Example use of TES data Susan Kulawik, California Institute of Technology Government sponsorship acknowledged

Similar documents
Characterization of Atmospheric Profile Retrievals From Limb Sounding Observations of an Inhomogeneous Atmosphere

TES Algorithm Status. Helen Worden

RAL IASI MetOp-A TIR Methane Dataset User Guide. Reference : RAL_IASI_TIR_CH4_PUG Version : 1.0 Page Date : 17 Aug /12.

Technical Note: Regularization performances with the error consistency method in the case of retrieved atmospheric profiles

3-D Tomographic Reconstruction

The Use of Google Earth in Meteorological Satellite Visualization

Information Content of Limb Radiances from MIPAS

GOME NO 2 data product HDF data file user manual

Assimilated SCIAMACHY NO 2 fields HDF data file user manual

Goddard Atmospheric Composition Data Center: Aura Data and Services in One Place

Summary of Publicly Released CIPS Data Versions.

Design and Implementation of Data Models & Instrument Scheduling of Satellites in a Space Based Internet Emulation System

Definition of Level 1B Radiance product for OMI

Introduction of new WDCGG website. Seiji MIYAUCHI Meteorological Agency

Integrated SST Data Products: Sounders for atmospheric chemistry (NASA Aura mission):

Predicting Atmospheric Parameters using Canonical Correlation Analysis

SST Retrieval Methods in the ESA Climate Change Initiative

Mass-flux parameterization in the shallow convection gray zone

Beginner s Guide to VIIRS Imagery Data. Curtis Seaman CIRA/Colorado State University 10/29/2013

Overview of the EMF Refresher Webinar Series. EMF Resources

Interactive comment on Quantification and mitigation of the impact of scene inhomogeneity on Sentinel-4 UVN UV-VIS retrievals by S. Noël et al.

Interactive comment on Quantification and mitigation of the impact of scene inhomogeneity on Sentinel-4 UVN UV-VIS retrievals by S. Noël et al.

Level 2 Radar-Lidar GEOPROF Product VERSION 1.0 Process Description and Interface Control Document

S5P Mission Performance Centre Carbon Monoxide [L2 CO ] Readme

CRYOSAT-2: STAR TRACKER ATTITUDE CALCULATION TOOL FILE TRANSFER DOCUMENT

Essentials for Modern Data Analysis Systems

Impact of New GMAO Forward Processing Fields on Short-Lived Tropospheric Tracers

Simulating the influence of horizontal gradients on refractivity profiles from radio occultation measurements

Western U.S. TEMPO Early Adopters

Comparison of Full-resolution S-NPP CrIS Radiance with Radiative Transfer Model

GPU-optimized computational speed-up for the atmospheric chemistry box model from CAM4-Chem

Preprocessed Input Data. Description MODIS

Towards a Portal to Atmospheric and Marine Information Resources (PAMIR)

ASTER User s Guide. ERSDAC Earth Remote Sensing Data Analysis Center. 3D Ortho Product (L3A01) Part III. (Ver.1.1) July, 2004

Before beginning a session, be sure these packages are loaded using the library() or require() commands.

Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) Level 1B Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document

G009 Scale and Direction-guided Interpolation of Aliased Seismic Data in the Curvelet Domain

Working with M 3 Data. Jeff Nettles M 3 Data Tutorial at AGU December 13, 2010

MODIS Atmosphere: MOD35_L2: Format & Content

[VESPA]-[SOIR profiles]

Geometric Rectification of Remote Sensing Images

Lecture 12. Applications of passive remote sensing using emission: Remote sensing of SST. Principles of sounding by emission and applications.

