Evaluation of the ground retracking algorithms on Jason-1 data P.Thibaut, S. Labroue Collecte Localisation Satellite : Toulouse, France.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

OVERVIEW OF THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE ON THE EMPIRICAL DETERMINATION OF THE SEA STATE BIAS CORRECTION S. Labroue, P. Gaspar, J. Dorandeu, F. Mertz, N. Tran,

Advertisements

CRYOSAT WORKSHOP ESRIN – 8 to 10 March 2005 Cryosat Data Processing in Near Real Time for Oceanographic Applications J. BENVENISTE - ESA/ESRIN, Italy OZ.

Waveform Analysis of Envisat RA-2 data We have pre-processed 9 days’ of data from Envisat and piped them through the expert system. Summary: –Data over.

Page - 1 RA2 CCVT meeting March 2003 F-PAC validation context CMA chain has to be inline with the algorithms approved by ESA and used for the prototype.

TOPEX & Jason Retracking OSTST ‘07 Retracking and SSB Splinter TOPEX and Jason Retracking Ernesto Rodriguez, Phil Callahan, Ted Lungu March 13, 2007 Jet.

Altimeter sea surface height bias calibration with in situ network G. Jan 1, P. Bonnefond 2, Y. Ménard 3, O. Laurain 2 1 NOVELTIS, Toulouse, France 2 OCA,

SSB – Retrack Splinter Summary and Perspectives OSTST Hobart, Tasmania March 15, 2007.

CP4O Progress meeting 1 - Frascati November WP 5000 – Impact Assessment S. Labroue, T. Moreau, P. Thibaut (CLS) N. Picot, F. Boy (CNES)

Draft Recommendations subtitle here. Recommendation 1 The study groups from this workshop continue to collaborate with the goal of reporting progress.

Retracking & SSB Splinter OSTST ‘07 Retracking and SSB Splinter Report Juliette Lambin and Phil Callahan March 14, 2007 Hobart, Tasmania.

OSE meeting GODAE, Toulouse 4-5 June 2009 Interest of assimilating future Sea Surface Salinity measurements.

Using HF radar coastal currents to correct satellite altimetry Carolyn Roesler, William J. Emery and Waqas Qazi CCAR Aerospace Eng. Sci. Dept. University.

26/11/2012 – Observatoire de Paris Analysis of wind speed evolution over ocean derived from altimeter missions and models M. Ablain (CLS)

Validation of radiometric models and simulated KaRIn/SWOT data based on ground and airborne acquisitions Page de titre, mentionner contributions Altamira.

5-7 Feb Coastal Altimetry Workshop 11 Sea state bias correction in coastal waters D. Vandemark, S. LaBroue, R. Scharroo, V. Zlotnicki, H. Feng, N.

POD/Geoid splinter March 14, 2007 J.P. Berthias Ocean Topography Science Team Meeting - Hobart, Australia – March 2007.

Tolman and friends, Feb. 6, 2008Coastal Altimetry 1/23 Altimeter wave data Deep ocean and coastal use and issues Hendrik L. Tolman NOAA / NWS / NCEP /

Radar Altimeter Fundamentals and Near-Shore Measurements A brief commentary on well-known concepts, presented to help unify terminology and focus discussions.

SAR Altimetry in Coastal Zone: Performances, Limits, Perspectives Salvatore Dinardo Serco/ESRIN Bruno Lucas Deimos/ESRIN Jerome Benveniste ESA/ESRIN.

Coastal Altimetry Workshop February 5-7, 2008 Organized by: Laury Miller, Walter Smith: NOAA/NESDIS Ted Strub, Amy Vandehey: CIOSS/COAS/OSU With help from.

- 1- Quality of real time altimeter products OSTST, Hobart, March 2007 Quality of real time altimeter products impact of the delay G.Larnicol, G. Dibarboure,

Page 1 Singular Value Decomposition applied on altimeter waveforms P. Thibaut, J.C.Poisson, A.Ollivier : CLS – Toulouse - France F.Boy, N.Picot : CNES.

POD/Geoid Splinter Summary OSTS Meeting, Hobart 2007.

Remko Scharroo – Coastal Altimeter Workshop – Silver Spring, Maryland – 5-7 February 2008 Remko Scharroo, Altimetrics LLC, Cornish, New Hampshire with.

