The VIEW antenna is located on an open beach and is more isolated from structures which can cause distortion; therefore, its pattern shape is similar to.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
GOME-2 polarisation data and products L.G. Tilstra (1,2), I. Aben (1), P. Stammes (2) (1) SRON; (2) KNMI GSAG #42, EUMETSAT,
Advertisements

Teresa Garner Larry Atkinson. Introduction to HFRADAR Sites & Data Circulation in the Bay Tidal Sub-tidal Quality Control Efforts Instrument Comparisons.
Modulation Error Ratio and Signal-to-Noise Ratio Demystified Presented by Sunrise Telecom Broadband …a step ahead.
Measuring Two-Dimensional Surface Velocity Distribution
RAPID-SCAN DOW RADAR OBSERVATIONS OF TORNADOES DURING VORTEX and 2010 Joshua Wurman, Karen Kosiba, Paul C. Robinson Center for Severe Weather Research.
FIELD OBSERVATIONS OF TIDAL CURRENT IN THE MOUTH OF ISAHAYA BAY BY MEANS OF DBF OCEAN RADAR AND ADCP DURING AUTUMN SEASON IN 2005 Kenta Takenouchi 1),
Surface Current Observations with Drifting Buoys in the Philippines Archipelago Carter Ohlmann University of California, Santa Barbara DRI Objective: Provide.
SAR Altimetry in Coastal Zone: Performances, Limits, Perspectives Salvatore Dinardo Serco/ESRIN Bruno Lucas Deimos/ESRIN Jerome Benveniste ESA/ESRIN.
Lynn K. Shay 1, J. Martinez-Pedraja 1, M. Powell 2, B. Haus 1, and J. Brewster 1 1 Division of Meteorology and Physical Oceanography, RSMAS 2 Hurricane.
Determination of Station Depths Relative to NGVD29 Methods and results Jan 24, 2003 Charles Seaton.
Comparison of Gap Interpolation Methodologies for Water Level Time Series Using Perl/PDL By Aimee Mostella, Alexey Sadovski, Scott Duff, Patrick Michaud,
Specular reflectorquasi-specular reflector quasi-Lambert reflector Lambert reflector Limiting Forms of Reflection and Scatter from a Surface.
Influence of Antenna Pattern Distortions on Surface Current Data collected by a CODAR HF-Radar System Josh T. Kohut Scott M. Glenn Donald E. Barrick.
Surface Current Mapping in the Lower Chesapeake Bay Larry Atkinson Teresa Garner Jose Blanco.
Comparison and Evaluation of Scatterometer (SCR) observed wind data with buoy wind data Xinzhong Zhang Remote Sensing December 8 th, 2009.
Wave Measurements from SeaSondes. Measurements Significant Wave Height Wave Period Peak Wave Direction Wind Direction.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control Processes for Current Measurements From USCG ATONs Jennifer Dussault Qartod II February 28,2005.
Remote Sensing: John Wilkin Active microwave systems (4) Coastal HF Radar IMCS Building Room 214C ext 251 Dunes of sand.
Remote Sensing: John Wilkin Active microwave systems Coastal HF Radar IMCS Building Room 214C ph: Dunes of sand and seaweed,
The Calibration Process
SeaSonde Overview.
Profilers. Wind profilers are phased array radars that measure the wind as a function of height above a fixed location. Characteristics: Wavelength: 33.
Using NPOL (the NASA S-band polarimetric radar), and a network of 2D video disdrometers for external radar calibration and rain rate estimation, and to.
Modeling study of the coastal upwelling system of the Monterey Bay area during 1999 and I. Shulman (1), J.D. Paduan (2), L. K. Rosenfeld (2), S.
SCM 330 Ocean Discovery through Technology Area F GE.
CODAR Ben Kravitz September 29, Outline What is CODAR? Doppler shift Bragg scatter How CODAR works What CODAR can tell us.
Surface Current Mapping with High Frequency RADAR.
Surface Current Mapping in the Lower Chesapeake Bay.
0 0 Figure 3. Near real-time comparisons of 6 minute NOAA ADCP data (blue) and hourly CODAR data (red) at (YS) York Spit (CH) Cape Henry and (TS) Thimble.
L. K. Shay 1, J. Martinez-Pedraja 1, B. K. Haus 1, Brad Parks 1, Peter Vertes 1, Lew Gramer 2, and J. Brewster 1 1 Division of Meteorology and Physical.
An Introduction to Radiometry: Taking Measurements, Getting Closure, and Data Applications Part I: Guide to Radiometric Measurements (See Video)
Data Buoy Cooperation Panel Scientific and Technical Workshop Scripps Institution of Oceanography La Jolla, CA Recent Buoy Developments at NOAA/NOS/CO-OPS.
Tide corrections from KGPS and a precise geoid John Brozena, Randy Herr, Vicki Childers.
NOAA’s CENTER for OPERATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PRODUCTS and SERVICES NOAA/NOS/CO-OPS Maritime Services Current Observation Project San Francisco Bay and Vicinity.
