV, and multisource meteorological parameters of meteorological sites from 2016 to 2018 in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Architecture of the models GFPW (<b>a</b>) and GMPW (<b>b</b>) adjusting ERA5 PWV by GNSS PWV.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>GFPW Model for the NWC Subregion in Spring: changes in RMSE values <math display="inline"><semantics> <mi>σ</mi> </semantics></math> under different distribution parameters generated by 10-fold cross-validation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The mean Bias between different models in different seasons and subregions from 2016 to 2018 (Q1 and Q3 of the box represent the first and third quartiles, respectively; the distance of Q1 and Q3 reflects the degree of fluctuation of data; Q2 is the median value, which reflects the average level of data; Q4 represents the outlier).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The mean RMSE between different models in different seasons and subregions from 2016 to 2018 (Q1 and Q3 of the box represent the first and third quartiles, respectively; the distance of Q1 and Q3 reflects the degree of fluctuation of data; Q2 is the median value, which reflects the average level of data; Q4 represents the outlier).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Site distribution map of Bias between ERA5 PWV and GNSS PWV before and after adjustment (UA is the unadjusted result, GLPW, GFPW, and GMPW are different adjustment models).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Site distribution map of RMSE between ERA5 PWV and GNSS PWV before and after adjustment (UA is the unadjusted result, GLPW, GFPW, and GMPW are different adjustment models).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>External sites distribution map of Bias between ERA5 PWV and GNSS PWV before and after adjustment (UA is the unadjusted result, GLPW, GFPW, and GMPW are different adjustment models).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>External sites distribution map of RMSE between ERA5 PWV and GNSS PWV before and after adjustment (UA is the unadjusted result, GLPW, GFPW, and GMPW are different adjustment models).</p>
Full article ">
12 pages, 7758 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of the Zenith Tropospheric Delay (ZTD) Derived from VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP Products Based on the CMONOC Data
by Haoran Zhang, Liang Chen, Fei Yang, Jingge Ma, Junya Zhang, Wenyu Sun and Shiqi Xu
Atmosphere 2024, 15(7), 766; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15070766 - 27 Jun 2024
Viewed by 797
Abstract
Prior tropospheric information, especially zenith tropospheric delay (ZTD), is particularly important in GNSS data processing. The two types of ZTD models, those that require and do not require meteorological parameters, are the most commonly used models, whether the non-difference or double-difference mode is [...] Read more.
Prior tropospheric information, especially zenith tropospheric delay (ZTD), is particularly important in GNSS data processing. The two types of ZTD models, those that require and do not require meteorological parameters, are the most commonly used models, whether the non-difference or double-difference mode is applied. To improve the accuracy of prior tropospheric information, the Vienna Mapping Functions (VMFs) data server provides a gridded set of global tropospheric products based on the ray-tracing technique using Numerical Weather Models (NWMs). Note that two types of gridded tropospheric products are provided: the VMF3_OP for the post-processing applications and the VMF3_FC for real-time applications. To explore the accuracy and adaptability of these two grid products, a comprehensive analysis and discussion were conducted in this study using the ZTD data from 255 stations of the Crustal Movement Observation Network of China (CMONOC) as references. The numerical results indicate that both VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP exhibit high accuracy, with RMSE/Bias values of 17.53/2.25 mm and 14.62/2.67 mm, respectively. Both products displayed a temporal trend, with larger RMSE values occurring in summer and smaller values in winter, along with a spatial trend of higher values in the southeast of China and lower values in the northwest of China. Additionally, VMF3_OP demonstrated superior performance to VMF3_FC, with smaller RMSE values for each month and each hour. For the RMSE difference between these two products, 108 stations had a difference of more than 3 mm, and the number of stations with a difference exceeding 1 mm reached 217. Moreover, the difference was more significant in the southeast than in the northwest. This study contributes to the understanding of the differences between the two precision products, aiding in the selection of suitable ZTD products based on specific requirements. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue GNSS Meteorology: Algorithm, Modelling, Assessment and Application)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Geographic distribution of the 255 CMONOC stations (red dots indicate CMONOC stations).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Workflow of this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Scatter plots of the VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP ZTD products with reference values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Residual frequency distribution histograms of the two ZTD products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Variation in RMSE and Bias for VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP with changing reference ZTD.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>RMSE time series for VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Monthly RMSE Boxplots for VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP; (<b>b</b>) hourly RMSE Boxplots for VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP. Q3, Q2, and Q1 represent the upper quartile, median, and lower quartile, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The RMSE values of the two products at different hours and months.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Distribution of RMSE for VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP; (<b>b</b>) distribution of the RMSE differences between VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Number of sites with different RMSE for VMF3_FC and VMF3_OP.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 4067 KiB  
Article
Enhancing Atmospheric Monitoring Capabilities: A Comparison of Low- and High-Cost GNSS Networks for Tropospheric Estimations
by Paolo Dabove and Milad Bagheri
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(12), 2223; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16122223 - 19 Jun 2024
Viewed by 899
Abstract
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) signals experience delays when passing through the atmosphere due to the presence of free electrons in the ionosphere and air density in the non-ionized part of the atmosphere, known as the troposphere. The Precise Point Positioning (PPP) technique [...] Read more.
