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

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (19)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = geostationary microwave observation

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
34 pages, 10549 KiB  
Review
Multi-Sensor Precipitation Estimation from Space: Data Sources, Methods and Validation
by Ruifang Guo, Xingwang Fan, Han Zhou and Yuanbo Liu
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(24), 4753; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16244753 - 20 Dec 2024
Viewed by 777
Abstract
Satellite remote sensing complements rain gauges and ground radars as the primary sources of precipitation data. While significant advancements have been made in spaceborne precipitation estimation since the 1960s, the emergence of multi-sensor precipitation estimation (MPE) in the early 1990s revolutionized global precipitation [...] Read more.
Satellite remote sensing complements rain gauges and ground radars as the primary sources of precipitation data. While significant advancements have been made in spaceborne precipitation estimation since the 1960s, the emergence of multi-sensor precipitation estimation (MPE) in the early 1990s revolutionized global precipitation data generation by integrating infrared and microwave observations. Among others, Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) plays a crucial role in providing invaluable data sources for MPE by utilizing passive microwave sensors and geostationary infrared sensors. MPE represents the current state-of-the-art approach for generating high-quality, high-resolution global satellite precipitation products (SPPs), employing various methods such as cloud motion analysis, probability matching, adjustment ratios, regression techniques, neural networks, and weighted averaging. International collaborations, such as the International Precipitation Working Group and the Precipitation Virtual Constellation, have significantly contributed to enhancing our understanding of the uncertainties associated with MPEs and their corresponding SPPs. It has been observed that SPPs exhibit higher reliability over tropical oceans compared to mid- and high-latitudes, particularly during cold seasons or in regions with complex terrains. To further advance MPE research, future efforts should focus on improving accuracy for extremely low- and high-precipitation events, solid precipitation measurements, as well as orographic precipitation estimation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Synergetic Remote Sensing of Clouds and Precipitation II)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>A brief history of precipitation-observing techniques, experiments, and products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>GPM constellation. The left figure was obtained from <a href="https://gpm.nasa.gov/image-gallery/gpm" target="_blank">https://gpm.nasa.gov/image-gallery/gpm</a> (accessed on 1 December 2024).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Summary of major global satellite precipitation products currently available.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Number of SPP validation studies published over the last two decades (covered in Web of Science Core Collection). We used the keywords “validation” or “evaluation” or “assessment” for the topic and “IMERG”, “PERSIANN”, “CMORPH”, “GSMaP”, “CMAP and Merged Analysis of Precipitation”, “GPCP” or “TMPA or 3B42” for the abstract, focusing on the period between 2020 and 2024, the period between 2015 and 2019, the period between 2010 and 2014, and the period between 2000 and 2009.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Schematic diagram showing the SPE validation process.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 8367 KiB  
Article
Detecting Hailstorms in China from FY-4A Satellite with an Ensemble Machine Learning Model
by Qiong Wu, Yi-Xuan Shou, Yong-Guang Zheng, Fei Wu and Chun-Yuan Wang
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(18), 3354; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16183354 - 10 Sep 2024
Viewed by 906
Abstract
Hail poses a significant meteorological hazard in China, leading to substantial economic and agricultural damage. To enhance the detection of hail and mitigate these impacts, this study presents an ensemble machine learning model (BPNN+Dtree) that combines a backpropagation neural network (BPNN) and a [...] Read more.
Hail poses a significant meteorological hazard in China, leading to substantial economic and agricultural damage. To enhance the detection of hail and mitigate these impacts, this study presents an ensemble machine learning model (BPNN+Dtree) that combines a backpropagation neural network (BPNN) and a decision tree (Dtree). Using FY-4A satellite and ERA5 reanalysis data, the model is trained on geostationary satellite infrared data and environmental parameters, offering comprehensive, all-day, and large-area hail monitoring over China. The ReliefF method is employed to select 13 key features from 29 physical quantities, emphasizing cloud-top and thermodynamic properties over dynamic ones as input features for the model to enhance its hail differentiation capability. The BPNN+Dtree ensemble model harnesses the strengths of both algorithms, improving the probability of detection (POD) to 0.69 while maintaining a reasonable false alarm ratio (FAR) on the test set. Moreover, the model’s spatial distribution of hail probability more closely matches the observational data, outperforming the individual BPNN and Dtree models. Furthermore, it demonstrates improved regional applicability over overshooting top (OT)-based methods in the China region. The identified high-frequency hail areas correspond to the north-south movement of the monsoon rain belt and are consistent with the northeast-southwest belt distribution observed using microwave-based methods. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study area and sample distribution. Dark blue circles indicate hailstorm samples, while light blue circles denote non-hailstorm samples.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Technical roadmap for developing an ensemble machine learning model for hailstorm identification.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) Flowchart of the iterative H-minima transform method for identifying convective clouds. (<b>b</b>) Schematic of the process for identifying convective clouds with the iterative H-minima transform method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Bar chart of feature importance ranking using the ReliefF method. Six distinct breakpoints are indicated by yellow ellipses. The red dashed line drawn at the fourth breakpoint serves as the cutoff point for this study; features with importance scores above this line (amounting to 13 features) were chosen as inputs for the model, whereas those with lower scores were excluded.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The results of the identification of convective clouds using the iterative H-minima transform method on the FY-4A 10.8-μm infrared channel image, recorded at 06:38 UTC on 11 August 2018. (<b>a</b>–<b>h</b>) illustrate the outputs at various time steps throughout the process. In (<b>h</b>), the identified convective clouds are differentiated by color, with yellow plus signs indicating the positions of observed hail, and magenta ellipses outlining the corresponding hailstorms.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Joy plot of selected features. The curve filled with blue color represents the Gaussian kernel density estimation for hailstorm samples, while the orange curve represents the same for non-hailstorm samples. The horizontal axis represents the normalized value of each feature’s physical quantity. The black dashed line marks the feature value where the probability density is at its maximum. The white numbers correspond to the actual physical values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Joy plot for unselected features. Similar to <a href="#remotesensing-16-03354-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a>, this plot presents the Gaussian kernel density estimation curves for hailstorm and non-hailstorm samples, but for features that were not selected.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Confusion matrices for various models on the test set. (<b>a</b>) BPNN; (<b>b</b>) Dtree; (<b>c</b>) BPNN+Dtree.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Spatial distribution of hail occurrence probability calculated using various machine learning models: (<b>a</b>) The BPNN model; (<b>b</b>) the Dtree model; (<b>c</b>) the BPNN+Dtree ensemble model; and (<b>d</b>) 1-h hail event records.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Comparison of the spatial distribution of hail occurrence probability obtained with the BPNN+Dtree ensemble model and OT-based hail identification methods: (<b>a</b>) Calculated based on hail cloud pixels identified by the OT method; (<b>b</b>) calculated based on hail cloud pixels identified by the OTfilter method; (<b>c</b>) calculated using the BPNN+Dtree ensemble model-identified hailstorms; (<b>d</b>) calculated based on 1-h hail event records.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Comparison of the spatial distribution of hail occurrence probability obtained with the BPNN+Dtree ensemble model and microwave-based hail identification methods: (<b>a</b>) Calculated using the BPNN+Dtree ensemble model-identified hailstorms; (<b>b</b>) calculated using the Ni17 method-identified hail PFs; (<b>c</b>) Calculated using the CB12 method-identified hail PFs; (<b>d</b>) calculated using the Mroz17 method-identified hail PFs; (<b>e</b>) calculated based on the published BC19 annual average data; and (<b>f</b>) calculated based on 1-h hail event records.</p>
Full article ">
37 pages, 4497 KiB  
Review
Satellite Oceanography in NOAA: Research, Development, Applications, and Services Enabling Societal Benefits from Operational and Experimental Missions
by Eric Bayler, Paul S. Chang, Jacqueline L. De La Cour, Sean R. Helfrich, Alexander Ignatov, Jeff Key, Veronica Lance, Eric W. Leuliette, Deirdre A. Byrne, Yinghui Liu, Xiaoming Liu, Menghua Wang, Jianwei Wei and Paul M. DiGiacomo
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(14), 2656; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16142656 - 20 Jul 2024