Surface Current Mapping in the Lower Chesapeake Bay INTRODUCTION High frequency RADAR antennas are used to observe the surface circulation patterns in.
Automated Weather Observations from Ships and Buoys: A Future Resource for Climatologists Shawn R. Smith Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies.
Ocean Wave and Current Radars By Laura Elston. Our earth is a very aqueous environment with nearly three quarters of it covered by ocean. So how do we.
1 | Program Name or Ancillary Texteere.energy.gov Water Power Peer Review Assessment of Energy Production Potential from Ocean Currents along the United.
SWOT Near Nadir Ka-band SAR Interferometry: SWOT Airborne Experiment Xiaoqing Wu, JPL, California Institute of Technology, USA Scott Hensley, JPL, California.
Modeling the upper ocean response to Hurricane Igor Zhimin Ma 1, Guoqi Han 2, Brad deYoung 1 1 Memorial University 2 Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
SCCOOS Web Site Training Surface Currents and Wave Conditions.
Modulation Error Ratio and Signal-to-Noise Ratio Demystified Presented by Sunrise Telecom Broadband …a step ahead.
Sang-Ho Lee*, Hong-Bae Moon, Chang-Soo Kim Dept. Oceanography, BK21 Team, Kunsan Nat’l Univ., Korea Accuracy of currents measured by HF radar in the coastal.
Application of Radial and Elliptical Surface Current Measurements to Better Resolve Coastal Features  Robert K. Forney, Hugh Roarty, Scott Glenn 
Ship-based observations: CTD, Nansen and Niskin bottles, inverting thermometer and Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Ben Lee December 2, 2005 EPS 131.
Hindcast Simulations of Hydrodynamics in the Northern Gulf of Mexico Using the FVCOM Model Zizang Yang 1, Eugene Wei 1, Aijun Zhang 2, Richard Patchen.
As components of the GOES-R ABI Air Quality products, a multi-channel algorithm similar to MODIS/VIIRS for NOAA’s next generation geostationary satellite.
Tide corrections from KGPS and a precise geoid
Ocean Surface Current Observations in PWS Carter Ohlmann Institute for Computational Earth System Science, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA.
Figure 2. Near real-time comparisons of 6 minute NOAA ADCP data (blue) and hourly CODAR data (red) at (YS) York Spit (CH) Cape Henry and (TS) Thimble Shoals.
Ocean Dynamics Algorithm GOES-R AWG Eileen Maturi, NOAA/NESDIS/STAR/SOCD, Igor Appel, STAR/IMSG, Andy Harris, CICS, Univ of Maryland AMS 92 nd Annual Meeting,
Validation of Satellite-derived Clear-sky Atmospheric Temperature Inversions in the Arctic Yinghui Liu 1, Jeffrey R. Key 2, Axel Schweiger 3, Jennifer.
Navigation NAU 102 Lesson 7. Introduction Nautical Publications Charts are not enough! We need more information. Voyage planning. Often paper & electronic.
RD Instruments Home of the ADCP Measuring Water in Motion and Motion in Water AVOIDING BIASED DATA DURING REAL TIME HADCP DATA COLLECTION.
International Ocean Color Science Meeting, Darmstadt, Germany, May 6-8, 2013 III. MODIS-Aqua normalized water leaving radiance nLw III.1. R2010 vs. R2012.
National Data Buoy Center Ian Sears National Data Buoy Center An Overview of Quality Control Procedures for Buoy Data.
Seismic phases and earthquake location
Surface Current Mapping in the Lower Chesapeake Bay INTRODUCTION High frequency RADAR antennas are used to observe the surface circulation patterns in.
CASE #3: Floating Away The Situation: While entering New York Harbor, several boxes of rubber ducks fell off their cargo ship. Using the data provided,
Seasonal mean Arctic Ocean climatology calculated from the archived data (ADAM: Arctic ocean Data Archive for Model validation & data assimilation) beta-version.