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) signals experience delays when passing through the atmosphere due to the presence of free electrons in the ionosphere and air density in the non-ionized part of the atmosphere, known as the troposphere. The Precise Point Positioning (PPP) technique demonstrates highly accurate positioning along with Zenith Tropospheric Delay (ZTD) estimation. ZTD estimation is valuable for various applications including climate modelling and determining atmospheric water vapor. Current GNSS network resolutions are not completely sufficient for the scale of a few kilometres that regional climate and weather models are increasingly adopting. The Centipede-RTK network is a low-cost option for increasing the spatial resolution of tropospheric monitoring. This study is motivated by the question of whether low-cost GNSS networks can provide a viable alternative without compromising data quality or precision. This study compares the performance of the low-cost Centipede-RTK network in calculating the Zenith Tropospheric Delay (ZTD) to that of the existing EUREF Permanent Network (EPN), using two alternative software packages, RTKLIB demo5 version and CSRS-PPP version 3, to ensure robustness and software independence in the findings. This investigation indicated that the ZTD estimations from both networks are almost identical when processed by the CSRS-PPP software, with the highest mean difference being less than 3.5 cm, confirming that networks such as Centipede-RTK could be a reliable option for dense precise atmospheric monitoring. Furthermore, this study revealed that the Centipede-RTK network, when processed using CSRS-PPP, provides ZTD estimations that are very similar and consistent with the EUREF ZTD product values. These findings suggest that low-cost GNSS networks like Centipede-RTK are viable for enhancing network density, thus improving the spatial resolution of tropospheric monitoring and potentially enriching climate modelling and weather prediction capabilities, paving the way for broader application and research in GNSS meteorology. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue BDS/GNSS for Earth Observation: Part II)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>CentipedeRTK GNSS network map (<a href="https://centipede.fr/index.php/view/map/?repository=cent&amp;project=centipede" target="_blank">https://centipede.fr/index.php/view/map/?repository=cent&amp;project=centipede</a>, accessed on 15 June 2024).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>EUREF GNSS network map (<a href="https://www.epncb.oma.be/_networkdata/stationmaps.php" target="_blank">https://www.epncb.oma.be/_networkdata/stationmaps.php</a>, accessed on 15 May 2024).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Chosen stations from 2 distinct networks (Study area).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>ZTD time series for BRMG vs BIO for weeks of the year (WOY) 8 to 12.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>ZTD time series for BRMF vs BEFF for weeks of the year (WOY) 8 to 12.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparative ZTD estimates variability across BRMG and BIO stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparative ZTD estimate variability across BRMG and BIO stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparative ZTD estimate variability across BRMF and BEFF stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Comparative ZTD estimate variability across GRAS and SOPH stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Comparative ZTD estimate variability across VFCH and RDHB7 stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Comparative ZTD estimate variability across BRST and IUEM stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>RMSE values of ZTD estimates for BRMG and BIO stations in respect to the EUREF ZTD product for weeks of the year (WOY) 8 to 12.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>RMSE values of ZTD estimates for BRMF and BEFF stations in respect to the EUREF ZTD product for weeks of the year (WOY) 8 to 12.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>RMSE values of ZTD estimates for GRAS and SOPH stations in respect to the EUREF ZTD product for weeks of the year (WOY) 8 to 12.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>RMSE values of ZTD estimates for VFCH and RDHB7 stations in respect to the EUREF ZTD product for weeks of the year (WOY) 8 to 12.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>RMSE values of ZTD estimates for BRST and IUEM stations in respect to the EUREF ZTD product for weeks of the year (WOY) 8 to 12.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 13892 KiB  