Viewed by 2132
Abstract
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) facilitates and enables societal benefits from satellite oceanography, supporting operational and experimental satellite missions, developing new and improved ocean observing capabilities, engaging users by developing and distributing fit-for-purpose data, [...] Read more.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) facilitates and enables societal benefits from satellite oceanography, supporting operational and experimental satellite missions, developing new and improved ocean observing capabilities, engaging users by developing and distributing fit-for-purpose data, applications, tools, and services, and curating, translating, and integrating diverse data products into information that supports informed decision making. STAR research, development, and application efforts span from passive visible, infrared, and microwave observations to active altimetry, scatterometry, and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) observations. These efforts directly support NOAA’s operational geostationary (GEO) and low Earth orbit (LEO) missions with calibration/validation and retrieval algorithm development, implementation, maintenance, and anomaly resolution, as well as leverage the broader international constellation of environmental satellites for NOAA’s benefit. STAR’s satellite data products and services enable research, assessments, applications, and, ultimately, decision making for understanding, predicting, managing, and protecting ocean and coastal resources, as well as assessing impacts of change on the environment, ecosystems, and climate. STAR leads the NOAA Coral Reef Watch and CoastWatch/OceanWatch/PolarWatch Programs, helping people access and utilize global and regional satellite data for ocean, coastal, and ecosystem applications. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Oceans from Space V)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Climatology maps for 2012–2023 (SNPP VIIRS) for (<b>a</b>) suspended particulate matter and (<b>b</b>) water class product over global oceans and inland waters.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Three-sensor (VIIRS-SNPP, VIIRS-NOAA-20, and OLCI-S3A)-derived global daily gap-free 2 km ocean color products for (<b>a</b>) Chl-a, (<b>b</b>) <span class="html-italic">K<sub>d</sub></span> (490), and (<b>c</b>) SPM on 1 July 2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Global ocean LEO Level-3 super-collated (L3S-LEO) daily (DY) SST product for 1 April 2024 showing substantial global daily coverage of satellite observations (approximately 65% on average). The L3S-LEO DY time series begins in the year 2000. Gray areas indicate no SST data due to probable clouds or other quality flags and white areas represent no SST data due to probable ice.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Near-real-time infrared-derived sea ice products. Clockwise from upper left: VIIRS sea ice surface temperature, VIIRS sea ice thickness, VIIRS + AMSR2 ice concentration, and VIIRS + AMSR2 ice motion, with the AMSR2 providing passive microwave data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>SAR altimeter processor lead detection: blue—floe, yellow—ambiguous, red—lead.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>High-resolution ASCAT product utilizing the coastal and tropical cyclone wind speed retrieval improvements for Hurricane Ida on 28 August 2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR, Radarsat-2) data for Tropical Cyclone Freddy 11 September 2023 at 10:05 UTC: (<b>left</b>) 0.5 km resolution wind speed and (<b>right</b>) full storm radial profile, depicting that the 0.5 km processing extracts a maximum velocity (<span class="html-italic">VMax</span>) of 136.3 kts.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>NOAA Ocean Winds and Sea Ice Winter field experiment—2 March 2021. Flight track included near-coincident under-flights of CryoSat-2 and Sentinel-3A satellites and a survey of the SIDEx ice camp.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Spatial distribution of Arctic sea ice in 1982 (<b>left</b>) and 2020 (<b>right</b>) for perennial and seasonal sea ice and snow on land.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>(<b>Top</b>) NOAA Coral Reef Watch composite 5 km Satellite Bleaching Alert Area 2023 Year-to-Date Maximum map, depicting the highest bleaching alert levels experienced by tropical coral reefs as of 29 August 2023. In 2023, severe marine heat stress (Bleaching Alert Levels 1 and 2) associated with mass coral bleaching and mortality occurred along Florida, in the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico, throughout the eastern Tropical Pacific, and in swaths extending from the Sea of Japan to the South China Sea, and from eastern Papua New Guinea to the Cook Islands. (<b>Bottom</b>) NOAA Coral Reef Watch modeled Four-Month Coral Bleaching Heat Stress Outlook for 29 August 2023, showing predicted ocean heat stress (and corresponding bleaching alert levels) from September to December 2023.</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 2310 KiB  
Article
Data Assimilation of Satellite-Derived Rain Rates Estimated by Neural Network in Convective Environments: A Study over Italy
by Rosa Claudia Torcasio, Mario Papa, Fabio Del Frate, Alessandra Mascitelli, Stefano Dietrich, Giulia Panegrossi and Stefano Federico
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(10), 1769; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16101769 - 16 May 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1133
Abstract
The accurate prediction of heavy precipitation in convective environments is crucial because such events, often occurring in Italy during the summer and fall seasons, can be a threat for people and properties. In this paper, we analyse the impact of satellite-derived surface-rainfall-rate data [...] Read more.
The accurate prediction of heavy precipitation in convective environments is crucial because such events, often occurring in Italy during the summer and fall seasons, can be a threat for people and properties. In this paper, we analyse the impact of satellite-derived surface-rainfall-rate data assimilation on the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model’s precipitation prediction, considering 15 days in summer 2022 and 17 days in fall 2022, where moderate to intense precipitation was observed over Italy. A 3DVar realised at CNR-ISAC (National Research Council of Italy, Institute of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate) is used to assimilate two different satellite-derived rain rate products, both exploiting geostationary (GEO), infrared (IR), and low-Earth-orbit (LEO) microwave (MW) measurements: One is based on an artificial neural network (NN), and the other one is the operational P-IN-SEVIRI-PMW product (H60), delivered in near-real time by the EUMETSAT HSAF (Satellite Application Facility in Support of Operational Hydrology and Water Management). The forecast is verified in two periods: the hours from 1 to 4 (1–4 h phase) and the hours from 3 to 6 (3–6 h phase) after the assimilation. The results show that the rain rate assimilation improves the precipitation forecast in both seasons and for both forecast phases, even if the improvement in the 3–6 h phase is found mainly in summer. The assimilation of H60 produces a high number of false alarms, which has a negative impact on the forecast, especially for intense events (30 mm/3 h). The assimilation of the NN rain rate gives more balanced predictions, improving the control forecast without significantly increasing false alarms. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remote Sensing of Extreme Weather Events: Monitoring and Modeling)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>WRF model domain and rain gauge stations’ altitude (<b>a</b>); simulations’ scheme using the very short-term forecast approach (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Rain rates estimated by the neural network (in millimetres per hour) (<b>a</b>), and the relative humidity innovation fields at 2094 m a.s.l. at 06 UTC on 18 August 2022 for the NN_3th (<b>b</b>) and the NN_1th (<b>c</b>) model configurations (in percentages).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Rain rates estimated by H60 (<b>a</b>) and relative humidity field innovation (<b>b</b>) at 06 UTC on 18 August 2022 at 2094 m a.s.l. for the H60_3th configuration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Precipitation between 07 and 10 UTC on 18 August 2022, as reported by rain gauges (<b>a</b>) and MCM (<b>b</b>) and simulated by CTRL (<b>c</b>), H60_3th (<b>d</b>), NN_3th (<b>e</b>), and NN_1th (<b>f</b>) WRF model configurations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Performance diagrams for the CTRL, NN_3th, NN_1th, and H60_3th configurations and for the 1 mm/3 h, 10 mm/3 h, and 30 mm/3 h thresholds for the case studies in summer (<b>a</b>) and in fall (<b>b</b>) for the 1–4 h verification phase. Red hyperboles branches represent the threat score while cyan lines represent the frequency bias.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Performance diagrams for the CTRL, NN_3th, NN_1th, and H60_3th configurations and for the 1 mm/3 h, 10 mm/3 h, and 30 mm/3 h thresholds for the case studies in summer (<b>a</b>) and in fall (<b>b</b>) for the 3–6 h verification phase. Red hyperboles branches represent the threat score while cyan lines represent the frequency bias.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 528 KiB  
Technical Note
Atmospheric Temperature Measurements Using Microwave Hyper-Spectrum from Geostationary Satellite: Band Design, Weighting Functions and Information Content
by Yanmeng Bi, Jun Yang, Caiying Wei, Fangli Dou, Weiwei Xu, Dawei An, Yinghong Luan, Jianfeng Feng and Lichang Zhang
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(2), 289; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16020289 - 11 Jan 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1279
Abstract
A passive microwave instrument will be carried by China’s geostationary microwave satellite. A microwave hyper-spectral band included by the instrument ranges from 52.6 to 57.3 GHz, and totally has 89 channels in this spectral domain. The design of the hyper-spectral band is described [...] Read more.
