Applications for Fine Resolution Marine Observations Mark A. Bourassa.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PRESENTS: FORECASTING FOR OPERATIONS AND DESIGN February 16 th 2011 – Aberdeen.
Advertisements

1 st Joint GOSUD/SAMOS Workshop The Florida State University 1 Sensitivity of Surface Turbulent Fluxes to Observational Errors  or.
Hurricanes and Atlantic Surface Flux Variability Mark A. Bourassa 1,2, Paul J. Hughes 1,2, Jeremy Rolph 1, and.
Atelier Moment Cinetique Paris 26 Novembre 2012 Les Vents de Surface Diffusiométriques ERS-1 ERS-2 ADEOS-1 QuikSCAT.
Combined Active & Passive Rain Retrieval for QuikSCAT Satellite Khalil A. Ahmad Central Florida Remote Sensing Laboratory University of Central Florida.
Maintaining and Improving the AMSR-E and WindSat Ocean Products Frank J. Wentz Remote Sensing Systems, Santa Rosa CA AMSR TIM Agenda 4-5 September 2013.
Sandra Castro, Gary Wick, Peter Minnett, Andrew Jessup & Bill Emery.
Examination of the Dominant Spatial Patterns of the Extratropical Transition of Tropical Cyclones from the 2004 Atlantic and Northwest Pacific Seasons.
Using Scatterometers and Radiometers to Estimate Ocean Wind Speeds and Latent Heat Flux Presented by: Brad Matichak April 30, 2008 Based on an article.
Princeton University Global Evaluation of a MODIS based Evapotranspiration Product Eric Wood Hongbo Su Matthew McCabe.
Comparison and Evaluation of Scatterometer (SCR) observed wind data with buoy wind data Xinzhong Zhang Remote Sensing December 8 th, 2009.
Long-Term Ambient Noise Statistics in the Gulf of Mexico Mark A. Snyder & Peter A. Orlin Naval Oceanographic Office Stennis Space Center, MS Anthony I.
TRENDS IN MARINE WINDS ADJUSTED FOR CHANGES IN OBSERVATION METHOD, Bridget R. Thomas 1, Elizabeth C. Kent 2, Val R. Swail 3 and David I. Berry.
Climate quality data and datasets from VOS and VOSClim Elizabeth Kent and David Berry National Oceanography Centre, Southampton.
ElectroScience Lab IGARSS 2011 Vancouver Jul 26th, 2011 Chun-Sik Chae and Joel T. Johnson ElectroScience Laboratory Department of Electrical and Computer.
MWR Roughness Correction Algorithm for the Aquarius SSS Retrieval W. Linwood Jones, Yazan Hejazin, Salem Al-Nimri Central Florida Remote Sensing Lab University.
Oceanography 569 Oceanographic Data Analysis Laboratory Kathie Kelly Applied Physics Laboratory 515 Ben Hall IR Bldg class web site: faculty.washington.edu/kellyapl/classes/ocean569_.
Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology QuikScat Retrieving Ocean Surface Wind Speeds from the Nonspinning QuikSCAT Scatterometer.
Lidar Working Group on Space-Based Winds, Snowmass, Colorado, July 17-21, 2007 A study of range resolution effects on accuracy and precision of velocity.
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 MAP (Maximum A Posteriori) x is reduced state vector [SST(x), TCWV(w)]
IORAS activities for DRAKKAR in 2006 General topic: Development of long-term flux data set for interdecadal simulations with DRAKKAR models Task: Using.
Comparison of Surface Turbulent Flux Products Paul J. Hughes, Mark A. Bourassa, and Shawn R. Smith Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies & Department.
Evaluation of Microwave Scatterometers and Radiometers as Satellite Anemometers Frank J. Wentz, Thomas Meissner, and Deborah Smith Presented at: NOAA/NASA.
Preliminary Results of Global Climate Simulations With a High- Resolution Atmospheric Model P. B. Duffy, B. Govindasamy, J. Milovich, K. Taylor, S. Thompson,
Calibration and Validation Studies for Aquarius Salinity Retrieval PI: Shannon Brown Co-Is: Shailen Desai and Anthony Scodary Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
Dataset Development within the Surface Processes Group David I. Berry and Elizabeth C. Kent.
Spatial Variability of Random Error and Biases in the FSU3 Winds Mark A. Bourassa and Shawn R. Smith Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies, The.
Marine Climatology from Research Vessels Shawn R. Smith 1, Scott D. Woodruff 2, and Steve Worley 3 1 Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies, FSU,
High-Resolution Climate Data from Research and Volunteer Observing Ships: A Strategic Intercalibration and Quality Assurance Program A Joint ETL/WHOI Initiative.
Automated Weather Observations from Ships and Buoys: A Future Resource for Climatologists Shawn R. Smith Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies.
Characterization of Ocean Wind Vector Retrievals Using ERS-2 Scatterometer High-Resolution Long-term Dataset and Buoy Measurements Supervisor: Prof.