Introduction to ANSYS CFX

Improvements to a GPS radio occultation ray-tracing model and their impacts on assimilation of bending angle

Three dimensional meshless point generation technique for complex geometry

RECONSTRUCTING FINE-SCALE AIR POLLUTION STRUCTURES FROM COARSELY RESOLVED SATELLITE OBSERVATIONS

Driven Cavity Example

Accurate Thermo-Fluid Simulation in Real Time Environments. Silvia Poles, Alberto Deponti, EnginSoft S.p.A. Frank Rhodes, Mentor Graphics

Driftsonde System Overview

Important Notes on the Release of FTS SWIR Level 2 Data Products For General Users (Version 02.xx) June, 1, 2012 NIES GOSAT project

Simulating the influence of horizontal gradients on refractivity profiles from radio occultations

Analysis Methods in Atmospheric and Oceanic Science

Rendering Smoke & Clouds

Toward assimilating radio occultation data into atmospheric models

Multigrid Algorithms for Three-Dimensional RANS Calculations - The SUmb Solver

Lecture 13.1: Airborne Lidar Systems

Constellation Level-1C Product Format. Version 1.0

GOME-2 surface LER product

Scope and Sequence: National Curriculum Mathematics from Haese Mathematics (4 7)

aer Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Inc. Overview Part 3: Imagery and Gridding Version April 2005 Submitted by:

Overview. Experiment Specifications. This tutorial will enable you to

Algorithms for processing level 1a Tiny Ionospheric Photometer data into level 1b radiances

NWPSAF 1D-Var User Manual

Atmosphere Connect app updates

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS ANALYSIS OF ORIFICE PLATE METERING SITUATIONS UNDER ABNORMAL CONFIGURATIONS

Slide 1 / 96. Linear Relations and Functions

NUMERICAL VISCOSITY. Convergent Science White Paper. COPYRIGHT 2017 CONVERGENT SCIENCE. All rights reserved.

3-D Wind Field Simulation over Complex Terrain

STEREO EVALUATION OF ALOS/PRISM DATA ON ESA-AO TEST SITES FIRST DLR RESULTS

Adarsh Krishnamurthy (cs184-bb) Bela Stepanova (cs184-bs)

HYSPLIT model description and operational set up for benchmark case study

Reprocessing of Suomi NPP CrIS SDR and Impacts on Radiometric and Spectral Long-term Accuracy and Stability

Improvements to the SHDOM Radiative Transfer Modeling Package

HQ AFWA. DMSP Satellite Raw Sensor Data Record (RSDR) File Format Specification

Benchmark 1.a Investigate and Understand Designated Lab Techniques The student will investigate and understand designated lab techniques.

VIIRS-CrIS Mapping. P. Brunel, P. Roquet. Météo-France, Lannion. CSPP/IMAPP USERS GROUP MEETING 2015 EUMETSAT Darmstadt, Germany

McIDAS-V Tutorial Displaying Polar Satellite Imagery updated July 2016 (software version 1.6)

Homogenization and numerical Upscaling. Unsaturated flow and two-phase flow

3.9 LINEAR APPROXIMATION AND THE DERIVATIVE

Multigrid Pattern. I. Problem. II. Driving Forces. III. Solution

An introduction to plotting data

Revision History. Applicable Documents

18.02 Multivariable Calculus Fall 2007

Forward and Inverse Modeling of Gravity Data: Locating buried glacial channels and evaluating the results of published analysis

Using Arrays and Vectors to Make Graphs In Mathcad Charles Nippert

Using WindSim by means of WindPRO-interface gives the user many advantages:

CIAO (CNR-IMAA Atmospheric Observatory) Potenza GRUAN site

CIS

Retrieval of Sea Surface Temperature from TRMM VIRS

Pressure Sensitive Paint (PSP)/ Temperature Sensitive Paint (TSP) Part 2

VIBROACOUSTIC MODEL VALIDATION FOR A CURVED HONEYCOMB COMPOSITE PANEL

Component Level Prediction Versus System Level Measurement of SABER Relative Spectral Response

MATHEMATICS CONCEPTS TAUGHT IN THE SCIENCE EXPLORER, FOCUS ON EARTH SCIENCE TEXTBOOK

Investigation of cross flow over a circular cylinder at low Re using the Immersed Boundary Method (IBM)

Camera Parameters Estimation from Hand-labelled Sun Sositions in Image Sequences

Modern Surveying Techniques. Prof. S. K. Ghosh. Department of Civil Engineering. Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee.