Road-mapping the Way Forward for Sentinel-3 Topography Mission SAR-Mode waveform Re-tracking over water surfaces J Benveniste, P Cipollini, C Gommenginger,

ASIC**3 Workshop -- May 2006 Measuring Global Sea Level Rise With Satellite Radar Altimetry ASIC**3 Workshop -- May 2006 Laury Miller NOAA/NESDIS Lab for.

Using Altimetry Waveform Data and Ancillary Information from SRTM and LANDSAT to retrieve River Characteristics By Vivien ENJOLRAS 1) * and Ernesto RODRIGUEZ.

Monitoring Jason-1 and TOPEX/POSEIDON from a California Offshore Platform: Latest Results from the Harvest Experiment Bruce Haines and Shailen Desai Jet.

ICESat dH/dt Thinning Thickening ICESat key findings.

Principles of Sea Level Measurement Long-term tide gauge records  What is a tide station?  How is sea level measured relative to the land?  What types.

HY-2A Satellite Altimetric data Evaluation in the Arctic Ocean Yongcun Cheng Ole Baltazar Andersen.

ODINAFRICA/GLOSS Sea Level Training Course

OSTST, Hobart, March Future altimeter systems : is mesoscale observability guaranteed for operational oceanography? Future altimeter systems.

OSTST Hobart 2007 – SLA consistency between Jason-1 and TOPEX data SLA consistency between Jason-1 and TOPEX/Poseidon data M.Ablain, S.Philipps,

Coastal Altimetry Workshop - February 5-7, 2008 CNES initiative for altimeter processing in coastal zone : PISTACH Juliette Lambin – Alix Lombard Nicolas.

Precipitation and altimeter missions Jean Tournadre Laboratoire d’Océanographie Spatiale IFREMER Plouzane France.

Satellite Altimetry - possibilities and limitations

ESEOO meeting, Santiago de Compostela, january 2007 Improved satellite altimetry for the observation of shelf/coastal dynamics The Margins Altimetry Projects.

IRI Workshop 2005 TEC Measurements with Dual-Frequency Space Techniques and Comparisons with IRI T. Hobiger, H. Schuh Advanced Geodesy, Institute of Geodesy.

GEOF334 – Spring 2010 Radar Altimetry Johnny A. Johannessen Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Bergen, Norway.

Monitoring of altimeter measurements against a global tide gauge network F. Lefèvre, G. Valladeau, E. Sénant, J. Dorandeu F. Lefèvre, G. Valladeau, E.

Philip Moore Jiasong Wang School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences University of Newcastle upon Tyne Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU

SWOT Near Nadir Ka-band SAR Interferometry: SWOT Airborne Experiment Xiaoqing Wu, JPL, California Institute of Technology, USA Scott Hensley, JPL, California.

OSTST Hobart 2007 – Performance assessment Jason-1 data M.Ablain, S.Philipps, J.Dorandeu, - CLS N.Picot - CNES Jason-1 GDR data Performance assessment.

OSTST - March Hobart 1 Impacts of atmospheric attenuations on AltiKa expected performances J.D. Desjonquères (1), N. Steunou (1) A. Quesney (2)

Effects of Cloud/rain on Ka band altimeter J. Tournadre et al Ifremer Brest.

Improved Satellite Altimeter data dedicated to coastal areas :

Recent Results from the Corsica Calibration Site P. Bonnefond (1), P. Exertier (1), O. Laurain (1), Y. Ménard (2), F. Boldo (3), E. Jeansou (4), G. Jan.

Dr. Galal Nadim.  The root-MUltiple SIgnal Classification (root- MUSIC) super resolution algorithm is used for indoor channel characterization (estimate.

Ocean Surface Topography Science Team, Reston, VA, USA, October, 2015 References Feng et al., Splin based nonparametric estimation of the altimeter.

Jason-1/Envisat cross-calibration Y. Faugere (CLS) J. Dorandeu (CLS) N. Picot (CNES) P. Femenias (ESA) Jason-1 / Envisat Cross-calibration.

Local and global calibration/validation P. Bonnefond, S. Desai, B. Haines, S. Nerem and N. Picot Jason-1 - T/P Sea Surface Height Formation Flying Phase.

Joint OS & SWH meeting in support of Wide-Swath Altimetry Measurements Washington D.C. – October 30th, 2006 Baptiste MOURRE ICM – Barcelona (Spain) Pierre.

1 SVY 207: Lecture 12 Modes of GPS Positioning Aim of this lecture: –To review and compare methods of static positioning, and introduce methods for kinematic.