Corrections to Scatterometer Wind Vectors from the Effects of Rain, Using High Resolution NEXRAD Radar Collocations David E. Weissman Hofstra University.
David E. Weissman Hofstra University Hempstead, New York IGARSS 2011 July 26, 2011 Mark A. Bourassa Center for Ocean Atmosphere Prediction Studies.
Fluxes With input from: USCLIVAR Working Group on High-Latitude Fluxes: Ed Andreas, Cecelia Bitz, Dave Carlson, Ivana Cerovecki, Meghan Cronin‏, Will Drennan,
Why We Care or Why We Go to Sea.
Modern Era Retrospective-analysis for Research and Applications: Introduction to NASA’s Modern Era Retrospective-analysis for Research and Applications:
Impacts of surface currents on derived scatterometer wind at Ku and C band Amanda Plagge and Doug Vandemark (UNH) James Edson (UConn) Bertrand Chapron.
R. A. Brown 2003 U. Concepci Ó n Nov 9 ‘96 18Z Gulf of Alaska rab.
1) What is the variability in eddy currents and the resulting impact on global climate and weather? Resolving meso-scale and sub- meso-scale ocean dynamics.
The New Geophysical Model Function for QuikSCAT: Implementation and Validation Outline: GMF methodology GMF methodology New QSCAT wind speed and direction.
Graduate Course: Advanced Remote Sensing Data Analysis and Application A COMPARISON OF LATENT HEAT FLUXES OVER GLOBAL OCEANS FOR FOUR FLUX PRODUCTS Shu-Hsien.
Wind Stress Data Products for Model Comparison 2012 ECCO Meeting California Institute of Technology David Moroni 10/31/12.
Shipboard Automated Meteorological and Oceanographic System (SAMOS) Initiative: A Key Component of an Ocean Observing System Shawn R. Smith Center for.
High Quality Wind Retrievals for Hurricanes Using the SeaWinds Scatterometer W. Linwood Jones and Ian Adams Central Florida Remote Sensing Lab Univ. of.
Evapotranspiration Estimates over Canada based on Observed, GR2 and NARR forcings Korolevich, V., Fernandes, R., Wang, S., Simic, A., Gong, F. Natural.
Evaluation of the Accuracy of in situ Sources of Surface Flux Observations for Model Validation: Buoys and Research Vessels in the Eastern Pacific C. W.
Characterization of Errors in Turbulent Heat Fluxes Caused by Different Heat and Moisture Roughness Length Parameterizations 1. Background and Motivation.
IOVWST Meeting May 2011 Maryland Calibration and Validation of Multi-Satellite scatterometer winds Topics  Estimation of homogeneous long time.
Evaluation of the Real-Time Ocean Forecast System in Florida Atlantic Coastal Waters June 3 to 8, 2007 Matthew D. Grossi Department of Marine & Environmental.
Surface Observations in The Southern Ocean, Variability, and the Consequences.
An evaluation of a hybrid satellite and NWP- based turbulent fluxes with TAO buoys ChuanLi Jiang, Kathryn A. Kelly, and LuAnne Thompson University of Washington.
Montserrat Fuentes Statistics Department NCSU Research directions in climate change SAMSI workshop, September 14, 2009.
The Florida State University MARCDAT2 Oct Spatial Variability of Random.
Direct aerosol radiative effects based on combined A-Train observations Jens Redemann, Y. Shinozuka, J. Livingston, M. Vaughan, P. Russell, M.Kacenelenbogen,
NASA, CGMS-44, 7 June 2016 Coordination Group for Meteorological Satellites - CGMS SURFACE PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS FROM THE ORBITING CARBON OBSERVATORY-2.
Understanding and Improving Marine Air Temperatures David I. Berry and Elizabeth C. Kent National Oceanography Centre, Southampton
Sandra Castro and Gary Wick.  Does direct regression of satellite infrared brightness temperatures to observed in situ skin temperatures result in.
Enhancement of Wind Stress and Hurricane Waves Simulation
A Fear-Inspiring Intercomparison of Monthly Averaged Surface Forcing
Retrieving Extreme wind speeds using C-band instruments
MET3220C & MET6480 Computational Statistics
Coupled atmosphere-ocean simulation on hurricane forecast
Radar/Surface Quantitative Precipitation Estimation
Institute of Low Temperature Science, Hokkaido University
High-Resolution Climate Data from Research and Volunteer Observing Ships: A Strategic Intercalibration and Quality Assurance Program A Joint ETL/WHOI Initiative.
Jackie May* Mark Bourassa * Current affilitation: QinetiQ-NA
Shuyi S. Chen, Ben Barr, Milan Curcic and Brandon Kerns
Mark A. Bourassa and Qi Shi
David E. Weissman Hofstra University Hempstead, New York 11549
Mark A. Bourassa1 Ernesto Rodriguez2 and Sarah Gille3
Presentation transcript:

