Page 1 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 1 st Envisat Validation Workshop MERIS Conclusions and recommendations.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ERS - ENVISAT SYMPOSIUM Gothenburg October, 2000 MERIS Validation of MERIS Products Jean-Paul Huot, Carsten Brockmann Peter Regner, Phillipe Goryl.
Advertisements

Atmospheric Correction Algorithm for the GOCI Jae Hyun Ahn* Joo-Hyung Ryu* Young Jae Park* Yu-Hwan Ahn* Im Sang Oh** Korea Ocean Research & Development.
Page 1GlobColour CDR Meeting – July 10-11, 2006, ESRIN All rights reserved © 2006, ACRI-ST Resulting Technical Specification.
Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite Observing SATellite 29 March 2011 Hyper Spectral Workshop The ACOS/GOSAT Experience David Crisp JPL/CALTECH.
MCST – MODLAND Eric F. Vermote –MODLAND representative.
Proposed participation of the MODIS Aerosol team and Si-Chee in the Dry/wet AMC + SMOCC campaign in Amazonia August-November 2002 (There are question marks.
Constraining aerosol sources using MODIS backscattered radiances Easan Drury - G2
CAVIAR – Continuum Absorption by Visible and Infrared Radiation and its Atmospheric Relevance How on schedule are we? Keith Shine Department of Meteorology,
Menghua Wang NOAA/NESDIS/ORA E/RA3, Room 102, 5200 Auth Rd.
Xin Kong, Lizzie Noyes, Gary Corlett, John Remedios, Simon Good and David Llewellyn-Jones Earth Observation Science, Space Research Centre, University.
Using satellite-bourne instruments to diagnose the indirect effect A review of the capabilities and previous studies.
1 Calibration Adjustments for the MODIS Aqua 2015 Ocean Color Reprocessing Gerhard Meister, NASA Code 616 OBPG (Ocean Biology Processing Group) 5/18/2015.
ESTEC July 2000 Estimation of Aerosol Properties from CHRIS-PROBA Data Jeff Settle Environmental Systems Science Centre University of Reading.
Determining the accuracy of MODIS Sea- Surface Temperatures – an Essential Climate Variable Peter J. Minnett & Robert H. Evans Meteorology and Physical.
2010 CEOS Field Reflectance Intercomparisons Lessons Learned K. Thome 1, N. Fox 2 1 NASA/GSFC, 2 National Physical Laboratory.
Aerosol-cci: WP2220: Cloud mask comparison Gerrit de Leeuw.
WP 3: Absorbing Aerosol Index (AAI) WP 10: Level-1 validation L.G. Tilstra 1, I. Aben 2, and P. Stammes 1 1 Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute.
Progress report on work at the CHRIS-PROBA study site on Thorney Island, UK Ted Milton, University of Southampton, UK Karen Anderson, University of Exeter,
The IOCCG Atmospheric Correction Working Group Status Report The Eighth IOCCG Committee Meeting Department of Animal Biology and Genetics University.
MERIS US Workshop, Silver Springs, 14 th July 2008 MERIS US Workshop Vicarious Calibration Methods and Results Steven Delwart.
EARLINET and Satellites: Partners for Aerosol Observations Matthias Wiegner Universität München Meteorologisches Institut (Satellites: spaceborne passive.
Menghua Wang, NOAA/NESDIS/ORA Atmospheric Correction using the MODIS SWIR Bands (1240 and 2130 nm) Menghua Wang (PI, NASA NNG05HL35I) NOAA/NESDIS/ORA Camp.
Sentinel-3 Validation Team (S3VT) Meeting ESA/ESRIN, Frascati, Italy, th November 2013 General Presentation Template for S3VT meeting Project name.
EUMETSAT METEOROLOGICAL SATELLITE CONFERENCE 15/09/2013 – 20/09/2013, VIENNA EUMETSAT METEOROLOGICAL SATELLITE CONFERENCE 15/09/2013 – 20/09/2013, VIENNA.
Ocean Color Radiometer Measurements of Long Island Sound Coastal Observational platform (LISCO): Comparisons with Satellite Data & Assessments of Uncertainties.
Soe Hlaing *, Alex Gilerson, Samir Ahmed Optical Remote Sensing Laboratory, NOAA-CREST The City College of the City University of New York 1 A Bidirectional.
Validation workshop, Frascati, 13 December 2002Page 1 SCIAMACHY products quality and recommendations Based on presentations and discussions during this.
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Image: MODIS Land Group, NASA GSFC March 2000 Image: MODIS Land Group,
23 rd WGCV, March , 2005 IVOS (15 th ) IVOS Working Meeting CONAE, 10&11. March 2005.
Page 1ENVISAT Validation Review / GOMOS session - ESRIN – 13th December 2002 ENVISAT VALIDATION WORKSHOP GOMOS Recommendations by the ESL team : Service.
Page 1 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December st Envisat Validation Workshop MERIS, December 2002 Conclusions and Recommendations.