A passive microwave instrument will be carried by China’s geostationary microwave satellite. A microwave hyper-spectral band included by the instrument ranges from 52.6 to 57.3 GHz, and totally has 89 channels in this spectral domain. The design of the hyper-spectral band is described from the aspects of scientific objectives and specifications. The weighting functions for each channel are calculated utilizing radiative transfer simulations under clear sky conditions. Then, the information content as well as the degree of freedom for signal are computed and analyzed to characterize this hyper-spectral sounding for atmospheric temperature profiling. Both the vertical distribution of the weighting functions and the width of retrieval averaging kernels indicate that the hyper-spectral band can provide more denser sampling for atmospheric temperature. The information content for the hyper-spectral band is approximately 46% higher than that of the ATMS-type channel 3 to 15, indicating that hyper-spectral measurement can improve the accuracy of retrieval. The most informative channels mainly locate near 57 GHz, having good consistency with the existing channels. The height range where the retrieval using the hyper-spectral observations is sensitive to the true profile, begins from about 800 to 1 hPa. Some channels can be considered as alternatives to each other since they have very similar information content and weighting functions. These results are expected to provide a valuable reference for future applications of the microwave hyper-spectral measurements. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The signal processing flow implemented by the microwave hyper-spectral band.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The microwave hyper-spectral range and the optical depth as a function of frequency near 55 GHz. The left and the right dashed lines show the band boundaries. The middle dashed line shows the boundary between the two sub-bands. Nine fine oxygen absorption lines are indicated by the numbers.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The means (red line) and the standard deviations (blue line) of the temperature profiles in the first data set.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The temperature weighting functions calculated using an individual profile for the microwave hyper-spectral band. Each curve corresponds to a channel. (<b>a</b>) the first L43 data set. (<b>b</b>) the second L101 data set.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>Left</b>): the coldest (solid) and the hottest (dashed) profile in the first data set. (<b>Right</b>): the representative temperature weighting function peaking at the low, middle and upper atmosphere, corresponding to the coldest and the hottest profile in the left panel.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The FWHM of a typical weighting function. The pentagram shows the peak position. The red lines show the range of the FWHM.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The FWHM variations as a function of frequency.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Averaging kernels for the temperature sounding using microwave hyper-spectral channels (solid), and their area (dashed).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The total information content and DFS for each atmospheric profile in the first data set. The unit of information content is bits and DFS is unitless.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The first 30 components of the information content and DFS for an individual profile in the first data set.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The mean information content for each channel over all the profiles in the first data set.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The cumulative information content and DFS against the number of channels selected.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>The weighting functions of the top 10 channels shown in <a href="#remotesensing-16-00289-t003" class="html-table">Table 3</a>. The weighting functions are labeled by their sorted number according to the amount of information content. The legend is shown by the format of [sorted number-channel number-frequency].</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>The distribution of the oxygen absorption coefficients. The unit is km<math display="inline"><semantics> <msup> <mrow/> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msup> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 244219 KiB  
Article
Impact of the Detection Channels Added by Fengyun Satellite MWHS-II at 183 GHz on Global Numerical Weather Prediction
by Yali Ju, Jieying He, Gang Ma, Jing Huang, Yang Guo, Guiqing Liu, Minjie Zhang, Jiandong Gong and Peng Zhang
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(17), 4279; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15174279 - 31 Aug 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1114
Abstract
Fine spectral detection can basically solve the problem of low vertical resolution at the 183 GHz water-vapor absorption line, and it is expected to become one of the main methods for next-generation geostationary and polar-orbiting satellites. Here, using data from Microwave Humidity Sounder [...] Read more.
Fine spectral detection can basically solve the problem of low vertical resolution at the 183 GHz water-vapor absorption line, and it is expected to become one of the main methods for next-generation geostationary and polar-orbiting satellites. Here, using data from Microwave Humidity Sounder II (MWHS-II) onboard the Chinese Fengyun 3D (FY-3D) satellite in the Global/Regional Assimilation and Prediction System (GRAPES) Four-Dimensional Variational (4D-Var) system of the China Meteorological Administration (CMA), we explore the assimilation application of the water-vapor absorption line at 183.31 ± 1 GHz, 183.31 ± 3 GHz and 183.31 ± 7 GHz, as well as 183.31 ± 1.8 GHz and 183.31 ± 4.5 GHz, two added channels, to assess the impact of adding the 183.31 ± 1.8 GHz and 183.31 ± 4.5 GHz sampling channels on data assimilation and numerical weather prediction. Our findings reveal a significant increase in the specific-humidity increment, which in the middle–upper troposphere is numerically much larger than in the lower troposphere. Specifically, the assimilation of 183.31 ± 1.8 GHz observations, positioned near the center of the water-vapor absorption line, results in a pronounced adjustment compared with the 183.31 ± 4.5 GHz observations. And under the strong constraint of the numerical model, the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of the wind field diminishes more significantly (by an average of 2–4%) after assimilating the water-vapor observations at greater heights. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Weighting function for 5 channels at 183 GHz of FY-3D MWHS-II.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatial distribution of brightness observation of MWHS-II channel 1 at 19:00 UTC on 15 June 2019. The black circle indicates the selected single-point location (28.56°S, 86.47°E).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Spatial distribution of the observed specific-humidity assimilation increments for (<b>a</b>) Exp. 1, (<b>b</b>) Exp. 2, and (<b>c</b>) the difference between Exp. 2 and Exp. 1 at different isobaric surfaces.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Meridional profile of assimilation analysis increments in (<b>a</b>) specific humidity, (<b>b</b>) temperature, (<b>c</b>) U wind field and (<b>d</b>) V wind field for Exp. 1 (left panel) and Exp. 2 (right panel).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>As in <a href="#remotesensing-15-04279-f004" class="html-fig">Figure 4</a>, but for latitudinal profiles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Impact on forecasts of Exp. 1 and Exp. 2 after assimilation at (<b>a</b>) 1-h forecast field, (<b>b</b>) 3-h forecast field and (<b>c</b>) 6-h forecast field.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>As in <a href="#remotesensing-15-04279-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a>, but for 15:00–21:00 UTC.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The RMSE of assimilation analyses of (<b>a</b>) specific humidity, (<b>b</b>) temperature, (<b>c</b>) U wind field and (<b>d</b>) V wind field.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Difference <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>B</mi> <mi>Q</mi> </msub> </semantics></math> between Exp. 1 and Exp. 2 on the impact of forecasting at 300 hPa (first row), 500 hPa (second row), 700 hPa (third row) and 850 hPa (fourth row).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>As in <a href="#remotesensing-15-04279-f009" class="html-fig">Figure 9</a>, but for potential-height-field <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>B</mi> <mi>H</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>As in <a href="#remotesensing-15-04279-f009" class="html-fig">Figure 9</a>, but for the U-component of wind-field <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>B</mi> <mi>U</mi> </msub> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Time series of the forecast field RMSE values from 0 to 240 h at (<b>a</b>) 300 hPa, (<b>b</b>) 500 hPa, (<b>c</b>) 700 hPa and (<b>d</b>) 850 hPa. The red line indicates the specific-humidity field, and the blue line indicates the V wind field.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 23684 KiB  
Article
Comparison of the Potential Impact to the Prediction of Typhoons of Various Microwave Sounders Onboard a Geostationary Satellite
by Ke Chen and Guangwei Wu
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(7), 1533; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14071533 - 22 Mar 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2018
Abstract
A microwave radiometer onboard a geostationary satellite can provide for the continuous atmospheric sounding of rapidly evolving convective events even in the presence of clouds, which has aroused great research interest in recent decades. To approach the problem of high-spatial resolution and large-size [...] Read more.
A microwave radiometer onboard a geostationary satellite can provide for the continuous atmospheric sounding of rapidly evolving convective events even in the presence of clouds, which has aroused great research interest in recent decades. To approach the problem of high-spatial resolution and large-size antennas, three promising geostationary microwave (GEO-MW) solutions—geostationary microwave radiometer (GMR) with a 5 m real aperture antenna, geostationary synthetic thinned aperture radiometer (GeoSTAR) with a Y-shaped synthetic aperture array, and geostationary interferometric microwave sounder (GIMS) with a rotating circular synthetic aperture array—have been proposed. To compare the potential impact of assimilating the three GEO-MW sounders to typhoon prediction, observing system simulation experiments (OSSEs) with the simulated 50–60 GHz observing brightness temperature data were conducted using the mesoscale numerical model Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) and WRF Date Assimilation-Four dimensional variational (WRFDA-4Dvar) assimilation system for Typhoons Hagibis and Bualoi which occurred in 2019. The results show that the assimilation of the three GEO-MW instruments with 4 channels of data at 50–60 GHz could lead to general positive impacts in this study. Compared with the control experiment, for the two cases of Bualoi and Hagibis, GMR improves the average 72 h typhoon track forecast accuracy by 24% and 43%, GeoSTAR by 33% and 50%, and GIMS by 10% and 29%, respectively. Overall, the three GEO-MW instruments show considerable promise in atmospheric sounding and data assimilation. The difference among these positive impacts seems to depend on the observation error of the three potential instruments. GeoSTAR is slightly better than the other two GEO-MW sounders, which may be because it has the smallest observation error of the 4 assimilation channels. Generally, this study illustrates that the performance of these three GEO-MW sounders is potentially adequate to support assimilation into numerical weather prediction models for typhoon prediction. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Satellite Observations on Earth’s Atmosphere)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Geostationary orbit microwave observation system simulation experimental framework.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>WRFDA-4DVar system framework.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>50.3 GHz simulated brightness temperature map of the full-Earth disk for (<b>a</b>) GMR, (<b>b</b>) GeoSTAR, and (<b>c</b>) GIMS.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Simulated upwelling brightness temperature TB (<b>A</b>–<b>H</b>) and observation TA of GMR (<b>I</b>–<b>P</b>), GeoSTAR (<b>a</b>–<b>h</b>), and GIMS (<b>i</b>–<b>p</b>). (<b>A</b>,<b>I</b>,<b>a</b>,<b>i</b>) represents channel-1 50.3 GHz, (<b>B</b>,<b>J</b>,<b>b</b>,<b>j</b>) represents channel-2 51.76 GHz, (<b>C</b>,<b>K</b>,<b>c</b>,<b>k</b>) represents channel-3 52.8 GHz, (<b>D</b>,<b>L</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>l</b>)represents channel-4 53.596 GHz, (<b>E</b>,<b>M</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>m</b>) represents channel-5 54.4 GHz, (<b>F</b>,<b>N</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>n</b>) represents channel-6 54.94 GHz, (<b>G</b>,<b>O</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>o</b>) represents channel-7 55.5 GHz, and (<b>H</b>,<b>P</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>p</b>) represents channel-8 57.29 GHz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4 Cont.