Applications for Fine Resolution Marine Observations Mark A. Bourassa 1,2,3 and Shawn R. Smith 1,3  1. Center for Ocean  Atmospheric Prediction Studies 2. Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Institute 3. The Florida State University

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April General Applications  Research vessel observations can be found in many regions of the globe, sampling a very wide range of conditions, which is ideal for all the many applications.  Modeling of surface turbulent fluxes (or radiation if it is measured).  Coupled with observations of surface turbulent fluxes (or co-located satellite data) the data are useful for evaluating and improving models of surface turbulent fluxes.  Comparison of time integrated fluxes to numerical weather prediction climate products.  Comparison to routine VOS data and assessment of quality of quality of VOS data.  Calibration or validation of satellite instruments.  Interpretation of errors in satellite data.  Useful for estimating naturally occurring noise in observations. NEW!

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Ocean’s TKE Based on Observed Surface Fluxes Eddy CorrelationInertial Dissipation Bulk Methods Calculations by Derrick Weitlich Clayson & Kantha model Bulk Method

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Flux Model Evaluation with ASTEX (Buoy Observations) rr2r2 SlopeRMS Taylor & Yelland  Wu  Smith et al  Calculations by Yoshi Goto

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Observed Surface Stresses  Preliminary data form the SWS2 (Severe Wind Storms 2) experiment.  The drag coefficients for high wind speeds are large and plentiful.  The atypically large drag coefficients are associated with rising seas  Many models overestimate these fluxes.  Excellent empirical fit to means of these data and many other by P.K. Taylor & M. Yelland (2001).

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Evaluations Using SWS2 Ship and Buoy Observations rr2r2 regressionRMS Taylor & Yelland  Wu  Smith et al  All Data Stress < 0.5 N/m 2 rr2r2 SlopeRMS Taylor & Yelland  Wu  Smith et al  Calculations by Yoshi Goto

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Understanding Physics Via Differences in Remotely Sensed and In Situ Data In areas of strong currents, U scat – U buoy will be dominated by the current. Areas with strong currents are often known, or can be identified in time series (Cornillon and Park 2001, GRL; Kelley et al. 2001, GRL). Remaining mean differences in U scat – U buoy are expected to be dominated by wave-related variability in z o (u  ) or ambiguity selection errors.  Problems related to ambiguity selection and dealing with vectors can be bypassed by comparing observed backscatter to the backscatter predicted by buoy observations (Bentamy et al. 2001, JTech).

