Page 1 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 MIPAS Pointing Error Status Gaétan Perron ABB Bomem Inc.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SCIAMACHY LoS Mispointing Modelling M. Gottwald & E. Krieg – DLR-IMF - DLR/IFE IUP-IFE, Bremen, 30 November 2006.
Advertisements

MIPAS Quality assessment of ENVISAT Atmospheric mission: implication for the scientific user community The monthly reports for each instrument.
Page1 SCIAMACHY Calibration Review – ESTEC – Sept 2002 SCIAMACHY Tangent Height Verification H.Bovensmann University of Bremen Institute of Remote.
1 st post launch SCIAMACHY calibration & Verification Meeting L1b Astrium Friedrichshafen – Germany 24 July 2002 First Level 1b Spectral Calibration analysis.
1 Analysis of Airborne Microwave Polarimetric Radiometer Measurements in the Presence of Dynamic Platform Attitude Errors Jean Yves Kabore Central Florida.
US Calibration/Validation Activities for the ADM/Aeolus Mission Mike Hardesty and Lars-Peter Riishojgaard.
Microwindow Selection for the MIPAS Reduced Resolution Mode INTRODUCTION Microwindows are the small subsets of the complete MIPAS spectrum which are used.
Analysis of L1b files with restituted attitude Bianca M. Dinelli E. Papandrea.
CPI International UV/Vis Limb Workshop Bremen, April Development of Generalized Limb Scattering Retrieval Algorithms Jerry Lumpe & Ed Cólon.
Atmospheric, Oceanic & Planetary Physics, University of Oxford A Dudhia MIPAS QWG12 ESRIN Feb 2007 Page 1 pT Microwindows Anu Dudhia University of.
Page 1 Reduced Resolution Retrievals from MIPAS / MORSE and Oxford Level 2 Monitoring Alastair Burgess and Anu Dudhia Atmospheric, Oceanic and Planetary.
Atmospheric, Oceanic & Planetary Physics, University of Oxford A Dudhia MIPAS ST5 Granada Jan 2007 Page 1 AE Mode Dec06 Anu Dudhia University of.
Atmospheric, Oceanic & Planetary Physics, University of Oxford A Dudhia MIPAS QWG16 Venice Apr 2008 Page 1 Recent MIPAS L2 Data Retrieved at Oxford.
SCIAMACHY Limb pointing: Geolocation and Intensities on the Level 1b product Sander Slijkhuis, Remote Sensing Technology Institute.
SADDU meeting, IUP Bremen, June 16/17, 2008 SCIAMACHY limb pointing performance: 2002 – 2008 C. von Savigny 1, M. Gottwald 2, E. Krieg 2, K. Bramstedt.
Atmospheric, Oceanic & Planetary Physics, University of Oxford A Dudhia MIPAS QWG13 Firenze June 2007 Page 1 Azimuth Dependence of LOS Pointing Anu.
John Thornton, Yuriy Zakharov, David Grace
Use of GPS RO in Operations at NCEP
Aircraft Characterization in Icing Using Flight Test Data Ed Whalen University of Illinois Urbana Champaign 42 nd Annual Aerospace Sciences Conference.
EARLINET and Satellites: Partners for Aerosol Observations Matthias Wiegner Universität München Meteorologisches Institut (Satellites: spaceborne passive.
International Ocean Vector Winds Science Team Meeting, Annapolis, May 2011 ASCAT backscatter processing status Julia Figa-Saldaña, Craig Anderson, Hans.
MG 1/10/01 1 PCS SMOV-3B Review Objectives Overview Activity Descriptions Requirements.
Page 1 Validation by Model Assimilation and/or Satellite Intercomparison - ESRIN 9–13 December 2002 Monitoring of near-real-time SCIAMACHY, MIPAS, and.
Page 1 Validation by Model Assimilation and/or Satellite Intercomparison - ESRIN 9–13 December 2002 Validation of ENVISAT trace gas data products by comparison.
® Kick off meeting. February 17th, 2011 QUAlity aware VIsualisation for the Global Earth Observation system of systems GEOVIQUA workshop February, the.
Page 1 Envisat Validation Workshop, ACVT-GBMCD, SCIAMACHY scient. prod. 12/12/2002 Envisat Validation Workshop Atmospheric Chemistry Validation Team Ground-Based.
INTRODUCTION When two or more instruments sound the same portion of atmosphere and observe the same species either in different spectral regions or with.
EUREF Symposium, Paris, 6-8 June 2012 Impact of Individual GNSS Antenna Calibration Used in the EPN on Positioning Q. Baire, E. Pottiaux, C. Bruyninx,
Page 1 ENVISAT Validation Workshop, 9 – 13 Dec 02, ESRIN AATSR Cal/Val Data Distribution Hannah Tait AATSR System Analysis Engineer (EOP-PPP) ESA ESTEC.
Validation workshop, Frascati, 13 December 2002Page 1 SCIAMACHY products quality and recommendations Based on presentations and discussions during this.
SWOT Near Nadir Ka-band SAR Interferometry: SWOT Airborne Experiment Xiaoqing Wu, JPL, California Institute of Technology, USA Scott Hensley, JPL, California.
