gerb-ceres shortwave and longwave/day comparisons
DESCRIPTION
GERB-CERES Shortwave and Longwave/Day Comparisons. G. L. Smith and P. E. Mlynczak Langley Research Centre et Belgae. Shortwave Comparisons. December 03/January 04 and June/July 04 comparisons have been upgraded using CERES edition 2 data - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
GERB-CERES Shortwave and Longwave/Day
Comparisons
G. L. Smith and P. E. Mlynczak
Langley Research Centre
et Belgae
Shortwave Comparisons• December 03/January 04 and
June/July 04 comparisons have been upgraded using CERES edition 2 data
• December 04/January 05 comparisons use CERES edition 1 data
• Compare first on detector and then on latitude grid basis
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis, Dec.03/Jan04, CERES Edition 2
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis, Dec.03/Jan04, CERES Edition 2
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis, Dec.03/Jan04, CERES Edition 2
GERB SW/CERES SW Latitude basis, Dec.03/Jan04, CERES Edition 2
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis June/July04, CERES Edition 2
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis June/July04, CERES Edition 2
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis June/July04, CERES Edition 2
GERB SW/CERES SW Latitude basis June/July04, CERES Edition 2
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis, Dec.04/Jan05, CERES Edition 1
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis, Dec.04/Jan05, CERES Edition 1
GERB SW/CERES SW Detector basis, Dec.04/Jan05, CERES Edition 1
GERB SW/CERES SW Latitude basis, Dec.04/Jan05, CERES Edition 1
Conclusions for SW: Ratio
Detector DJ04 DJ05 JJ04
32 – 112 .98(.01) .97(.01) .97(.03)*
128 – 160 .95(.01) .95(.01) .96(.02)
193 - 224 .95(.02) .95(.02) .96(.03)
*eyeball guess
Conclusions for SW: Differences
• Detector No.
DJ04 & DJ05: JJ04:
1 - 31 Inadequate sampling
32 – 112 -2 (1) 48 – 224 -2.5 (2)
128 – 192 -4 (2)
193 – 240 -7 (4)
240 – 256 Inadequate sampling
Conclusions for SW: Difference in Latitude Bins
DJ04 -3.3 W-m-2-Sr-1
DJ05 -3.1
JJ04 -2.3
In NH many grids are within 1 of 0
In SH many grid are below 0 by > 1
Conclusions for SW• Detector to Detector variation is slow in Northern
Hemi. and more erratic in SH for both DJ04 and JJ04.
• DJ04 and DJ05 agree very well, thus
Any degradation of GERB SW matches
CERES ed. 1 degradation.
Detector to Detector variations match
between DJ04 and DJ05, indicating that the variations are real and not sampling noise.
GERB LW/CERES LWDecember 03/January 04
GERB LW/CERES LWDecember 03/January 04
GERB LW/CERES LWDecember 03/January 04
GERB LW/CERES LWJune/July 04
GERB LW/CERES LWJune/July 04
GERB LW/CERES LWJune/July 04
Conclusions reLW/day: Ratio
• CERES FM-2 Comparisons are excellent.
• ARG Row Dec3/Jan04 June/July04
1 - 31 Inadequate Sampling
32 - 128 0.995 (0.005) 1.000 (0.005)*
129 - 192 1.000 (0.007) 0.995 (0.005)
193 - 224 1.000 (0.02) 0.995 (0.02)
*eyeball guess
Conclusions reLW/day: Differenec
• ARG Row Dec3/Jan04 June/July04
0 - 31 Inadequate Sampling
32 – 128 -0.5 (0.5) 0.0 (0.5) W-m-2-Sr-1
129 – 192 0.0 (0.5) -0.3 (0.5)
193 - 224 0.0 (1.-2.) 0.0 (1)
SEVIRI LW EstimatesDecember 03/January 04
SEVIRI LW EstimatesDecember 03/January 04
SEVIRI LW EstimatesDecember 03/January 04
SEVIRI LW EstimatesJune/July04
SEVIRI LW Estimates June/July04
SEVIRI LW Estimates June/July04
Conclusions reSEVIRI LW/Day Retrievals
• Inadequate sampling to get accurate comparisions, especially for ARG 96 – 256
ARG 32 - 50 -1.5+/- 1.5*
51 - 96 1.5 +/- 1.5
97 - 135 0 +/- 1.5
136 - 200 -2. +/- 3 *eyeball
201 - 224 -2.5 +/- 2.5 guess