<p>Simulated upwelling brightness temperature TB (<b>A</b>–<b>H</b>) and observation TA of GMR (<b>I</b>–<b>P</b>), GeoSTAR (<b>a</b>–<b>h</b>), and GIMS (<b>i</b>–<b>p</b>). (<b>A</b>,<b>I</b>,<b>a</b>,<b>i</b>) represents channel-1 50.3 GHz, (<b>B</b>,<b>J</b>,<b>b</b>,<b>j</b>) represents channel-2 51.76 GHz, (<b>C</b>,<b>K</b>,<b>c</b>,<b>k</b>) represents channel-3 52.8 GHz, (<b>D</b>,<b>L</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>l</b>)represents channel-4 53.596 GHz, (<b>E</b>,<b>M</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>m</b>) represents channel-5 54.4 GHz, (<b>F</b>,<b>N</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>n</b>) represents channel-6 54.94 GHz, (<b>G</b>,<b>O</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>o</b>) represents channel-7 55.5 GHz, and (<b>H</b>,<b>P</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>p</b>) represents channel-8 57.29 GHz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Simulated 2-D antenna pattern of RA and synthetic AF of SAIR at 50.3 GHz. (<b>a</b>) GMR, (<b>b</b>) GeoSTAR with a rectangular window, (<b>c</b>) GeoSTAR with a Blackman window, (<b>d</b>) GIMS with a rectangular window, and (<b>e</b>) GIMS with a Blackman window. The simulated 1-D antenna pattern and synthetic AF of SAIR. (<b>f</b>) GMR, (<b>g</b>) GeoSTAR with a rectangular window, (<b>h</b>) GeoSTAR with a Blackman window, (<b>i</b>) GIMS with a rectangular window, and (<b>j</b>) GIMS with a Blackman window.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The antenna array (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) (partial zoomed—in view) and resulting UV plane sampling pattern (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) (partial zoomed-in view) of GeoSTAR.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The antenna array (<b>a</b>) and resulting UV plane sampling pattern of the GIMS. (<b>b</b>) Snapshot samples, (<b>c</b>) the full samples after a rotation cycle, and (<b>d</b>) partial zoomed-in view.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) Diagram of the pseudo polar grid. (<b>b</b>) Sketch of 1-D interpolations in the angular direction to obtain equisloped points. (<b>c</b>) Sketch of 1-D interpolations in the radial direction to square the circles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The average RMSE of 13 TA images of Typhoon Hagibis from 06:00 to 12:00 UTC on 8 October 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Sequence diagram of CTRL, REAL, DA-GMR, DA-GeoSTAR, and DA-GIMS experiments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Scatter plots of model-calculated brightness temperature versus the observations (K) of GMR for (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) background and (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>) analyses valid at 06:00 UTC on 8 October 2019. (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>) represents channel-4 53.596 GHz, (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>) represents channel-5 54.4 GHz, (<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>) represents channel-6 54.94 GHz, and (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>) represents channel-8 57.29 GHz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Scatter plots of model-calculated brightness temperature versus the observations (K) of GeoSTAR for (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) background and (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>) analyses valid at 06:00 UTC on 8 October 2019. (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>) represents channel-4 53.596 GHz, (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>) represents channel-5 54.4 GHz, (<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>) represents channel-6 54.94 GHz, and (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>) represents channel-8 57.29 GHz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Scatter plots of model-calculated brightness temperature versus the observations (K) of GIMS for (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) background and (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>) analyses valid at 06:00 UTC on 8 October 2019. (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>) represents channel-4 53.596 GHz, (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>) represents channel-5 54.4 GHz, (<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>) represents channel-6 54.94 GHz, and (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>) represents channel-8 57.29 GHz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>The predicted track of Hagibis initialized from 06:00 UTC on 8 October 2019 (<b>a</b>) and track forecast errors (<b>b</b>). The red curve in (<b>a</b>) represents the best typhoon track data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The predicted track of Bualoi initialized from 06:00 UTC on 22 October 2019 (<b>a</b>) and track forecast errors (<b>b</b>). The red curve in (<b>a</b>) represents the best typhoon track data.</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 4788 KiB  
Article
A Rapid Beam Pointing Determination and Beam-Pointing Error Analysis Method for a Geostationary Orbiting Microwave Radiometer Antenna in Consideration of Antenna Thermal Distortions
by Hualong Hu, Xiaochong Tong and He Li
Sensors 2021, 21(17), 5943; https://doi.org/10.3390/s21175943 - 4 Sep 2021
Viewed by 2395
Abstract
When observing the Earth’s radiation signal with a geostationary orbiting (GEO) mechanically scanned microwave radiometer, it is necessary to correct the antenna beam pointing (ABP) in real time for the deviation caused by thermal distortions of antenna reflectors with the help of the [...] Read more.
When observing the Earth’s radiation signal with a geostationary orbiting (GEO) mechanically scanned microwave radiometer, it is necessary to correct the antenna beam pointing (ABP) in real time for the deviation caused by thermal distortions of antenna reflectors with the help of the on-board Image Navigation and Registration (INR) system during scanning of the Earth. The traditional ABP determination and beam-pointing error (BPE) analysis method is based on the electromechanical coupling principle, which usurps time and computing resources and thus cannot meet the requirement for frequent real-time on-board INR operations needed by the GEO microwave radiometer. For this reason, matrix optics (MO), which is widely used in characterizing the optical path of the visible/infrared sensor, is extended to this study so that it can be applied to model the equivalent optical path of the microwave antenna with a much more complicated configuration. Based on the extended MO method, the ideal ABP determination model and the model for determining the actual ABP affected by reflector thermal distortions are deduced for China’s future GEO radiometer, and an MO-based BPE computing method, which establishes a direct connection between the reflector thermal distortion errors (TDEs) and the thermally induced BPE, is defined. To verify the overall performance of the extended MO method for rapid ABP determination, the outputs from the ideal ABP determination model were compared to calculations from GRASP 10.3 software. The experimental results show that the MO-based ABP determination model can achieve the same results as GRASP software with a significant advantage in computational efficiency (e.g., at the lowest frequency band of 54 GHz, our MO-based model yielded a 4,730,000 times faster computation time than the GRASP software). After validating the correctness of the extended MO method, the impacts of the reflector TDEs on the BPE were quantified on a case-by-case basis with the help of the defined BPE computing method, and those TDEs that had a significant impact on the BPE were therefore identified. The methods and results presented in this study are expected to set the basis for the further development of on-board INR systems to be used in China’s future GEO microwave radiometer and benefit the ABP determination and BEP analysis of other antenna configurations to a certain extent. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Remote Sensors)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The geometry of the GEO microwave antenna that was used in this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The operational principle of the GEO microwave antenna in this study. (<b>a</b>) 1-D LFS. (<b>b</b>) 2-D OSS.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The reverse propagation path of the beam within the GEO microwave antenna.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Definition of basic BFCSs that are used in deducing the ideal ABP determination model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The calculation errors of the MO-based model for ABP determination. (<b>a</b>) The variation of the ABP calculation error within one complete 360° scan cycle of the ECF. (<b>b</b>) The histogram of the ABP calculation errors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>The calculation errors of the MO-based model for ABP determination. (<b>a</b>) The variation of the ABP calculation error within one complete 360° scan cycle of the ECF. (<b>b</b>) The histogram of the ABP calculation errors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The impact of the roll misalignment angle <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>FSR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> of the FSR on the BPE. (<b>a</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to the ECF scan azimuth at some fixed levels of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>FSR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. (<b>b</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>FSR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> at some fixed ECF scan azimuths.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>The impact of the roll misalignment angle <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>FSR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> of the FSR on the BPE. (<b>a</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to the ECF scan azimuth at some fixed levels of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>FSR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. (<b>b</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>FSR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> at some fixed ECF scan azimuths.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The impact of the roll misalignment angle <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. of the MR on the BPE. (<b>a</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to the ECF scan azimuth at some fixed levels of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. (<b>b</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> at some fixed ECF scan azimuths.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The impacts of different thermal misalignment errors at different levels on the BPE. The impact was measured by the RMSE of the ABPs over a scan period of the ECF.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The impact of the pitch axial translation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>y</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. of the MR on the BPE. (<b>a</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to the ECF scan azimuth at some fixed levels of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>y</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. (<b>b</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>y</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> at some fixed ECF scan azimuths.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9 Cont.
<p>The impact of the pitch axial translation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>y</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. of the MR on the BPE. (<b>a</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to the ECF scan azimuth at some fixed levels of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>y</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. (<b>b</b>) The variation of the BPE with respect to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>y</mi> <mrow> <mi>MR</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>m</mi> <mi>a</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> at some fixed ECF scan azimuths.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The impacts of different thermal translation errors at different levels on the BPE. The impact was measured by the RMSE of the ABPs over a scan period of the ECF.</p>
Full article ">
32 pages, 51857 KiB  
Article
The Potential Impact of Assimilating Synthetic Microwave Radiances Onboard a Future Geostationary Satellite on the Prediction of Typhoon Lekima Using the WRF Model
by Yuanbing Wang, Jieying He, Yaodeng Chen and Jinzhong Min
Remote Sens. 2021, 13(5), 886; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13050886 - 26 Feb 2021
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 2998
Abstract
Geostationary meteorological satellites can provide continuous observations of high-impact weather events with a high temporal and spatial resolution. Sounding the atmosphere using a microwave instrument onboard a geostationary satellite has aroused great study interests for years, as it would increase the observational efficiency [...] Read more.
