Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byAlexia Perkins Modified over 6 years ago
1
Jason Hamel Dr. Rolando Raqueño Dr. John Schott Dr. Minsu Kim
Sensitivity Analysis of Suspended Sediment Inherent Optical Property Effects on Modeled Water Leaving Radiance Jason Hamel Dr. Rolando Raqueño Dr. John Schott Dr. Minsu Kim
2
Outline Objective Water Modeling Suspended Solids Test Cases Results
Conclusion
3
Objective Examine the effect of suspended solids on water leaving radiance Perform a sensitivity study using a model to determine effect of: Composition Particle size Concentration Analyze the NIR region to determine cases where normal atmospheric correction methods over water will fail Tools: OOPS Hydrolight
4
80% 10% 10% Atmosphere to Sensor Air/Water Transition
Signal Sources Atmosphere to Sensor 80% 10% 10% Air/Water Transition Water/Air Transition Atmosphere is a big problem (in-water information is only 10% of image) Upwelling and down welling, cloud plumes effect data In Water
5
Characteristics of Spectral data
Difference is water characteristic curves can be seen here Some more green, more brackish, some darker then others Basis of what we do: what can we tell about water based on it’s spectral characteristics? Irondequoit Bay Genesee River Lake Ontario
6
Outline Objective Water Modeling Suspended Solids Test Cases Results
Conclusion
7
Water Modeling Hydrolight is our current water modeling tool
To model the radiance leaving the water surface Hydrolight needs defined: Illumination Surface wind speed Water quality parameters Bottom conditions
8
Water Modeling Water quality parameters
Material components in the water column (typically included is pure water, chlorophyll, suspended solids, and color dissolved organic matter) Concentration Absorption coefficient Scattering coefficient Scattering phase function All variables can be defined for wavelength and depth
9
Water Modeling Ocean Optical Plankton Simulator (OOPS) developed at Cornell Models absorption and scattering coefficients and the scattering phase function Generate IOP’s of in-water constituents if basic properties of the materials are known Can generate test data sets with Hydrolight to analyze how specific constituents effect the water leaving radiance
10
Outline Objective Water Modeling Suspended Solids Test Cases Results
Conclusion
11
Suspended Solids in OOPS
Basic physical and optical properties needed by OOPS to model IOP’s: Suspended solids composition Refractive index Particle size distribution Density
12
Suspended Solids Composition
Quartz SiO2 Feldspars Orthoclase KAlSi3O8 Albite NaAlSi3O8 Anorthite CaAl2Si2O8 Clay minerals Kaolinite Al4 (OH)8 [Si4O10] Chlorite (Al, Mg, Fe)3 (OH)2 [(Al,Si}4O10] Mg3 (OH) Illite (K, H2O) Al2 (H2O, OH)2 [AlSi3O10] Montmorillonite {(AL2-xMgx) (OH)2 [Si4O10]}-x Nax.n H1O Calcite/aragonite CaCO3 Opal SiO2 (amorphous)
13
Refractive Indices Quartz 1.544 1.553 Feldspars
Ordinary Ray Extraordinary Ray Tertiary Ray Quartz Feldspars Orthoclase Albite Anorthite Clays Kaolinite Chlorite Illite Montmorillonite Calcium Carbonate Calcite Aragonite Opal From Lide, D. R. (2003). CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics CRC Press, 84th edition.
14
Refractive Indices From Gifford, J. W. (1902). The refractive indices of fluorite, quartz, and calcite. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 70:
15
Particle Size Distributions
Will test 3 particle size distributions (PSD): Junge Gaussian Log-Normal
16
Typical Ocean PSD’s From Simpson, W. R. (1982). Particulate matter in the oceans-sampling methods, concentration, size distribution, and particle dynamics. Oceanography and Marine Biology, 20:
17
Junge PSD’s
18
In Situ PSD’s Measurements made using a Benthos plankton camera
Found 80% of particulate matter in suspension as flocs larger than 100 mm in size From Eisma, D., et al. (1991). Suspended-matter particle size in some West-European estuaries; Part I: Particle-size distribution. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 28(3):
19
Gaussian PSD’s
20
Log-Normal PSD’s
21
Outline Objective Water Modeling Suspended Solids Test Cases Results
Conclusion
22
Hydrolight Analysis Now that some variations of suspended solids are known, Oops can generate various suspend solid IOP’s These IOP’s can operate as variables in Hydrolight to test the effect different suspended solids have on the water leaving radiance Since the different IOP’s are of main interest, most Hydrolight inputs will be held constant between runs
23
Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Refractive index Particle size distribution
24
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Refractive index Particle size distribution
25
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution
26
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal
27
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal OOPS
28
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal OOPS
29
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal OOPS
30
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal Concentration CHL TSS CDOM OOPS
31
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal Concentration CHL TSS CDOM 0 10 0 OOPS
32
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal Concentration CHL TSS CDOM 0 10 0 OOPS
33
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal Concentration CHL TSS CDOM 0 10 0 OOPS