Article
ZPD Retrieval Performances of the First Operational Ship-Based Network of GNSS Receivers over the North-West Mediterranean Sea
by Andrea Antonini, Luca Fibbi, Massimo Viti, Aldo Sonnini, Simone Montagnani and Alberto Ortolani
Sensors 2024, 24(10), 3177; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24103177 - 16 May 2024
Viewed by 997
Abstract
This work presents the design and implementation of an operational infrastructure for the monitoring of atmospheric parameters at sea through GNSS meteorology sensors installed on liners operating in the north-west Mediterranean Sea. A measurement system, capable of operationally and continuously providing the values [...] Read more.
This work presents the design and implementation of an operational infrastructure for the monitoring of atmospheric parameters at sea through GNSS meteorology sensors installed on liners operating in the north-west Mediterranean Sea. A measurement system, capable of operationally and continuously providing the values of surface parameters, is implemented together with software procedures based on a float-PPP approach for estimating zenith path delay (ZPD) values. The values continuously registered over a three year period (2020–2022) from this infrastructure are compared with the data from a numerical meteorological reanalysis model (MERRA-2). The results clearly prove the ability of the system to estimate the ZPD from ship-based GNSS-meteo equipment, with the accuracy evaluated in terms of correlation and root mean square error reaching values between 0.94 and 0.65 and between 18.4 and 42.9 mm, these extreme values being from the best and worst performing installations, respectively. This offers a new perspective on the operational exploitation of GNSS signals over sea areas in climate and operational meteorological applications. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue GNSS Software-Defined Radio Receivers: Status and Perspectives)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>GNSS meteorology equipment onboard ships. (<b>a</b>) System architecture, (<b>b</b>) Photos of GNSS antanna (<b>top</b>), GNSS receiver and data collector (<b>bottom left</b>), weather station (<b>bottom right</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Points (red) available for the comparison between GNSS-based and MERRA-2-based ZPD over the period 2020–2022. The two purple circles show the positions of the fixed stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Density scatter plots of GNSS-ZPD (using MG-APP software) vs. ZPD retrieved from MERRA-2 reanalysis data. Only data from ship stations are included in this figure. All available data in the period 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2022 are considered.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3 Cont.
<p>Density scatter plots of GNSS-ZPD (using MG-APP software) vs. ZPD retrieved from MERRA-2 reanalysis data. Only data from ship stations are included in this figure. All available data in the period 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2022 are considered.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Density scatter plots for GNSS-ZPD (using MG-APP software) vs. ZPD retrieved from MERRA-2 reanalysis data for the two fixed stations. All available data in the period 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2022 are considered (i.e., one year less than for the ship data of <a href="#sensors-24-03177-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>GNSS-ZPD (using MG-APP software). Only ship stations are considered in this figure. All available data in the period 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2022 are considered.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>GNSS-ZPD (using MG-APP software) for the two fixed stations. All available data in the period 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2022 are considered.</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 1750 KiB  
Article
Evaluating the Polarimetric Radio Occultation Technique Using NEXRAD Weather Radars
by Antía Paz, Ramon Padullés and Estel Cardellach
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(7), 1118; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16071118 - 22 Mar 2024
Viewed by 956
Abstract
Currently, it remains a challenge to effectively monitor areas experiencing intense precipitation and the associated atmospheric conditions on a global scale. This challenge arises due to the limitations on both active and passive remote sensing methods. Apart from the lack of observations in [...] Read more.