Geostationary meteorological satellites can provide continuous observations of high-impact weather events with a high temporal and spatial resolution. Sounding the atmosphere using a microwave instrument onboard a geostationary satellite has aroused great study interests for years, as it would increase the observational efficiency as well as provide a new perspective in the microwave spectrum to the measuring capability for the current observational system. In this study, the capability of assimilating future geostationary microwave sounder (GEOMS) radiances was developed in the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model’s data assimilation (WRFDA) system. To investigate if these frequently updated and widely distributed microwave radiances would be beneficial for typhoon prediction, observational system simulation experiments (OSSEs) using synthetic microwave radiances were conducted using the mesoscale numerical model WRF and the advanced hybrid ensemble–variational data assimilation method for the Lekima typhoon that occurred in early August 2019. The results show that general positive forecast impacts were achieved in the OSSEs due to the assimilation of GEOMS radiances: errors of analyses and forecasts in terms of wind, humidity, and temperature were both reduced after assimilating GEOMS radiances when verified against ERA-5 data. The track and intensity predictions of Lekima were also improved before 68 h compared to the best track data in this study. In addition, rainfall forecast improvements were also found due to the assimilation impact of GEOMS radiances. In general, microwave observations from geostationary satellites provide the possibility of frequently assimilating wide-ranging microwave information into a regional model in a finer resolution, which can potentially help improve numerical weather prediction (NWP). Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Atmospheric Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The best track of Lekima from 2100 UTC on 6 August to 0000 UTC on 10 August provided by Tropical Cyclone Data Center of China Meteorological Administration (<b>left panel</b>); the Himawari-8 true color image of Lekima at 0000 UTC on 6 August provided by Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency Himawari Monitor P-Tree System (<b>right panel</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Framework of the geostationary microwave sounder (GEOMS) radiances simulating system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Weighting functions distributed from surface to 30 hPa for 183 GHz.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The scatterplots of model-calculated GEOMS versus observed radiances (K) for (<b>a</b>) backgrounds before bias correction, (<b>b</b>) backgrounds after bias correction, and (<b>c</b>) analyses valid at 0000 UTC 06 August 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4 Cont.
<p>The scatterplots of model-calculated GEOMS versus observed radiances (K) for (<b>a</b>) backgrounds before bias correction, (<b>b</b>) backgrounds after bias correction, and (<b>c</b>) analyses valid at 0000 UTC 06 August 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The GEOMS brightness temperature (K): (<b>a</b>) simulated observation; (<b>b</b>) observation minus background; (<b>c</b>) observation minus analysis at 0000 UTC 6 August 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Experimental domain. d02 denotes the initial position of the vortex center for the typhoon moving-nested run.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Observing system simulation experiment framework. R denotes the observation error covariance; B denotes the background error covariance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Flow chart of one of the hourly partially cycling data assimilation runs. FC: Forecast.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Analysis increments at 500 hPa of (<b>a</b>) water vapor mixing ration (shaded; kg/kg), (<b>b</b>) temperature (shaded; K), and (<b>c</b>) x-component of wind (shaded; m/s) of the single GEOMS radiance observation test. The black solid lines represent the corresponding background variables, respectively, at analysis time 0600 UTC 8 August.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>RMSE vertical profiles of 24 h forecast verified against ERA-5 data for five experiments: (<b>a</b>) water vapor mixed ratio (g/Kg); (<b>b</b>) temperature (K); (<b>c</b>) zonal wind (m/s).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10 Cont.
<p>RMSE vertical profiles of 24 h forecast verified against ERA-5 data for five experiments: (<b>a</b>) water vapor mixed ratio (g/Kg); (<b>b</b>) temperature (K); (<b>c</b>) zonal wind (m/s).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The predicted (<b>a</b>) minimum surface level pressure (hPa) and (<b>b</b>) its error (hPa). The predicted (<b>c</b>) maximum wind speed (m/s) and (<b>d</b>) its error (m/s). The predicted (<b>e</b>) track errors and (<b>f</b>) track of Lekima initialized from 0000 UTC 6 August 2019. The black line in (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>) represent the best track data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11 Cont.
<p>The predicted (<b>a</b>) minimum surface level pressure (hPa) and (<b>b</b>) its error (hPa). The predicted (<b>c</b>) maximum wind speed (m/s) and (<b>d</b>) its error (m/s). The predicted (<b>e</b>) track errors and (<b>f</b>) track of Lekima initialized from 0000 UTC 6 August 2019. The black line in (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>) represent the best track data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Vertical cross-sections at 23° N of the horizontal wind speed (shaded; m/s) and potential temperature (5 K, contours) for (<b>a</b>) hourly continuous DA (CDA(-3, (<b>b</b>) CDA-2, (<b>c</b>) CDA-1, (<b>d</b>) single time DA (SDA), and (<b>e</b>) no DA (NDA) at 0000 UTC 9 August 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12 Cont.
<p>Vertical cross-sections at 23° N of the horizontal wind speed (shaded; m/s) and potential temperature (5 K, contours) for (<b>a</b>) hourly continuous DA (CDA(-3, (<b>b</b>) CDA-2, (<b>c</b>) CDA-1, (<b>d</b>) single time DA (SDA), and (<b>e</b>) no DA (NDA) at 0000 UTC 9 August 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Rainfall forecast score as a function of forecast lead time for (<b>a</b>) threat score (TS), (<b>b</b>) equitable threat score (ETS), and (<b>c</b>) fraction skill score (FSS).</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Similar to <a href="#remotesensing-13-00886-f013" class="html-fig">Figure 13</a>, but for 24-h accumulated rainfall forecast scores as a function of threshold. (<b>a</b>) threat score (TS), (<b>b</b>) equitable threat score (ETS), and (<b>c</b>) fraction skill score (FSS).</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>(<b>a</b>) The observed total accumulated rainfall (mm) from 0000 UTC to 1200 UTC 08 August 2019 and the corresponding forecast rainfall of the five experiments: (<b>b</b>) CDA-3, (<b>c</b>) CDA-2, (<b>d</b>) CDA-1, (<b>e</b>) SDA, and (<b>f</b>) NDA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) The observed total accumulated rainfall (mm) from 0000 UTC to 1200 UTC 08 August 2019 and the corresponding forecast rainfall of the five experiments: (<b>b</b>) CDA-3, (<b>c</b>) CDA-2, (<b>d</b>) CDA-1, (<b>e</b>) SDA, and (<b>f</b>) NDA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>(<b>a</b>) The observed total accumulated rainfall (mm) after landfall from 0200 UTC to 0500 UTC 10 August 2019 and the corresponding forecast rainfall of the five experiments: (<b>b</b>) CDA-3, (<b>c</b>) CDA-2, (<b>d</b>) CDA-1, (<b>e</b>) SDA, and (<b>f</b>) NDA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) The observed total accumulated rainfall (mm) after landfall from 0200 UTC to 0500 UTC 10 August 2019 and the corresponding forecast rainfall of the five experiments: (<b>b</b>) CDA-3, (<b>c</b>) CDA-2, (<b>d</b>) CDA-1, (<b>e</b>) SDA, and (<b>f</b>) NDA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Water vapor mixing ratio (kg/kg) of the analyses at 0000 UTC 6 August 2019 at 850 hPa. (<b>a</b>) ERA-5, (<b>b</b>) CDA-3, (<b>c</b>) CDA-2, (<b>d</b>) CDA-1, (<b>e</b>) SDA, and (<b>f</b>) NDA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Water vapor flux difference (shaded, (kg × m/s<sup>−2</sup>)/m<sup>−2</sup>) of 24-h forecasts initialized from 0000 UTC 06 August 2019 at 850 hPa. (<b>a</b>) CDA-3 minus ERA-5, (<b>b</b>) CDA-2 minus ERA-5, (<b>c</b>) CDA-1 minus ERA-5, (<b>d</b>) SDA minus ERA-5, and (<b>e</b>) NDA minus ERA-5.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18 Cont.
<p>Water vapor flux difference (shaded, (kg × m/s<sup>−2</sup>)/m<sup>−2</sup>) of 24-h forecasts initialized from 0000 UTC 06 August 2019 at 850 hPa. (<b>a</b>) CDA-3 minus ERA-5, (<b>b</b>) CDA-2 minus ERA-5, (<b>c</b>) CDA-1 minus ERA-5, (<b>d</b>) SDA minus ERA-5, and (<b>e</b>) NDA minus ERA-5.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 4079 KiB  
Article
Estimates of Daily Evapotranspiration in the Source Region of the Yellow River Combining Visible/Near-Infrared and Microwave Remote Sensing
by Rong Liu, Jun Wen, Xin Wang, Zuoliang Wang, Yu Liu and Ming Zhang
Remote Sens. 2021, 13(1), 53; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13010053 - 25 Dec 2020
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2525
Abstract
The spatial variation of surface net radiation, soil heat flux, sensible heat flux, and latent heat flux at different times of the day over the northern Tibetan Plateau were estimated using the Surface Energy Balance System algorithm, data from the FY-2G geostationary meteorological [...] Read more.
The spatial variation of surface net radiation, soil heat flux, sensible heat flux, and latent heat flux at different times of the day over the northern Tibetan Plateau were estimated using the Surface Energy Balance System algorithm, data from the FY-2G geostationary meteorological satellite, and microwave data from the FY-3C polar-orbiting meteorological satellite. In addition, the evaporative fraction was analyzed, and the total evapotranspiration (ET) was obtained by the effective evaporative fraction to avoid the error from accumulation. The hourly change of latent heat flux presented a sound unimodal diurnal variation. The results showed the regional ET ranged between 2.0 and 4.0 mm over the Source Region of the Yellow River. The conditional expectations of surface energy components during the experimental period of the study area were statistically analyzed, and the correspondence between different surface temperatures and the effective energy distribution was examined. The effective energy distribution of the surface changed significantly with the increase in temperature; in particular, when the surface temperature exceeded 290 K, the effective energy was mainly used for surface ET. The aim of this study was to avoid the use of surface meteorological observations that are not readily available over large areas, and the findings lay a foundation for the commercialization of land surface evapotranspiration. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Location and land use of the Source Region of the Yellow River (SRYR).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Surface parameters of the SRYR (<b>a</b>) Surface albedo (<b>b</b>) NDVI (<b>c</b>) LAI (<b>d</b>) DEM.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Hourly surface energy fluxes over the study area on 18 August 2019 (11:00 to 16:00 Beijing time).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3 Cont.
<p>Hourly surface energy fluxes over the study area on 18 August 2019 (11:00 to 16:00 Beijing time).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) Sensible heat flux from FY-2G and FY-3C (at Beijing time 15:40). (<b>b</b>) Latent heat flux from FY-2G and FY-3C (at Beijing time 15:40).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparisons between hourly surface energy flux measurements and the estimated: (<b>a</b>) net radiation, (<b>b</b>) soil heat flux, (<b>c</b>) sensible heat flux, (<b>d</b>) latent heat flux.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>Comparisons between hourly surface energy flux measurements and the estimated: (<b>a</b>) net radiation, (<b>b</b>) soil heat flux, (<b>c</b>) sensible heat flux, (<b>d</b>) latent heat flux.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Trend of energy fluxes conditional expectation with the land surface temperature. (<b>b</b>) Relationship between evaporation fraction (EF) and latent heat flux.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Spatial distribution of daily evapotranspiration (ET) over Northern Tibetan Plateau on 18 August 2019.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 4381 KiB  
Article
An Improved Conversion Relationship between Tropical Cyclone Intensity Index and Maximum Wind Speed for the Advanced Dvorak Technique in the Northwestern Pacific Ocean Using SMAP Data
by Sumin Ryu, Sung-Eun Hong, Jun-Dong Park and Sungwook Hong
Remote Sens. 2020, 12(16), 2580; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12162580 - 11 Aug 2020
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3140
Abstract
The Advanced Dvorak Technique (ADT) uses geostationary satellite data to estimate tropical cyclone (TC) intensity owing to the difficulty in directly observing a TC’s internal structure. This study presents a new relationship (Hong and Ryu scale) between the current intensity (CI) number and [...] Read more.
The Advanced Dvorak Technique (ADT) uses geostationary satellite data to estimate tropical cyclone (TC) intensity owing to the difficulty in directly observing a TC’s internal structure. This study presents a new relationship (Hong and Ryu scale) between the current intensity (CI) number and estimated maximum wind speed (MWS) of TCs over the northwestern Pacific region; the CI number is the TC intensity index retrieved from the ADT. The Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) with the L-band (1.4 GHz) microwave radiometer, is used to calibrate and produce the new Hong and Ryu scale for the ADT algorithm. Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) best track MWS data, SMAP sea surface wind speed estimates, and ADT’s TC intensity data between 2015–2018 are spatiotemporally collocated for the calibration process. The CI number is derived from the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) operational ADT which uses the Koba scale to convert to the MWS for validation against the MWS of the best track. The conversion relationships between CI number and SMAP MWS, and between SMAP MWS and MWS of the best track a derived, and the MWS of two ADTs with the Koba and Hong and Ryu scales are then estimated using the same CI numbers with TC intensity data between 2015–2018. Finally, the MWS of the ADT with the Koba scale and the new ADT with the proposed Hong and Ryu scale are independently validated on best track data from 2013–2014. The MWS root mean square error (RMSE) is 4.39 m/s for the new ADT using the Hong and Ryu scale, which is lower than 4.77 m/s RMSE of the ADT using the Koba scale. Hence, the ADT using the Hong and Ryu scale can modestly improve the accuracy of TC intensity analysis in the northwestern Pacific region. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Ocean Remote Sensing)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>An example of a typhoon observed by Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) sea surface wind speed retrievals on 9 July 2015.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Time series of the collocated maximum wind speeds (MWSs) of SMAP, Advanced Dvorak Technique (ADT), and best track data from 1 July to 31 December 2016.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>(<b>a</b>) Example of TC cloud system center (CSC) determination from the COMS imagery and (<b>b</b>) procedure for estimating MWS using ADT and COMS satellite observations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Examples of current intensity (CI) number and the corresponding enhanced Infrared (EIR) images from the COMS satellite.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Validation procedure of the Hong and Ryu scale CI to MWS conversion scale for northwestern Pacific TCs.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) MWS (best track) vs. MWS (SMAP) and (<b>b</b>) MWS (best track) vs. MWS (Koba scale).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Koba (blue dotted line) and Hong and Ryu (red line) scales depending on the CI number.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) MWS (best track) vs. MWS (Hong and Ryu scale) and (<b>b</b>) MWS (best track) vs. MWS (Koba scale) between 2015–2018. In this case, the number of data points is 1970.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) MWS (best track) vs. MWS (Hong and Ryu scale) and (<b>b</b>) MWS (best track) vs. MWS (Koba scale) for an independent sample of northwestern Pacific TCs in 2013–2014.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Time series of estimated maximum wind speeds for three typhoons: (<b>a</b>) Jebi in 2013, (<b>b</b>) Rammasun in 2014, and (<b>c</b>) Haima in 2016, derived from the best track, and two ADTs with the Koba and Hong and Ryu scales.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10 Cont.
<p>Time series of estimated maximum wind speeds for three typhoons: (<b>a</b>) Jebi in 2013, (<b>b</b>) Rammasun in 2014, and (<b>c</b>) Haima in 2016, derived from the best track, and two ADTs with the Koba and Hong and Ryu scales.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 4090 KiB  
Article
Precise Orbit Determination of BDS-2 and BDS-3 Using SLR
by Honglei Yang, Tianhe Xu, Wenfeng Nie, Fan Gao and Meiqian Guan
Remote Sens. 2019, 11(23), 2735; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11232735 - 21 Nov 2019
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 3613
Abstract
The BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) of China is currently in the hybrid-use period of BDS-2 and BDS-3 satellites. All of them are equipped with Laser Retroreflect Arrays (LRAs) for Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR), which can directly obtain an independent, sub-centimetre level of [...] Read more.
The BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) of China is currently in the hybrid-use period of BDS-2 and BDS-3 satellites. All of them are equipped with Laser Retroreflect Arrays (LRAs) for Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR), which can directly obtain an independent, sub-centimetre level of distance measurement. The main purpose of this contribution is to use the solely SLR Normal Points (NPs) data to determinate the precise orbit of BDS-2 and BDS-3 satellites, including one Geostationary Earth Orbit (GEO), three Inclined Geo-Synchronous Orbits (ISGO), and one Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) of BDS-2 satellites, as well as four MEO of BDS-3 satellites, from 1 January to 30 June 2019. The microwave-based orbit from Wuhan University (WUM) are firstly validated to mark and eliminate the bad SLR observations in our preprocessing stage. Then, the 3-, 5-, 7-, and 9-day arc solutions are performed to investigate the impact of the different orbital arc lengths on the quality of SLR-derived orbits and test the optimal solution of the multi-day arc. Moreover, the dependency of SLR-only orbit determination accuracy on the number of SLR observations and the number of SLR sites are discussed to explore the orbit determination quality of the 3-,5-, 7-, and 9-day arc solutions. The results indicate that (1) during the half-year time span of 2019, the overall Root Mean Square (RMS) of SLR validation residuals derived from WUM is 19.0 cm for BDS-2 GEO C01, 5.2–7.3 cm for three BDS-2 IGSO, 3.4 cm for BDS-2 MEO C11, and 4.4–5.7 cm for four BDS-3 MEO satellites respectively. (2) The 9-day arc solutions present the best orbit accuracy in our multi-day SLR-only orbit determination for BDS IGSO and MEO satellites. The 9-day overlaps median RMS of BDS MEO in RTN directions are evaluated at 3.6–5.7, 12.4–21.6, and 15.6–23.9 cm respectively, as well as 5.7–9.6, 15.0–36.8, and 16.5–35.2 cm for the comparison with WUM precise orbits, while these values of BDS IGSO are larger by a factor of about 3–10 than BDS MEO orbits in their corresponding RTN directions. Furthermore, the optimal average 3D-RMS of 9-day overlaps is 0.49 and 1.89 m for BDS MEO and IGSO respectively, as well as 0.55 and 1.85 m in comparison with WUM orbits. Owing to its extremely rare SLR observations, the SLR-only orbit determination accuracy of BDS-2 GEO satellite can only reach a level of 10 metres or worse. (3) To obtain a stable and reliable SLR-only precise orbit, the 7-day to 9-day arc solutions are necessary to provide a sufficient SLR observation quantity and geometry, with more than 50–80 available SLR observations at 5–6 SLR sites that are evenly distributed, both in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>The multi-day arcs solution strategy.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The daily SLR observations of BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) provided by Europe Data Centre (EDC) since 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The contribution of each SLR site to the daily SLR observations of all BDS satellites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The SLR validation time series for BDS-2 satellites derived from WUM in the half-year time series since 2019. The blue scatters, green scatters, magenta scatters, and red line refer to the Sun elevation angle of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>β</mi> <mo> </mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, the SLR residuals during the non-eclipse period, the Normal Yaw Steering (NYS) of the eclipse period, and the Yaw Manoeuver (YM) period respectively. The definitions of these concepts for BDS-2 satellites were summarized and described in Yang, Xu, Nie, Gao and Guan [<a href="#B20-remotesensing-11-02735" class="html-bibr">20</a>], and we apply exactly the same SLR validation strategy in this contribution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The SLR validation time series for BDS-3 satellites derived from WUM in the half-year time series since 2019. The definition of different colour dots and the red line are the same as in <a href="#remotesensing-11-02735-f004" class="html-fig">Figure 4</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C01.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C08.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C10.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C13.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C11.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C20.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C21.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C29.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>The results of SLR-only orbit determination for C30.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The overall average 3D-Root Mean Square (RMS) of SLR-only orbit determination for BDS satellites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>The dependency of median RMS on the number of SLR observations. The red, green, and blue dots, as well as dotted lines, represent values in the R, T, and N directions respectively. In particular, the hollow circle dotted line refers to the median RMS with a step size of 10.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>The dependency of median RMS on the number of SLR sites. The definition of different colour dots and circles are the same as in <a href="#remotesensing-11-02735-f016" class="html-fig">Figure 16</a>.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 2160 KiB  
Article
Precipitation Retrieval over the Tibetan Plateau from the Geostationary Orbit—Part 1: Precipitation Area Delineation with Elektro-L2 and Insat-3D
by Christine Kolbe, Boris Thies, Sebastian Egli, Lukas Lehnert, Hans Martin Schulz and Jörg Bendix
Remote Sens. 2019, 11(19), 2302; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11192302 - 2 Oct 2019
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 3293
Abstract
The lack of long term and well distributed precipitation observations on the Tibetan Plateau (TiP) with its complex terrain raises the need for other sources of precipitation data for this area. Satellite-based precipitation retrievals can fill those data gaps. Before precipitation rates can [...] Read more.
The lack of long term and well distributed precipitation observations on the Tibetan Plateau (TiP) with its complex terrain raises the need for other sources of precipitation data for this area. Satellite-based precipitation retrievals can fill those data gaps. Before precipitation rates can be retrieved from satellite imagery, the precipitating area needs to be classified properly. Here, we present a feasibility study of a precipitation area delineation scheme for the TiP based on multispectral data with data fusion from the geostationary orbit (GEO, Insat-3D and Elektro-L2) and a machine learning approach (Random Forest, RF). The GEO data are used as predictors for the RF model, extensively validated by independent GPM (Global Precipitation Measurement Mission) IMERG (Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM) gauge calibrated microwave (MW) best-quality precipitation estimates. To improve the RF model performance, we tested different optimization schemes. Here, we find that (1) using more precipitating pixels and reducing the amount of non-precipitating pixels during training greatly improved the classification results. The accuracy of the precipitation area delineation also benefits from (2) changing the temporal resolution into smaller segments. We particularly compared our results to the Infrared (IR) only precipitation product from GPM IMERG and found a markedly improved performance of the new multispectral product (Heidke Skill Score (HSS) of 0.19 (IR only) compared to 0.57 (new multispectral product)). Other studies with a precipitation area delineation obtained a probability of detection (POD) of 0.61, whereas our POD is comparable, with 0.56 on average. The new multispectral product performs best (worse) for precipitation rates above the 90th percentile (below the 10th percentile). Our results point to a clear strategy to improve the IMERG product in the absence of MW radiances. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Data availability of the least common data of Insat-3D, Elektro-L2 and GPM IMERG (with all met conditions) for the half year of 2017 on a temporal (<b>a</b>) and spatial (<b>b</b>) scale relative to the number of available scenes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic view of the processing scheme of the precipitation area delineation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Workflow of the selection of the best model. See <a href="#sec2dot4-remotesensing-11-02302" class="html-sec">Section 2.4</a> for a detailed description.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Average feature importance and standard deviations relative to the most important feature of the feature space. Feature importance was calculated for a subset of all available scenes from the training data set using all non-static predictors. The error bars were calculated based on one standard deviation of each predictor.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) diagram comparing the probability of detection (POD) with the false alarm ration (FAR) based on the mean prediction samples of all test weeks in 2017. The colors / shape indicate the different temporal resolutions/different balanced data sets.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Performance of the precipitation area delineation for eight days (5–12 July 2017) as boxplots. The validation scores are calculated for each validation scene of these eight days. The boxes display the 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles. Whiskers indicate extreme data up to 1.5 times of the interquartile range. Outliers are marked as crosses. The width of the boxes is relative to the available number of validation scenes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Performance of the new precipitation area delineation for July 2017 as boxplots for low, medium and high precipitation amounts according to percentiles. The boxes display the 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles. Whiskers indicate extreme data up to 1.5 times of the interquartile range. Outliers are marked as crosses. The width of the boxes is relative to the available number of validation scenes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparison of the performance of the new precipitation area delineation (left) with IMERG’s IR only, both with reference to IMERG’s gauge calibrated MW precipitation on July 7th 2017 on 4:00 p.m. UTC. These estimates are available for the grey MW swath marked area. Snow covered areas do not fulfill the quality index from IMERG.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Performance of the precipitation area delineation using IR only precipitation for July 2017 as boxplots for low, medium and high precipitation rates according to percentiles. The boxes display the 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles. Whiskers indicate extreme data up to 1.5 times of the interquartile range. Outliers are marked as crosses. The width of the boxes is relative to the available number of validation scenes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Distribution of mean validation measures over the Tibetan Plateau (TiP) for 2017 (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) with the precipitation totals (<b>e</b>) and frequency of gauge calibrated MW precipitation for 2017 (<b>f</b>).</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 6435 KiB  
Article
A New Retrieval Algorithm for Soil Moisture Index from Thermal Infrared Sensor On-Board Geostationary Satellites over Europe and Africa and Its Validation
by Nicolas Ghilain, Alirio Arboleda, Okke Batelaan, Jonas Ardö, Isabel Trigo, Jose-Miguel Barrios and Francoise Gellens-Meulenberghs
Remote Sens. 2019, 11(17), 1968; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11171968 - 21 Aug 2019
Cited by 13 | Viewed by 5013
Abstract
Monitoring soil moisture at the Earth’surface is of great importance for drought early warnings. Spaceborne remote sensing is a keystone in monitoring at continental scale, as satellites can make observations of locations which are scarcely monitored by ground-based techniques. In recent years, several [...] Read more.