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Comparison of Backscatter Residuals To Wave Parameters  Differences between observed and predicted (based on observed winds) backscatter are correlated with various wave parameter (Bentamy et al. 2001, JTech).  Significant wave height (the height of the 1/3 tallest waves)  Orbital velocity  Significant wave slope  Orbital velocity and significant slope are highly correlated. Wind Speed (m/s) Sig. Wave Height Orbital Velocity Sig. Wave Slope Tair - Tsea 4 to to to Correlation Coefficients

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Differences Between In Situ and Satellite Observations Could be Due to Physics  Surface stress modeling and QSCAT-derived stresses  Modeling surface stress for storm winds (Bourassa 2004 ASR)  Direct retrieval of surface turbulent stress from scatterometer backscatter

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Evaluations of Surface Fluxes in Climatologies  Quality processed R/V AWS data are ideal for evaluation of global reanalysis fluxes (e.g., Smith et al., 2001, J. Climate).  Sampling rates allow accurate estimation of 6 hourly integrated fluxes.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Where are the Problems: Algorithm or Data  NCEP fluxes are compared to fluxes calculated from R/V data.  Fluxes calculated with Smith (1988) parameterization.  The triangles indicate a large bias that has a substantial dependence on wind speed.  Alternatively, fluxes can be calculated from the model winds, SST, air temperature, and atmospheric humidity (circles).  Much weaker dependence on wind speed.  Still a substantial bias.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Evaluation of VOS Observation: VOSCLIM  Accuracies of VOS observations are not as well characterized as desired.  Wind biases have been studied in relatively great detail.  Lindau (1995)  CFD Modeling of flow distortion (Peter Taylor et al.)  Biases in SST have also been examined.  Biases in air temperature and atmospheric humidity are far less well know (Liz Kent).  Air temperature biases are expected to be a function of radiative heating and ventilation.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Changes With Time As An Indication of Quality  Spikes, steps, suspect values identified (flagged)  Examines difference in near-neighbor values  Flags based on threshold derived from observations  Graphical Representation  Identifies flow conditions w/ severe problems  Flags plotted as function of ship-relative wind  % flagged in each wind bin on outer ring  Differences between ship and scatterometer could be used to examine flow distortion.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April R/V Data for Scatterometer Validation Co-location Criteria  Automated Weather Systems  e.g., IMET  Observations interval is 5 to 60s  Record all parameters needed to calculate equivalent-neutral earth-relative winds  Co-location Criteria  Maximum temporal difference of 20 minutes (usually <30s).  Maximum spatial difference of 25 km (usually <12.5km).  Quality control includes checks for  Maneuvering (ship acceleration),  Apparent wind directions passing through superstructure.  Details in Bourassa et al. (2003 JGR)

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Collocations with R/V Atlantis

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Collocations with R/V Oceanus

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Collocations with R/V Polarstern

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Wind Speed Validation (QSCAT-1 GMF)  Preliminary results  2 months of data  Observations from eight research vessels  <25 km apart, <20 minutes apart.  Uncertainty was calculated using PCA, assuming ships and satellite make equal contributions to uncertainty. Likely to be unflagged rain contamination