NOAA/NESDIS Cooperative Research Program Second Annual Science Symposium SATELLITE CALIBRATION & VALIDATION July Barry Gross (CCNY) Brian Cairns.
09 Sept ENVISAT symposium, Salzburg Aerosol over land with MERIS, present and future Ramon, D. 1 and Santer, R. 2 (1) HYGEOS, France (2) LISE, Université.
NASA Ocean Color Research Team Meeting, Silver Spring, Maryland 5-7 May 2014 II. Objectives Establish a high-quality long-term observational time series.
The Second TEMPO Science Team Meeting Physical Basis of the Near-UV Aerosol Algorithm Omar Torres NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Atmospheric Chemistry.
14 ARM Science Team Meeting, Albuquerque, NM, March 21-26, 2004 Canada Centre for Remote Sensing - Centre canadien de télédétection Geomatics Canada Natural.
Menghua Wang, NOAA/NESDIS/ORA Refinement of MODIS Atmospheric Correction Algorithm Menghua Wang (PI, NASA NNG05HL35I) NOAA/NESDIS/ORA Camp Springs, MD.
Slide 1 NATO UNCLASSIFIEDMeeting title – Location - Date Satellite Inter-calibration of MODIS and VIIRS sensors Preliminary results A. Alvarez, G. Pennucci,
Intercomparison of OMI NO 2 and HCHO air mass factor calculations: recommendations and best practices A. Lorente, S. Döerner, A. Hilboll, H. Yu and K.
Page 1 Validation Workshop, 9-13 th December 2002, ESRIN ENVISAT Validation Workshop AATSR Report Marianne Edwards Space Research Centre Department of.
VIIRS Product Evaluation at the Ocean PEATE Frederick S. Patt Gene C. Feldman IGARSS 2010 July 27, 2010.
October 02, st IHOP_2002 Water Vapor Intercomparison Workshop Status of intercomparisons and the next steps  Characterize moisture measuring techniques.
SCIAMACHY TOA Reflectance Correction Effects on Aerosol Optical Depth Retrieval W. Di Nicolantonio, A. Cacciari, S. Scarpanti, G. Ballista, E. Morisi,
SeaWiFS Calibration & Validation Strategy & Results Charles R. McClain SeaWiFS Project Scientist NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center February 11, 2004.
Jetstream 31 (J31) in INTEX-B/MILAGRO. Campaign Context: In March 2006, INTEX-B/MILAGRO studied pollution from Mexico City and regional biomass burning,
AATSR Calibration Using DesertsENVISAT Validation Review 9-13 December 2002 Inter-Comparisons of AATSR, MERIS and ATSR-2 Calibrations using Desert Targets.
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Image: MODIS Land Group, NASA GSFC March 2000 Image: MODIS Land Group,
Cloud property retrieval from hyperspectral IR measurements Jun Li, Peng Zhang, Chian-Yi Liu, Xuebao Wu and CIMSS colleagues Cooperative Institute for.
Polarization analysis in MODIS Gerhard Meister, Ewa Kwiatkowska, Bryan Franz, Chuck McClain Ocean Biology Processing Group 18 June 2008 Polarization Technology.
Radiometric Comparison between Suomi NPP VIIRS and AQUA MODIS using Extended Simultaneous Nadir Overpass in the Low Latitudes Sirish Uprety a Changyong.
Preliminary results from the new AVHRR Pathfinder Atmospheres Extended (PATMOS-x) Data Set Andrew Heidinger a, Michael Pavolonis b and Mitch Goldberg a.
Preliminary Analysis of Relative MODIS Terra-Aqua Calibration Over Solar Village and Railroad Valley Sites Using ASRVN A. Lyapustin, Y. Wang, X. Xiong,
The International Ocean Colour Coordinating Group International Network for Sensor Inter- comparison and Uncertainty assessment for Ocean Color Radiometry.
R. Santer and B. Berthelot Final meeting, ESRIN, Frascati, April 21, 2009 Calibration Test Sites Selection and Characterisation WP260 – Error analysis:
Estimation of surface characteristics over heterogeneous landscapes from medium resolution sensors. F. Baret 1, S. Garrigues 1, D. Allard 2, R. Faivre.
A Atmospheric Correction Update and ACIX Status
The Lodore Falls Hotel, Borrowdale
SADE Export Web Site Claire Tinel, Denis Blumstein, Patrice Henry - CNES Pascale Lafitte - CNES GSICS WG Meeting – Feb 2010 – Claire Tinel / CNES.
A. K Mitra, A.K Sharma and Shailesh Parihar
PROBA scenes acquired over our study sites
Analysis Ready Data July 18, 2016 John Dwyer Leo Lymburner
SEVIRI Solar Channel Calibration system
Meteorological Satellite Center Japan Meteorological Agency
WP300 – Recommendations for S2 and S3
Towards achieving continental scale field validation and multi-sensor interoperability of satellite derived surface reflectance in Australia Medhavy Thankappan1,
Overview of the AATSR Validation Programme
Atmospheric Correction Inter-comparison eXercise
Combination Approaches
Recent activities of OCR-VC
Presentation transcript:

Page 1 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December st Envisat Validation Workshop MERIS Conclusions and recommendations

Page 2 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Plan F Introduction F Calibration u In-flight u Vicarious F Verification F Validation u Cloud and Water Vapour u Land Products Water Products F Conclusion

Page 3 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Introduction Instrument works well. In-flight radiometric and spectral calibration performed regularly. Spectral calibration campaigns took place giving an in-flight spectral characterization results with unprecedented accuracy. Verification activity was more demanding than originally expected but produced good results. Following the verification phase, the vicarious calibration and the validation activities started. First results have been presented during the workshop.

Page 4 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Calibration Team Conclusions Second spectral campaigns confirm early results. - Overall accuracy 0.2 nm, resolution 0.05 nm Radiometric calibration results showed a little degradation in some camera. (below 2.5%) Vicarious calibration results (based on field measurements) showed good agreement (within the accuracy of the method used). Inter comparison with AATSR showed good agreements. Inter comparison results over desert sites showed an over estimation of Meris compared to last century’s sensors.

Page 5 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Calibration Team Recommendations Spectral characterization Repeat spectral characterization campaigns every six months Improve the instrument model using calibrated data Instrument Degradation: Include a pixel-wise degradation model in the L1b processing Run a diffuser ageing calibration in SciLo configuration (planned) BRDF modelling Improve the BRDF model based on in-flight data Develop a diffuser degradation model Study the Speckle effect Run a vigneting check for diffuser illumination extremes (planned)

Page 6 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Radiative Transfer Codes Inter-compare the Radiative Transfer Codes used for Vicarious Calibration Tool Box Improvements Include a L1b conversion to TOA reflectance & TOA normalized radiance Include the RTC in the Toolbox for vicarious calibration exercises METRIC Improvements Include Snow, Buoys, instrumented site extraction Include IOCCG Diagnostic data sites extraction Calibration Plan Systematic acquisition of data over designated targets and distribution via FTP Hold Regular Cal/Val workshops Calibration Team Recommendations

Page 7 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Exploitation of available spectral campaign data SeaWiFs, Chris/Proba Programming of new spectral campaigns for radiometric calibration Spot/Vegetation, ATM, MODIS, GLI, AATSR Calibration Plan Systematic comparison of MERIS and AATSR based on macro-pixels Systematic acquisition of data over designated targets and distribution via FTP Hold Regular Cal/Val workshops Calibration Team Recommendations

Page 8 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Verification Team Conclusions All the products are verified and ready for the validation loop. Minor problems have been identified for some products (Land Surface Pressure, Water Vapour above clouds, Case2 products). Additional interaction between verification and validation team is needed. DPM/IODD/TDS including smile correction and pressure upgrade will be available by Christmas as recommended during the calibration workshop.