Currently, it remains a challenge to effectively monitor areas experiencing intense precipitation and the associated atmospheric conditions on a global scale. This challenge arises due to the limitations on both active and passive remote sensing methods. Apart from the lack of observations in remote areas, the quality of some observations deteriorates when heavy precipitation is present, making it difficult to obtain highly accurate measurements of the thermodynamic parameters driving these weather events. However, there is a promising solution in the form of the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Polarimetric Radio Occultation (PRO) technique. This approach provides a way to assess the large-scale bulk-hydrometeor characteristics of regions with heavy precipitation and the meteorological conditions associated with them. PRO offers vertical profiles of atmospheric variables, including temperature, pressure, water vapor pressure, and information about hydrometeors, all in a single fine-vertical resolution observation. To continue validating the PRO technique, we make use of polarimetric weather data from Next Generation Weather Radars (NEXRAD), focusing on comparing specific differential phase shift (Kdp) structures to PRO observable differential phase shift (ΔΦ). We have seen that PAZ and NEXRAD exhibit a good agreement on the vertical structure of the observable ΔΦ and that their combination could be useful for enhancing our understanding of the microphysics underlying heavy precipitation events. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>In panel (<b>a</b>), the distribution of NEXRAD radar across the continental United States is shown. Black points indicate radar locations, with the blue areas illustrating the approximate range of the radars. The panel (<b>b</b>) showcases a particular colocated observation of PAZ and NEXRAD in 3D, while panel (<b>c</b>) shows the same observation in a 2D image. Only the portion of the rays below 20 km is shown. The gray region in panel (<b>c</b>) represents the 2D projection of the PRO rays, and the coloured map is a Plan Position Indicator (PPI) of the reflectivity measured by the selected radars for that observation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Diagram showing the steps followed to obtain the vertical profiles of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <mo>Φ</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> from NEXRAD.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Histogram showing the correlation coefficient for the cases considered as rainy events (see text), for the different window sizes represented in different colors (as indicated in the legend).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Mean <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <mo>Φ</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (mm) between 2 km and 8 km for both NEXRAD and PAZ and for three window sizes. The slope and the coefficient of determination are also displayed in the legend. The colocated observations presented here are the ones where the radar coverage exceeds 60%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Mean <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> between 0–10 km (<b>a</b>) for those observations where the mean <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>E</mi> <mi>X</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> between 0–10 km is below 1 mm, and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>E</mi> <mi>X</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> between 0–10 km (<b>b</b>) for those observations where the mean of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> between 0–10 km is below 1 mm. For each of the window sizes we have calculated the percentage of the cases that have the mean <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> between 0–10 km below 1 mm (<b>a</b>) and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>E</mi> <mi>X</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> between 0–10 km below 1 mm (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>PAZ observation (ID: PAZ1.2020.057.22.53.G09) colocated with NEXRAD radars and the associated vertical profiles for both instruments. The left panel shows the <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>K</mi> <mrow> <mi>d</mi> <mi>p</mi> </mrow> </msub> </semantics></math> composite field captured by the radars (black points indicate radar locations) with the area of the projection on the surface of the portion of PRO rays below 20 km, in grey. Right panel shows the corresponding vertical profiles of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <mo>Φ</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> as obtained using NEXRAD data (red) and PAZ (black). In the legend we also present the corresponding values of window size (w), the correlation coefficient (cc) and the percentage of the area covered by the radars (p).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Same as in <a href="#remotesensing-16-01118-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>, but corresponding to PAZ profile ID PAZ1.2021.220.13.34.G01.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Same as in <a href="#remotesensing-16-01118-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>, but corresponding to PAZ profile ID PAZ1.2018.360.23.55.G11.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Difference between <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>E</mi> <mi>X</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> for those cases that are covered more than <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>60</mn> <mo>%</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> by the radars. Each column represents a different window size ((<b>a</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>g</b>) represent a window size = 4, etc.), while each row represents a different condition for the mean <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> between 0–10 km. For the first row, the cases represented are the ones were PAZ has detected rain and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>〈</mo> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>〉</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is larger than 4 mm. In second row, we represent as well cases where PAZ has detected precipitation but <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>〈</mo> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>〉</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is lower than 4mm. The third row represents those cases where PAZ has not detected precipitation, this means that <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>〈</mo> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mo>Φ</mo> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mi>A</mi> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>〉</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is between ±0.5 mm. For each figure the number of valid points for each altitude is represented by a red line (top x-axis).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Values of the echotop height obtained from NEXRAD and PAZ datasets for two different thresholds, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>Z</mi> <mo>≥</mo> <mn>20</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> dBZ and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>Z</mi> <mo>≥</mo> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> dBZ.</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 8816 KiB  
Article
Field Test of an Autonomous Observing System Prototype for Measuring Oceanographic Parameters from Ships
by Fernando P. Santos, Teresa L. Rosa, Miguel A. Hinostroza, Roberto Vettor, A. Miguel Piecho-Santos and C. Guedes Soares
Oceans 2024, 5(1), 127-149; https://doi.org/10.3390/oceans5010008 - 14 Mar 2024
Viewed by 1229
Abstract
A prototype of an autonomous system for the retrieval of oceanographic, wave, and meteorologic data was installed and tested in May 2021 on a Portuguese research vessel navigating on the Atlantic Ocean. The system was designed to be installed in fishing vessels that [...] Read more.