Multi-Mission Cross Calibration – results with upgraded altimeter data Wolfgang Bosch Deutsches Geodätisches Forschungsinstitut (DGFI), München

Estimation of wave spectra with SWIM on CFOSAT – illustration on a real case C. Tison (1), C. Manent (2), T. Amiot (1), V. Enjolras (3), D. Hauser (2),

Value of Node Closest to HARVEST = 150 mm Value of Node Closest to SENETOSA = 117 mm Value of Node Closest to BURNIE = 154 mm SOUTH Mean = mm  =

Modification of JASON rain flag for MLE4 processing J.Tournadre 1IFREMER.

JASON2 Status in NOAA Gary Petti Office of Satellite Data Processing and Distribution.

Validation of the TMR and JMR Wet Path delay Measurements using GPS, SSM/I, and TMI Shailen Desai Shannon Brown Bruce Haines Wenwen Lu Victor Zlotnicki.

Wet tropospheric correction comparison for Jason-1 mission between GPD V2.0 (FCUP) and GPD V1.1 corrections The GPD V2.0 correction is referred to as GPD_V2.0.

AXK/JPL SBAS Training at Stanford University, October 27-30, 2003 Satellite Based Augmentation Systems Brazilian Ionosphere Group Training at Stanford.

Japan Meteorological Agency, June 2016 Coordination Group for Meteorological Satellites - CGMS Non-Meteorological Application for Himawari-8 Presented.

C. Shum, C. Zhao, Y. Yi, and P. Luk The Ohio State University GFO Calibration/Validation Meeting NOAA Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry Silver Spring,

ESA Climate Change Initiative Sea-level-CCI project A.Cazenave (Science Leader), G.Larnicol /Y.Faugere(Project Leader), M.Ablain (EO) MARCDAT-III meeting.

Alternating Polarization ´Single´ Look Complex Product Status

Tilecal Pion Response and Energy Resolution

Can fully-focused altimeter range data provide enhanced detection of coastal currents in the Nova Scotia Shelf?: Preliminary diagnosis Hui Feng1, Alejandro.

EMCal Recalibration Check

NASA OSTST meeting , Miami, Florida, USA, October 2017

Presentation transcript:

Evaluation of the ground retracking algorithms on Jason-1 data P.Thibaut, S. Labroue Collecte Localisation Satellite : Toulouse, France

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 2 Objective  The objective of this presentation is to characterize the various retracking algorithms applied on Jason and Topex waveforms and to determine if they can be considered as responsible for differences observed between Jason and Topex SSB.  We decided to apply the various retracking on Jason-1 WFs. If no differences are observed when retracking the same waveforms, the differences between Topex and Jason SSB may directly come from the WFs (leakages on Topex WFs) All the results presented have been obtained on one cycle of Jason-1 data (cycle 20) GDR ‘B’ nominal Jason-1 products Retracked files provided by JLP (same information than in Topex RGDRs including LSE and MAP estimations)

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 3 Characteristics of the 3 retracking algorithms MLE4 (nominal proc. for GDRs) : LSE MAP Epoch, SWH, Pu, slope of the trailing edge : 20 estimations per second Retracking a single gaussian + LUT which provide the correction between one gaussian and the full real PTR (as a function of SWH) Skewness s set to 0.1 Waveforms averaging (2x2 in Ku band, 4x4 in C band) before retracking Decomposition of the PTR into a sum of Gaussians (for 20 side-lobes) Epoch : 10 estimations per second in Ku (5 in C) SWH, Pu, slope of the trailing edge : 1 estimation per second s : 1 estimation per second or fixed to 0 Idem LSE Allows comparison to Topex LSE Allows comparison to Jason MLE4 (except that for Jason a 0.1 value is used)

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 4  Range 1Hz = Tracker GDR – Epoch JPL – LUT GDR – Range GDR_1Hz Information provided by the various products JPL products provide: the retracked epoch (10 Hz and 1 Hz) (JPL = LSE or MAP) : Epoch JPL GDR products provide: the range (20 Hz and 1Hz) : Range GDR the tracker range (20Hz and 1 Hz) : Tracker GDR the Look Up Table correction for epoch (1Hz) : LUT GDR Comparison between JPL and GDR ranges is given by:  Range 1Hz = Range JPL_1Hz – Range GDR_1Hz But we have only the Epoch JPL