Page 9 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Verification Team Recommendations Level 0 data corresponding to match-up need to be retrieved and processed with appropriate calibration files. Atmospheric correction over glint area needs to be revised. Atmospheric correction above complex water needs improvement (different treatment of absorbing aerosol). PCDs are ok, but the logic may need some simplification. Additional flag for land product to be added.

Page 10 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Cloud and Water Vapour Team Conclusions CTP works quite well when comparing with radiosoundings. WV in a quite good agreement with Radiosoundings, radiometer, gps and Modis. Apparently Meris under-estimates somewhat. WV over clouds and land needs more investigation. Cloud Optical Thickness ‘looks’ ok, but it is too early to have a conclusion. Need 3 months of data for statistical analysis. First estimation results: products range method accuracy COT0-200MODIS40% CTP hPaMODIS-radiosonde<50 hPa WV land g/cm²MODIS-radiosonde-gps <15% WV clouds0-2 g/cm²radiosonde<20% WV water g/cm²radiosondetbc

Page 11 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Cloud and Water Vapour Team Recommendation New neural network for CTP using the precise wavelengths. Planned. 3 aircraft campaigns were made in November. Results will be analysed. Aircraft campaign are planned in May. Check carefully the meteo products. Averaging effect. (A)ATSR data IR can be used for CTP validation. Use the reflectance from Meris to generate an albedo map for improving the atmosphere products. For WV above ocean take into account the aerosol effect.

Page 12 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Interlude : Mean Water Vapour Content from to

Page 13 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Land Team Conclusion The first results are very promising. Independent investigations of MGVI show good agreement in comparison with SeaWIFS. Cross-Validation of variables using other sensors (also w/o products) show consistency.

Page 14 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Land Team Recommendation New Look Up Table has been generated. Based on ESL first validation, the results are improved. If investigation confirms the first results, The new land LUT should be loaded in the processor. Include additional test on cloud screening based on results of vegetation validation. Need more data (including FR data). Improve PCDs and include new science flags in the product. Compare MERIS MGVI with the corresponding products from MOS, VEGETATION, MODIS.

Page 15 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Land Team Recommendation Investigate red edge classification capability in MERIS FR data. Establish more combinations with MODIS over e.g. VALERI and MODLAND sites. Intercomparison. over global sites. Need to have a spatial and temporal composite product to support/validate global vegetation maps. Need for exact knowledge of the MERIS geometric performance.

Page 16 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Land Team Recommendation Pressure over Land: Recommendation: shift the O2 band 1.25 nm toward the red. Use of pressure into cloud flagging. Aerosol: Need to improve RO_DDV versus ARVI. Extend the concept of DDV to less dark vegetation.

Page 17 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Ocean Colour Team Conclusions A significant effort was put in the intercalibration of optical instruments and in the definition of common measurements laboratories protocols. The number of match-ups for marine products is too limited to conclude on the validation exercise. The first preliminary results show that water leaving reflectance seem quite good. The validation measurements data set is small to draw any further conclusion. Some spectra with strange shapes have been reported by some PIs, but in many cases, the corresponding data are flagged as invalid by the processor. PCDs are very severe. Algorithm is unable to discriminate absorbing aerosols from absorbing waters when the turbid flag is not raised.

Page 18 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 Ocean Colour Team Recommendations Process missing match ups Improve the mission_planning overpasses to include camera 5 Detection of Clouds Improve cloud detection using O2 results Develop cirrus clouds, Improve the atmospheric correction over absorbing waters Revise PCDs and Flags (new flags = white cap etc.) Smoother transition of Case2_s AC correction Improve the Sun-glint correction

Page 19 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 General Recommendations Full Resolution Background Regional Missions All land surfaces and coastal zones

Page 20 ENVISAT Validation Review – Frascati – 9-13 December 2002 MERIS instrument is in a very good shape. The validation has started, however,more match up data are needed to conclude on the achieved accuracy. More time is needed to look at the data and make a complete synthesis. The first results look very promising. The products can be distributed following smile update early next year. IPF updates foreseen by May 2003 to include the validation findings. Conclusion