34
Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal Particle size distribution
Process Summary Composition Quartz Albite Kaolinite Calcite Opal /1.658/Spectral 1.44 Refractive index Particle size distribution 14 Junge 2 Gaussian 7 Log-Normal Concentration CHL TSS CDOM 0 10 0 OOPS
35
Outline Objective Water Modeling Suspended Solids Test Cases Results
Conclusion
36
Original Hydrolight IOP
37
Junge Reflectances
38
Effect of Composition and PSD
39
Lake Ontario Cases
40
Genesee River Plume Cases
41
Conesus Lake Cases
42
Long Pond Cases
43
Different Minerals, Same PSD and Concentration
44
Different PSD’s, Same Mineral and Concentration
45
Different Concentrations, Same Mineral and PSD
46
NIR Region 170 observations of a Junge
105 observations of a Log-Normal
47
ENVI n-D Visualizer
48
Data Cube for Analysis Junges Log-Normals UFI measured Albite
0chl, 10tss, 0cdom Calcite 1.486 Calcite 1.658 Calcite spec 0.7chl, 0.5tss, 0.5tss Kaolinite 4chl, 10tss, 2cdom Opal Quartz 6chl, 10tss, 2cdom 62chl, 22tss, 6cdom
49
Data Cube for Analysis Junges Log-Normals UFI measured Albite
0chl, 10tss, 0cdom Calcite 1.486 Calcite 1.658 Calcite spec 0.7chl, 0.5tss, 0.5tss Kaolinite 4chl, 10tss, 2cdom Opal Quartz 6chl, 10tss, 2cdom 62chl, 22tss, 6cdom
50
Data Cube for Analysis Junges Log-Normals UFI measured Albite
0chl, 10tss, 0cdom Calcite 1.486 Calcite 1.658 Calcite spec 0.7chl, 0.5tss, 0.5tss Kaolinite 4chl, 10tss, 2cdom Opal Quartz 6chl, 10tss, 2cdom 62chl, 22tss, 6cdom
51
Data Cube for Analysis Junges Log-Normals UFI measured
0chl, 10tss, 0cdom Albite 0.7chl, 0.5tss, 0.5tss Calcite 1.486 Calcite 1.658 Calcite spec 4chl, 10tss, 2cdom Kaolinite 6chl, 10tss, 2cdom Opal Quartz 62chl, 22tss, 6cdom
52
Data Cube for Analysis Junges Log-Normals UFI measured
0chl, 10tss, 0cdom 0.7chl, 0.5tss, 0.5tss Albite Calcite 1.486 Calcite 1.658 Calcite spec 4chl, 10tss, 2cdom 6chl, 10tss, 2cdom Kaolinite Opal 62chl, 22tss, 6cdom Quartz
53
ENVI n-D Visualizer J L-N UFI 0, 10, 0 0.7, 0.5, 0.5 4, 10, 2 6, 10, 2
62, 22, 6 ENVI N-D Visualizer Classified Pixels
54
CDOM Classes There is separability between these concentrations that feature a CDOM range of 0-7 Some CHL influence is noticeable
55
CHL Classes Classification by CHL content shows vector branching attributable to varying CDOM concentrations
56
TSS Classes There is no separability between different TSS concentrations
57
Spectral Visualization
5 concentration cases 133 combinations of refractive index and particle size distribution each
58
Spectral Visualization
4 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom case is not displayed simply for visual clarity
59
Spectral Visualization
4 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom case is not displayed simply for visual clarity
60
Non-Trivial TSS Separation
Added concentration cases for: 6 chl, 0.5 tss, 2 cdom 6 chl, 5 tss, 2 cdom 6 chl, 15 tss, 2 cdom These all align with 6 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom
61
Non-Trivial TSS Separation
Added concentration cases for: 6 chl, 0.5 tss, 2 cdom 6 chl, 5 tss, 2 cdom 6 chl, 15 tss, 2 cdom These all align with 6 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom
62
PSD and Mineral Classes
Differences between PSD’s and mineral types manifest along the same dimension as TSS concentration
63
Vector Direction is CHL/CDOM Dependant
Added cases: 6 chl, 5 tss, 0.2 cdom 6 chl, 10 tss, 0.2 cdom 6 chl, 15 tss, 0.2 cdom Result is another vector
64
Vector Direction is CHL/CDOM Dependant
Added cases: 6 chl, 5 tss, 0.2 cdom 6 chl, 10 tss, 0.2 cdom 6 chl, 15 tss, 0.2 cdom Result is another vector
65
Trend in CDOM Keeping: Add: 6 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom
66
Trend in CDOM Keeping: Add: 6 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom
67
Trend in CDOM Same trend seen for different concentration CHL Added:
11 chl, 10 tss, 0.2 cdom 11 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom 11 chl, 10 tss, 7 cdom
68
Trend in CDOM Same trend seen for different concentration CHL Added:
11 chl, 10 tss, 0.2 cdom 11 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom 11 chl, 10 tss, 7 cdom
69
Trend in CHL Changing CHL also shows trends Display shows:
2 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom 6 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom 11 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom
70
Trend in CHL Changing CHL also shows trends Display shows:
2 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom 6 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom 11 chl, 10 tss, 2 cdom
71
Trend in CHL Added cases: 2 chl, 10 tss, 0.2 cdom
72
Trend in CHL Added cases: 2 chl, 10 tss, 0.2 cdom
73
CDOM Classification 640 concentration cases
74
CDOM Classification Zoom in of higher concentration areas
75
CHL Classification
76
TSS Classification
77
Case 1 vs. Case 2 Waters Case 1 Case 2
78
Conclusions OOPS and Hydrolight model the water-leaving radiance from water bodies given physical and optical properties of constituents A database of reflectance curves representative of case 2 water bodies has been generated Results: TSS concentration and particle composition and size distribution are not separable Possible exception is for very low absorption cases CDOM and CHL have spectral effects that allow for theoretical separation
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.