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 5 Delta Range(LSE - GDR) versus (SWH and SIG0) 40 cm50 cm  No remaining dependancies with SWH or SIG0 in the bulk of the data  Skewness solved Range_LSE-Range_GDR versus (SWH,SIG0) Skew solved

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 6 Delta Range(LSE - GDR) versus (SWH and ATT 2 ) 40 cm50 cm  No remaining dependancies with SWH or ATT 2 in the bulk of the data Range_LSE-Range_GDR versus (SWH,ATT) Skew solved  Skewness solved

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 7 Delta Range(LSE - GDR) versus (SWH and SIG0 and ATT2)  Dependances appear when the skewness is fixed but it was fixed to 0 (in GDR 0.1) Range_LSE-Range_GDR versus (SWH,ATT) Skew fixed Range_LSE-Range_GDR versus (SWH,SIG0) Skew fixed 40 cm50 cm 40 cm50 cm

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 8 SWH LSE-GDR MAP-GDR SWH ATT2  Range  Very good agreement between LSE and MLE4  MAP introduces SWH and ATT dependances (Constraints on MAP skewness is too strong : s=0) Skewness solved 45 cm 50 cm 45 cm 50 cm 1%SWH

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 9 Delta Range(MAP - GDR) versus (SWH and SIG0 and ATT2)  MAP introduces dependances but the skewness remains close to 0 (in GDR 0.1)  Same kind of plot when skewness fixed at 0 Range_MAP-Range_GDR versus (SWH,ATT) Skew solved Range_MAP-Range_GDR versus (SWH,SIG0) Skew solved 40 cm50 cm40 cm50 cm

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 10 Difference of range (LSE – MAP) -5cm+5cm

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 11 Skewness estimation LSEMAP  Skewness is not estimated for SWH smaller than 1 m  Skewness remains close to 0 for MAP Mean=0.06Mean=0.001

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 12 Skewness with respect to SWH LSEMAP  Skewness is not estimated for SWH less than 1 m  Skewness remains close to 0 for MAP

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 13 ATT_LSEATT_MAPATT_GDR  ATT(LSE-GDR)  ATT(MAP-GDR) Statistics on ATT – Skewness Solved Mean=-0.002Mean= Mean=0.003Mean=0.001

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 14 Statistics on SWH  SWH(LSE-GDR)  SWH(MAP-GDR) Skewness solved Skewness fixed Mean=7.64 cmMean=7.91 cm Mean=28.8 cmMean=7.06 cm

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 15 Jason-1 SLA Power Spectrum J1 LSE5 TP LSE5 J1 MLE4 (GDRB) J1 LSE4 (fixed skew)  Very good coherence between Topex LSE5 and Jason MLE4  Between MLE4 and LSE4, impact of 1HZ estimation for SWH, Pu and Att2 (skew fixed for both)  Between LSE4 and LSE5, impact of the estimation of a 5 th parameter ( s)  Between MLE4 and LSE5, addition of the two previous effects (it has been shown that they are very close regarding the SSB) (see Faugere’s talk)

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 16 Conclusions LSE and MLE4 algorithms are equivalent wrt SSB when skewness is solved for. SSB differences between Topex and Jason cannot be explained by differences in the retracking algorithms SSB differences lie in the WFs themselves SWH biases (LSE) are still to be analysed MAP is not yet ready to provide users with reliable estimates Range_LSE-Range_GDR versus (SWH,SIG0) Skew solved

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 17

Simulator of Interferometric Radar Altimeters concept and first results P. THIBAUT, B.PICARD : CLS, France, O.GERMAIN : Starlab, Spain, F.COLLARD : Boost-Technologies, France L.PHALIPPOU : Alcatel-Alenia-Space, France C.BUCK5 : ESTEC-ESA, The Netherlands PRF - 1 V sat Left swath Right swath Nadir track Sea State Modelling Waveform generation Boost Starlab Interferometric Inversion CLS

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 19

Hobart OSTST Meeting Pierre THIBAUT – March 2007 Page 20 Sigma-0 blooms in the Envisat Radar Altimeter data P.THIBAUT, F.FERREIRA : CLS, France, P.FEMENIAS : ESA/ESRIN, Italy Which one is a bloom, which one is not ? Where are the egdes ? What are their length ? Where are they ? What about the waveforms during blooms ? What are the impact of blooms on ranges ? How many blooms are edited by Calval criteria? Which kind of criteria would be more useful ? …. Ideas, comments …. Come to talk with me.