Chapter 18. Geometric Operations

Fluent User Services Center

McIDAS-V Tutorial Displaying Gridded Data updated June 2015 (software version 1.5)

Introduction to Objective Analysis

Transcription:

Example use of TES data Susan Kulawik, 2009 2009 California Institute of Technology Government sponsorship acknowledged The following shows how to find, browse plots of, download, plot, and compare TES data. We start with a sonde to match, locate the closest TES matching data, apply the TES observation operator to the sonde to see if the sonde and TES results are consistent, and plot the results. All examples use the IDL programming language. 1. Data you want to find Say you have a temperature sonde you want to compare to TES result. This comparison analysis would also work for comparisons to model data. Here is the sonde location: Latitude 21.9800 Longitude 200.650 Date/Time 2006-02-13 12:00:00 UTC Here are the raw sonde values: sonde=[ 296.150, 295.350, 288.750, 288.350, 284.250, 281.750, 280.550, 280.350, 278.350, 277.950, 276.750, 266.550, 263.450, 262.750, 258.550, 249.350, 248.550, 247.150, 235.650, 225.950, 215.250, 204.350, 203.950, 203.750, 207.650, 211.450, 210.550, 208.750, 205.850, 205.350, 203.550, 208.550, 209.950, 207.750, 210.550, 209.750, 209.950, 212.350, 217.050, 215.650, 214.350, 223.450, 222.350, 223.550, 231.950, 233.950, 234.950, 233.150] psonde =[1016.00, 1000.00, 925.000, 916.000, 850.000, 817.000, 788.000, 766.000, 731.000, 712.000, 700.000, 593.000, 540.000, 534.000, 500.000, 418.000, 400.000, 380.000, 300.000, 250.000, 200.000, 154.000, 150.000, 142.000, 122.000, 119.000, 100.000, 95.0000, 72.0000, 70.0000, 66.0000, 50.0000, 45.0000, 38.0000, 34.0000, 30.0000, 27.0000, 26.0000, 21.0000, 20.0000, 17.0000, 12.0000, 10.0000, 9.00000, 7.00000, 6.00000, 5.00000, 4.00000] 2. Checking what TES data is available

http://tes.jpl.nasa.gov/data/datacalendar/ Click on 2006, and see one nadir option: 3329 Global Survey - 16 orbits 2006-02-13T09:55:26 2006-02- 14T12:15:25 3. Quick look plots Go to http://tes.jpl.nasa.gov/visualization/science_plots/tes_l3_daily.htm and enter the date and species desired (TATM). The following plots are displayed, where the left shows the results for each target, and the right has interpolation between TES observations:

4. Downloading the TES data Go to the Langley Atmospheric Sciences Data Center (ASDC) webpage: http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/prodocs/tes/table_tes.html Hit the Level 2 Global Survey Standard Products link. Select TES/Aura L2 Atmospheric Temperatures Nadir v004 (most recent) data. We are in luck, this has been processed in v004. Download file TES-Aura_L2- ATM-TEMP-Nadir_r0000003329_F05_05.he5. It only takes 15 minutes! 5. Reading in TES data TES data is in HDF format, which is a standard format. The TES team has provided a reader for the TES files for the IDL programming language. See here: http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/prodocs/tes/tools/read_software.html Download TES_L2_ReadSoftware_V5.tar (443 KB) and unzip (e.g. using 7-zip). There is a Readme that tells how to call each program. For L2, we use the following call: filename = TES-Aura_L2-ATM-TEMP- Nadir_r0000003329_F05_05.he5 read_l2_hdf, filename, species_data, geo_data 6. Quick look at TES data

