AN IMPROVED MODEL FOR THE MICROWAVE

BRIGHTNESS TEMPERATURE SEEN FROM SPACE

OVER CALM OCEAN
by
Your name here
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO
MAYAGEZ CAMPUS
2005
Approved by:
________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
Member, Graduate Committee
__________________
Date
________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
Member, Graduate Committee
__________________
Date
________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
President, Graduate Committee
__________________
Date
________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
Representative of Graduate Studies
__________________
Date
________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
Chairperson of the Department
__________________
Date
This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.
ABSTRACT
This thesis was formatted so that you only type on top of it your material and it should redo the
Table of contents automatically by the command on the Menu: Insert>Reference>Index and
Tables. IMPORTANT: when pasting material to this file be sure to use Edit>Paste_Special>
Unformatted_Text, so that the format given by this file is not changed. When pasting figures,
be sure to use Paste_special>Picture(JPEG) to make the size of your thesis file as much as 10
times smaller than using just Paste, which usually utilized the BMP format for figure, making
your file huge and not portable. The figures should be inserted using
Insert>References>Caption>(Figure), and typing the caption of the figure. In some versions
of Word you can skip the Reference part. The tables should be inserted using
Insert>References>Caption>(Table). Word should automatically increase the figure
number and add the chapter number to it. The equations are also set so that you do
Insert>References>Caption>(Equation) and the equation number increases automatically.
You can delete the word Equation later, if you prefer to display only the equation number.
Good luck! Hope this saves you a lot of work and time. SCP
This work presents models that predict extinction rates due to atmospheric gases for 35 GHz
and 95 GHz radars as a function of elevation angle. The minimum detectable radar reflectivity
(dBZ
emin
) is computed for both wavelengths using radiosonde and microwave radiometer
measurements. In general, sensitivity decreases with elevation angle mostly because water
vapor and their corresponding highest extinction rates propagate through the lower portion of
the atmosphere.
ii
This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.
RESUMEN
Este trabajo presenta un modelo que predice la razn de extincin para seales de 33 y 95 GHz
debido a los gases atmosfricos en funcin del ngulo de elevacin. Se computo la mnima
reflectividad detectable por el radar (dBZ
emin
) para ambas frecuencias usando medidas de
radiosonda y radimetro de microondas. En general la sensitividad decrece con el ngulo de
elevacin debido principalmente a que el vapor de agua y su correspondiente alta extincin
suceden en la porcin baja de la atmsfera.
.
iii
This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.
To my family . . .
iv
This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
During the development of my graduate studies in the University of Puerto Rico several
persons and institutions collaborated directly and indirectly with my research. Without their
support it would be impossible for me to finish my work. That is why I wish to dedicate this
section to recognize their support.
I want to start expressing a sincere acknowledgement to my advisor, Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol
because she gave me the opportunity to research under her guidance and supervision. I
received motivation; encouragement and support form her during all my studies. With her, I
have learned writing papers for conferences and sharing my ideas to the public. I also want to
thank the example, motivation, inspiration and support I received from Dr. Jos Colom. From
these two persons, I am completely grateful. Special thanks I owe Dr. Stephen M. Sekelsky for
the opportunity of researching under his supervision, his support, guidance, and transmitted
knowledge for the completion of my work.
The Grant from NSF EIA 99-77071 provided the funding and the resources for the
development of this research. At last, but the most important I would like to thank my family,
for their unconditional support, inspiration and love.
v
This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................................. II
RESUMEN ................................................................................................................................................................ III
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... V
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................... VI
TABLE LIST ............................................................................................................................................................ VII
FIGURE LIST ........................................................................................................................................................ VIII
1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 2
0.1 MOTIVATION ..................................................................................................................................................... 2
0.2 LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................................................................... 3
0.3 SUMMARY OF FOLLOWING CHAPTERS ................................................................................................................... 5
1 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 6
1.1 RADIATIVE TRANSFER EQUATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 SCAN EQUATIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 12
1.3 RADAR SYSTEM CHARACTERISTIC AND MCTEX EXPERIMENT LAYOUT ................................................................. 17
2 MICROWAVE ATMOSPHERIC ABSORPTION MODEL ........................................................................... 19
2.1 ATMOSPHERIC ABSORPTION ............................................................................................................................... 19
2.2 NEW MODEL RETRIEVED PARAMETERS .............................................................................................................. 21
2.3 BACKSCATTERING WITH DDSCAT ................................................................................................................... 23
3 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK ............................................................................................................ 26
4 APPENDIX A. IDL CODES FOR DBZEMIN ................................................................................................... 29
APPENDIX B PROGRAMS FOR BULLET AND DWR ................................................................................... 32
APPENDIX B1 IDL PROGRAM FOR REFRACTION INDEX ........................................................................................... 32
......................................................................................................................................................................... 32
vi
This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.
Table List
Tables Page
TABLE 2.1CPRS PARAMETERS...........................................................................................................................10
TABLE 2.2CPRS OPERATIONAL MODELS......................................................................................................11
TABLE 2.3 MEAN VALUES OF THE REGIONS FOR CPRS DATA COLLECTED AND DBZEMIN
SIMULATED..............................................................................................................................................................16
vii
This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.
Figure List
Figures Page
FIGURE 2.1 PASSIVE REMOTE SENSING WITH UPWARD-LOOKING RADIOMETER........................7
FIGURE 2.2 MEAN SPECIFIC HUMIDITY PROFILE.......................................................................................9
FIGURE 2.3 PROFILE OF EXTINCTION RATES (--33 GHZ AND 95 GHZ)PROFILE OF
EXTINCTION RATES (--33 GHZ AND 95 GHZ)............................................................................................10
FIGURE 2.4 MINIMUM DETECTABLE SIGNAL FOR A SINGLE ZENITH PULSE AT DIFFERENT
MODES OF RADAR PULSE WIDTH.(A) MODE 1: = 200NS, (B) MODE 2: = 500NS, (C) MODE 3:
= 1,000NS.....................................................................................................................................................................11
FIGURE 2.5 FLOWCHART FOR THE IDL ROUTINE USED FOR CALCULATING THE DBZEMIN..13
FIGURE 2.6 MNIMUM DETECTABLE DBZE IN MODE 1 ( = 200 NS), (A) 33 GHZ, (B) 95 GHZ.......14
FIGURE 2.7 MINIMUM DETECTABLE DBZE IN MODE IN MODE 2 (= 500 NS), (A) 33 GHZ, (B) 95
GHZ..............................................................................................................................................................................14
FIGURE 2.8 THE PLOT ON (A) DEPICTS THE RADAR REFLECTIVITY MEASURED AT 95GHZ
WITH CPRS AND PLOT ON DATA AT SAME TIME THAN CPRS DATA WAS COLLECTED AT
95GHZ..........................................................................................................................................................................15
FIGURE 2.9 HILL RATIO COMPARISON BETWEEN VARIOUS ATMOSPHERIC MODELS
SHOWING AGREEMENT OF THE CHOSEN WATER VAPOR ABSORPTION LINE SHAPE WITH
THE RADIOMETER DATA. (SEE TEXT FOR EXPLANATION OF MODELS' ACRONYMS)...............16
FIGURE 3.10 BULLET AND BULLET ROSETTES WITH DIFFERENT ANGLES OF JUNCTION.......20
FIGURE 3.11 WIND SPEED MODEL RELATING 0 TO WIND SPEED FOR THE MCW
ALGORITHM AS CALIBRATED FOR TOPEX ALTIMETER.......................................................................22
FIGURE 3.12 METHODOLOGY USED TO CREATE A BULLET FORMED BY AN ARRAY OF N
DIPOLES SEPARATED BY, (A) GENERAL PROCESS, (B) BULLET 3D-VIEW, AND (C) BULLET
ROSETTE WITH 3 BULLETS................................................................................................................................23
FIGURE 3.13 BACKSCATTERING (10 LOGB) OF DIFFERENT INDEXES OF REFRACTION, (A)
BACKSCATTERING IN DB TO 33GHZ WITH 652 DIPOLES ARRAY, (B) BACKSCATTERING IN DB
TO 95GHZ ..................................................................................................................................................................24
FIGURE 3.14 VARIATION OF THE NUMBER OF RAOB PROFILES USED DEPENDING ON THE
LIMITS IN SPACE AND TIME SEPARATION IMPOSED ON THE DATA.................................................25
viii
This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.
ix
1 INTRODUCTION
Knowledge of the state of the ocean plays a vital role in weather and ocean wave forecasting
models [Wilheit, 1979a] as well as in ocean-circulation models [Dobson et al., 1987]. One
approach to measuring the state of the ocean is by remote sensing of the oceans surface
emission. Microwave radiometers on satellites can completely cover the earths oceans.
Satellite radiometry offers numerous advantages over ship and buoy data. Some of these
advantages include the vast coverage of global seas, including locations where radiosonde or
buoys cannot be afforded, relatively low power consumption, no maintenance and continuous
operation under a wide range of weather conditions.
Measurements of the microwave brightness seen from the sea are used in the retrieval of
physical parameters such as wind speed, cloud liquid water and path delay. A suitable model
for these measurements includes contributions from atmospheric emission, mainly water vapor
and oxygen, and from ocean emission.
0.1 Motivation
The need to improve the calibration of existing models for atmospheric and ocean emission is
motivated by several current and upcoming satellite remote sensing missions. In the case of
TMR, an improved atmospheric model would enhance the inversion algorithm used to retrieve