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Wind Direction Validation  Preliminary results  Same conditions as the previous plot.  Correctly selected ambiguities are within 45  of the green line or the corners.  Red dashed lines indicates 180  errors.  Yellow dashed lines indicate 90  errors.  Statistics are for correctly selected ambiguities.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April R/V Atlantis Preliminary Comparison  Preliminary comparison to R/V Atlantis was much better than typical.  Uncertainties of 0.3 m/s and 4  (a factor of 4 or 5 better than average).  Possible explanations include a small sample, and  All but one co-location was <5 km.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Variance in Speed · There have been several retrieval algorithms with different rain flags. · Ku2000 from Remote Sensing Systems. · QSCAT-1 from JPL. · Wind speed variance (i.e., uncertainty squared) decreases with decreasing co-location distance. Spatial Difference in Co-Location (km) Wind Direction Uncertainty 2 (degrees 2 )

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Variance in Direction  Variance (uncertainty squared) in direction also decreases as co-location distance decreases.  Taylor’s hypothesis can be used to estimate the spatial scale to which extrapolation can be justified.  The optimum spatial scale is between 5 and 7 km.  This distance has been confirmed in the signal to noise ratio from backscatter (David Long, pers. Comm, 2003). Spatial Difference in Co-Location (km) Wind Direction Uncertainty 2 (degrees 2 )

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Natural Variability In Scatterometer Observations  Examine how much noise in scatterometer winds is due to natural variability in surfaces winds.  Versus variability (noise) due to the retrieval function.  Will naturally variable winds be a serious problem for finer resolution scatterometer winds???  Antenna technology has progressed to the point where a 1 or 2km product could be produced from a satellite in mid earth orbit.  Current scatterometer wind cells are 25x25km from low earth orbit.  There is a lot of atmospheric variability on scales <25km.  The different looks within a vector wind cell do not occur at the same time or location. The winds can and do change between looks.  These changes can be thought of as appearing as noise in the observed backscatter. When individual footprints are averaged over sufficient space/time (space in this case), the variability due to smaller scale processes can be greatly reduced.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April The Approach  Taylor’s hypothesis is used to convert a spatial scale (e.g., 25, 20, 15, 10, 5, and 2km) to a time scale.  Time scale = spatial scale / mean wind speed.  A maximum time scale of 40 minutes is used.  The non-uniform antenna pattern is considered.  The weighting in space (translated to time) is equal to a Gaussian distribution, centered on the center of the footprint, and dropping by one standard deviation at the edge of the footprint.  Mean speeds and directions are calculated, and differences are calculated for temporal differences of 1 through 20 minutes.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Example of Variability in 60s Averages for Various Difference In Time  Variance in wind speed differences (m 2 s -2 ) as a function of the difference in time (minutes) for individual observations (one minute averages). 0 to 4 ms -1 4 to 8 ms -1 8 to 12 ms to 16 ms to 20 ms -1

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Examples for 25km footprints  Standard deviation in wind speed differences (left; ms -1 ) and directional differences (right; degrees) as a function of the difference in time (minutes).  High wind speeds have more variability in speed, but less so in direction.  Directional variability for low wind speeds is very sensitive to the differences in time.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Examples for 20km footprints  Standard deviation in wind speed (left; ms -1 ) and direction (right; degrees) as a function of the difference in time (minutes).

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Examples for 15km footprints  Standard deviation in wind speed (left; ms -1 ) and direction (right; degrees) as a function of the difference in time (minutes).

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Examples for 10km footprints  Standard deviation in wind speed (left; ms -1 ) and direction (right; degrees) as a function of the difference in time (minutes).  Odd features are creeping into the directional analysis for high wind speeds, presumably due to insufficient temporal resolution of the ship data.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Examples for 5km footprints  Standard deviation in wind speed (ms -1 ) as a function of the difference in time (minutes).  Speeds, for large wind speeds, are highly sensitive to the differences in observation time.  For lower wind speeds, the spatial differences in sampling dominate the uncertainty in speed.

Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies The Florida State University HRMM 2 nd Workshop April Conclusions  There are many applications for high resolution in situ observations.  Improving flux modeling  Validation of climatologies  Quality assessment of VOS observations  Validation of satellite observations  Planning new earth observing satellites  The satellite related applications would benefit from observations with a sampling rate greater than once per minute.  Wave data and radiation data would be extremely useful for flux modeling.