help, species_data, /st I ve pulled out some of the more important components of species_data and geo_data: IDL> help, species_data, /st SPECIES FLOAT Array[67, 3394] ALTITUDE FLOAT Array[67, 3394] AVERAGECLOUDEFFOPTICALDEPTH FLOAT Array[3394] AVERAGECLOUDEFFOPTICALDEPTHERROR FLOAT Array[3394] AVERAGINGKERNEL FLOAT Array[67, 67, 3394] CONSTRAINTVECTOR FLOAT Array[67, 3394] CLOUDTOPPRESSURE FLOAT Array[3394] DEGREESOFFREEDOMFORSIGNAL FLOAT Array[3394] O3_CCURVE_QA BYTE Array[3394] OBSERVATIONERRORCOVARIANCE FLOAT Array[67, 67, 3394] PRESSURE FLOAT Array[67, 3394] SPECIESRETRIEVALQUALITY BYTE Array[3394] UTCTIME STRING Array[3394] IDL> help, geo_data, /st LATITUDE FLOAT Array[3394] LONGITUDE FLOAT Array[3394] SCAN INT Array[3394] SEQUENCE INT Array[3394] SURFACETYPEFOOTPRINT BYTE Array[3394] TIME DOUBLE Array[3394] Geo_data.latitude and longitude have target footprint location. You can see that there are 3394 targets in this file. Species_data.species has the profile results. Each profile has 67 pressure levels. Note geo_data.time is the TAI time (starting 1/1/1993). 7. Finding a geolocation match to TES data and checking quality To find each target s distance from the sonde location, use the IDL routine map_2points: n = N_ELEMENTS(geo_data.latitude) dist = FLTARR(n) FOR ii = 0, n-1 DO dist[ii] = map_2points(200.650,21.98, geo_data.longitude[ii], geo_data.latitude[ii], /meters)/1000.d0 > print, min(dist, ind) 263.673 > print, ind 360 > print, species_data.utctime[360] 2006-02-13T12:41:57.946886Z

Note that I changed the domain for the sonde longitude to match TES, which ranges from -180 to 180. The closest TES point is 264 km from the sonde. The time matches within 40 minutes as well. This occurs at index 360. Before proceeding, check the quality of the TES result: > print, species_data.speciesretrievalquality[360] 1 > print, species_data.o3_ccurve_qa[360] 157 1 = good quality. 157 = fill. In v04 data, O3_CCURVE_QA is only populated for ozone data but it is always best to check both flags and remove any profiles where either have value 0. For aligning TES and model data, the procedure is different, and would involve deciding which model gridbox each TES profile belongs in, and deciding what to do when multiple TES profiles go into a single model gridbox. 8. Plotting data Let s plot the TES result and a priori vector: indp=where(species_data.species[*,360] ge 0) plot,species_data.species[indp,360],species_data.pressure[in dp,360],yrange=[1000,10],/ylog,xtitle='temp (K)',ytit='Pressure (hpa)' oplot,species_data.constraintvector[indp,360],species_data.p ressure[indp,360],linestyle=2 oplot, sonde, psonde,linestyle=1 Since the surface pressure is variable, TES data will have fill values (-999) at the bottom levels. Indp finds non-fill indices.

Although they look similar, the initial (dashed) and TES result profile (solid) differ by as much as 2K. The sonde (dotted line) has some differences from both. To properly compare to the sonde, we need to (a) to the TES pressure grid, and (b) account for TES sensitivities. 9. Mapping sonde data to the TES grid This section is a very short guide on mapping from a fine grid to a coarser grid. One could use a straight interpolation, which would work if there are approximately similar levels for the sonde and TES. However, if the sonde is on a much finer pressure scale, the only information kept from the sonde would be the two points bracketing each TES level. To map from a fine grid to a coarse grid to create final values which take into account the sonde values at all of the intermediate levels, mapping must be done. For a step-by-step guide of this, see http://tes.jpl.nasa.gov/ming/web.html (or see appendix). (a) Calculate an interpolation map W which maps from TES pressures to sonde pressures, i.e. from LOG(species_data.pressure[indp2,360]) to LOG(psonde). This procedure is described here: http://tes.jpl.nasa.gov/ming/get_map.txt. Note indp2 are pressures between sonde minimum and maximum pressure.

(b) Calculate an inverse of this map,w_inv = invert(transpose(w)##w)##transpose(w) (c) Use this map to map the sonde to TES levels: sonde_tes0 = W_inv ## sonde [note for ozone, use log(sonde)] (d) Fill in the pressures outside of the sonde pressure range with the TES constraint vector: sonde_tes = REFORM(species_data.constraintvector[*,360]) sonde_tes[indp2] = sonde_tes0 Here is the resultant, sonde mapped to the TES pressure grid (with the constraint vector filling up pressures where the sonde did not cover) : sonde_tes = [ -999.000, -999.000, 294.670, 295.064, 287.734, 282.215, 279.515, 275.339, 268.817, 264.883, 260.091, 254.636, 249.756, 247.425, 242.826, 238.176, 233.329, 228.190, 223.326, 218.807, 214.289, 210.420, 206.128, 203.453, 204.906, 209.417, 211.635, 210.220, 208.145, 207.260, 206.489, 204.275, 204.423, 206.544, 208.143, 209.772, 209.268, 207.629, 210.140, 210.265, 209.348, 211.727, 214.480, 216.750, 215.610, 214.423, 215.434, 218.261, 220.675, 223.336, 222.967, 222.364, 223.362, 226.540, 232.678, 235.031, 234.359, 243.807, 245.610, 250.123, 256.892, 260.402, 265.666, 259.057, 249.142, 240.075, 227.986] You can add this to the previous plot and check that it is essentially the same as the original sonde (here interpolated result shown in red)

10. Application of the Observation operator Again, this follows Ming Luo s guide http://tes.jpl.nasa.gov/ming/web.html or see the TES Data User s Guide, section 7.1. x_result = x_tes_apriori + AK_tes##(x_sonde - x_tes_apriori) x_result +- the observation error (found in the TES standard product) simulates what TES would observe IF x_sonde were the atmospheric true state. So, if x_result and x_tes are within the observation error, they are considered to be consistent with each other. Note: For all other species other than temperature, the above should be done in log, e.g.: x_result = EXP(ALOG(x_tes_aPriori) + AK_tes##(ALOG(x_sonde) ALOG(x_tes_aPriori))) ; get non-fill data: indp=where(species_data.species[*,360] ge 0) pressure = species_data.pressure[indp,360] AK_TES = REFORM(species_data.AVERAGINGKERNEL[indp,indp,360])

x_tes_apriori = species_data.constraintvector[indp,360] x_tes = species_data.species[indp,360] x_sonde = Sonde_tes[indp] ; pull out non-fill sonde data ; application of the observation operator x_result = x_tes_apriori + AK_tes##(x_sonde - x_tes_apriori) ; get predicted error obs_error = REFORM(species_data.OBSERVATIONERRORCOVARIANCE [*,*,360]) obs_error = sqrt(obs_error[indp,indp]) print, obs_error 1.11236 1.12449 1.19919 1.29392 1.09227 0.953536 0.765534 0.655048 0.514325 0.447764 0.343971 0.335064 0.290062 0.337749 0.312072 0.355580 0.331500 0.380160 [...] 11. Plot result +- predicted error and compare ; previously plotted plot,species_data.species[indp,360],species_data.pressure[in dp,360],yrange=[1000,10],/ylog,xtitle='temp (K)',ytit='Pressure (hpa)' oplot,species_data.constraintvector[indp,360],species_data.p ressure[indp,360],linestyle=2 oplot, x_result, pressure,linestyle=1 for jj = 0, N_ELEMENTS(x_result)-1 DO oplot, [x_result[jj]- obs_error[jj],x_result[jj]+obs_error[jj]], [pressure[jj],pressure[jj]],color=17 //error bars, red

Sonde with TES observation operator applied (dotted). This has markedly smoothed out the sonde in the stratosphere; however it is not consistent with either the TES result (solid) or TES initial guess from GMAO (dashed) to within the predicted observation error (red - barely visible in plot). Not all sondes agree well with TES results because of spatial or temporal differences in the air mass measured and statistics with many matches are used to validate TES results.

