Use of the Moon as an On-orbit Calibration Source Thomas C. Stone US Geological Survey, Flagstaff AZ Hugh Kieffer Celestial Reasonings, Carson City NV.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
VIIRS Reflective Solar On-orbit Calibration and Performance Jack Xiong and Jim Butler Code 618.0, NASA/GSFC, Greenbelt, MD CLARREO SDT Meeting, NASA.
Advertisements

Achieving Global Ocean Color Climate Data Records ASLO Aquatic Sciences Meeting 17 February 2011 – San Juan, Puerto Rico Bryan A. Franz and the NASA Ocean.
Disk-Integrated Polarization of the Moon in the Ultraviolet from SOLSTICE M. Snow, G. Holsclaw, W. McClintock, T. Woods University of Colorado/LASP
ASIC3 WorkshopLandsdowne, VA May 16-18, 2006 J. Harder Page 1 Calibration Status of the Solar Irradiance Monitor (SIM) : The Present and the Future Jerald.
Page 1 1 of 20, EGU General Assembly, Apr 21, 2009 Vijay Natraj (Caltech), Hartmut Bösch (University of Leicester), Rob Spurr (RT Solutions), Yuk Yung.
Lunar Observations of Changes in the Earth’s Albedo (LOCEA) Alexander Ruzmaikin Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology in collaboration.
Rachel Klima (on behalf of the MASCS team) JHU/APL MASCS/VIRS Data Users’ Workshop LPSC 2014, The Woodlands, TX March 17,2014 MASCS Instrument & VIRS Calibration.
Solar Irradiance Variability Rodney Viereck NOAA Space Environment Center Derived Total Solar Irradiance Hoyt and Schatten, 1993 (-5 W/m 2 ) Lean et al.,
SNPP VIIRS On-Orbit Calibration for Ocean Color Applications MODIS / VIIRS Science Team Meeting May 2015 Gene Eplee, Kevin Turpie, Gerhard Meister, and.
On-orbit Cross-calibration of AM Satellite Remote Sensing Instruments Using the Moon International Workshop on Radiometric & Geometric Calibration Grand.
Global NDVI Data for Climate Studies Compton Tucker NASA/Goddard Space Fight Center Greenbelt, Maryland
Remote Sensing Basics | August, Calibrated Landsat Digital Number (DN) to Top of Atmosphere (TOA) Reflectance Conversion Richard Irish - SSAI/GSFC.
Reducing the RObotic Lunar Observatory (ROLO) Irradiance Model Uncertainty SI David B. Pollock 1, Thomas C. Stone 2, Hugh H. Kieffer 3, Joe P. Rice 4 1.
NASA, CGMS-41, July 2013 Coordination Group for Meteorological Satellites - CGMS Calibration/validation of Operational Instruments at NASA Langley Research.
ISCCP Calibration 25 th Anniversary Symposium July 23, 2008 NASA GISS Christopher L. Bishop Columbia University New York, New York.
VIIRS Product Evaluation at the Ocean PEATE Frederick S. Patt Gene C. Feldman IGARSS 2010 July 27, 2010.
ASIC 3 May Broadband Breakout Group Recommendations Big 3 Crosscutting Earth Radiation Budget.
SeaWiFS Calibration & Validation Strategy & Results Charles R. McClain SeaWiFS Project Scientist NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center February 11, 2004.
Radiometric Calibration PROBA-V QWG #2. PRESENTATION OUTLINE »Introduction »Stability of PROBA-V »ICP updates since QWG#1 »Outlook »Moon calibration GSICS.
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Image: MODIS Land Group, NASA GSFC March 2000 Image: MODIS Land Group,
Use of the Moon as a calibration reference for NPP VIIRS Frederick S. Patt, Robert E. Eplee, Robert A. Barnes, Gerhard Meister(*) and James J. Butler NASA.
Overview of Climate Observational Requirements for GOES-R Herbert Jacobowitz Short & Associates, Inc.