S5P Ozone Profile (including Troposphere) verification: RAL Algorithm R.Siddans, G.Miles, B.Latter S5P Verification Workshop, MPIC, Mainz th May.
Page 1ENVISAT Validation Review / GOMOS session - ESRIN – 13th December 2002 ENVISAT VALIDATION WORKSHOP GOMOS Recommendations by the ESL team : Service.
Page 1Validation by Satellite Intercomparison - ESRIN 9–13 December 2002 National Institute for Space Research Preliminary validation of the first SCIAMACHY.
SCIAMACHY long-term validation M. Weber, S. Mieruch, A. Rozanov, C. von Savigny, W. Chehade, R. Bauer, and H. Bovensmann Institut für Umweltphysik, Universität.
Survey of OSPO Efforts to Improve Operational GOES Imagery S. Hadesty*, K. Ludlum**, N. Sanders*, C. Thomas* * ASRC Federal Contractor – Engineering and.
WP 3 Satellite observations. SCIAMACHY retrieval Month 15: Initial error report Month 18: First dataset for CH4 and CO Incorporation of ECMWF p/T profiles.
HIAPER 3D Winds – current status - Dick Freisen -.
INSTRUMENT STATUS AND PERFORMANCE Guido Levrini. Page 2 ENVISAT Validation Workshop - ESRIN - 9–13 December 2002 ASAR F Instrument operability issues.
Page 1 Validation Workshop, 9-13 th December 2002, ESRIN ENVISAT Validation Workshop AATSR Report Marianne Edwards Space Research Centre Department of.
Networks in Engineering A network consists of a set of interconnected components that deliver a predictable output to a given set of inputs. Function InputOutput.
EUM/OPS/VWG/11 Issue /06/2011 Yoke Yoon Yago Andres Christian Marquardt COSMIC GPS Data Processing Slide: 1.
Page 1Validation by Balloons and Aircraft - ESRIN - 9–13 December 2002 Validation of MIPAS on ENVISAT by in situ instruments on the M55-Geophysica J. Heland,
Sciavalig – 6-8/12/2004 Status of the Atmospheric Chemistry Instruments onboard Envisat SCIAVALIG 6–8 December 2004 Rob Koopman Angelika Dehn Lidia Saavedra.
October 02, st IHOP_2002 Water Vapor Intercomparison Workshop Status of intercomparisons and the next steps  Characterize moisture measuring techniques.
NPP ATMS Instrument Performance SDR Product Review, 23 Oct Kent Anderson Chief Engineer, Civil Space Programs NG Electronic Systems Azusa, CA.
Page 1ENVISAT Cal/Val Workshop – ESRIN – 9/13 December 2002 Antenna Elevation Pattern Estimation from Rain Forest Data M. Zink ENVISAT Programme ESA-ESTEC.
Page 1 Envisat Validation Workshop, ACVT-GBMCD, MIPAS p&T&H20 12/12/2002 Envisat Validation Workshop Atmospheric Chemistry Validation Team Ground-Based.
1 st post launch SCIAMACHY calibration & Verification Meeting L1b Astrium Friedrichshafen – Germany 24 July 2002 First level 1b Leakage current analysis.
12/12/01Fall AGU Vertical Reference Frames for Sea Level Monitoring Thomas Herring Department of Earth, Atmosphere and Planetary Sciences
BOWSER 1 COSGC Space Research Symposium 2010 BOWSER Balloon Observatory for Wavelength and Spectral Emission Readings.
L2 Processor: CH4 Our first operational processor's Methane L2 products Verification strategy: - Reference year 2004 (w/o anomaly and decontamination orbits)
Japan Meteorological Agency, June 2016 Coordination Group for Meteorological Satellites - CGMS Non-Meteorological Application for Himawari-8 Presented.
GPM Inter-Calibration Update Rachael Kroodsma UMD ESSIC / NASA GSFC Kroodsma GSICS meeting 2015/01/131.
GOMOS Mission and Processing Status On 22nd March 2003 GOMOS suffered the anomaly ‘Azimuth Voice coil command saturation”. The anomaly occurred during.
OSIRIS Solar System Simulator
(2) Norut, Tromsø, Norway Improved measurement of sea surface velocity from synthetic aperture radar Morten Wergeland Hansen.
Status of ACVE-3/pre-validation recommendationss 21. 6
GOES Lunar Calibration
M. Goldberg NOAA/NESDIS Z. Cheng (QSS)
Calibration, Validation and Status of OSI SAF ScatSat-1 products
Use of NWP+RTM as inter-calibration tool
Validation of airborne 1
Current Status of ROLO and Future Development
Authors: B.Kerridge, R.Siddans, J.Reburn, B.Latter and V.Jay
MIPAS-2D water database and its validation
Open Loop Tracking of GPS Radio Occultation for LEOs
G16 vs. G17 IR Inter-comparison: Some Experiences and Lessons from validation toward GEO-GEO Inter-calibration Fangfang Yu, Xiangqian Wu, Hyelim Yoo and.
The Deorbiting of GOCE – A Spacecraft Operations Perspective
Flight Operations for GOCE, ESA’s Gravity Mission
Presentation transcript:

Page 1 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 MIPAS Pointing Error Status Gaétan Perron ABB Bomem Inc.

Page 2 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Presentation Plan  MIPAS Reference Frame  Pointing Error Information Sources  MIPAS LOS Calibration (Star Measurements)  Restituted Attitude Data  L2 Retrieved  MIPAS L1B Tangent Height Computation  MIPAS Pointing Error Monitoring  Pitch/Roll Error Characterization  Inter-Comparison

Page 3 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 MIPAS Reference Frame Definition of the LOS vector, the azimuth angle , the elevation angle  in the satellite fixed frame Definition of the orbital frame F LO0, the orbital rate  orb, the yaw steering angle YSM, the pitch error  and the roll error 

Page 4 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006  The MIPAS requirement (see [PO-RS-DOR-MP-0001] Iss. 7) is to achieve +/ mdeg, i.e. +/- ~1.8km. This requirement is dependent on the absolute knowledge of the platform position (orbit) and orientation (mainly pitch and roll).  Inter-compares pointing error information from different sources in order to characterize and improve accuracy of reported MIPAS L1B tangent heights so-called engineering altitudes.  The pointing error information sources are  Envisat platform restituted attitudes provided by ESOC computed from on-board star tracker information.  MIPAS LOS calibration pointing error computed from special measurements looking at stars passing through its FOV.  Retrieved altitudes from IMK L2 processing. MIPAS Pointing Error

Page 5 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 MIPAS L1B Tangent Height Computation  Inputs  Time of measurements from the instrument,  MIPAS pointing mirror angles (azimuth and elevation) from the instrument,  Orbital vector information (from L0 MPH) and  Pitch/roll error characterization from the MIP_CL1_AX ADF file.  Steps  A special CFI SW is used to compute Envisat position at time of measurement using the orbital vector information.  Then a correction is applied to the pointing angles taking into account the pitch and roll error.  Finally, from the position and corrected angles, another CFI SW is used to compute the tangent height taking into account refraction in the atmosphere.  See MIPAS L1B DPM/PDL [PO-RP-BOM-GS-0003] and ENVISAT-1 Mission CFI Software [PO-IS-GMV-GS-0557, PO-IS-GMV-GS-0558, PO-IS-GMV-GS-0559]

Page 6 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 MIPAS L1B Tangent Height Computation  E.g., if ENVISAT has a positive pitch error (related to the reference frame and definition presented before) then the L1B processor will correct for it toward higher altitude (doted line). Note that the correction could take into account also a roll error. +

Page 7 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Pitch/Roll Error Characterization  The pitch/roll error information is characterized from MIPAS LOS campaign (see MIPAS LOS Calibration Algorithms [PO-RP-BOM-GS-0008]). Measurement campaigns are done every week. Note that data analyses is not fully automated, it necessitates manual steps.  The information is passed to the L1B processor through the MIP_CL1_AX ADF calibration file which is updated manually every month.  Each, the pitch and roll error has two components  A bias component and  An orbital sine variation component characterized by an amplitude and a phase.  For the moment, only the pitch bias characterization is updated in the MIP_CL1_AX file. It is the main contributor to the MIPAS pointing error.

Page 8 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Rearward Characterization  To determine pointing error, a cross-correlation is done between expected signal and measured one. The peak shift gives a time offset. It is translated into a pointing error (especially pitch component), using the platform orbital rate.  Example of cross-correlation peak in rearward for orbit 5528

Page 9 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Pointing Error Retrieved  The following gives example of comparison of Platform Pitch Error with the MIPAS pointing error for the period starting from Nov 2003 (Before update of ENVISAT Attitude Control SW).  To convert MIPAS pointing errors into pitch errors (as defined previously), divide by cos (azimuth angle) ~ -1.  Note that the pitch error from ESOC file on graphs were multiplied by –1 to be consistent with definition.

Page 10 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Pointing Error Monitoring  Note: Each data point is a rearward average pointing error over 1 orbit or 2 orbit.

Page 11 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Sideways Characterization  To determine pointing error (especially roll component), a cross-correlation is done between expected signal and measured one. The peak shift gives a time offset. It is translated into a pointing error using the elevation mirror scan rate.  Example of cross-correlation peak in sideways for orbit  Note sideways results are not yet explained.

Page 12 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 u Use orbit and inter-compare t L1b Reported altitudes (corrected with MIP_CL1_AX from MIPAS LOS) tFrom IPF t L1b Reported altitudes (uncorrected and corrected with restituted attitudes) tReprocess with prototype t IMK L2 Retrieved altitudes (Micheal Kiefer) Inter-comparison

Page 13 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Pitch and Roll Errors u MIPAS LOS (MIP_CL1_AX) (see last MIPAS Monthly Report) u Restituted Attitudes (AUX_FRA_AXVFOS _083207_ _000000_ _000000) Inter-comparison

Page 14 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Inter-comparison Reported Altitudes u Uncorrected u MIPAS LOS (MIP_CL1_AX) u Restituted Attitudes

Page 15 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Inter-comparison

Page 16 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Inter-comparison Old Assumptions u Assumption that the roll is small may not be true H See CalVal report September 2002

Page 17 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Inter-comparison New Assumptions u The bias roll is large and contributes to half of pointing error. H Pitch bias of ~10 mdeg H Roll bias of ~50 to 60 mdeg u With this, IMK results can be reconciled. u MIPAS LOS pointing error t ~10 mdeg of pointing error explained by Pitch t ~10 mdeg of pointing error explained by roll tRoll bias multiply by sin(azimuth angle)

Page 18 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Inter-comparison

Page 19 SCIAMACHY Pointing Meeting Bremen – 30 November 2006 Status Summary – Sources can’t be reconciled u Pitch error H LOS: ~25mdeg H Restituted Attitude: 0 to 6mdeg H L2 Retrieved: ~10mdeg u Roll error H LOS: ? H Restituted Attitude: ~0mdeg H L2 Retrieved: ~40 to 60mdeg –Large roll bias –May explain problems of MIPAS LOS calibration sideways –Would give an error of about 3km sideways Note that UOxford retrieve a 5km error in sideways Work to do u Valid assumptions with latest MIPAS LOS u Investigate MIPAS LOS sideways u Propose strategy for MIP_CL1_AX updates u Propose strategy for Restituted Attitudes