Appendix Steps of making comparisons of TES nadir retrievals to your profiles with higher vertical resolution Ming.Luo@jpl.nasa.gov, H. Worden and TES team Updated March 20, 2007 http://tes.jpl.nasa.gov/ming/web.html TES nadir retrievals of tropospheric species profiles (and the integrated total or partial columns) are not the same as the true profiles (or the columns). Papers have been published to describe the differences and the relationship between the two, e.g., Rodgers (2000), Rodger and Connor (2003), and comparison examples related to the TES data, e.g., Worden et al. (2006), and Luo et al. (2007). The MOPITT team has also given advices and examples on the related topic, e.g., Deeter (2002), and Emmons et al. (2003). This webpage gives detailed steps dealing with TES data and your data with higher vertical resolution, assuming that you understand the basics. (1) TES data TES standard product file (.he5) consists following data fields per profile (e.g., iobs) that you need for your inter-comparison: Pressure[67, iobs], speciesvmr[67, iobs] (e.g., TATM, O 3 ), ConstraintVector[67, iobs], AveragingKernel[67,67,iObs], where iobs is your selected TES profile, 67 is the number of TES standard pressure levels. In most cases, the 1 st a couple (a few) pressure levels are filled with -999 (index = 0, 1,...). The 1st non -999 pressure value represent the surface. You need to 'reform' (in IDL) the TES vectors (Pressure, speciesvmr and ConstraintVector) and the AveragingKernel to smaller number of levles starting from the surface level (numlevel < 67). (2) The standard equation for mimicing TES retrievals assuming your profile is the 'true' (see the above listed references) x_result = x_tes_apriori + AK_tes##(x_your_profile - x_tes_apriori) where the corresponding TES data is x_tes_apriori= alog(constraintvector), and AK_tes = AveragingKernel

You probably noticed that x_your_profile in the equation must be on the same pressure grids as the TES pressure grids for the corresponding TES species profile. The next section gives you suggestions on how to map and extend (if necessary) your profile to all the TES pressure levels. Here we use an IDL notation "##" to match the way that the values in TES 'AveragingKernel' matrices are stored. It is important to know that the above x_tes_apriori and x_your_profile need to be 'alog(vmr)' (IDL notation), so 'exp(x_result)' is what you want (except atmospheric temperature). Again, this is uniqe to TES due to that TES does volume mixing ratio (VMR) retrievals in alog(vmr). (3) Map your profile at fine levels to TES standard pressure levels (number < 67) There are a few things that you need to consider before doing the mapping. 1. Your species profile needs to be a function of pressure in hpa. 2. In most cases, your species profile needs to cover entire TES pressure range, surface to 0.1 hpa. If your profile covers only a small portion of the atmosphere and do not have anything above or below handy, one suggestion is to append the shifted TES a priori profile down or upward of your profile. This extension offers reasonably realistic atmosphere where you don't have measurements. 3. An interpolation of your profile to very fine levels may be necessary. Now you are ready to map your profile at fine levels to the TES pressure levels. There is a way described in Rodgers 2000, section 10.3.1. x = the species profile vector on your fine grids; z = your species profile vector mapped to TES levels. x = Wz, or z = W * x, where W is the map matrix. The following IDL codes show you how to do this with eq (10.7) in Rodgers 2000, W * = (W T W) -1 W T : The IDL pseudo code for calculating the map, W, and the IDL pseudo code for obtain your maped profile, x_your_profile (or z in the equation above). Final note: it is important to check your interpolated, extended, and mapped profiles via, for example overlaying with the original. (4) References

Deeter (2002), Calculation and Application of MOPITT Averaging Kernels, available at http://mopitt.eos.ucar.edu/mopitt/data/avg_krnls_app.pdf. Emmons et al., (2004), Validation of Measurements of Pollution in the Troposphere (MOPITT) CO retrievals with aircraft in situ profiles, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D03309, doi:10.1029/2003jd004101. Luo et al., (2007), Comparison of carbon monoxide measurements by TES and MOPITT the influence of a priori data and instrument characteristics on nadir atmospheric species retrievals, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D09303, doi:101029/2006jd007663. Rodgers, C. D., Inverse Methods for Atmospheric Sounding: Theory and Practice, World Sci., River Edge, N. J., 2000. Rodgers, C. D., and B. J. Connor (2003), Intercomparisons of remote sounding instruments, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4116, doi:10.1029/2002jd002299. Worden et al., (2007), Comparisons of Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) ozone profiles to ozonesondes: Methods and initial results, J. Geophys. Res., 112, D03309, doi:10.1029/2006jd007258.