Précédent|Prochain

Intercalibration of FY-3B/MWRI and GCOM-W1/AMSR-2 brightness temperature over the Arctic

  • role： First author第一作者
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Marine Technology,College of information Science and Engineering,Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100,China

  • Email：tangxt199425@163.com
  • Introduction：唐晓彤，1994年生,女,硕士研究生, 研究方向为卫星海洋遥感。E-mail: tangxt199425@163.com
TANG Xiaotong1,  
  • role： Corresponding author通信作者
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Marine Technology,College of information Science and Engineering,Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100,China

  • Email：chh7791@ouc.edu.cn
  • Introduction：陈海花，1977年生，女，讲师，研究方向为卫星海洋遥感与海洋信息处理。E-mail: chh7791@ouc.edu.cn
CHEN Haihua1*,  
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Marine Technology,College of information Science and Engineering,Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100,China

    Laboratory for Regional Oceanography and Numerical Modeling, Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, Qingdao 266071, China

GUAN Lei12,  
  • Affiliation：

    Department of Marine Technology,College of information Science and Engineering,Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100,China

LI Lele1

résumé

Microwave radiometers have been widely applied in polar region research because of their all-weather and all-time capabilities. Microwave Radiation Imager (MWRI) on FY-3B is the microwave radiometer of China’s own research and development and has aroused widespread concern. Long time series of earth observation data records play an important role in the research of earth environment changes and trends. The Arctic region is used as the study area and the data of Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer-2 (AMSR-2) on Global Change Observation Mission 1st-Water (GCOM-W1) are considered the standard data in providing the intercalibration result and the basis of retrieving remote sensing parameters in Arctic region in the future. Ascending and descending brightness temperatures at 10 channels in 2015 from FY-3B/MWRI are calibrated against those from GCOM-W1/AMSR-2.Before brightness temperature data analysis and intercalibration, the data are processed in five steps. The first step is reading data, in which the DN value of remote sensing is transferred to brightness temperature value in the research region. The second step is data quality control. If the standard deviation of values in a grid and eight surrounding grids is more than 3 K, then the values in the nine grids should be eliminated. The value that is more than 300 K or less than 10 K should also be eliminated. In the third step, stereographic projection is used to project the brightness temperature value, time, longitude, and latitude into 896×608 grids. In the fourth step, data at the land-sea boundary and Marginal Ice Zone (MIZ) should be eliminated because of the mixed pixel. First, the grid data of 7×7 around the land data are marked as land, and the data marked as land are removed. Then, the ratio of V187 to V365 from AMSR-2 is used to calculate the MIZ. The ratio, which is equal to 0.92, is viewed as the threshold to divide the sea ice and the open water. Thereafter, the 3×3 grid is set as a template. If the template includes the grids that represent sea ice and open water, then the nine grids are eliminated. The fifth and last step is to set the time window as 30 min and the space window as 12.5 km ×12.5 km and convert 2D matched data to 1D data for intercalibration.The intercalibration results of MWRI and AMSR-2 are as follows. First, the brightness temperature data of each channel of MWRI are smaller than those of AMSR-2, and the absolute values of monthly bias of vertical polarization channels are greater than those of horizontal polarization channels at the same frequency. The difference in monthly bias between ascending and descending orbits is small in each channel, which is less than 1 K. Second, the difference in the monthly bias in each channel between the ascending and descending orbits in the sea ice area is less than 1 K, while that in the open water is between 0 and 1.5 K. Third, linear regression analysis shows that most of the correlation coefficients of MWRI and AMSR-2 in each channel are above 0.99, which indicates a good correlation. The slope and intercept of the intercalibration of each channel in the ascending and descending orbits are obtained. Fourth, the brightness temperature of MWRI after calibration is consistent with that of AMSR-2. This consistency indicates that the intercalibration is effective.

mots-clés

remote sensing;MWRI;AMSR-2;Arctic area;brightness temperature;intercalibration;FY-3

