1 / 8

Various sun correction evaluation

Various sun correction evaluation. X. Yin (LOCEAN) and R. Oliva (ESA). The Sun correction algorithms that have been tested are: OFF: No Sun correction (for reference) DPGS : Standard Sun correction: v5 , G Matrix from DPGS

louis-durham
Download Presentation

Various sun correction evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Various sun correction evaluation X. Yin (LOCEAN) and R. Oliva (ESA) • The Sun correction algorithms that have been tested are: • OFF: No Sun correction (for reference) • DPGS: Standard Sun correction: v5 , G Matrix from DPGS • G3F: Optimal G matrix: Averaging 3 Freq, replacing hinge antenna patterns and using cross-pol terms • 4P_HEX: 4 point interpolation + hexagonal G matrix: v550 QWG9, Boutin et al.

  2. Anomalies of 10 averaged ascending orbits in July 2010 w.r.t September 2010 DPGS Sun on Sun off Sun correction on => ‒improvement in Y pol (std, vertical stripes and Sun tail reduced). ‒ X pol? (lower std but vertical stripes and Sun tail enhanced) QWG9, Boutin et al.

  3. Anomalies of 10 averaged ascending orbits in July 2010 w.r.t September 2010 Sun on, 4P_Hex G mat Sun on+ G3F matrice Whatever Sun correction (DPGS, G3F, 4P_Hex), similar conclusions=> ‒Y pol: vertical stripes and Sun tail reduced w.r.t Sun off. ‒ X pol? (enhanced vertical stripes with the 4-points-interpolation Sun correction, whereas smoother with the new optimal Gmat) QWG9, Boutin et al.

  4. Anomalies of 10 averaged ascending orbits in July 2010 w.r.t September 2010 Sun on Sun on, 4P_Hex G mat Sun off No clear improvement in T3 The G matrix makes actually use of the Cross-polar patterns, which do not improve HV data. So we don’t show the map with the new G matrix here. QWG9, Boutin et al.

  5. Anomalies of 10 averaged descending orbits in November 2010 w.r.t July 2010 DPGS Sun on Sun off Sun correction on => ‒ improvement in Y pol (std, vertical stripes and Sun tail reduced) ‒ X pol, lower std but still vertical stripes and Sun tail QWG9, Boutin et al.

  6. Anomalies of 10 averaged descending orbits in November 2010 w.r.t July 2010 Sun on, 4P_Hex G mat Sun on+ G3F matrice G3F =>enhanced stripes in X pol. w.r.t old Gmat (both Sun on and off) 4P_Hex Gmatrix => stronger std, especially in Y pol. QWG9, Boutin et al.

  7. Anomalies of 10 averaged descending orbits in November 2010 w.r.t June 2010 DPGS Sun on Sun on, 4P_Hex G mat Sun off No clear differences in T3 The G matrix makes actually use of the Cross-polar patterns, which do not improve HV data. So we don’t show the map with the new G matrix here. QWG9, Boutin et al.

  8. Conclusions 1. Large differences between the 4-points interpolation Sun correction and the other three, problem of different configurations with the 4-points interpolation in the L1 processing? 2. Improvement in Y pol (std, vertical stripes and Sun tail reduced), especially for ascending orbits 3. Vertical stripes enhanced in X pol with Sun correction. Table. statistics of OTT anomalies in the FOV QWG9, Boutin et al.

More Related