path delay information. Another case is the JASON satellite, a joint NASA/CNES radiometer
and altimeter scheduled to be launched in 2000 [JPL, 1998]. For JASON, absolute calibration
is performed by occasionally looking at calm water. This type of calibration reduces the cost
2
in hardware, complexity, size and power. However, the quality of the calibration depends
strongly on the accuracy of a model for the calm water emission. In contrast, for the TMR an
absolute calibration is performed using hot and cold references carried by the satellite [Ruf et
al., 1995].
In this document, a section is devoted to each of these models. In Part I, the development of an
improved microwave atmospheric absorption model is presented. Part II is dedicated to ocean
microwave emission. In both cases, a model is developed and iteratively adjusted to fit a
carefully calibrated set of measurements.
0.2 Literature Review
Seasat was the first satellite designed for remote sensing of the Earth's oceans. It was launched
in 1978 by the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA). The mission was
designed to demonstrate the feasibility of global satellite monitoring of oceanographic
phenomena and to help determine the requirements for an operational ocean remote sensing
satellite system. It included the Scanning Multichannel Microwave Radiometer (SMMR)
which measured vertical and horizontal linearly polarized brightness temperatures at 6.6, 10.7,
18, 21 and 37 GHz. The SMMR was used to retrieve surface wind speed, ocean surface
temperature, atmospheric water vapor content, rain rate, and ice coverage. Unfortunately, the
mission only lasted approximately 100 days due to a failure of the vehicle's electric power
system [Njoku et al.,1980].
, cloud water content, and ocean surface wind speeds [Hollinger et al., 1990].
3
In 1991 the European Space Agency launched The ERS-1 satellite. The primary mission of
ERS-1 was to perform remote sensing of the Earth's oceans, ice caps, and coastal regions by
providing global measurements of wind speed and direction, wave height, surface
temperatures, surface altitude, cloud cover, and atmospheric water vapor levels. The mission
included a nadir viewing radiometer operating at 23.8 and 36.5 GHz and co-aligned with the
altimeter to provide range corrections with 2 cm accuracy [Gnther et al., 1993].
In 1998 the US Navy launched the GEOSAT Follow On (GFO), designed to provide real-time
ocean topography data. It includes a radar altimeter with 3.5 cm height measurement
precision. In addition, a dual frequency (22 and 37 GHz) water vapor radiometer is included to
provide path delay correction with an accuracy of 1.9 cm [Ruf et al., 1996].
Sekelsky et al. [1998, 1999] used simulations from the ice crystals backscattering at various
millimeter wavelengths using the DDA models on the version 5 of DDSCAT, using a more
realistic density model where ice density is not constant, as in previous studies, but decreases
with the particles diameter. They calculated the dual-wavelength ratio (DWR). Their findings
also agree with previous studies where the shape and orientation are the principal causes of
error on the DWR estimates and other products.
Uncertainties in the improved model for atmospheric emission are significantly improved over
previous published models. The line-strength and width parameters' uncertainties are reduced
to 1% and 1.6%, respectively. The overall uncertainty in the new absorption model is
conservatively estimated to be 3% in the vicinity of 22GHz and approaching 8% at 32 GHz.
The RMS difference between modeled and measured thermal emission by the atmosphere, in
4
terms of the brightness temperature, is reduced by 23%, from 1.36 K to 1.05 K, compared to
one of the most currently used atmospheric models.
The modified ocean dielectric models exhibit significant improvements in the estimate of TB.
Of the two, the modified Ellison et al.[1977] model exhibits superior overall performance,
including the lowest bias at both frequencies, which is a very important attribute indicative of
the accuracy of the model. Its frequency dependence was decreased to 0.30K, which will allow
for more reliable extrapolation to higher frequencies. In addition, this modified model has the
lowest dependence on sea surface temperature and the lowest RMS difference for both 18GHz
and 37GHz. Consequently, this is the model that we recommend for future remote sensing
applications involving microwave emissions from the ocean emissivity of the ocean. The
average error in the modified emissivity model, over the range 18-40 GHz, is found to be
0.37%, which in terms of brightness temperatures, translates into a model error of
approximately 1K.
0.3 Summary of Following Chapters
We first develop the necessary background theory in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 deals with the
model theory, experiments and data analysis related to the atmospheric absorption model. The
third chapter presents the model theory, data, statement of the problem, and analysis for the
ocean emission model. Conclusions are presented in Chapter 4.
5
1 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
1.1 Radiative Transfer Equations
1.1.1 Equations relating humidity profiles and microwave radiometer data to
attenuation
The atmosphere receives most of its energy by means of solar electromagnetic radiation. Some
of this energy is absorbed by the atmosphere and some reaches the surface of the Earth where it
can also be absorbed or it can be reflected. Energy absorption implies a rise in thermal energy
and, therefore, temperature of the object. Any object with a temperature above absolute zero
emits electromagnetic radiation. Electromagnetic emission implies a decrease in the objects
temperature. These processes, i.e. absorption and emission, altogether help create a balance
between the energy absorbed by the Earth and its atmosphere and the energy emitted by them.
The study of these energy transformation processes is called radiative transfer.
The Planck function for spectral brightness describes the radiation spectrum of a blackbody at
thermal equilibrium. It is given by

,
_

1
1 2
) (
/ 2
3
kT hf
f
e c
hf
T B 2.1
Using the Rosenkranzs model for gaseous attenuation due to oxygen, K
O2
(I), and a modified
Liebes model for gaseous attenuation due to water vapor, K
wv
(l), for every layer (see Fig. 2.1)
and for each radar frequency, 33 GHz and 95 GHz [Cruz-Pol, 1998; Keihm, et al. 2002] total
6
gaseous attenuation were calculated. The equation for K
wv
(l) is [Cruz-Pol, 1998]. It is given
by shape and continuum terms.
Figure 2.1 Passive remote sensing with upward-looking radiometer
In this equations we delete the word Equation automatically inserted by Word and we
formatted the text to the Right. You can leave the word Equation if you like. All the body text
is formatted as justified so that the margins are even..
( ) ( )

1 143 . 2 5 . 3
0109 . 0 e P C T
wv L L
2.2
( ) ( ) 1
1
]
1

+ +
+

2 2 2
1 1

f f f f
f
T
z z
z
S
2.3
( )
5 . 10 2 7 3 8
10 57 . 3 10 13 . 1
wv dry wv C C
P P P C T

+ 2.4
The absorption model for the water vapor resonance line is accomplished by the addition of
three parameters, given by C
L
= 1.064, C
W
= 1.066, and C
C
= 1.234. These are the parameters
for scaling the line strength, the line width and the continuum, respectively. Here f is the radar
7
frequency in GHz, f
z
is the water vapor resonant frequency, 22.235 GHz, is the inverse
temperature, P
wv
is the water vapor partial pressure, and P
dry
is the difference between total
pressure, P, and the water vapor pressure, P
wv
. Their respective equations are:
t
300
2.5
7223 . 0
sh
P
wv
2.6
wv dry
P P P
2.7
where sh is the specific humidity, t is the air temperature in Kelvin. The width parameter,, is
defined as:
( )
1 . 1 6 . 0
8 . 4 002784 . 0
wv dry W
P P C + 2.8
The oxygen absorption model is defined as:
( ) ( )

,
_

33
1
2
3
2
odd n
n
n
dry
O
f L
f
f
T S
c P
K

2.9
where c=0.5034 x 10
12
, S(T) is the line strength [Rosenkranz, 1993]
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) 1 1 0068952 . 0 2
0
'
+

n n
e T S T S 2.10
1.1.2 Water vapor profile and zenith attenuation statistics at 33 and 95 GHz
8
Maritime Continent Island Thunderstorm Experiment was held during the Australian summer
monsoon. Thunderstorms develop in an environment with low shear and high moisture. The
data obtained by the radiosonde were corroborated with radiometer data. Collecting the
radiosonde measurements every day during the experiment, gaseous attenuation, specific
humidity and cumulative attenuation profiles were calculated for the complete experiment.
The average profile is shown in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2 Mean specific humidity profile
Gaseous attenuation mean for 33 GHz is 0.11 dB/Km and 0.74 dB/Km for 95 GHz (see Fig.
2.3).
9
Figure 2.3 Profile of extinction rates (--33 GHz and 95 GHz)Profile of extinction rates
(--33 GHz and 95 GHz)
Equation (2.10) contains all the quantities needed to compute the response of a satellite-based
microwave radiometer to changes in atmospheric and surface variables.
The 33 GHz signal has more peak power than the 95 GHz signal (see Table 2.1) to compensate
for its smaller gain (wide bandwidth).
TABLE 2.1CPRS Parameters
W
band
Ka band
Frequency (GHz) 95 33
Peak power (kW) 1.5 120
Average power (W) 15 120
Pulse width (ns) 500 200
Gain 10
5.8
10
4.83
Range gate spacing (m) 75 30
Pulse repetition freq. (kHz) 10 5
Noise figure (dB) 13 11
Bandwidth (MHz) 2 5
Beam width (deg) 0.18 0.50
10
Thus, the 95 GHz signal has a comparable performance and has similar values of minimum
detectable signal to the 33 GHz signal, obtaining similar resolution and noise immunity for
both signals for a single pulse in zenith angle. This is shown in Figure 2.5. The other modes
parameters are shown in the Table 2.2
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 2.4 Minimum detectable signal for a single zenith pulse at different modes of
radar pulse width.(a) Mode 1: = 200ns, (b) Mode 2: = 500ns, (c) Mode 3: = 1,000ns.
TABLE 2.2CPRS Operational Models
M M M
Pulse width (ns) 200 500 1,000
W Band. Pulse Repetition
Frequency (kHz)
10,000 10,000 10,000
Ka Band. Pulse Repetition
Frequency (kHz)
2,500 1,000 500
Bandwidth (MHz) 5 2 1
But when the radar scans and many pulses are sent, the radar performance does not behave in
the same way as when as sending a single pulse in zenith angle. So we need to analyze the
performance of scanning radar
11
1.2Scan Equations
The one-way path loss, A
g
, depends on the frequency being used. For frequencies where the
path loss degrades the signal strongly, higher power was used to minimize this effect.
After obtaining the atmospheric attenuation for every layer (see Fig. 2.1), we found the
cumulative gaseous attenuation. This one is calculated for a fixed angle and for every range
gate in which the radar operates. A matrix of radius times angles was used to save the
projected attenuation. Then the cumulative attenuation for specific angle and radius was
computed as:
sec ) , 0 ( sec ) , 0 ( sec ) , 0 (
) )( 1 (
H
C DN s
H
s s UP a
e e T T e T T T

+ + + 2.11
Finally with the cumulative attenuation for every radius at a specific angle, the total path loss,
l, can be calculated. To implement all this procedure we used IDL program. IDL is a language
capable to process great amount of data, and a flow diagram in Figure 2.6 shows the algorithm
implemented in this work.
12
Figure 2.5 Flowchart for the IDL routine used for calculating the dBZemin
Graphs from calculations of the dBZ
emin
when the radar operates in modes 1, 2, and 3, for every
radio and each angle at 33 and 95 GHz are plotted in Figures 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9. The delta
between two lines of the contour is 2 dB. The lightest bar colors represent larger minimum
reflectivity values that can be detected by the radar, i.e. less signal can be detected in those
areas.
13
(a) (b)
Figure 2.6 Mnimum detectable dBZe in mode 1 ( = 200 ns), (a) 33 GHz, (b) 95 GHz
(a) (b)
Figure 2.7 Minimum detectable dBZe in mode in mode 2 (= 500 ns), (a) 33 GHz, (b) 95
GHz
14
(a)
Figure 2.8 The plot on (a) depicts the radar reflectivity measured at 95GHz with CPRS
and plot on data at same time than CPRS data was collected at 95GHz.
The radar begins to detect the cloud from a radius of 13 km and from an angle between 8 and
76 degrees. To the W band, the cloud looks much smaller than the one shown by the Ka band.
These data validate the simulation and confirm the effect of the attenuation of the W band in
angles smaller than 50 degrees (see Fig. 2.11a). Figures 2.10 and 2.11 show three regions,
these are the dBZ
emin
that represent the CPRS data. We can see here that the radar received a
greater reflectivity than the minimum estimated reflectivity. We can see that this is also true for
the 95 GHz signal.
These results strongly suggest that VVW is the preferred choice for vapor absorption line
shape at 22 GHz. Note that the same finding was obtained by Hill [1986] when the ratio test
was applied to the original Becker and Autler [1946] laboratory data.
15
Figure 2.9 Hill ratio comparison between various atmospheric models showing agreement
of the chosen water vapor absorption line shape with the radiometer data. (See text for
explanation of models' acronyms).
The other regions behave in the same way. All the reflectivity mean values are within the
limits of the mean dBZ
emin
simulated for both, the 33 GHz as for the 95 GHz. The other mean
values are listed in Table 2.3.
TABLE 2.3 Mean values of the regions for CPRS data collected and dBZ
emin
simulated
R
e
g
i
o
n

1
R R
e
g
i
o
n

3
Mean dBZ
emin
33GHz (dB) -27.9162 -28.8563 -29.1437
Mean Reflectivity at 33GHz (dB) 3.718391 7.22807 -2.63717
16
Mean dBZ
emin
95GHz (dB) -12.9728 -17.7505 -23.7513
Mean Reflectivity at 95GHz (dB) -8.31193 -7.19231 -3.61205
1.3 Radar System Characteristic and MCTEX
Experiment Layout
1.3.1 Maritime Continent Thunderstorm Experiment (MCTEX)
The MCTEX experiment was performed in the North Coast of Australia, and in the Bathurst
and Melville Islands. The principal objective of this experiment was to better understand the
physical processes, such as humidity balance over tropical islands on a maritime continent.
For this reason, the experiment was held between November 13th and December 10th, 1995;
season on which the transition phases occurs between the dry and wet seasons. The data of this
experiment were collected with different sensors. One set was collected by means of the Cloud
Profiling Radar System (CPRS). This one collected data on the Ka frequency band (33.12
GHz) and W frequency band (94.92 GHz). Data from the W frequency band, 95 GHz, also
was collected by the Airborne Cloud Radar. The NOAA radar collected data on the S
frequency band, at 2.8 GHz.
1.3.2 Radar Hardware of Cloud Profiling Radar System (CPRS)
The CPRS is a dual-frequency polarimetric Doppler radar system that works with two sub-
systems at 33 and 95 GHz. This was fully developed by the University of Massachusetts
Microwave Remote Sensing Laboratory (MIRSL).
17
Table 2.1 shows the CPRS parameter. The CPRS has a programmable structure that allows
working in different modes of scanning. It has a high-speed VXI-bus-based data acquisition
and digital signal processing (DSP) system. A radome protects the system from atmospheric
effects. Both the 33 and 95 GHz sub-systems simultaneously transmit and receive by means of
a single aperture and not producing pointing errors between both frequencies. Table 2.1 shows
other typical characteristics of the CPRS operation. The CPRS works in three different
operational modes, changing the pulse width and by consequence the pulse repetition
frequency and the bandwidth change. These values are shown in 2. 2. The CPRS measures
can obtain the reflectivity (Z
e
), mean fall velocity (u) linear depolarization ratio (LDR),
velocity spectral width (
v
), and the full Doppler spectrum (S(v)) [Firda, 1997; Lohmeire, et al.
1997].
18
2 Microwave Atmospheric Absorption
Model
An improved model for the absorption of the atmosphere near the 22 GHz water vapor line is
presented. The Van-Vleck-Weisskopf line shape is used with a simple parameterized version
of the model from Liebe for the water vapor absorption spectra and a scaling of the model from
Rosenkranz for the 20-32 GHz oxygen absorption. Radiometric brightness temperature
measurements from two sites of contrasting climatological properties San Diego, CA and
West Palm Beach, FL were used as ground truth for comparison with in situ radiosonde
derived brightness temperatures. The retrieval of the new models four parameters, related to
water vapor line strength, line width and continuum absorption, and far-wing oxygen
absorption, was performed using the Newton-Raphson inversion method.
2.1Atmospheric Absorption
Various shapes of the bullet rosettes are observed (see Fig. 3.1). The angles among the bullets
within the rosette are random between 70 and 90. Each bullet has a longitude relation
[Heymsfield, 1972], L (mm), versus wide, w (mm), (twice times the apothem) for temperatures
between 18 and 20 C given by
19
J
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
T
C
B
L
B
W
B
C
B
X
B
L
B
W
B
C
B
X
B
L
B
W
B
C
B
X
Bn
L
Bn
W
Bn
C
Bn
X

1
]
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3

3.12
and the Gross Line shape is given by [Gross, 1955]

'

< +
> +

) conditions 0(unstable ' / for ) ' / 18 1 (

) conditions 0(stable ' / for ' / 7 1
) conditions (neutral 0 ' / for 1
) ' / (
25 . 3
L z L z
L z L z
L z
L z
u
u

3.13
Although DDA can describe any geometry, it is limited by a minimum distance d that should
exist between dipoles. This distance should be inversely proportional to any structural
longitude on the target and to the wavelength. Previous studies [Draine and Flatau, 1994] sum
up the two criteria in equation 3.6.
Figure 3.10 Bullet and Bullet Rosettes with different angles of junction
20
In this way the equations were determined for the bulk density, , of the bullet, considering the
solid ice density as 0.9 g cm
-3
and using the volume of ice in individual crystals [Heymsfield,
1972]
As the Wieners theorem states [Oguchi, 1983], the complex index of refraction, m, depends of
the bulk density when dealing with dry ice particles:
Ln is proportional to the shape of the lines
.
( ) ( )
L
Y f f
f f
Y f f
f f
n
n n n
n n
n n n
n n

+
+
+

+

1
]
1
1

( ) ( )
2
2
2
2
Equation 3.14
The pressure-broadened line half-width is,
[ ]

n dry H O
w P P + 0001 11
8
2
. .
.
Equation 3.15
The O2 resonant lines are very close to each other and troposphere pressures are high enough
( > 100 mbars) to cause the lines to broaden and overlap. This is called collisional broadening
and is taken into account through the interference parameter.
2.2 New Model Retrieved Parameters
The final retrieved parameters, CL, CW, CC and CX, are shown in Table 2.1. As the table
indicates, the nominal parameters used in the L87R93 model are 3 to 7 percent lower. Figures
2.7a-c depict plots of the brightness temperature for three climatological conditions. Each
graph has a plot corresponding to the L87R93 and new models. Also shown are the radiometer
measured brightnesses. The new estimated parameters show better agreement with the WVR
data. L87R93 model as the reference (therefore, by definition the L87R93 model is . In these
21
figures we have included the L93 model which, as explained above, is similar to L87R93
except that it has a higher water vapor line
Although DDA can describe any geometry, it is limited by a minimum distance d that should
exist between dipoles. This distance should be inversely proportional to any structural
longitude on the target and to the wavelength. Previous studies [Draine and Flatau, 1994] sum
up the two criteria in equation 3.6.

Figure 3.11 Wind speed model relating
0
to wind speed for the MCW algorithm as
calibrated for Topex altimeter.
2.2.1 Bullet and Bullet Rosettes Toolbox for DDSCAT Program
We developed two toolboxes for DDSCAT where we implemented the most common shapes
of the cirrus ice crystals, i.e. the bullet and bullet rosettes. Using a single DDSCAT
environment by means of the ddscat.par file [Draine and Flatau, 2000], we specified which
one of the geometries we wanted to use and parameters such as size, dielectric constant of the
material, and in general all the parameters related to the target to be analyzed.
22
(a)

(b) (c)
Figure 3.12 Methodology used to create a bullet formed by an array of N dipoles separated by,
(a) General process, (b) bullet 3D-view, and (c) Bullet rosette with 3 bullets.
2.3Backscattering with DDSCAT
Once the bullet toolbox was created in DDSCAT, we proceeded to use it to simulate the
crystals backscattering at 33 and 95 GHz. Figure 3.4 shows the backscattering for one bullet
crystal of different sizes using several models for index of refraction and crystal density. The
figure shows the sensitivity of the backscattering to the index of refraction, showing the
23
necessity of considering the index of refraction for each size and density of the ice crystal, and
not assuming a constant density for all the bullets sizes.
(a) (b)
Figure 3.13 Backscattering (10 logb) of different indexes of refraction, (a) Backscattering in dB to
33GHz with 652 dipoles array, (b) Backscattering in dB to 95GHz .
It can also be seen that the backscattering obtained when varying the index of refraction
according to the particle size is not significantly different to the results obtained when using
constant indexes of refraction for different particle sizes.
Given that one of the objectives is to analyze the DWR, we designed an interface between
DDSCAT and IDL program. We developed a routine that iteratively collects data from IDL
such as the index of refraction, m, which is computed according to the particles size and the
index of refraction of the solid ice, n
i
, and saving m in DDSCAT to compute the backscattering
and again this value is saved in IDL to obtain the DWR. The DWR is defined as [Sekelsky, et
al. 1999]
24
( ) ( )
( )
( )
( ) ( )
( )
( )

,
_

1
]
1

+
+

1
]
1

+
+
0
67 . 3
2
2
4
0
67 . 3
2
2
4
0
0
, ,
, ,
log 10
dD e D D K
dD e D D K
DWR
D
D
h b l I h
D
D
l b h I l

3.16
where
l
and
h
are the values of the smaller wavelength and greater respectively, K
I
is an
dimensionless quantity that depends on the index of refraction and on the density. For ice we
used 0.176 for both frequencies [Sekeslky, et al. 1999].
Figure 3.14 Variation of the number of raob profiles used depending on the limits in space and time
separation imposed on the data
25
3 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
Recent work to determine the sea water dielectric coefficient was based on laboratory
measurements of sea water samples from different parts of the ocean. Although these
measurements should render good understanding of the emission from a calm ocean surface,
their accuracy in providing values of the ocean still needed to be examined. Our present
investigation of the specular sea emission seen from space provides field verification of the sea
water specular emissivity over broader regions of the oceans. In this work, we investigate and
adjust two ocean dielectric models using well calibrated radiometer data from the
TOPEX/Poseidon satellite mission, paying particular attention to reducing the overall bias of
the estimated brightness. In addition, we evaluate the performance of several models for their
dependence on salinity and sea temperature.
The modified models exhibit significant improvements in the estimate of TB. Of the two
modified models, ModE exhibits superior overall performance. It has the lowest bias at both
frequencies (0.16 and 0.14K, respectively), which is indicative of the accuracy of the model.
Its frequency dependence was decreased from -2.3 to 0.30K. In addition, ModE has the lowest
dependence on sea surface temperature and the lowest RMS difference of 2.58K and 3.52K for
18GHz and 37GHz, respectively. For these reasons, we recommend this model for future
remote sensing applications involving microwave emissions from the ocean.
26
REFERENCES
Altshuler, E. E. and R. A. Marr, A comparison of experimental and theoretical values of
atmospheric absorption at the longer millimeter wavelengths, IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propagat., vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 1471-1480, Oct. 1988.
Aydin, K. and C. Tang, Millimeter wave radar scattering from model ice crystal
distributions, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 35, pp. 140-146, 1997 a.
Cruz-Pol, S. L., C. S. Ruf and S. J. Keihm, Improved 20-32 GHz Atmospheric Absorption
Model, Radio Sci., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 1319-1333, 1998.
Draine, B. T. and P. J. Flatau, Discrete-dipole approximation for scattering calculations, J.
Opt. Soc. Am. A, vol. 11, pp. 1491-1499, 1994.
Doviak, R. J.and D. S. Zrnic, Doppler Radar and Weather Observations, Second edition,
Academic Press, San Diego, 1993.
Evans, K. F. and J. Vivekanandan, Multiparameter radar and microwave radiative transfer
modeling of nonspherical atmospheric ice particles, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sensing.,
vol. 28, pp. 423-437, July 1990
Keihm, S. J., C. Ruf, V. Zlotnicki and B. Haines, TMR Drift Analysis, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, Internal Report, October 6, 1997.
Klein, L. A., and C. T. Swift, An Improved Model for the Dielectric constant of Sea Water at
Microwave Frequencies, IEEE Trans. on Antennas Propagation, Vol. AP-25, No. 1, 1977.
Hogan, R. J. and A. J. Illingworth, The potential of spaceborne dual-wavelength radar to
make global measurements of cirrus clouds, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., vol. 16, 518-531.
1999
Keihm, S. J., Y. Bar-Server, and J. C. Liljegren, WVR-GPS Comparison Measurement and
Calibration of the 20-32 GHz Tropospheric Water Vapor Absorption Model, IEEE Trans.
Geosci. Remote Sensing. 2002, 40, No. 6, pp. 1199-1210
27
Lhermitte, R., A 95 GHz Doppler radar of cloud observations, J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol.,
vol. 4, pp. 36-48, 1987.
Li, L., S.M. Sekelsky, S.C. Reising, C.T. Swift, S.L. Durden, G.A. Sadowy, S.J. Dinardo, F.K.
Li A. Huffman, G.L. Stephens D.M. Babb, and H.W. Rosenberger, Retrieval of Atmospheric
Attenuation Using Combined Ground-based and Airborne 95 GHz Cloud Radar
Measurements, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., vol. 18, 1345-1353. 2001
Matrosov, S. Y. Radar reflectivity in snowfall, IEEE. Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens., vol. 30,
pp. 454-461, 1992.
Oguchi, T. Electromagnetic wave propagation and scattering in rain and other hydrometeors,
Proc. IEEE, vol. 71, pp. 1029-1078, 1983
Ray, P. S., Broadband complex refractive indices of ice and water, Appl. Opt., vol. 11, pp.
1836-1844, 1972
Rosenkranz, P. W., Absorption of Microwaves by Atmospheric Gases, In: Atmospheric
Remote Sensing by Microwave Radiometry, Chapter 2, Ed. By Jansen, Wiley, New York, 1993.
Sekelsky, S. M., Multi-frequency radar Doppler Spectrum Measurements of Cirrus Clouds,
Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IGARSS '01., vol. 2, 697 699 2001.
Ulbrich, C. W., Natural variations in the analytical form of the raindrop size distribution, J.
Climate Appl. Meteor., vol. 22, pp. 1764-1775, 1983.
Wilheit, T.T., The Effect of Wind on the Microwave Emission From the Oceans Surface at
37 GHz, J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 84, No. C8, pp. 244-249, 1979.
28
4 APPENDIX A. IDL CODES FOR DBZ
EMIN
;********dBZemin Program********
;********MAIN PROGRAM*********
LoadCT, 5
sondefilename='c:/jorgemvg/prog-idl/DataAustralia/Radiosonde/sonde.951127.025800.cdf'
mwrfilename='c:/jorgemvg/prog-idl/DataAustralia/Radiometer/mwr.951127.000020.cdf'
;**Function to read microwave-radiometer data
get_mwr_cdfdata, mwrfilename, VAPcm, LIQcm, DEWflag, t_begin$, $
date$,unix_time,sec_into_UTCday
;**Function to read radiosonde data
get_sonde_cdfdata, sondefilename, tdry, sh, rh, dp, h, pres, $
wspd, deg, t_begin$, date$,unix_time,sec_into_UTCday
;**Function to read Radar data
Radar,z_mask_range_33,z_mask_range_95
;;********************************************************************************
h = h/1000. ;altitude [Km]
pres = pres/0.1 ;pressure [Kpascales]
; a extrapol le debe entrar h en (Km) y pres en (KPascales)
extrapol_general,z_mask_range_33,h,tdry,pres,sh,altura,temperatura,presion,humedad_especifica
altura = altura*1000.;altitude [m]
presion = presion*0.1 ;pressure [ mbars]
tdry = temperatura ;temperature [deg C]
sh = humedad_especifica ;specific humidity [gm^-3]
pres = presion
h = altura
;omit radiosonde data above 35 km to speed up processing
alt=30000.
hlimit=max(where(h LT alt))
tdry=tdry(0:hlimit) & sh=sh(0:hlimit)
h=h(0:hlimit) & pres=pres(0:hlimit)
;setup regular height grid for profiles
29
num_elem=500
del=alt/num_elem
h_prof = findgen(num_elem) * del ; 0-35km
tdry = INTERPOL(tdry, h, h_prof) ; regrid profiles
sh = INTERPOL(sh, h, h_prof) > 0.
pres = INTERPOL(pres, h, h_prof)
h = h_prof
; compare radiosonde and mwr data
L=0
FOR i=0,n_elements(h)-2 DO L=L+sh(i)*(h(i+1)-h(i))
L=0.001*L ; mm of water vapor in column from radiosonde profile
L = L*0.1 ; cm of vapor ... compare to Vapcm from microwave radiometer
; probably will not be exactly the same since different meas. locations
; if mwr data valid then use to correct radiosonde humidity profiles
indx = where(dewflag LT 1) ; filter out flagged data
sh = sh*mean((vapcm(indx)))/L ; scale radiosonde profile by mwr total
prSH=fltarr(2,n_elements(sh)/2)
FOR par=0,(n_elements(sh)/2)-1 DO BEGIN
prSH(0,par)=sh(par*2)
prSH(1,par)=h(par*2)/1000.
ENDFOR
for the gases atten. SLCP June 2001
PRO atten_humidity_liebe, sh,tdry,pres,fi, h, AGASEOUS,Agas_liebe, KGASEOUS
_ground(n,rg) = extinction rate at ground level [dBkm^-1]
height=h/1000. ; h esta en metros , height esta en kilometros
rangesamples = size(height)
rangesamples = rangesamples(1)
AH2O_liebe(i, j) = TOTAL(KH2O_liebe(i, 0:j)*ABS((height(1:j+1)-(height(0:j))) > 0.))
ENDFOR
ENDFOR
AH2O_liebe(*,rangesamples -1 ) = AH2O_liebe(*,rangesamples -2 )
PRO scanning_new2, sh,tdry,pres,fi, h, AGASEOUS,Agas_liebe, KGASEOUS,LF1,LF0,ATKF1,ATKF0
ATKF1(zeta,altura)=TOTAL(KGASEOUS_EQUIf1(zeta,0:altura)*ABS(((proyeccion_radio(zeta,1:altura+1)-
proyeccion_radio(zeta,0:altura))/sin(angles(zeta) * !pi/180)) > 0.))
ATKF0(zeta,altura)=total(KGASEOUS_EQUIf0(zeta,0:altura)*abs(((proyeccion_radio(zeta,1:altura+1)-
proyeccion_radio(zeta,0:altura))/sin(angles(zeta) * !pi/180)) > 0.))
dbz0=imgpolrec(dbz0, 0., 91., 0., 40., 0., 25., .03, 0., 25., .03)
ocu95=intarr(n_elements(ymax),20)
30
Position = [0.1, 0.9, 0.9, 0.95], Color=!P.Background
stop
END
31
APPENDIX B PROGRAMS FOR BULLET AND DWR
APPENDIX B1 IDL PROGRAM FOR REFRACTION INDEX
;****IDL PROGRAM***
;*** Refraction Index
n=200 ;
index=complexarr(2,n)
D=fltarr(n)
aeff=fltarr(n)
p=fltarr(n)
fi=fltarr(n)
for i=0, n-1 DO BEGIN
D(i)=(i+1)*1E-2 ;D[mm]
p(i)=0.78*D(i)^(-0.0038) ;Heymsfield density relationship bullet
pi=0.916 ; pi[g*cm^-3]
fi(i)=p(i)/pi
ni=[complex(1.785, 0.000235),complex(1.784, 0.00010)] ; 33GHz , 95GHz paper Ray 1972
f=fi(i)
for k=0, n_elements(ni)-1 DO BEGIN
n=ni(k)
index(k,i)=(2.+(n^2)+2.*f*(n^2-1))/(2.+(n^2)+f*(1-n^2))
end
aeff(i)=1e+3*D(i)/2 ;[um]
END
END