References

  1. 1.
    Chander G, Hewison T J, Fox N, Wu X Q, Xiong X X and Blackwell W J. 2013. Overview of intercalibration of satellite instruments. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 51(3):1056-1080
  2. 2.
    Chen J and Wu S L. 2014. Comparison analysis between MWRI and AMSR-E brightness temperature data over the polar region ice sheet. Remote Sensing Technology and Application, 29(5): 752-760
  3. 3.
    Du J Y, Kimball J, Shi J C, Jones L, Wu S L, Sun R J and Yang H. 2014. Inter-calibration of satellite passive microwave land observations from AMSR-E and AMSR2 using overlapping FY3B-MWRI sensor measurements. Remote Sensing, 6(9): 8594-8616
  4. 4.
    Hu T X, Zhao T J, Shi J C and Gu J Z. 2016. Inter-calibration of AMSR-E and AMSR2 brightness temperature. Remote Sensing Technology and Application, 31(5): 919-924
  5. 5.
    Huang D, Qiu Y B, Shi L J, Wu S L, Liu X S and Ruan Y J. 2017. Cross-calibration for passive microwave measurement of MWRI and AMSR-E. Science of Surveying and Mapping, 42(1): 136-142
  6. 6.
    Huang W, Hao Y L, Wang J and Cui T W. 2013. Brightness temperature data comparison and evaluation of FY-3B MicroWave radiation imager with AMSR-E. Periodical of Ocean University of China, 43(11): 99-111
  7. 7.
    Imaoka K, Kachi M, Kasahara M, Ito N, Nakagawa K and Oki T. 2010. Instrument performance and calibration Of AMSR-E and AMSR2//International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Science, Volume XXXVIII, Part 8. Kyoto, Japan: [s.n.]
  8. 8.
    Imaoka K, Maeda T, Kachi M, Kasahara M, Ito N and Nakagawa K. 2012. Status of AMSR2 instrument on GCOM-W1//Proceedings Volume 8528, Earth Observing Missions and Sensors: Development, Implementation, and Characterization II. Kyoto, Japan: SPIE
  9. 9.
    季青, 庞小平, 张志鹏, 赵羲, 刘清全 高翔2017. 南极海冰及其表面积雪深度变化研究. 第34届中国气象学会年会S3冰冻圈对全球气候变化的响应与反馈论文集 北京: 中国气象学会)
  10. 10.
    Liu G F, Wu S L, Chen W Y, Pan L and He J K. 2014. Calibration system and achievement of microwave radiation imager of FY-3 satellite.(Journal of Microwaves, (S1): 576-579
  11. 11.
    Miao J G and Liu D W. 2013. Introduction to Microwave Remote Sensing. Beijing: China Machine Press
  12. 12.
    Okuyama A and Imaoka K. 2014. Intercalibration of the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer-2 (AMSR2) level-1B dataset//2014 13th Specialist Meeting on Microwave Radiometry and Remote Sensing of the Environment. Pasadena, CA, USA: IEEE: 205-206
  13. 13.
    Okuyama A and Imaoka K. 2015. Intercalibration of advanced microwave scanning radiometer-2 (AMSR2) brightness temperature. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 53(8): 4568-4577
  14. 14.
    Svendsen E, Kloster K, Farrelly B, Johannessen O M, Johannessen J A, Campbell W J, Gloersen P, Cavalieri D and Mätzler C. 1983. Norwegian Remote Sensing Experiment: evaluation of the Nimbus 7 scanning multichannel microwave radiometer for sea ice research. Journal of Geophysical Research, 88(C5): 2781-2791
  15. 15.
    Wang G X, Jiang L M, Wu S L, Liu X J and Hao S R. 2017. Intercalibrating FY-3B and FY-3C/MWRI for synergistic implementing to snow depth retrieval algorithm. Remote Sensing Technology and Application, 32(1): 49-56
  16. 16.
    Yang H, Li X Q, You R and Wu S L. 2013. Environmental data records from FengYun-3B microwave radiation imager. Advances in Meteorological Science and Technology, (4): 136-143
  17. 17.
    Yang J T, Luojus K, Lemmetyinen J, Jiang L M and Pulliainen J. 2014. Comparison of SSMIS, AMSR-E and MWRI brightness temperature data//2014 IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. Quebec City, Canada: IEEE: 2574-2577
  18. 18.
    Comiso J C, Parkinson C L, Gersten R, et al., “Accelerated decline in the Arctic sea ice cover,” Geophysical Research Letters, vol.35, no.1,2008.
  19. 19.
    Zhang S G. 2012. An algorithm to detect arctic sea ice edge using microwave brightness temperature. Periodical of Ocean University of China, 42(11): 1-7
  20. 20.
    Zhao J P and Ren J P. 2000. Study on the method to analyze parameters of arctic sea ice from airborne digital imagery. Journal of Remote Sensing, 21(4): 271-278

Lire l'article complet

The above content is generated by Large Model Translation. The translated content is for reference only. We do not assume any commercial or legal responsibilty for any consequences arising from the use of our website