A prototype of an autonomous system for the retrieval of oceanographic, wave, and meteorologic data was installed and tested in May 2021 on a Portuguese research vessel navigating on the Atlantic Ocean. The system was designed to be installed in fishing vessels that could operate as a distributed network of ocean data collection. It consists of an automatic weather station, a ferrybox with a water pumping system, an inertial measurement unit, a GNSS unit, an onboard desktop computer, and a wave estimator algorithm for wave spectra estimation. Among several parameters collected by this system’s sensors are the air temperature, barometric pressure, humidity, wind speed and direction, sea water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, salinity, chlorophyll-a, roll, pitch, heave, true heading, and geolocation of the ship. This paper’s objectives are the following: (1) describe the autonomous prototype; and (2) present the data obtained during a full-scale trial; (3) discuss the results, advantages, and limitations of the system and future developments. Meteorologic measurements were validated by a second weather station onboard. The estimated wave parameters and wave spectra showed good agreement with forecasted data from the Copernicus database. The results are promising, and the system can be a cost-effective solution for voluntary observing ships. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Mário Ruivo research vessel.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>AOS prototype layout onboard RV Mário Ruivo.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) AWS; (<b>b</b>) WeatherLink<sup>®</sup> user interface (weather bulletin).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) IMU motion sensor in the survey room; (<b>b</b>) LabVIEW™ user interface for the IMU.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) GNSS receiver and power supply; (<b>b</b>) GNSS software (NovAtel Connect 2.3.2) user interface.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Section of the RV route along the southwest coast of Portugal; (<b>b</b>) RV’s speed estimated from the AOS GNSS and second GNSS data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Data of the following meteorologic parameters from both weather stations: (<b>a</b>) average air temperature; (<b>b</b>) average relative humidity; (<b>c</b>) barometric pressure; (<b>d</b>) true wind speed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Three locations along the vessel’s route.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Ship motions, heave, roll, and pitch for 20 min IMU readings in and near location 1 corrected by considering the distance of the IMU relatively to the vessel’s centre of gravity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>For location 1: (<b>a</b>) estimated wave spectrum over 20 min of corrected ship motions; (<b>b</b>) forecasted significant height of combined wind waves and swell based on data from Copernicus.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Ship motions, heave, roll, and pitch for 20 min IMU readings in and near location 2 corrected by considering the distance of the IMU relatively to the vessel’s centre of gravity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>For location 2: (<b>a</b>) estimated wave spectrum over 20 min of corrected ship motions; (<b>b</b>) forecasted significant height of combined wind waves and swell based on data from Copernicus.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Ship motions, heave, roll, and pitch for 20 min IMU readings in and near location 3 corrected by considering the distance of the IMU relatively to the vessel’s centre of gravity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>For location 3: (<b>a</b>) estimated wave spectrum over 20 min of corrected ship motions; (<b>b</b>) forecasted significant height of combined wind waves and swell based on data from Copernicus.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop