Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Sea water dielectric constant, temperature and remote sensing of Sea Surface Salinity E. P. Dinnat 1,2, D. M. Le Vine 1, J. Boutin 3, X. Yin 3, 1 Cryospheric.

Published byElinor Simpson Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Sea water dielectric constant, temperature and remote sensing of Sea Surface Salinity E. P. Dinnat 1,2, D. M. Le Vine 1, J. Boutin 3, X. Yin 3, 1 Cryospheric."— Presentation transcript:

1 Sea water dielectric constant, temperature and remote sensing of Sea Surface Salinity E. P. Dinnat 1,2, D. M. Le Vine 1, J. Boutin 3, X. Yin 3, 1 Cryospheric Sciences Lab., NASA GSFC, Greenbelt, MD, U.S.A 2 Chapman University, Orange, CA, U.S.A. 3 LOCEAN, Paris, France

2 SSS retrieved by SMOS and Aquarius differs significantly. Effects of dielectric constant model, ancillary data for SST? 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Motivation SSS: Aquarius – SMOS (Jan 2012)

3 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Outline Presentation of SMOS and Aquarius – Mission parameters – Quick overview of calibration and retrieval algorithm Comparison of SSS from SMOS and Aquarius Impact of: – sea water dielectric constant model – ancillary SST Comparisons with Argo in situ data Summary

4 Both measure sea surface salinity (SSS) globally, monthly, precision ~ 0.2 psu. L-band radiometry. Sun synchronous polar orbit (equatorial ascending node = 6 PM for Aquarius, = 6AM for SMOS) Aquarius has 3 beams pointing across track (pushbroom) towards the night side. SMOS is an imager (interferometer): better spatial resolution, multiple incidence angles over a wide range. Aquarius has a better radiometric sensitivity & scatterometer to correct for effects of surface roughness. 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. SMOS and Aquarius/SAC-D Mission Parameters Aquarius has 3 beams pointing toward the night side of the Earth SMOS images a large area under multiple incidence angle and at high resolution

5 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. SMOS and Aquarius/SAC-D Algorithm and vicarious calibration

6 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. SMOS and Aquarius/SAC-D Algorithm and vicarious calibration

7 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. SMOS and Aquarius/SAC-D Algorithm and vicarious calibration

8 Aquarius SSS L2 V3.0 Source: Physical Oceanography Distributed Active Archive Center http://podaac.jpl.nasa.gov/ Along track 1.44 sec. Binned monthly at 1°x1° Ascending & descending orbits combined SMOS SSS L3 (LOCEAN processing) Source: Centre Aval de Traitement des Données SMOS (CATDS) eftp.ifremer.fr/salinity/ Monthly maps at 0.25°x0.25° Binned monthly at 1°x1° Ascending & descending orbits combined 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Comparison of SSS from SMOS and Aquarius Data sources and processing

9 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Comparison of SSS from SMOS and Aquarius Global map of SSS from Aquarius and SMOS (Jan 2012) SMOSAquarius Very similar large-scale structures, but significant regional differences (e.g. freshening around coastlines for SMOS, higher SSS close to ice edge at 60S). ‘fresh’ SSS =land contamination

10 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Comparison of SSS from SMOS and Aquarius Differences SSS Aquarius – SMOS versus latitude Aquarius – SMOS vs LatitudeAquarius - SMOS Differences shows large dependence on latitude, cf. around 40N, 50S and 60S.

11 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Comparison of SSS from SMOS and Aquarius Differences SSS Aquarius – SMOS depends on SST SSTAquarius - SMOS Differences pattern is similar to SST pattern.

12 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Comparison of SSS from SMOS and Aquarius Differences SSS Aquarius – SMOS versus SST Aquarius – SMOS vs SSTAquarius - SMOS Aquarius SSS is 1/ fresher for very cold water ( 22°C)

13 Impact of the dielectric constant model We reprocess Aquarius data using SMOS dielectric constant model (i.e. Klein and Swift 1977) for: Radiometers Calibration SSS Retrieval 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

14 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Impact of the dielectric constant model Aquarius reprocessed with SMOS dielectric constant |Aq – SMOS| - |Aq_repr – SMOS| Aquarius match with SMOS is improved between 6°C and 18°degC (~ 0.2 psu) improvedsameworse better worse

15 Impact of SST ancillary product Aquarius : NOAA Optimally Interpolated SST (IR satellite) “Reynolds” SMOS : Operational Sea Surface Temperature and Sea Ice Analysis OSTIA (IR and microwave satellites) 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

16 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Impact of SST ancillary product SST differences OSTIA – Reynolds NOAA OI Mean = 0.2C Median = 0.1C

17 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Impact of SST ancillary product SST differences OSTIA – Reynolds NOAA OI Mean = 0.2C Median = 0.1C

18 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Impact of SST ancillary product SST interpolated at Aquarius footprints  SST OSTIA – Reynolds (°C)  TbV OSTIA – NOAA (K)

19 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Impact of SST ancillary product SST interpolated at Aquarius footprints  SST OSTIA – Reynolds (°C)  TbV OSTIA – Reynolds (K) ~ 3years of data  TbV OSTIA – NOAA (K) 7-day global average

20 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Impact of SST ancillary product SST interpolated at Aquarius footprints  SST OSTIA – Reynolds (°C)  TbV OSTIA – Reynolds (K) ~ 3years of data  TbV OSTIA – NOAA (K) 7-day global average  SSS OSTIA – Reynolds (K) Week 46

21 Comparison to Argo in situ data (*) global network of 3000 free-drifting profiling floats (http://www.argo.net/) 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

22 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. SSS difference with Argo for all algorithms Aquarius – Argo SSS (psu)Aquarius (nominal) - Argo

23 SSS difference between Aquarius and SMOS is in part due to dielectric constant model (~0.2 psu in temperate waters) Large differences remain in very cold waters and around coastlines Differences in ancillary SST: no impact on calibration large (~1 psu) SSS differences in cold waters. 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Summary  SSS OSTIA – Reynolds (K) Aquarius – Argo SSS (psu)

24 BACKUP 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

25 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

26 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

27 Differences in ancillary SSS used in calibration SMOS: region in Pacific ocean to compute and Ocean Target Transformation (OTT) The OTT consists of removing average difference between measured Tb and forward model OTT uses ancillary SSS 11/13/2014 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

28 Ancillary SSS differences in SMOS calibration targetAncillary SSS differences in SMOS calibration target 11/13/2014

29 Comparison of SSS from Aquarius and Argo~22 months of dataComparison of SSS from Aquarius and Argo~22 months of data SSS ‘error’ (= difference with Argo) depends on SST  An empirical correction to SSS is introduced in V3.0 as a function of SST:  SSS = -0.0019594*T 2 + 1.1257*T - 161.4934 Aquarius - Argo Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Aquarius - Argo 11/13/2014

30 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. SSS V3.0 – Argo : Nominal and ‘bias adjusted’ Aquarius - ArgoAquarius bias adjusted- Argo

31 SSS V3.0 – Argo : Nominal and ‘bias adjusted’ vs SSTSSS V3.0 – Argo : Nominal and ‘bias adjusted’ vs SST V3.0 bias adjustment reduces error except for very cold waters Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Aquarius - ArgoAquarius bias adjusted- Argo 11/13/2014

32 SSS V3.0 – Argo : Nominal and reprocessed with Klein and Swift model Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Aquarius - ArgoAquarius KS - Argo 11/13/2014

33 SSS V3.0 – Argo : Nominal and reprocessed with Klein and Swift model vs SST Both model show fresher water than Argo in warm water (precipitations/stratification) KS model shows smallest differences from 6 degC to 22 degC Very cold waters are worsened by the reprocessing Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. Aquarius - ArgoAquarius KS - Argo 11/13/2014

34 SSS difference with Argo for all algorithmsSSS difference with Argo for all algorithms Cold waters < 6 deg C nominal L2 matches Argo the best 6 < SST < 22 deg C bias adjusted SSS reduces bias in nominal L2, KS provides the best match SST > 25 degC bias adjusted SSS provides the best match, but the lower SSS in other products could be due to precipitations. Should it be adjusted? Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. 11/13/2014

35 Inter-beam difference vs latitude (top) ascending and (bottom) descending orbits outer - middle outer - inner middle - inner Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. 11/13/2014

36 Dinnat et al., Aquarius Science Team Meeting, Seattle, WA, U.S.A. SSS difference between Aquarius reprocessed and SMOS Aquarius (Reprocessed) - SMOS Reprocessed Aquarius SSS have reduced differences with SMOS SSS for SST between 6°C and 18°C Nominal Aquarius Reprocessed Aquarius (SMOS  )

Download ppt "Sea water dielectric constant, temperature and remote sensing of Sea Surface Salinity E. P. Dinnat 1,2, D. M. Le Vine 1, J. Boutin 3, X. Yin 3, 1 Cryospheric."

Similar presentations

Analysis of AMSR-E C & X-band Tb data dependencies with wind & wave characteristics.

Analysis of AMSR-E C & X-band Tb data dependencies with wind & wave characteristics.
On the use of observations from the Aquarius/SAC-D mission to study the cryosphere Emmanuel Dinnat 1,2 and Ludovic Brucker 1,3 1. Cryospheric Sciences.

On the use of observations from the Aquarius/SAC-D mission to study the cryosphere Emmanuel Dinnat 1,2 and Ludovic Brucker 1,3 1. Cryospheric Sciences.
F. Wentz, T. Meissner, J. Scott and K. Hilburn Remote Sensing Systems 2014 Aquarius / SAC-D Science Team Meeting November 11- 14,

F. Wentz, T. Meissner, J. Scott and K. Hilburn Remote Sensing Systems 2014 Aquarius / SAC-D Science Team Meeting November ,
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity www.argans.co.uk Level 2 Ocean Salinity L1 -> L2OS tools 12 February 2014 ARGANS & SMOS L2OS ESL.

SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity L1 -> L2OS tools 12 February 2014 ARGANS & SMOS L2OS ESL.
Www.argans.co.uk/smos SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity Using TEC estimated from Stokes 3 24 October 2012 ACRI-st, LOCEAN & ARGANS SMOS+polarimetry.

SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity Using TEC estimated from Stokes 3 24 October 2012 ACRI-st, LOCEAN & ARGANS SMOS+polarimetry.
1 © ACRI-ST, all rights reserved – 2012 TEC estimation Jean-Luc Vergely (ACRI-ST) Jacqueline Boutin (LOCEAN)

1 © ACRI-ST, all rights reserved – 2012 TEC estimation Jean-Luc Vergely (ACRI-ST) Jacqueline Boutin (LOCEAN)
Aquarius Status Salinity Retrieval and Applications D. M. Le Vine NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD 20771 E. P. Dinnat, G. Lagerloef, P. de Matthaeis, H. Kao, F.

Aquarius Status Salinity Retrieval and Applications D. M. Le Vine NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD E. P. Dinnat, G. Lagerloef, P. de Matthaeis, H. Kao, F.
The Aquarius Salinity Retrieval Algorithm Frank J. Wentz and Thomas Meissner, Remote Sensing Systems Gary S. Lagerloef, Earth and Space Research David.

The Aquarius Salinity Retrieval Algorithm Frank J. Wentz and Thomas Meissner, Remote Sensing Systems Gary S. Lagerloef, Earth and Space Research David.
IFREMER EMPIRICAL ROUGHNESS MODEL Joe Tenerelli, CLS, Brest, France, November 4, 2010.

IFREMER EMPIRICAL ROUGHNESS MODEL Joe Tenerelli, CLS, Brest, France, November 4, 2010.
1 Boutin et al., Avril 2015, SMOS-OCEAN TOSCA SMOS Salinity anomalies – Towards the correction of SMOS SSS systematic biases - J. Boutin 1, N. Martin 1,

1 Boutin et al., Avril 2015, SMOS-OCEAN TOSCA SMOS Salinity anomalies – Towards the correction of SMOS SSS systematic biases - J. Boutin 1, N. Martin 1,
1 Boutin et al., 2014 SMOS Salinity anomalies: new insights into SMOS capability at sensing SSS variability and into the improvements to be made in the.

1 Boutin et al., 2014 SMOS Salinity anomalies: new insights into SMOS capability at sensing SSS variability and into the improvements to be made in the.
PERFORMANCE AND POTENTIAL FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE SMOS DIELECTRIC CONSTANT MODEL S. Guimbard and the BEC team Institut de Ciències del Mar CSIC SMOS Barcelona.

PERFORMANCE AND POTENTIAL FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE SMOS DIELECTRIC CONSTANT MODEL S. Guimbard and the BEC team Institut de Ciències del Mar CSIC SMOS Barcelona.
Aquarius/SAC-D Mission Validation Working Group Summary Gary Lagerloef 6 th Science Meeting; Seattle, WA, USA 19-21 July 2010.

Aquarius/SAC-D Mission Validation Working Group Summary Gary Lagerloef 6 th Science Meeting; Seattle, WA, USA July 2010.
Aquarius/SAC-D Mission Mission Simulators - Gary Lagerloef 6 th Science Meeting; Seattle, WA, USA 19-21 July 2010.

Aquarius/SAC-D Mission Mission Simulators - Gary Lagerloef 6 th Science Meeting; Seattle, WA, USA July 2010.
Aquarius/SAC-D Mission Error Validation and Early Orbit Corrections Gary Lagerloef 6 th Science Meeting; Seattle, WA, USA 19-21 July 2010.

Aquarius/SAC-D Mission Error Validation and Early Orbit Corrections Gary Lagerloef 6 th Science Meeting; Seattle, WA, USA July 2010.
1 Satellite & In Situ Salinity (SISS) Working Group: Current Status and Future Plans Yi Chao, Co-Chair (Jacqueline Boutin, Co-Chair) Aquarius Science Meeting.

1 Satellite & In Situ Salinity (SISS) Working Group: Current Status and Future Plans Yi Chao, Co-Chair (Jacqueline Boutin, Co-Chair) Aquarius Science Meeting.
MWR Algorithms (Wentz): Provide and validate wind, rain and sea ice [TBD] retrieval algorithms for MWR data Between now and launch (April 2011) 1. In-orbit.

MWR Algorithms (Wentz): Provide and validate wind, rain and sea ice [TBD] retrieval algorithms for MWR data Between now and launch (April 2011) 1. In-orbit.
1 Improved Sea Surface Temperature (SST) Analyses for Climate NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center Asheville, NC Thomas M. Smith Richard W. Reynolds Kenneth.

1 Improved Sea Surface Temperature (SST) Analyses for Climate NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center Asheville, NC Thomas M. Smith Richard W. Reynolds Kenneth.
1 NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center April 2005 Climate Observation Program Blended SST Analysis Changes and Implications for the Buoy Network 1.Plans.

1 NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center April 2005 Climate Observation Program Blended SST Analysis Changes and Implications for the Buoy Network 1.Plans.
MWR Roughness Correction Algorithm for the Aquarius SSS Retrieval W. Linwood Jones, Yazan Hejazin, Salem Al-Nimri Central Florida Remote Sensing Lab University.

MWR Roughness Correction Algorithm for the Aquarius SSS Retrieval W. Linwood Jones, Yazan Hejazin, Salem Al-Nimri Central Florida Remote Sensing Lab University.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google