1EUM/RSP/VWG/16/ Tim Hewison Tom Stone Manik Bali Selecting and Migrating GSICS Inter-Calibration Reference Instruments.
1 CLARREO Advances in Reflected Solar Spectra Calibration Accuracy K. Thome 1, N. Fox 2, G. Kopp 3, J. McCorkel 1, P. Pilewskie 3 1 NASA/Goddard Space.
2015 GSICS Annual Meeting, Deli India March 16~20, 2015 Xiuqing Hu National Satellite Meteorological Center, CMA Yupeng Wang, Wei Fang Changchun Institute.
Thomas C. Stone U.S. Geological Survey, Flagstaff, AZ USA GSICS Research Working Group Meeting EUMETSAT 24−28 March 2014 Using the Moon as a Radiometric.
NOAA VIIRS Team GIRO Implementation 8/30/2016 Taeyoung (Jason) Choi, Xi Shao, Changyong Cao, Fuzhong Weng For Lunar Calibration Web Meeting.
INSAT-3D Calibration Using Moon at IMD A.K. Mitra, Shailesh Parihar, S.K Peshin A.K. Sharma Ministry of Earth Sciences India Meteorological Department,
A.K. Mitra, Shailesh Parihar, S.K. Peshin Ministry of Earth Sciences
NOAA VIIRS Team GIRO Implementation Updates
VIS/NIR reference instrument requirements
Tim Hewison (1) Sébastien Wagner (1), Tom Stone (2), Gary Fowler (1)
Calibrating the METEOSAT SEVIRI solar channels using lunar observations Sébastien Wagner (1) Bartolomeo Viticchie (1), Tom Stone (2), Tim Hewison(1), Gary.
EUMETSAT’s Lunar Calibration Capabilities
Update on Lunar Calibration Development
Lunar Calibration Workshop Activities
Fangfang Yu and Xiangqian Wu
MODIS and VIIRS Reflective Solar Bands Calibration Methodologies and
The ROLO Lunar Calibration System Description and Current Status
GOES-16 ABI Lunar Data Preparation to GIRO
An Overview of MODIS Reflective Solar Bands Calibration and Performance Jack Xiong NASA / GSFC GRWG Web Meeting on Reference Instruments and Their Traceability.
Sébastien Wagner (1) Tom Stone (2), Gary Fowler (1), Tim Hewison (1)
GOES Lunar Calibration
Calibration and Performance MODIS Characterization Support Team (MCST)
Data Preparation for Using the ROLO / GIRO Model
MODIS Lunar Calibration Data Preparation and Results for GIRO Testing
Measurements of the Moon by CLARREO Pathfinder and ARCSTONE
Update on Advancing Development of the ROLO Lunar Calibration System
USGS Status Frank Kelly, USGS EROS CEOS Plenary 2017 Agenda Item #4.14
Future Developments of the Lunar Calibration System
CALIBRATION over the Moon An introduction to « POLO »
Toru Kouyama Supported by SELENE/SP Team HISUI calibration WG
Data Preparation for ASTER
Using the Moon for Sensor Calibration Inter- comparisons
Meteosat Second Generation
Update on the GIRO Benchmark
Lunar reflectance model based on SELENE/SP data
Effort toward Characterization of Selected Lunar Sites for the Radiometric Calibration of Solar Reflective Bands Fangfang Yu1, Xi Shao1, Xiangqian Wu2.
Sensitivity ANALYSIS Sébastien Wagner (EUMETSAT) In collaboration with
Lunar data preparation for PROBA-V
Lu Zhang, Peng Zhang , Xiuqing Hu, Lin Chen
Current Status of ROLO and Future Development
Traceability of the GIRO to the ROLO: Definition of a benchmark
Lunar calibration of COMS visible channel using GIRO
Preliminary SCIAMACHY Lunar observations as intercalibration source
Inter-band calibration using the Moon
goes-16/17 abi lunar calibration
Revising the ROLO Lunar Model — A Status Update
Lunar Calibration Workshop Activities
Toward a synergy between on-orbit lunar observations
Presentation transcript:

Use of the Moon as an On-orbit Calibration Source Thomas C. Stone US Geological Survey, Flagstaff AZ Hugh Kieffer Celestial Reasonings, Carson City NV Achieving Satellite Instrument Calibration for Climate Change Workshop National Conference Center 16 – 18 May 2006

Why Use the Moon? Unmatched stability of the reflecting surface –better than 10 −8 per year [Icarus 130, (1997)] Smooth reflectance spectrum, with only broad, shallow features Accessible to all spacecraft, regardless of orbit Utilizes a spacecraft instrument’s normal Earth-viewing optical path –overcomes a common limitation of on-board calibration systems Appropriate brightness for terrestrial environmental sensors –at visible to SWIR wavelengths “ it is non-uniform and changes brightness all the time ” Radiometric behavior is knowable to high precision and accuracy STOP

Dynamic range of the Moon at low phase angles is similar to clear land extracts from GOES-12 vis-channel full-disk image, phase = 9.5° space Moon ocean land cloud

How to use the Moon Complexity of the reflectance properties requires use of a model The spacecraft instrument must view the Moon The lunar calibration program at USGS-Flagstaff has pioneered development of a system to utilize the disk-integrated lunar irradiance for on-orbit calibration and sensor response trending Model developed for the lunar disk-equivalent reflectance –Solar reflectance wavelength range — 350 to 2500 nm –Based on 4.6 years of observations by the ground-based RObotic Lunar Observatory (ROLO) –Empirically-derived function in the primary geometric variables of phase and lunar libration Formal interface, participation by spacecraft instrument cal teams → Spacecraft Calibration

ROLO Observational Program Spatially resolved radiance images –6+ years in operation, >85000 lunar images –phase angle coverage from eclipse to 90° Operations emphasized extinction –>800,000 star images Dormant since Sept Dedicated observatory, located at USGS in Flagstaff, AZ Altitude 2143 m Dual telescopes –23 VNIR bands, nm –9 SWIR bands, nm

USGS Lunar Irradiance Model Model inputs for fitting developed from calibrated exoatmospheric radiance images, spatially integrated to irradiance and converted to disk-equivalent reflectance A k : Analytic form derived empirically, from correlation study of fit residuals. For band k : Publication Ref.: Astronomical Journal 129, (2005 June)

Lunar Irradiance Model – performance ~ 1200 observations fitted for each band –sufficient libration coverage gained by multiple years of observations Mean absolute residual over all bands is in ln A, ~1% This is a measure of the model’s geometric prediction capability over the full range of phase and libration angles covered Absolute scale tied to Vega, field calibration at ROLO involving NIST Smoothing of model reflectance spectrum using Apollo return samples Current absolute uncertainty: 5-10%; geometric reliability far exceeds – ultimate accuracy goal is 1-2% absolute – new lunar spectral irradiance program under development at NIST absolute accuracy

The stability of the lunar irradiance model means that given a time series of lunar views acquired by a spacecraft instrument, sensor relative response trending with sub-percent precision can be achieved. e.g. SeaWiFS plot is 85 lunar observations (SeaWiFS now has over 100) ordinate is discrepancy: [inst – model] / model × 100% band-correlated temporal jitter removed, attributed to size measurement error in small lunar images (~6×20 pixels)

After correction for sensor degradation based on lunar views, residual SeaWiFS band response trends are < 0.1% per year 1 This meets the stability requirement for visible-wavelength radiometer measurements of environment variables for climate change 1 Applied Optics 43 (31), (2004) 85 SeaWiFS lunar observations asymptotic temporal correction applied for each band

Lunar calibration for space-based climate monitoring Instrument stability benchmark is achieved now Potential for absolute accuracy to exceed that achievable with on-board radiance/reflectance calibration hardware Capability for instrument inter-calibration and consistency of radiometric scale –instruments view the same, ultra-stable source Bridge for possible gap in observations prior to NPP/NPOESS –requires series of lunar views by current instruments prior to failure Regular lunar observations need to be part of spacecraft operational plans for calibration –called for in GEOSS 10-year Implementation Plan Reference Document –no mention in: US CCSP Strategic Plan, GCOS Climate Monitoring Principles

Lunar calibration comparison of EOS instruments average of all observations for each instrument differences between instruments represent current best practices

Application for geostationary instruments NOAA has recently instituted regular lunar views for GOES-10 and -12 monthly observations since November 2005 subsample format: 1000 lines × 5000 elements The Moon appears regularly in the margins of GEO full-disk images GEO visible-channel imagers typically lack on-board calibration Archived Moon images can provide calibration history, including for instruments not currently operational USGS has tools for predicting GEO Moon appearances from orbit TLE Lunar calibration for GOES – work in progress GOES-12 vis channel 2004 August 30 17:45:14

Lunar observing strategy for LEO spacecraft SeaWiFS has viewed the Moon over 100 times, EO-1 > 60 times Phase angle 4–10° –good signal-to-noise, but avoids “opposition effect” strong backscatter –achievable at least twice per month –restricted phase angle range is not a requirement for lunar calibration Pitch-over maneuver, executed in Earth’s shadow –rotate to the Moon, then scan past at constant rate –oversample rate higher than for Earth view, preferably in the usual down-track direction –adds (or subtracts) one complete revolution to the nadir-locked rate

Summary Utility – the Moon provides a useful, drift-free source for on-orbit calibration Lunar calibration methods and model are developed and are being utilized by several spacecraft instrument teams This system meets the stability requirement for climate change measurements (may be the only method for the solar reflectance range) With reduced uncertainty in absolute scale, capability for high-accuracy instrument inter-calibration and to bridge possible gap in observations Actions needed Get regular lunar views into satellite operations plans –has recently commenced for GOES Expand lunar calibration group of participating instruments –method is applicable to all sensors that could/do view the Moon –potential NASA contribution to multi-national efforts, e.g. GCOS