point vs. vad scans for complex terrain
DESCRIPTION
Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain. G. D. Emmitt and C. O’Handley WG SBLW Destin, FL January 27-30, 2009. Overview. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain
G. D. Emmitt and C. O’HandleyWG SBLWDestin, FL
January 27-30, 2009
![Page 2: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Overview The conical scan is the traditional pattern used to obtain vertical profiles of the wind field with an airborne Doppler wind lidar. Nadir or zenith pointing scanning wedges are ideal for this type of scan.
A bi-axis scanner has been operated on a Navy Twin Otter for more than 6 years and was installed on a Navy P3 for use in a field experiment to study typhoons.
The bi-axis scanner enables a broad range of scanning patterns. A subset of the possible patterns is critical to obtaining useful wind profiles in the presence of complex terrain or small (~ 100's of meters) organized atmospheric structures (rolls, updrafts, waves, etc).
Several scanning strategies have been tested in flights over the Monterey Peninsula and within tropical cyclones. Combined with Google Earth (on-board) and satellite imagery overlays, new realtime adaptive scanning algorithms are being developed and tested.
![Page 3: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
TODWLscanner
STV
Particleprobes
SurfaceTemperatureSensor
![Page 4: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
The instrument
• 2µm coherent detection (CTI MAG1A)• 2 mJ ; 500 Hz• 10 cm two axis scanner, side door mounted• GUI with realtime instrument control and data
display• Range: .3 – 21km depending upon aerosols• Accuracy: < .10 m/s in three components• Weight: 700lb Power: 700 W
![Page 5: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
![Page 6: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Scanning options
• Nadir step-stare conical (3 – 12 positions) for vertical profiles for u, v, w & aerosols
• Zenith step-stare (u, v, w)• Forward sweeping (prospecting for OLEs and
shear layers ahead of aircraft• Nadir point scans (u,v,w) in complex terrain
and organized flows (e.g. OLEs)
![Page 7: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000EAST/W EST D ISTAN C E (M )
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
NO
RT
H/S
OU
TH
DIS
TA
NC
E (
M)
SC AN PATTER N FO R "PO IN T SC AN "3 C O M PLETE SC AN SG S: 64 M /S , H T: 1950 M , D W ELL: 2 SECBLAC K: 1200 MR ED : 750 MBLU E: 300 M
FLIG H T TR ACK
![Page 8: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000EAST/W EST D ISTAN C E (M )
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
NO
RT
H/S
OU
TH
DIS
TA
NC
E (
M)
SC AN PATTER N FO R "VAD "2 C O M PLETE SC AN SG S: 64 M /S , H T: 1950 M , D W ELL: 2 SECBLAC K: 1200 MR ED : 750 MBLU E: 300 M
FLIG H T TR ACK
![Page 9: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Ridge and Valley
![Page 10: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
-45000 -44000 -43000 -42000 -41000 -40000
10000
11000
12000
13000
14000
15000SCAN C O VERAG ERED : VADS 10 - 13, F ILE 1226 (SW TR ACK)BLACK: PO INT, 1241 (NE TR ACK)LO S 'S EN D AT 950 M M SL
![Page 11: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
![Page 12: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
POINT
Speed Comparison Over High Complex Terrain
![Page 13: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Valley Floor
![Page 14: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
-54000 -53000 -52000 -51000 -50000 -49000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000SCAN C O VER AG ER ED : VAD S 4 - 6 , F ILE 1231 (SW TR AC K)BLACK: PO IN T, 1237 (N E TRAC K)LO S 'S END AT 150 M M SL
![Page 15: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
![Page 16: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Speed comparisons over valley floor
POINT
![Page 17: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
-2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
STAR TIN G PO IN T(A IR C R AFT LO C ATIO N )
TAR G ET PO IN T
TAN G ENT PO IN T
SAM PLE PO IN T SC AN G EO M ETR Y
FLIG HT TRACK
![Page 18: Point vs. VAD scans for complex terrain](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062315/568157b4550346895dc53dae/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Acknowledgements
• Most of our research on profiling in complex terrain and the implications to model validation/initialization has been funded under an SBIR through the Army Research Office (Dr. Walter Bach).
• Additional funds were provided by the Integrated Program Office of NPOESS (Dr. Stephen Mango)