QA/QC Methods for 13 MHz Brant Beach (BRNT) Test Case
Evaluation of Three Antenna Pattern Measurements for a 25 MHz SeaSonde
Surface Current Mapping in the Lower Chesapeake Bay
A Closer Look at CODAR HF Radar Spectra
Bistatic Systems: Preparing for Multistatic
The Calibration Process
Robert K. Forney, Hugh Roarty, Scott Glenn March 5th, 2015
Quality Assurance Measures for High Frequency Radar Systems
LCDR George Wright, USN OC 3570 – Winter 2008 Friday, March 14th 2008
A Multi-static HF Radar Network for the
Presentation transcript:

The VIEW antenna is located on an open beach and is more isolated from structures which can cause distortion; therefore, its pattern shape is similar to an ideal pattern. The CBBT antenna has a 360 degree ocean facing view and the pattern shows more distortion due to the proximity of conductive materials, some within a wavelength of the antenna. Pattern Measurements CHESAPEAKE BAY CODAR DATA QUALITY &VALIDATION MEASURES The Center for Coastal Physical Oceanography at Old Dominion University, through a project funded by CIT and NOAA, operates two CODAR standard range (25 MHz) HF RADAR antennas in the lower Bay: one located at Ocean View (VIEW) and another on the 4th island of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel (CBBT). Baseline Comparisons Figure 2: a) VIEW measured pattern b) CBBT measured pattern c) ideal pattern A basic check of data consistency with two facing CODAR HF RADAR instruments is a comparison of data along the baseline, the line between the sites. Along this line the radial velocities ought to agree well in magnitude and have opposite signs. In particular, at the middle of this baseline, where the radial footprint areas are very similar, the data should match within the velocity errors of the measurements. (Lipa, 2003) A mid-baseline comparison with two months of data (June :00 - August :00 UTC) for radials calculated using ideal antenna patterns demonstrates a lack of internal consistency between sites (Figure 4a). However, the same comparison for the same time period using measured antenna patterns shows a dramatic improvement (Figure 4b). Data collected when the monopole signal to noise ratio was less than 25 dB were not included in this analysis. The slope of a least squares fit line should ideally be 1. Use of the ideal pattern radials yields a slope of 0.24 while use of the measured pattern radials raises the slope value to Figure 4: Radial speeds from the CBBT and VIEW sites plotted against each other for radials determined using (a) ideal patterns and (b) measured patterns. In both cases, a least squares line and the equation for this line are also displayed. Lipa, B.J., B.Nyden, D.S. Ullman, and E. Terrill, “SeaSonde Radial Velocities: Derivation and Internal Consistency,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng.,vol. 31, no.4, pp , Oct NOAA Ocean Systems Test and Evaluation Program (OSTEP), "Test, Evaluation, and Implementation of Current Measurement Systems on Aids-To-Navigation", NOAA Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 043, Silver Spring, MD, Yoshikawa,Y., A. Masuda, K. Marubayashi, M. Ishibashi, and A Okuno, “On the accuracy of HF radar measurement in the Tsushima Strait,” J. Geophys. Res., 111, C04009, doi: /2005JC This project is supported by the Center for Innovative Technology (CIT) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Thanks to CODAR for technical support, and to the City of Norfolk and Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel for use of their facilities. ADCP Comparisons Figure 1: Locations of CODAR antenna sites (green dots) and NOAA PORTS Doppler current profilers mounted on Aids-to-Navigation buoys (blue diamonds) in the lower Chesapeake Bay. SiteMean (cm/s)Standard Deviation (cm/s) Search Radius (km) Cape Henry Thimble Shoals York Spit Table 1: Means and standard deviations of the speed differences (absolute value of ADCP data – CODAR data). Particularly in the case of a narrow channel such as the one at Thimble Shoals, averaging in as little of the radial data outside the channel as possible is preferable because the velocities might reasonably be expected to differ outside and inside the channel. Another spatial difference consideration is the vertical depth: CODAR standard range velocity data generally measures current within the top meter of water while the NOAA ADCP depths for the first bins are 3.9, 4.0 and 3.4 meters for the CH, TS and YS stations respectively. Future Work NOAA operates three Doppler current profilers on Aids- to-Navigation (ATON) buoys in the lower Chesapeake Bay through the Physical Oceanographic Real-Time System (PORTS) program. These instruments continuously collect data and disseminate it every six minutes. Deployments last for several months and the time period between deployments is typically only a few days so it is a lengthy and reliable time series record for comparison. However there are documented problems with the compass readings of the instruments, which are mounted on metal structures, and the problems unfortunately persist despite compass calibration (NOAA, 2005). For this reason, only the total speeds are suitable for our comparison purposes. Figure 6: Time series of absolute speed for hourly averaged NOAA ADCP data (blue) and CODAR data (red) and their difference (black line). We plan to tow an ADCP for further data comparisons focusing on key areas where we will collect data within a few radial footprints for at least four hours to compare with radials. Other comparisons will be possible using ADCP transects from routine monthly Bay Mouth cruises. Introduction Project website: National HFRADAR Network Gateway: REFERENCES Figure 5: Average of radials speeds along the baseline. Stronger comparisons occur near the middle of the baseline; the midpoint between the stations is at 9.6 km. Phases and patterns are critical to the direction- finding algorithm of the CODAR system. At a site such as CBBT, which receives sea echo from all sides, the phases measured from sea echo are not reliable. Use of a measured pattern here is essential. Figure 3: A radial map for CBBT for May :00 UTC using (a) the measured pattern and (b) the ideal pattern with sea echo phases. Center for Coastal Physical Oceanography Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA Teresa Garner Jose Blanco Larry Atkinson ab Total vectors are calculated at grid points centered on each of the ATON buoy locations. Only CODAR radials falling within a certain distance (radius) of the buoy are included in the calculation of the total vector. Figure 6 and Table 1 show the results from a 4 day comparison (July 27 00:00 -July 31 00:00 UTC). For each station, the radius was defined differently to help minimize horizontal spatial differences. (a)(b) CONTACTACKNOWLEDGMENTS (CH) (TS) (YS) (a)(b)(c)