Monitoring soil moisture at the Earth’surface is of great importance for drought early warnings. Spaceborne remote sensing is a keystone in monitoring at continental scale, as satellites can make observations of locations which are scarcely monitored by ground-based techniques. In recent years, several soil moisture products for continental scale monitoring became available from the main space agencies around the world. Making use of sensors aboard polar satellites sampling in the microwave spectrum, soil moisture can be measured and mapped globally every few days at a spatial resolution as fine as 25 km. However, complementarity of satellite observations is a crucial issue to improve the quality of the estimations provided. In this context, measurements within the visible and infrared from geostationary satellites provide information on the surface from a totally different perspective. In this study, we design a new retrieval algorithm for daily soil moisture monitoring based only on the land surface temperature observations derived from the METEOSAT second generation geostationary satellites. Soil moisture has been retrieved from the retrieval algorithm for an eight years period over Europe and Africa at the SEVIRI sensor spatial resolution (3 km at the sub-satellite point). The results, only available for clear sky and partly cloudy conditions, are for the first time extensively evaluated against in-situ observations provided by the International Soil Moisture Network and FLUXNET at sites across Europe and Africa. The soil moisture retrievals have approximately the same accuracy as the soil moisture products derived from microwave sensors, with the most accurate estimations for semi-arid regions of Europe and Africa, and a progressive degradation of the accuracy towards northern latitudes of Europe. Although some possible improvements can be expected by a better use of other products derived from SEVIRI, the new approach developped and assessed here is a valuable alternative to microwave sensors to monitor daily soil moisture at the resolution of few kilometers over entire continents and could reveal a good complementarity to an improved monitoring system, as the algorithm can produce surface soil moisture with less than 1 day delay over clear sky and non-steady cloudy conditions (over 10% of the time). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remote Sensing of Regional Soil Moisture)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The viewing zenithal angle (VZA) from MSG/SEVIRI, expressed in degrees, is varying over the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The exponential relation between daily heating rates and ground measurements of surface soil moisture at Tojal, Portugal, has been calibrated with the SCEM-UA algorithm. Each parameters is determined as the median of the probability density function.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The validation sites of the soil moisture retrievals are spread over Europe and Africa, some are situated in challenging environments or settings for satellite remote sensing in terms of complexity of landscapes or topography. Most of the validation sites are grouped in networks, sharing same measurement methodologies, but not necessarily grouped geographically.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The topography around some SMOSMANIA-E sites is not favourable for MSG/SEVIRI soil moisture validation (two examples shown): the contrasts in topography within one pixel do not allow a fair comparison, as noted in the correlation results obtained in this study. Red and green markers indicate the location of the site within its overlapping MSG/SEVIRI pixel.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of daily surface soil moisture retrieved from MSG/SEVIRI LST (black) and measured locally (grey), for a set of 8 sites from different networks and climates: Agoufou (Mali, AMMA, BWh), Demokeya (Sudan, CarboAfrica, BWh), Dahra (Senegal, AMMA, BSh), Cathedral Peak (South Africa, COSMOS, Cwb), Guarena (Spain, REMEDHUS, BSk), Las Majadas del Tietar (Spain, CarboEurope, Csa), St Felix (France, SMOSMANIA, Cfc), Friedling (Germany, UDC-SMOS, Dfc) (from (<b>top left</b>) to (<b>bottom right</b>)).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The quality of sites representativity within the SEVIRI pixel affects the statistical results obtained. In Sabrès (France), soil moisture retrievals from SEVIRI (black) compares well with ground observations (grey) except in Summer: intensive irrigation is detected, while the ground observation are taken at a non-irrigated site. Removing the summer improves the statistics.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Statistical scores of the comparison between local observations and soil moisture derived from LSASAF LST, presented in a Taylor diagram. Each colored point represents the comparison for a set of data at a in-situ validation site. Codes of colour indicate the climate type region associated to the data. Average of correlations par climate type is represented with bigger symbols next to the correlation curved axis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The comparison of MSG/SEVIRI (black), SMOS (magenta) and ASCAT (cyan) products (low-pass filter applied) with observations (red) at sites show sometimes strong consistency (R13, REMEDHUS Spain), or disagreement (Llano de los Juanes, Spain and Agoufou, Mali).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The correlation (average (crosses), distribution (boxplot with median, inter-quartile and extrema)) of the SEVIRI retrieval with ground observations is compared to scores obtained with SMOS L3 and ASCAT H25 products. Highest correlations for SEVIRI are obtained in five groups. * Correlation is improved with SEVIRI when removing summer season due to irrigation in the SMOSMANIA area (second box). ** SMOS only available for a selection of site-years.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Tri-monthly availability of daily soil moisture retrieval averaged over 5 years. Cloud cover affects the number of available retrieval, especially over the equator and during winter over Europe. Sahelian regions are well sampled.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Daily heating rates are increasingly sensitive to wind speed over non vegetated areas with up to 15% of change under another wind speed regime.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>(<b>Left</b>) Apparent wet peaks from SSM retrieval in Bamba (Mali) are correlated with AOD forecast from MACCII. (<b>Right</b>) Soil moisture retrieved over Africa for 19 February 2008 displays an anomously large wet area in Sahara, due to a large dust storm and local fire emissions.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 3343 KiB  
Article
Land Surface Temperature Derivation under All Sky Conditions through Integrating AMSR-E/AMSR-2 and MODIS/GOES Observations
by Donglian Sun, Yu Li, Xiwu Zhan, Paul Houser, Chaowei Yang, Long Chiu and Ruixin Yang
Remote Sens. 2019, 11(14), 1704; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11141704 - 18 Jul 2019
Cited by 34 | Viewed by 5248
Abstract
Land surface temperature (LST) is an important input to the Atmosphere–Land Exchange Inverse (ALEXI) model to derive the Evaporative Stress Index (ESI) for drought monitoring. Currently, LST inputs to the ALEXI model come from the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) and Moderate Resolution [...] Read more.
Land surface temperature (LST) is an important input to the Atmosphere–Land Exchange Inverse (ALEXI) model to derive the Evaporative Stress Index (ESI) for drought monitoring. Currently, LST inputs to the ALEXI model come from the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES) and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) products, but clouds affect them. While passive microwave (e.g., AMSR-E and AMSR-2) sensors can penetrate non-rainy clouds and observe the Earth’s surface, but usually with a coarse spatial resolution, how to utilize multiple instruments’ advantages is an important methodology in remote sensing. In this study, we developed a new five-channel algorithm to derive LST from the microwave AMSR-E and AMSR-2 measurements and calibrate to the MODIS and GOES LST products. A machine learning method is implemented to further improve its performance. The MODIS and GOES LST products still show better performance than the AMSR-E and AMSR-2 LSTs when evaluated against the ground observations. Therefore, microwave LSTs are only used to fill the gaps due to clouds in the MODIS and GOES LST products. A gap filling method is further applied to fill the remaining gaps in the merged LSTs and downscale to the same spatial resolution as the MODIS and GOES products. With the daily integrated LST at the same spatial resolution as the MODIS and GOES products and available under nearly all sky conditions, the drought index, like the ESI, can be updated on daily basis. The initial implementation results demonstrate that the daily drought map can catch the fast changes of drought conditions and capture the signals of flash drought, and make flash drought monitoring become possible. It is expected that a drought map that is available on daily basis will benefit future drought monitoring. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Hydrometeorological Prediction and Mapping)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Cloud free MODIS LST, (<b>b</b>) the merged MODIS and AMSR-E LST, (<b>c</b>) the original MODIS LST in the zoomed area (inside the gold square of <a href="#remotesensing-11-01704-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>a), (<b>d</b>) the original merged LST in the zoomed region (inside the gold square of <a href="#remotesensing-11-01704-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>b), (<b>e</b>) the merged LST with the regular gap-filling method, and (<b>f</b>) the integrated LST with the GWR-based filling algorithm applied to fill the gaps and also downscale to the same resolution of the MODIS LST, during nighttime on 15 December 2008.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Scatter plots of MODIS ascending (<b>a</b>) and descending (<b>b</b>), and AMSR-E ascending (<b>c</b>) and descending (<b>d</b>) LST against the SURFRAD observations. The RMS is the Root Mean Square (RMS) error, and R represents Pearson correlation coefficient, N stands for sample number. The black diagonal refers to 1:1 line and the pink line is the least square fit line.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Scatter plots of GOES LST products at 1.5 h before noon (<b>a</b>) and 1.5 h after sunrise (<b>b</b>), and the retrieved AMSR-2 ascending (<b>c</b>) and descending (<b>d</b>) LST vs. the SURFRAD observations in 2015. The RMS and R are the same as in <a href="#remotesensing-11-01704-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a>. The black diagonal refers to 1:1 line, the pink line is the least square fit line.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) Cloud free MODIS LST at 5 km resolution, (<b>b</b>) the derived AMSR-E LST at 25 km resolution, (<b>c</b>) the merged MODIS and AMSR-E LST at 25 km resolution, and (<b>d</b>) the integrated LST from MODIS and AMSR-E with the GWR-based method applied to fill the gaps and also downscale to the same 5 km resolution as the MODIS LST, during daytime on 5 December 2008.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Cloud free MODIS LST at 5 km resolution, (<b>b</b>) the AMSR-E LST at 25 km resolution, (<b>c</b>) the merged MODIS and AMSR-E LST at 25 km resolution, and (<b>d</b>) the integrated LST from MODIS and AMSR-E with the GWR-based method applied to fill the gaps and also downscale to the same 5 km resolution as the MODIS LST, during nighttime on 2 June 2008.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Cloud free GOES LST with 4 km resolution at 1.5 h before noon, (<b>b</b>) the AMSR-2 ascending LST at 10 km resolution, (<b>c</b>) the merged GOES and AMSR-2 LST at 10 km resolution, and (<b>d</b>) the integrated GOES and AMSR-2 LST with the GWR-based method applied to fill the gaps and also downscale to the same 4 km resolution as the GOES LST, on 19 July 2013.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Cloud free GOES LST with 4 km resolution at 1.5 h after sunrise, (<b>b</b>) the AMSR-2 descending LST at 10 km resolution, (<b>c</b>) the merged GOES and AMSR-2 LST at 10 km resolution, and (<b>d</b>) the integrated LST from GOES and AMSR-2 with the GWR-based method applied to fill the gaps and also downscale to the same 4 km resolution as the GOES LST, on 27 September 2013.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>An example of daily proxy ESI with the integrated MODIS and AMSR-E LST input (the first column), as compared with the current ESI (the second column), and the weekly US Drought Monitor (USDM) drought map (the third column).</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop