PH.D Thesis

Repuublic of IR
RAQ
stry of Higher Ed
Minis ducation
And Scientific Research
Al-Muustansiriyah University
Colle
ege of Sccience
Depaartment of
o Atmosspheric Sciences
S s
Effect of Soome Atmosph heric Factors

o Ultrav
on U violett Rad
diatioon
A Thesis subm mitted to

o
Deparrtment of o Atmosspheric sciences
s s
Colleege of Science
S
A
Al-Musta ansiriyahh Univerrsity
In
n partial fulfillmeent of th
he requirrementss for
The deegree off doctor of philosophy inn
Atmosspheric Sciences
S s
By
Ali Moham
M mmed Abdul
A lrahmaan AL--Salihii
B.Scc(Physicss) 1994
M.S
Sc (Atmoospheric Sciences)
S s) 2002
Su
uperviseed by
A
Asst.Pro
of Dr. Natiq
Na Ahmmed Zakki Assst.Prof Dr.
D Kaiss Jamil Al-Juma
A aily
Octobber 20077 Ram

madan 14428
‫ﺑﺴﻢ اﷲ اﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ اﻟﺮﺣﻴﻢ‬
‫ل‬
‫ﺿﻴَﺎ ًء وَا ْﻟ َﻘ َﻤ َﺮ ﻧُﻮرًا َو َﻗ ﱠﺪ َر ُﻩ َﻣﻨَﺎ ِز َ‬ ‫ﺲ ِ‬ ‫ﺸ ْﻤ َ‬‫ﻞ اﻟ ﱠ‬ ‫ﺟ َﻌ َ‬
‫ُه َﻮ اﱠﻟﺬِي َ‬
‫ﻖ‬
‫ﺤﱢ‬ ‫ﻻ ﺑِﺎ ْﻟ َ‬
‫ﻚ ِإ َ‬ ‫ﷲ َذِﻟ َ‬ ‫ﻖ ا ُ‬ ‫ﺧَﻠ َ‬ ‫ب ﻣَﺎ َ‬‫ﺤﺴَﺎ َ‬‫ﻦ وَا ْﻟ ِ‬‫ﺴﻨِﻴ َ‬ ‫ﻋ َﺪ َد اﻟ ﱢ‬
‫ِﻟ َﺘ ْﻌَﻠﻤُﻮا َ‬
‫ﻞ وَاﻟ ﱠﻨﻬَﺎ ِر َوﻣَﺎ‬ ‫ف اﻟﱠﻠ ْﻴ ِ‬
‫ﻼ ِ‬ ‫ﺧ ِﺘ َ‬‫ن ﻓِﻲ ا ْ‬
‫ن ِإ ﱠ‬
‫ت ِﻟ َﻘ ْﻮ ٍم َﻳ ْﻌَﻠﻤُﻮ َ‬
‫ﻵﻳَﺎ ِ‬
‫ﻞاَ‬‫ُﻳ َﻔﺼﱢ ُ‬
‫ن‪.‬‬ ‫ت ِﻟ َﻘ ْﻮ ٍم َﻳ ﱠﺘﻘُﻮ َ‬
‫ﻻﻳَﺎ ٍ‬
‫ض َ‬
‫ت وَاﻷ ْر ِ‬ ‫ﺴ َﻤﻮَا ِ‬ ‫ﷲ ﻓِﻲ اﻟ ﱠ‬ ‫ﻖا ُ‬ ‫ﺧَﻠ َ‬
‫َ‬
‫ﺻﺪق اﷲ اﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺳﻮرة ﻳﻮﻧﺲ ) أﻳﺔ ‪ (6-5‬‬
SUPERVISION CERTIFICATION
We certify that this thesis entitled “Study of Atmospheric

parameters Effect on Ultraviolet Radiation transfer” was
prepared under our supervision in the Department of
Atmospheric sciences, College of Science Al-Mustansiriyah
University as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of philosophy in Atmospheric sciences.
Signature Signature
Dr. Kais Jamil Al-Jumaily Dr. Natiq Ahmed Zaki
Assist. Professor (Supervisor) Assist. Professor(Supervisor)
Dept of Atmospheric Sciences Dept of Atmospheric Sciences
Date: Date:
In view of the available recommendation, I forward this

thesis for debate by the examination committee.
Signature
Dr. Kais Jamil Al-Jumaily
Assist. Professor
Graduate Studies Coordinator
Date:
COMMITTEE CERTIFICATION
We, the members of examining committee certify that after reading the present thesis
in titled “Effect of Some Atmospheric Factors on Ultraviolet Radiation” and we have
examining the student “Ali Mohammed AbdulRahman Al-Salihi” in its content, and
in who connected with it, and that in our opinion it meets the standard of thesis for
degree of Doctor of Philosophy in atmospheric science, with excellent degree
Signature
Name: Dr. Rasheed H. Al-Naimi
Title: Professor
Date:
(Chairman)
Signature Signature
Name: Dr. Hassan H. Salman Name: Dr. Nadir Fadil Habobi
Title: Professor Title: Professor
Date: Date:
(Member) (Member)
Signature Signature
Name: Dr. Husain Zaidan Ali Name: Dr. Talib Abd Zaid
Title: Expert Title: Senior Researcher
Date: Date:
(Member) (Member)
Signature Signature
Name: Dr. Natiq Ahmed Zaki Name: Dr. Kais Jamil Al-Jumaily
Title: Assistant Professor Title: Assistant Professor
Date: Date:
(Supervisor) (Supervisor)
Approved by the council of the college of science, Al-Mustansiryah University
Signature:
Dr. Kadhum H. Al-Musawi
Dean of the college of science
Date:

Acknowledgements
First and foremost I thank ALLAH for bringing me his grace and
mercy; I am forever grateful to my God.
I would like to seize this opportunity to thank my supervisor,
Assistant professor Dr. Kais. J. AlJumaily for his time and continuous
support during the period of my study in the college. Dr. AlJumaily
has created a deep interest within myself to explore the different
potential in the field of ultraviolet radiation and has also inspired me
to carry out further research in this field.
I am deeply indebted to Assistant professor . Dr. Natiq Ahmed Zaki
,without his support, I would not have been able to complete this work.
Also I would like to express my thanks to the Administration of the
Department of Atmospheric science and College of science for giving
me the chance to complete my study.
I am also grateful to all my classmates for their valuable support.
Special thanks to Dr. Ahmed Sami for providing me the data which
were used in this work. I would like to thank Dr. Jay Herman for
providing me (TOMS) data from NASA.
Also I would like to express my gratitude to my great friends; Mr.
Jasim Hamid, Dr. Abdulhadi, Dr. Osama Tariq and my close friend
Mr. Ayad Abdul Karim.
Finally I would like to thank all my family members for their patience
during my Study.
Ali M AL-Salihi
Salihi72@yahoo.com
Wxw|vtà|ÉÇ
g{|á ãÉÜ~ |á wxw|vtàx àÉ Åç ytÅ|Äç
TÄ|
DK WxvxÅuxÜ ECCJ
Abstract
The increased understanding of the factors effecting the UV levels reaches on
earth surface has become an important concern which deals with ozone
depletion.
Modeling of the radiative transfer in the atmosphere has become an important
tool for estimating the radiation at ground level for different altitudes in the
atmosphere. Modeling has became an important tool for understanding the
complex variability related to solar radiation and factors influencing the solar
radiation spectral at ground. Radiative transfer models make it possible to
estimate the radiation available for the photochemistry in the atmosphere when
models are run.
This thesis focuses on SMARTS 2.9.5 model which is widely used in this field ,
this package contains a set of FORTRAN codes with a lot of possible input
information. The model used in this thesis gives both the diffuse and direct
radiation in the UV, visible and infrared Radiation as output, It offers many
options for different input parameters such as extraterrestrial radiation,
atmospheric trace components such as ozone, aerosols, atmospheric
composition, and ground conditions such as surface type and albedo.
This thesis performs the work model evaluation and determination of the above-
mentioned model. The SMARTS 2.9.5 model achieves correlation coefficient
close to (0.91) while comparing it's calculation with measurements with over
estimation close to (%5) and compared with TUV model which achieves
correlation coefficient (0.86). Sensitively study of different atmospheric
parameters such as: solar Zenith angle on global irradiance, albedo on global
irradiance, ozone on global irradiance, altitude on global irradiance have been
made. The aerosol as Impact on global UV and cloud cover effecting on global
UV level uses different solar elevation through the cloud cover conditions.
Finally an empirical relation for ultraviolet cloud modification factor (Fuv) with
R=0.93 has been obtained.
I
The Contents
Page
Title Number
Chapter One: General Overview
1.1 Introduction 1
1..2 Nature of Ultraviolet Radiation 2
1.3 Absorber in the ultraviolet spectrum 3
1.4 Scattering of Direct solar radiation 4
1.5 Previews studies 6
1.6 Aim of thesis 8
1.7 Thesis organization 9
Chapter Two: Theoretical Concepts
2.1 Radiometric quantities 10
2.2 Extinction and emission 12
2.3 Angstrom’s Turbidity Formula for all Aerosols 15
2.4 Surface Reflection: The BRDF 16
2.5 Ozone Absorption 17
2.6 Uniformly Mixed Gases Absorption 18
Chapter Three: Instrumentation and Measurements
3.1 Introduction 19
3.2 Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS) Sensor 19
3.3 TOMS Instrument Description 20
3.4 Radiometric Calibration 20
3.5 Epply pyranometer and Ultraviolet data sets. 21
3.6 Automatic weather station and global UV sensor 22
3.7 Method of Statically Tests 24
3.7.1 Mean Bais Deviation 24
3.7.2 Root Mean Square Deviation 25
3.7.4 Correlation Coefficient 25
II
Chapter Four: Results and Discussions
4.1 Introduction 26
4.2 SMARTS2.9.5 model description 27
4.3 T.U.V4.4 model description 30
4.4 T.U.V4.4 model evaluation 31
4.5 SMARTS2.9.5 model evaluation 34
4.6 Sensitivity Studies and Atmospheric Parameters 37
Impact on Spectral Ultraviolet.
4.6.1 Effect of solar zenith angle. 37
4.6.2 Effect of albedo. 39
4.6.3 Effect of altitude 40
4.6.4 Effect of ozone 44
4.7 Test of diurnal behavior of smarts output in UV-range. 46
4.8 Ozone influence on UV-B 49
4.9 Impact of aerosols and clouds on ground base
ultraviolet measurements and the seasonal behavior of
UV-B with seasonal behavior of ozone. 54
4.10 Impact of cloud cover on global UV irradiance. 60
Chapter Five: Conclusion and Suggestion
5.1 Conclusion 70
5.2 Suggestions and Future Works 71
References 73
Appendix
III
List of Abbreviations
Symbol Meaning
-10
Aْ Angstrom (10 meter)
G Global radiation (W/m2)
m.a.s.l Meter above sea level
MBD Mean bais deviation
NASA National Administration Space Agency
O3 Ozone
RMSD Root mean square deviation
S.Z.A Solar Zenith Angle
SMARTS Simple Model Atmospheric Radiative transfer of
Sun Shine
TOMS Total Ozone Mapping spectrometer
TUV Troposphere ultraviolet and visible model
UV Ultraviolet Radiation (W/m2)
UVA Ultraviolet Radiation corresponding wavelength rang
between (315-400 nm)
UVB Ultraviolet Radiation corresponding wavelength rang
between (280-315nm)
UVC Ultraviolet Radiation corresponding wavelength rang
between (200-280 nm)
WHO World Health Organization
WMO World Meteorological organization
λ wavelength
GSFC Goddared Space Flight Center
CC Correlation Coefficient
IV
List of Figures
Title Page
1.1. Solar Spectrum 1
1.2 Ozone concentration with altitude. 3
1.3 Scattering of electromagnetic radiation. (a) Rayleigh scattering 5
(b) mie scattering.
2.1 Illustration at the definition of spectral radiance 10
2.2 Illustration of the calculation of the spectral irradiance by 11
integrating the spectral radiance over the hemisphere above the
shaded horizontal surface
2.3 A beam, or pencil of radiation travelling a distance ds from A1 of 13
unit area to surface A2
2.4 Geometry and symbols for the definition of the BRDSF, [the α is 17
the backscattering angle]
3.1 Epply Global ultraviolet Radiometer and Global solar Radiation 22
Radiometer
3.2 Ultraviolet sensor maintained on the Automatic weather station in 23
AL-Mustansiriyah university
3.3 The Automatic weather station in Al-Mustansiriyah university 23
4.1 Comparison of UV global irradiance based on measured and 33
calculations using TUV 4.4 model.
4.2 Comparison of UV global irradiance base on measured and 36
calculations using SMARTS 2.9.5 Model
4.3 The variation of direct irradiance with wavelength at different 37
solar zenith angles in the absence of aerosols.
4.4 The variation of direct irradiance with wavelength at different 38
solar zenith angles in the presents of aerosols.
4.5 The variation of global irradiance with wavelength at different 40
surface albedo in the absence of aerosols
surface albedo in the presents of aerosols .
altitude with absence of aerosols.
altitude& with presents of aerosols.
4.9 The variation of the global irradiance with wavelength at different 44
total ozone column with absence of aerosols.
4.10 The variation of global irradiance with different total ozone 45
column with presents of aerosols.
4.11 The variation of extinction at a monochromatic wavelength of 46
305 nm with altitude.
V
4.12 Comparison of diurnal behavior of UV global on measurements 48
and calculations using SMARTS 2.9.5. Model presented on
subfigures (a, b, d and e) in 10 January, 11 February, 26 march,
1september23 June, 8 July 1998.
4.13 UV-B irradiance calculations as a function of total ozone. 49
4.14 Correlation for 50º solar zenith angle for selected clear days of the 51
year 2002.
4.15 Total ozone column and UV-B irradiance seasonal behavior for 52
50º solar zenith angle for selected days of year 2002
4.16 Seasoned behavior of ozone and UV-B percentage variation in 52
relation to its average for 50º solar zenith angle for selected days
for year 2002.
4.17 The annual course of Total ozone column based on TOMS data 55
over Baghdad city in the year 2002.
4.18 .The annual course of UV-B irradiance based on Meteor data base 56
for the year 2002
4.19 The annual course of global UV, UV-B irradiance and Total 57
ozone column for the year 2002.
4.20 Comparison between measurements and calculated diurnal 58
variation of global UV radiation on 3 June 2007.
variation of global of global UV radiation on 28 June 2007
variation of global UV radiation on June 2007.
4.23 Ultraviolet global irradiance vs. cloud cover for different solar 61
elevation angles.
4.24 Ratio of global ultraviolet irradiance to total solar irradiance 62
UV/G vs cloud covers for different solar elevation angles.
4.25 Ratio of global ultraviolet irradiance to total solar irradiance 64
UV/G and hemispherical ultraviolet transmittance K tuv, vs. cloud
cover for different solar elevations
4.26 UV global irradiance Vs optical air mass 65
4.27 Ultraviolet cloud cover modification factor FUV vs cloud cover for 65
different solar elevation angles.
4.28 Ultraviolet cloud modification factor, FUV total global cloud 68
modification factor FG
4.29 Ratio of UV global cloud modification factor FUV to total global 69
cloud modification factor FG vs cloud cover
VI
List of Tables
Title page
Chapter Three
3.1 Characteristic of total ozone column database 20
3.2 Apply ultraviolet pyrometer specifications 21
Chapter Four
4.1 Values for the characteristic parameters for the 29
standard models and Braslou and Davels., 1973
model included in SMART 2.9.5
4.2 The models depending on relative humidity 30
4.3 Values for the characteristic parameters of the 31
model TUV 4.4
4.4 Statically results concerning TUV 4.4 model 32
behavior
4.5 Considering the modification suggested by Bosca 33
et.al., (1997)
4.6 Statically results concerning TUV 4.4 model 34
behavior with modification of Bosca et.al., (1997)
4.7 Statically results concerning SMARTS 2.9.5 35
model behavior with different aerosol models
4.8 Correlation coefficient (R) and their confidence 54
level (CL), A and B values for linear fit
(y=A+BX) for each solar zenith angle
4.9 Statically parameters for cloud modification factor 67
for different cloud cover
VII
Chapter One General Overview
Chapter 1
General overview
1.1 Introduction
The sun emits energy across the electromagnetic spectrum which is shown in
figure (1.1), but mainly in wavelength between 200 and 400 nm. Energy
emitted as a function of wavelength is very similar to what is expected from
a black body with a temperature of 6000 K , which is close to the sun's
photosphere temperature, while the averaged energy flux density emitted at
the photosphere is 6.2×107 W/m2 (Weeb et al ,1980), The distribution of
radiation depending on wavelength (the so-called spectrum of emission)
covers ranges (or bands) called infrared (larger than 720 nm), visible (VIS)
(between 400 and 720 nm) and ultraviolet (UV).The ultraviolet radiation
having wavelength in three bands in the range 200-400 nm, UVC corresponds
to wavelength from 200-280 nm, UVB corresponds from 280 to 315 nm and
UVA corresponds to wavelengths from 315 nm to the visible lower limit
(400nm) (Webb,1998).
Figure 1.1: Solar Spectrum [WMO, 2002].
1
Human eyes can detect wavelength in the region of spectrum from 400 nm to
700 nm, i.e. they can detect the visible region of the spectrum. All the seven
colors of light fall inside a small wavelength band and visible light have
wavelength in order of billionths of a meter. The red light is at the end of the
visible spectrum with wavelength of 630 nm and in the opposite side of the
spectrum is the blue light with 430 nm. The blue light is more energetic than
the red light and less energetic than the violet light which has even shorter
wavelength (WMO, 2002).
1.2 Nature of Ultraviolet Radiation

According to the previously mentioned limits of ultraviolet radiation
divisions. the boundary between UVB and UVA is somewhat ambiguous, and
some authors set it at 320 nm, based on the significant biological effects of
radiation with wavelength between 315 and 320 nm. However, most
international agencies and scientific research centers such as; World Heath
Organization (WHO, 2002); European Union's Action (Taalas et al ., 2000),
and according to Frederek et al., (2000), radiation in the UV band is received
at the top of the atmosphere is 8.3% of the total solar radiation.
When radiation is emitted by the sun enters into the earth's atmosphere,
Radiation is modified by several phenomena which will be explain in the
next section of this chapter, which are classifies them into absorption and
scattering (which together cause the beam extinction).
One of the most important phenomena that influence UV radiation is the
absorption by photochemical reactions, those phenomena in general are
involved in the ozone creation-destruction cycle which take place basically in
the stratospheric, virtually absorb all radiation in the UVC band even if
stratospheric ozone greatly reduced, all UVC which would still be totally
absorbed as shown in figure(1.2) (Mardonich et al ., 1998).However,
2
radiation within the UVB and UVA bands is not totally absorbed in the
stratosphere in amount depend relatively on tropospheric ozone content and
the presence of other trace gases , aerosols and clouds.
Figure (1.2): The Ozone concentration with altitude

(WMO, 2002).
1.3 Absorbers in the Ultraviolet Spectrum

The ozone (O3) is the principal absorber in the UV. Atomic oxygen and
nitrogen absorbs x-rays and other short-wave radiation continuously are up
to 85.0 nm. As these two gases are found high in the atmosphere, no radiation
of wavelengths less than 85.0 nm passes through to the lower atmosphere.
Oxygen and Nitrogen absorb solar radiation in a number of overlapping
bands in wavelengths below 200 nm. Since the upper (beyond 90 km) and
lower atmospheres are composed primarily of these gases (atomic and
molecular oxygen and nitrogen), no radiation below 200.0 nm reaches the
surface of the earth. This is fortunate, because this far-UV radiation degrades
materials colors, which are harmful to human beings. Ozone exhibits a
3
number of absorption bands beyond 200.0 nm in the UV, and Ozone has a
strong absorption band from 200.0 to 300.0 nm, weaker bands from 300.0 to
350 nm.
1.4 Scattering of Direct Solar Radiation

The scattering of electromagnetic energy in the atmosphere is a complex
process. The smallest scattering particles are molecules which can be
considered to be much smaller then wavelength of even visible light.
Rayleigh scattering describes the scattering by atmospheric molecules at all
wavelengths. When the scattering particles get larger, so they become at least
comparable in size to the wavelength, Mie scattering must be used. When the
particle size is of the order of the wavelength of the incident radiation, Mie
theory is applicable. For mathematical treatment, a convenient parameter to
express the size of the scattering particle is π D/λ, where D is the particle
diameter. Let n be the index of refraction and λ the wavelength in
micrometers. It is considered that;
(1) When πD/λ < 0.6/ν, scattering is governed by Raleigh's theory, and in a
cloudless atmosphere applies to air molecules, most of which have a size of
about 1Å.
(2) When πD/λ > 5, scattering is chiefly a diffuse reflected process seldom
occurring in the Earth’s atmosphere.
(3) When 0.6/n < πD/λ < 5, scattering is governed by Mie’s theory and
applies to scattering by particles of a size greater than 10Å, such as aerosols.
Figure1.3 shows the difference between the Rayleigh and Mie modes of
scattering. In the Rayleigh mode (figure1.3a), the scattering process is
identical forward and backward directions. In addition, scattering is
maximum in forward backward directions. It is minimum at 90 to the line of
4
incidence. Greater scattering occurs when incident radiation is of a shorter

wavelength. In Mie scattering (figure 1.3b), more energy is scattered in a
forward direction than in the backward direction. Furthermore, as the particle
size increases, so does forward scattering, and shape of the scattering
"balloon" is altered Iqbal, [1983]. The radiation which is scattered by one
particle strikes other particles in the medium, and this process, called multiple
scattering, continues in the atmosphere. In a clean dry atmosphere, about half
of the energy thus scattered goes back into space and the other half reaches
the ground as scattered radiation. In an atmosphere containing dust particles,
more scattered energy reaches the ground because of greater forward
scattering. The largest atmospheric scatterers are the raindrops and hailstones.
Their scattering must be calculated using Mie theory at all wavelengths. Most
other scatterers are treated by Rayleigh scattering approximation at longer
wavelengths.
Figure (1.3): Scattering of electromagnetic radiation.

(a)Rayleigh scattering. (b) Mie scattering.
Even Mie scattering is an approximation for almost all particles found in the
atmosphere. Few particles are spheres or ellipsoids, the shapes of particles
assumed in the Mie scattering theory. The Mie formulation takes absorption
5
into account, and lacking any other practical method for calculating scattering
by non-spherical particles, is frequently used by approximating complex
shaped aerosols as distribution of spheres. Just how well this distribution
approximates the actual scatterers is largely unknown.
Seldom has a scattering experiment provided measurements at more than a
small number of angles. Even more seldom, probably never, has the actual
distribution of aerosols been known. The angular scattering function can be
complex. There is really no good way for categorizing the shapes and sizes of
atmospheric aerosols. Rayleigh developed his scattering theory on the basis
of the charge polarization produced in the scattering particle by the
electromagnetic wave. The redistribution of the charge on the particle can be
regarded as a current issue. The interaction of this current (rapidly changing
current produces electromagnetic waves) and the incident electromagnetic
wave interact produce an altered wave. The modified Rayleigh assumes that
the particle was much smaller than the wavelength being scattered. Instead of
going through a derivation of Rayleigh, the same result can be obtained as the
small particle limit of the Mie theory. This allows the index of the refraction
to be complex, something not possible with Rayleigh scattering (Kyle, 1991).
1.5 Previews Studies

The measurement of solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation has increased
tremendously in the past 25 years, both from interest in UV itself and its role
in climate changes, The effect of increased UV-B radiation on plants and
terrestrial ecosystem, which might arise from stratospheric ozone depletion,
have been studied using a variety of experimental and modeling systems. The
point relevant radiation quantity of many biological systems which represents
a total radiation incident, was investigated by Mordonich , (1984), then the
same author (Mardonich, 1987) who studied the climatology of (UV) at the
6
earth surface and lower atmosphere. Ilyas,(1987) investigated the relation

between cloud cover effect on UV irradiance. There are several studies
utilizing empirical study of the cloud effect on UV radiation as a direct
function of cloud cover such as Kuchinke et al ., (1991) ; Martinez et al .,
(1994) studied the ratio of UV/G which provide the relative importance of UV
irradiance on total solar irradiance at the earth surface Instrumentation to
measure the spectral solar ultraviolet radiation researched by Müller et al.,
1996; kudish et al., (1997) has made an analysis of UV radiation in Dead Sea
basin. Webb , (1999) studied the change in strospheric ozone concentration
and Mayer et al., (1997) investigated the climatology of spectral UV with
long term using UV measurements and UVSPEC modeling, Manual et al .,
[1998] compromised of cloudless sky ultraviolet radiation at two sites in
southwest Sweden, Foyo-Mereno et al ., (1998) showed that UV radiation
exhibits daily seasonal and local variability associated with cloud cover
variation and also studied the cloud effect as a function on solar spectral
range. Krzyscin, (2000) investigated the effect of stratospheric ozone profile
variability on ultraviolet radiation trends in Poland.
A number of campaigns have been employed in order to achieve some
measurements of the spectral solar ultraviolet radiation (Hofzumahaus et al .,
1999; Shetter and Müller, 1999). Kylling et al., (2000) determined the surface
albedo Impact on global and direct UV irradiance measurements: Zenfer etal
(2000) estimated UV-B doses from the satellite observation.
Dubronvsky, (2000) analyzed UV-B measurements at two stations in the
Czech Republic. Barrtlet, (2000) studied the changes in ultraviolet radiation in
the 1990 in reading [England] Webb, (2000) presented the ozone depletion
impact on environmental UV-B radiation. Tena, (2000) estimated the direct
ultraviolet spectral irradiance in Valencia (Spain) and compared its
calculations with measured values.
7
Josefsson et al., (2000) estimated the effect of hydrometers in the atmosphere

such as cloud amount, type and precipitations on global UV irradiance.
Lokkala (2001) studied a decade of spectral UV measurements at saodankyla
(Finland), Christain, (2003) used a moderate bandwidth multichannel
instrument to measurement UV.
Malinovic et al., (2003) used NEOPLANTA model to estimate solar
ultraviolet irradiance [290-400 nm] model evaluation study. Civen et al.,
(2003) employed a long – term global earth surface UV radiation exposure
derived from TOMS satellite measurements. Wendisch, (2003) studied the
vertical distribution of spectral solar irradiance in the vertical distribution of
spectral solar irradiance in the cloudless sky conditions. Josefsson, (2004) has
measured UV radiation in Ncrrkőping between 1993-2003. Bernhard et al.,
(2004) used a network data in order to study UV and ozone climatology at
South Pole. Gusrnieri , (2004) investigated the anti correlation of ozone and
UV-B at fixed solar zenith angel in southern Brazil. Miguel , (2005) studied
the ultraviolet radiation at a rural area of Spain. Tadros et al., (2005) has made
a comparison study between SPECTRAL and SMARTS model and employed
the direct normal solar irradiance in different bands for Cairo and Aswan in
Egypt. Pinedo, (2006) showed the spectral signature of ultraviolet solar
irradiance in Zacatecos.
1.6 Aim of Thesis

The main objective of this work is to test and compare the output of the used
models in this thesis with the available measurements and to create an
evaluation for these models and shows their flexibility on using various
atmospheric parameters input. The present work will focus on the sensitivity
studies of different atmospheric parameters that would be performed.
8
Sensitivity studies on the effect of solar zenith angle on direct irradiance, the
effect of ozone on global irradiance, estimating the attenuation of direct
irradiance in the atmosphere, the effect of altitude on global irradiance and
the effect of aerosols on direct irradiance would be carried out. The general
purpose of this thesis is to obtain a clear understanding of ultraviolet radiation
because it became an important detection of the depletion of ozone caused by
anthropogenic sources.
1.7 Thesis Organization

Chapter1 presents a general introduction to solar spectrum and describes the
properties of Ultraviolet radiation and its wavelength range, The next part of
this chapter reviews the previous studies then explains the aims of the thesis
Chapter 2 reviews the theoretical concepts Chapter 3 provides information
about the measurements of Ultraviolet radiation and satellite data obtained
from TOMS, METEOSAT data, UV sensor maintained on Energy and
environmental researches center on Al-jadiriyah location and on AL
Mustansiriyah automatic meteorological station. Chapter 4 presents the
experiments which were made using [SMARTS2.9.5 and TUV4.4] and the
comparison between Models output and real measurements in order to
evaluate the performance of these models in order to employ them in this
work to assess the solar zenith angle, albedo, ozone, aerosols, altitude effect
on Ultraviolet radiation , This chapter also investigates the impact of Ozone
on UVB and obtains the strong anitcorrelation between these factors. Finally,
the effect of cloud cover on global UV is presented.
9
Chhapter Tw
wo Theorretical Co
oncepts

C
Chapter
r Two
Theooretical Concep
pts
2.11 Radiom
metric Quantitie
Q s
Sevveral diffe
ferent, butt related, quantitiees are ussed in the descrip
ption and
measurementt of radiattion. The most
m impo
ortant oncee are descrribed as fo
ollows.
Thee spectrall radiancee (or monnochromattic radiannce) L(r,s)) is the power per
uniit area. Per unit soliid angle, per
p wavelength inteerval in thhe neighbo
orhood of
the wavelenggth λ. at a point r.
r in the direction of the uunit vectorr s. It is
measured in Wm2nm-11 The specctral radiaance can be
b visualizzed in term
ms of the
m a small area ∆ with
phootons emerging from w unit normal
n s, centered at
a a point
a shown in Figure 2.1 . Connsider thosse photonns whose m
r: as momentum
m vectors
lie within a cone
c mall solid angle Ω∆ centered on the dirrections an
of sm nd whose
freqquencies lie
l betweeen ∆ . Then ∆ Ω∆ is the eneergy transferred by
the photons.
F
Figure 2.1: Illustration at the definition of spectral
s raadiance.
10

Chhapter Tw
wo Theorretical Co
oncepts

Thee radiancee L(r,s) is the poweer per unitt area, perr unit solidd angle at a point r
in the
t directiion of the unit vectoor s; in other wordss it is the integral of over
wavvelength.
, , (2.1)
Thee spectrall irradiancce (monocchromaticc irradiancce) , is the power

p per
uniit area, perr unit wavvelength interval
i in
n the neighhborhood of the waavelength
ormal n; its unit iis Wm-2
λ, at a poinnt r througgh a surfface of no It is
obttained from
m the speectral radiiance by the
t integration overr a hemissphere on
onee side of thhe surfacee:
, , . Ω (2.2))
t elemennt of solidd angle as shown in figure 2.22 :

where dΩ is the
Figu
ure 2.2 : Illu
ustration off the calcullation of th
he spectral iirradiance
by integratingg the spectrral radiancce over the hemispherre
aboove the shaaded horizo ontal surfacce.
Thee irradiannce (or fluux densityy) F(r,n) iss the pow

wer per uniit area at a point r
throough a surrface of n,, i.e., the integral
i off a point over waavelength,, and also
the integral of
o the radiaance over a hemisph
here:
11

Chapter Two Theoretical Concepts

, , λ L r, s . Ω (2.3)
its unit is Wm-1.

Irradiance has specific direction associated with it; for example, if the surface
in question is horizontal and the normal n points upwards, then the irradiance
under consideration is associated with upward-moving photons.
2.2 Extinction and Emission

Consider a beam of radiation of unit cross-sectional area, moving in a small
range of solid angles about the directions; as shown in Figure2.3. If the
photons experience absorption or scattering in a small distance ds along the
beam, due to the presence of a relatively active gases (or gas containing a
suspension of solid particles or liquid droplets), then the spectral radiance
will reduced.
The physics of the process is complex; however, it may be summed up in
Lamberi’s law, which states that the fractional decrease of a spectral radiance
is proportional to the mass of absorbing or scattering material encountered by
the beam in a distance ds. Since the beam has unit cross-sectional area, this
mass is ,ds, where , is the density of the radioactively active gases (or gas
containing a suspension of solid particles or liquid droplets), so
2.4
The quantity is the extinction coefficient; it is the sum of an absorption

coefficient and scattering coefficient defined in an obvious manner in
terms of the contribution to . from the absorption and scattering,
respectively:
12

Chhapter Tw
wo Theorretical Co
oncepts

(2.5)
Figure 2.33 :A beam,, or pencil’ of radiatioon travellin

ng a distancce
ds from Al of unit area
a to surfface A2.
Thee extinctioon coefficcient geenerally depends

d onn temperaature and pressure,
andd it can bee regardedd as a calcculable fro
om detaileed quantum
m mechan
nics or as
om measuurements. If the gas (or gas
an empericall quantityy, to be derived fro
conntaining a suspensioon of soliid particlees or liquiid dropletts) is also emitting
phootons of wavelength
w h λ , an exxtra term must
m be added
a to thhe right -h
hand side
of Equation
E (2.4), to represent the addittional pow
wer per unnit area in
ntroduced
intoo the beaam. This term
t will be propo
ortional too the masss s,, so it is
connvenient too write it as , wheere (s) iss called thhe source function.
f
Including booth extincction andd emission
n the raddiative-traansfer equ
uation is
obttained:
(2.6)
13


If , and are given as functions of distance, a formal solution of the
radiative- transfer equation can be obtained as follows. The optical path ‘is first
introduced and is defined as
′ ′ ′
d (2.7)
where
2.8
is the start of the path; then Equation (2.6) can be written as (2.8)
using the integrating factor exp( ).
Equation (2.7) is integrated to obtained:
(2.9)
if spectral radiance equals at the point so the
′
(2.10)
In the absence of emission the spectral radiance falls exponentially, decreasing

by a factor of e over a distance corresponding to unit optical path. A region is
said to be optically thick at a wavelength λ if the total optical path through
the region is greater than 1 and optically thin if the total optical path is less
than 1. A photon is likely to be absorbed or scattered within an optically thick
region, but likely to traverse an optically thin region without absorption or
scattering [Andrews, 2000].
14


2.3 Angstrom’s Turbidity Formula for All Aerosols
From moon’s coefficient for dust attenuation, the number of particles per unit
volume can be varied. However, the coefficient is independent of the size of
dust particles. The next step, then, is to incorporate the particles size in the
attenuation formula, Furthers since attenuation effects of scattering and
absorption by dust are difficult to separate. Angstrom suggested a single
formula generally known as Angstrom‘s turbidity formula is given by the
following:
2.11
where , is called Angstrom turbidity coefficient, is the wavelength

exponent, and the wavelength is in micrometers. It is called “turbidity” because
scattering of solar radiation by dry air molecules is called turbidity of the
atmosphere (in the optical sense). Consequently includes attenuation due
to “dry” as well “wet” dust particles. i.e. all aerosols.
In Equation (2.11), which varies from 0.0 to 0.5 or even higher, is an index
representing the amount of aerosols present in the atmosphere in the vertical
direction. The wavelength exponent a is related to the size distribution of the
aerosol particles. Large values of indicate a relatively high ratio of small
particles to large particles. Generally, a has a value between 0.5 to 2.5: a value
of 1.3 is commonly employed, since it was originally suggested by Angstrom.
A good average value for most natural atmosphere is a 1.3 0.5
At a fixed value of a lower value of signifies higher visibility i.e., higher
atmospheric transparency. By inference it can be concluded that lower values
of (larger average particle size) would result in higher amounts of solar
radiation reaching the ground.
Using Angstrom’s turbidity formula, aerosol transmittance can be written as
15


(2.12)
where ma is the optical path length [Iqbal, 1983].
2.4 Surface Reflection: The BRDF

The concepts of reflectance and transmittance are more complicated than those
of emittance or absorptance. Since they depend upon both the angles of
incidence and reflection or transmission. Referring to figure2.4, we consider a
downward-moving angular beam of radiation with intensity Iλ(Ω ) within a
cone of solid angle d around Ω . Then the energy incident on a flat surface
whose normal is directed along the z axis (figure2.4) is Ω cos
Denoting by dIλr+(Ω ), the intensity of reflecting light leaving the surface
within a cone of solid angle around the direction Ω , we define the
bidirectional reflectance distribution function (BRDF), as the ratio of the
reflected intensity to the energy in the incident beam:
′
Ω
, Ω, Ω = (2.13)
Ω
We note that dIλr+(Ω ) is a first-order differential quantity that balances the

differential in the denominator, so that is a finite quantity. Adding the
contributions to the reflected intensity in the direction Ω from beams incident
on the surface in all downward directions, we obtained the total reflected
intensity
′ ′ ′
Ω )= Ω cos , Ω, Ω Ω (2.14)
16

Chhapter Tw
wo Theorretical Co
oncepts

Thus, the reeflected inntensity is the inteegral of thhe energyy in each incident
direections tim
mes the BRDF
B mbinationn of incidence and
forr that partticular com
obsservation angles
a undder considderation.
Figure 2.44: Geometrry and symb bols for thee definition

n of the BRD
DF,[The an
ngle is
the backsccattering an
ngle].
2.55 Ozone Absorpttion
Thee Bouguerr law is ussed to deteermine thee ozone abbsorption aas follows:
(2.15)
where Is the ozonne optical thickness..
is optical mass, is reducced path length

l (in atm - cm
m), iss spectral
abssorption cooefficient.
17


Ozone absorbs strongly in the UV. Recent spectroscopic laboratory data from
Daumont et.al. [1992] are available for the Hartley – Huggins bands at 0.01 nm
resolution.
The original data were smoothed in 1 nm steps. Up to 344 nm. From 345 to
350 nm, data from Moline,[1986] were downgraded from their original
resolution of 0.5 nm between 351 and 355 nm, data from Cacciani et.al. [1989]
were smoothed to 1 nm. The same procedure way was performed between 356
and 365 nm where the absorption coefficients were derived from the data in
MODTRAN2.
2.6 Uniformly Mixed Gas Absorption
Some atmospheric constituents known as the "mixed gases" (Principally O2

and CO2) have both monotonically decreasing atmospheric concentration with
altitude and significant absorption bands in the infrared. Using the analysis of
pierluissi ,[1986] and Tsai ,[ 1987], the mixed gas transmittance is defined as:
(2.16)
where is the gas mass, is the spectral absorption coefficients, and is

the altitude – dependent gaseous scaled path length. The exponent a was
obtained by averaging the data tabulated by Pierluissi Tsai [1986, 1987] where
a = 0.5641 for λ < 1 µm
18

Chapter Three Instrumentation and Measurements

Chapter Three
Instrumentation and Measurements
3.1 Introduction
This chapter, introduces the measurements and types of radiometers, which are
used to obtain the measurements employed in this work.
Generally, we employ various types of measurements such as UV doses
measured by Epply pyrnometer in Al-Jadiriyah location and UV sensor mounted
on AL-Mustansiriyah meteorological station also we used ozone and UV-B data
from total ozone mapping spectrometer (TOMS) and meteor-3 data base
respectively additionally we employ the observations of cloud cover obtain from
Iraqi meteorological office.
3.2 Total Ozone mapping spectrometer (TOMS) sensor

TOMS instrument developed by National Aeronautics & Space Administration
(NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). The TOMS instrument was
designed to enable long-term daily mapping of global distribution of the earth’s
atmospheric Ozone. They have been such missions, and this deals with data
obtained from TOMS on board Earth Probe (1997-2005) missions.
TOMS makes 35 measurements every 8 seconds each covering a width of 30 to
125 miles (50-200 km) on the ground, strung along a line perpendicular to the
satellite path motion.
TOMS uses the ratio of back scattered earth radiance to solar irradiance at
specific wavelength to infer total ozone and Table (3-1) shows details of the
TOMS ozone data (Herman et al .,1996).
19


Table (3-1): Characteristics of the total Ozone column datasets
Satellites Earth Probe

Instrument Total Ozone mapping spectrometer (TOMS)
Parameter Total Ozone column
Temporal coverage 1997-2005
Temporal resolution Daily data
Special coverage Global
Special resolution 1.25 (latitude) × 1.25 (Longitude)
3.3 TOMS Instrument Description

The TOMS Ultraviolet sensors on board the Meteor-3 satellite measured incident
solar radiation and backscattered global ultraviolet and Ultraviolet-B.
Total ozone was derived from these measurements. To map total ozone, TOMS
instruments scan through the sub-satellite point in a direction in perpendicular to
the orbital plane.
Backscatter ultraviolet instrument measures the response to solar irradiance by
developing ground aluminum diffuser plate reflects sunlight into the instrument
(Herman, et al ., 1996).
3.4 Radiometric Calibration

The calibration of the TOMS measured earth radiance and solar irradiance may
be considered separately. The earth radiance can be written as a function of the
instrument coefficient counts in the following way:
Im(t) = Cr Kr Gr fins(t) (3.1)
where
Im(t) : derived earth radiance
20


Cr : counts detected in earth radiance mode
Kr : radiance calibration constant
Gr : gain range correction factor
fins(t): correction for instruments changes
The measured solar irradiance Fm can be written as:

Fm(t) = Ci Ki Gi fins(t) ⁄ g Ω(t) (3.2)
where
g : relative angular correction for diffuser reflectivity
Ω(t): solar diffuser plate reflectivity
3.5 Epply Pyrometer and Ultraviolet Data Sets

There are many types of sensor can be used to measure ultraviolet radiation.
Epply ultraviolet radiometer (photometer and global solar radiation shown in
Figure (3.1) is used for meteorological purposes and consisting of western
selenium barrier-Layer photoelectrical with a sealed-in quarters window. A band
passes through the filter to restrict the wavelength response of the photocell
according the selectable range (295-385 nm).
Table(3-2):Epply Ultraviolet Pyrometer specifications
Sensitivity 150 µ volt/wm-2

Response time 1 seconds
Linearity ± 2% from 0 to 70 w/m2
Size 5.75 inch diameter, 6.75 inch heights
Cosine response ± 2% from 0 to 70 solar zenith angle
weight 6 pounds
21


Figure (3.1): Epply Global Ultraviolet Radiometer and Global Solar
Radiation Radiometer.
The data from a radiometric station which is installed by the Environmental and
Energy research center in Al-Jadiriyah location (33.34No, 44.45Eo, 34 m .a.s.l).
The measurements were taken hourly.
In this work, we employ nine months of hourly measurements that allows us to
cover a relative wide range of different solar elevations and seasonal conditions.
3.5 Automatic Weather Station and Global UV Sensor

Global ultraviolet measurement used in this work was obtained by Davies UV
sensor which is shown in figure (3.2) mounted on the automatic weather station
which is shown in figure (3.3) installed on the roof of the Department of
Atmospheric science in Al-Mustansuriyah university (Lat 3.33No long 44.44Eo
34 masl).
22


The equipment measures the broad band radiation in the interval of (280-400nm)
that corresponds exactly to global UV range.
Figure (3.2): Ultraviolet sensor maintained on

the Automatic Weather Station in
Al-Mustansiriyah University
Figure (3.3): The Automatic Weather Station in

Al-Mustansiriyah University
23


The equipment consists of a sensor associated with optical parts such as quartz
fillers. The sensor output corresponds to a DC voltage level propertied to global
ultraviolet radiation incident on the diffuser, located inside the quartz dome.
The equipment is connected with wireless connection to a data logger able to
collect data for a period of about 28 days.
The data are recorded at a sample rate of one measurement per 15 minutes.
3.7 Method of Statitical Tests

This thesis employs two models for predicting or estimating the radiation
reaches earth surface. Comparison of an individual calculated value against a
measured value is not a sufficient test of accuracy of a predictive model rather it
is necessary to analyze a large number of data.
For solar radiation models , a number of useful statically tests are based on the
calculation of Mean Bais Deviation (MBD), Root Mean Square Deviation
(RMSD), Correlation Coefficient (r), these statically tests are defined below.
3.7.1 Mean Bais Deviation

The MBD is an indication of the average deviation of the predicted value from
the measured value. It is defined by:
∑ (3.1)
Where predicted value , measured value, and N the number of

observations. Ideally a zero of MBD should be obtain (Willmott,1982).
24


3.7.2 Root Mean Square Deviation
The RMSD is the measure of the variation of the predicted value around the
measured value which is defined as follows:
.
∑ (3.2)
The RMSD is always positive ; However a zero is ideal. It may be noted that a
few large variations of the calculated amount of radiation from the measured
radiation can substantially increase RMSD (Willmott,1982).
3.7.3 Correlation Coefficient

The correlation coefficient is a test of the linear relationship between the
calculated and measured value which is defined by
∑
. (3.3)
∑ ∑
Where yi is the estimated value , xi is the measured value , , are the mean
value of the estimated and measured values respectively and N is the number of
the values (Willmott,1982).
25

Chapter Four Results and Discussion
Chapter Four
Results and Discussion
4.1 Introduction
Since the discovery of the ozone depletion in Antarctic and the globally
declining trend of stratospheric ozone concentration, public and scientific
concern has been raised in the last decades. A very important consequence of
this fact is the increased broadband and spectral UV radiation in the
environment and biological effects and health risk that may take place in the
near future. The absence of wide spread measurement of this radio metric flux
has led to the development and use of alternative estimation procedures such
as the parametric approached. Parametric models compute the radiant energy
using the available atmospheric parameters. Some of these parametric models
compute the global solar irradiance at surface level and different altitudes by
the addition of its direct beam and diffuse components. This study presents a
comparison between two models that deal with cloudless sky
parameterization schemes, both models provide an estimation of solar spectral
irradiance that can be integrated spectrally within the limits of interest.
For this test we have used data recorded in a radiometric station located at
Baghdad city (33.34 °N, 44.45°E, 34.m.a.s.l) in Aljadiriyah location. The
data base includes hourly values of global UV measurement covering the
selected measurements (Four times a day for three months) of the year 1998.
Ultraviolet radiation (UV) is detrimental to various types of organisms,
including humans, animals and plant. According to the degree of damage, UV
radiation which is divided into three bands: UV-A (315-400 nm). UV-B (280-
315 nm), and UV-C (200-280 nm). UV-A is the least energetic and may cause
suntan, whereas UV-C is the most powerful, which can cause mutations and
even death of a small amount of exposure.
26
The damage caused by UV-B is somewhere in between. Until recently, the

Earth's atmosphere allowed for some UV-A, a little UV-B and no UV-C
radiation reaching the ground gases (CO2, N2, etc.), However, the shielding
effect of ozone layer is diminishing due to ozone depletion, and surface –
observed UV-B which has shown a significant upward trend (WMO, 1998).
4.2 SMARTS Model Description

The SMARTS model (simple model of Atmospheric Radiative Transfer of
sunshine) was first proposed by Gueymard , (1993) being the last version of
the result of series of additional improvements by Gueymard , (1995),then
after about ten years the final version proposed in December 2005. One of the
features in this version include more input parameters selection such as the
altitude above ground addition to height above sea level (Geuymard, 2005).
These options provide additional calculation of solar irradiance for different
altitudes. Two new synthetic spectra are possible to use, one is based on the
most up-to-date data (Gueymard, 2004), and the other one is interpolated
from the standard spectrum (ASTM, 2000) and two new aerosol models have
been added: DESERT-MIN (for beach ground desert conditions) and
DESERT-MAX (for sand storm conditions), altitude input as additional input
variable has been added to describe the vertical position of the object (e.g.
aircraft).
This model calculates the direct beam and diffuses radiation components
considering the separate parameterization of the various extinction processes
affecting the transfer of short wave radiation in cloud less atmosphere. The
solar extraterrestrial used in the model covers the wavelength range 280nm
and 4020nm with a resolution of 1nm and 0.5 nm in the range between 280
nm – 400nm (Gueymard , 2005).
27
The model permits the consideration of different aerosol model (standard

models and models depending on relative humidity) or the choices of a
particular model define by the user. The model has eleven aerosols model,
two models are proposed by (Breaslau and Dave ., 1973), B & Dc (aerosol
type C) and B & D (aerosol type C1) additionally, there are four models
proposed by Shettle and Fenn ., (1979) that depend on relative humidity:
MAR (maritime), QUR (rural), URB (urban) and TRO (troposheric), the last
three models correspond to standard atmospheres [ASTM,2000], SCONT
(continental), SMART (maritime) and SURBAN (urban), DESERT_MAX
and DESERT_MIN. The estimation of atmospheric turbidity has been carried
out from the available board band radiation following the procedure
developed by (Gueymard, 1998). This method is especially interesting
because the four widely used turbidity coefficients (Angström, Linke Schüepp
and Unsworth-Montieth) can easily interrelate without using any empirical
radiation. Gueymard ., (1998) has shown that the Unsworth-Monteith
coefficient slightly depends on both zenith angle and water vapor, the Linke
coefficient slightly depends on zenith angle but considerably on water vapor
and the Angström and Schüepp depend only on aerosols. In this way, the data
concerning the turbidity information are introduced by means of the
Schüepp's turbidity coefficient (at 0.5μm) although the model offers different
possibilities. The user can choose among the aerosol optical thickness
at(0.5μm), Angstrom's turbidity coefficient at(1μm), meteorological range or
prevailing visibility as observed airports. The aerosol models include two
average values of Angstrom's wavelength: ∝1 and ∝2 for wave bands
separated by (0.5 μm) respectively, thus Angstrom's exponent ∝ is the
average value. Table (4-1) presents the value for the characteristics
parameters of the three standard aerosol models and the two models from
Braslau and Dave, (1973).
28
Table (4-1): values for the characteristic parameters for the standard models
and Braslau and Dave's.,(1973) model included in SMARTS 2.9.5.
MODEL ∝1 ∝2 W0 G
B&DC -0.311 0.265 1 0.8042

B&DC1 0.311 0.265 0.9 0.8042
SMARTS 0.283 0.265 0.6 0.7471
SCONT 0.940 1.138 0.6 0.6541
URBAN 1.047 1.260 0.6 0.6085
Several of these values correspond to average value while others are fixed
value included in the models. All these models consider the Angstrom's
wavelength exponents ( ∝1 and ∝2 ) and the corresponding ∝ as fixed values.
For the standard models, the aerosols symmetry factors (g) present a
dependency with the wavelength in the form:
° (4.1)
(4.2)
Where the coefficients are fixed values which differ according to the
considered model. The model of Braslau and Dave ,(1973) assigns a fixed
value to w0 but the version B & DC1 includes a wavelength dependency
different from that of the standard models. Finally, both models assign a fixed
value for g.
The models depending on humidity consider the parameters ∝1 ,∝ 2 and
consequently ∝ variables, that is as a function of the relative humidity, on the
hand, ω0 and g depends on both the relative humidity and the wavelength. The
dependency on wavelength is calculated through equation (4.1) and equation
(4.2), but with coefficients depending on the relative humidity.
Table (4-2) shows the minimum and maximum values and the averages values
of these parameter
29
Table (4-2): the models depending on relative humidity

MODEL Mean ∝1 Mean ∝2 Mean W0 Mean G
MAR 0.43 ± 0.06 0.57 ± 0.09 0.979 0.71

RUR 0.93 ± 0.02 1.43 ± 0.02 0.6 0.68
URB 0.83 ± 0.02 1.18 ± 0.03 0.67 0.71
TRO 0.01 ± 0.02 2.37 ± 0.05 0.6 0.67
The dependency of the coefficients ( ∝1 and ∝2 ) with relative humidity are:

⁄ 1 (4.3)
1 (4.4)
Where X is
cos 0.9 (4.5)
And U is the relative humidity.

Therefore, the main difference between SMARTS 2.9.5 and TUV 4.4 models,
is the capability of the former to select the aerosols model from a set of built
in models.
A common feature of both models in order to estimate UV global irradiance is
the required input data regarding ozone and aerosols characteristics. The total
ozone data have been provided by (NASA Total Ozone Mapping
Spectrometer, TOMS on the Nimbus7 satellite).
TUV 4.4 Model Description

The TUV 4.4 model employed in our study corresponds to the spectral model
proposed by Madronich , [1998] which made improvements to the simple
model approached by Bird , [1984] including comparisons with results
rigorous radiative transfer and with measured spectra [Madronich, 1999].
30
The model uses the extraterrestrial spectral irradiance presented by Frohlich ,

(1981) with 1nm resolution in range 280-410 nm in order to cover the
spectral range of our data needed. The required input parameters are local
geographic coordinates, total ozone column, pressure and temperature,
perceptible atmosphere water vapor and aerosol information, the aerosol
information required by the model is the aerosol optical depth at 500 nm, the
model uses fixed values for the remaining optical features of the aerosols such
as Angstrom's exponent ∝ or the signal scattering albedo. In other words, we
can say that the model includes its own aerosol model.
Table (4-3) presents these values, where Fc is forward scattering, ∝ is
Angstrom's exponent, g is aerosol asymmetry factor, w0 is aerosol signal
scattering albedo, w0.4 is signal scattering albedo at 0.4μm, w1is wavelength
variation factor and ρ is the ground albedo.
Table (4-3): values for the characteristic parameter of the model TUV 4.4
Fc α G ω0 ω 0.4 ω ρ
0.81 1.14 0.65 0.57 0.945 0.095 0.15
TUV 4.4 Model Evaluation

This simple parametric model computes broadband transmittance for the
different atmospheric extinction process.
The use of this transmittance allows the computation of the direct beam
component and diffuse component, and the global irradiance is obtained by a
combination of the horizontal projected direct and diffuse irradiance.
The model was evaluated at Baghdad city. Table (4-4) shows the results
obtained including correlation coefficient r2, slope b, and intercept a, of the
linear regression of UV global irradiance estimated versus measurement data.
The model performance has been evaluated about its predictive capability
using mean bias deviation (MBD) and root mean square deviation (RMSD)
31
both as percentage of the mean experimented values. These statistics allow

the detection of both the differences between experimented data and model
estimates. These statistical indicators are defined by:
∑ (4.6)
.
∑ (4.7)
In which and are the estimated and measured values

respectively, and N is the number of the data.
From the Table (4-4), show that the results are satisfactory; the overall
performance is rather good with a slight over estimation approximately close
to 5% and RMSD close to 16%.
Table (4-4): Statically results concerning TUV 4.4 model behavior
Locality a B r2 MBD% RMSD%

Baghdad 0.815 0.968 0.87 4.8 15.6
Figure (4.1): shows the scatter plot of estimated versus measured value. The
points rather become near to the prefect fir line:
(r2 = 0.87, A= 0.815, B = 0.968)
32
Figure.(4.1): Comparision of UV global irradiance based on measured

and calculated using TUV4.4 model.
Bosca' et al.,(1997) have proposed a modified version of the TVU 4.4 code,
among other innovations; these authors propose the implementation of the
TUV 4.4 code. In this way, one can expect the rest of the aerosol model
parameters corresponding to MRC and MR are close to those fixed in original
version of TUV 4.4 code.
Table (4-5): considering the modification suggested by Bosca etal., [1997].
MODEL FC W0 W0.4 ∝ g
MCR 0.78 0.94 0.96 1.4 0.60
MR 0.81 0.9 0.95 1.3 0.65
RU 0.84 0.81 0.64 1.3 0.70
PU 0.87 0.59 0.74 1.1 0.75
The general underestimation is obtained when TUV 4.4 used with the aerosol
models included in table (4-6).
33
Table (4-6): Statistically results concerning TUV 4.4 model behavior with
modifications of Bosca et al., [1997]
MODEL a b r2 MBD% RMSD%
MCR 0.58 0.96 0.91 -4.1 8.9
MR 0.58 0.96 0.89 -3.8 9.1
RU 0.58 0.96 0.92 -8.9 13.0
MU 0.58 0.96 0.94 -9.9 14.5
PU 0.58 0.95 0.90 -12.9 18.1
4.5 SMARTS 2.9.5 Model Evaluation

As mentioned , this model permits the choice among eleven aerosol models.
Three models correspond to the standard radiation atmosphere (WMO, 1986).
Four models depending on relative humidity have been proposed by Shettle
and Fen, (1979), and two models have been proposed by Braslau and Dave,
(1973). And finally, two models deal with Desert conditions and sand storms.
This code requires as input parameters such as the local geographical
parameters (site's latitude and altitude). The code permits the introduction of
ground meteorological date, although it allows the choice of ten different
Atmospheric reference if this information is not available to the user using a
set of aerosol models that have been described in table (4-5). The models
available are MRC (maritime – rural - clear), MR (Mean Rural), RU (Rural -
Urban), MU (Mean Urban) and PU (Polluted Urban).
Utrillas et al., (1998) have checked the complete modified version of this
model with spectral data.
In our study we have considered the convenience of introducing additional
flexibility to the SMARTS2.9.5 code, allowing the selection among different
aerosol models. Thus the aerosol models described by Bosca' et al., (1997)
have been included as possible choice in the code.
34
Table (4-6): shows the results obtained by TUV 4.4 code when run with the
different aerosol model. All models shows under estimate with MBD
oscillating between 4.1 and 12.9% and RMSD ranging between 8.9 and
18.1%. The worst results correspond to the polluted urban model. On the
other hand, the Maritime – Rural – Clear model and Mean – Rural provide
similar results with MBD close to 4% these results are worse than those
obtained by the built – in aerosol model included in original code.
The code calculates the total NO2 absorption, without distinction between the
tropospheric and stratospheric contributions. The total column abundance of
NO2 is calculated with a correction for reference atmosphere, which is by
default U.S.A the perceptible water can be determined by different methods,
being possible to use climatological averages or empirical equations from
surface data of temperature and humidity, we have used this last method.
We have evaluated SMARTS 2.9.5 at Baghdad using the different aerosol
models.
Table (4-7): Statistically results concerning SMARTS 2.9.5 model behavior
with different aerosol models
MODEL A b r2 MBD% RMSD%
SURBAN 0.89 0.86 0.79 +7.3 17
URBAN 0.88 0.99 0.91 +3.6 16.1
RURL 0.12 0.97 0.82 +6.6 18.5
Maritime 0.55 0.92 0.67 +24.6 33.9
Tropospheric 0.93 0.98 0.84 +9.4 19.8
Table (4-7) through a graphic analysis estimated versus measured data, We

have detected a noticeable overestimation for all the aerosol models,
including the urban aerosol models. The last model shows the lowest over
estimation, about 3.6% as a general feature, all the models present that differ
in a ratio of 13% with a range (0.86-0.99), with the urban model having the
35
best fir line. The lowest RMSD correspond to the urban model, thus, we may
conclude that SAMARTS 2.9.5 provides estimations of the solar global
ultraviolet radiation with systematic deviation, within the experimental error,
if the urban aerosol model are selected.
Figure.(4.2): Comparision of UV global irradiance based on measured

and calculated using SMARTS2.9.5 model.
Figure (4.2) shows the scatter plot of the estimated versus measured values
for the urban aerosol model. The spread of the points around the perfect fit
line 1:1 is accordance with t
he RMSD and MBD values shown in table (7-4). In our study of
SMARTS2.9.5 model, a separate analysis concerning the model has been
performed. The analysis indicates that there is a correlation indicates that
there is a correlation of the bias with aerosol load. In the case of low aerosol
load, the model shows a slight overestimation as the aerosol load increases,
the overestimation became larger.
36
4.6 Sensitivity Studies and Atmospheric Parameters

Impact on Spectral Ultraviolet
4.6.1 Effect of Solar Zenith Angle

The influence of solar zenith angle on direct irradiance was investigated by
running the SMARTS 2.9.5 model using the following input parameters;
surface albedo was set 0.1, ozone column was set at 300 DU and the day of
the year was set as 1. The varied parameter in this section is solar zenith angle
which is changed from 0.1° to 80.1° degree with an interval of 10 ° for each
run while the other parameters (albedo, ozone column, day of the year) were
kept constant at this stage; aerosols were not introduced into the model .The
US. Standard atmosphere is used in the model .The results of these studies are
shown in figure (4.3).
Figure(4.3): The variation of direct irradiance with wavelength at

diffrent solar zenith angles in the absence of aerosol.
37
Figure (4.3) clarifies that the direct irradiance varies with wavelength in
different values of solar zenith angles. The direct irradiance decreases with
the increase of solar zenith angle . The irradiance on a horizontal surface is Ib
cos (4.8)
Where In is irradiance on the horizontal surface and is the solar zenith

angle [Iqbal , 1983]. So as the solar zenith angle increases the irradiance on
horizontal surface decreases. At solar zenith angle of 0.1°, the irradiance has a
value around 87.8 m w/m² for the wavelength between (280-400).
In the wavelength range between (280-300)nm the irradiance ranged between
(3.2×10-14 to 6.5 m w/m²).The irradiance with solar zenith angle 60° increases
with wavelength from around zero at wavelength of 280 nm to 325 mw/m² at
wavelength of 400 nm. The influence of solar zenith angle on direct
irradiance was studied again using the same parameters used before but in this
stage aerosols were introduced into the model (using Urban aerosol model)
and the results of this sensitivity studies are shown in figure (4.2).
Figure (4.4): The variation of direct irradiance with wavelength at

different solar zenith angle in the presents of aerosols.
38
The direct irradiance decrease as the solar zenith angle increases but the direct
irradiance In figure (4.2) as compared to figure (4.1) results is reduced about
17% for the same solar zenith angle and this is due to scattering by aerosols.
The irradiance generally increases with all wavelengths from around zero at
the wavelength of 280 nm to 269 m w/m² at wavelength of 400 nm.
4.6.2 Effect of Albedo

The influence of surface albedo on global irradiance was studied by running
the SMARTS 2.9.5 model using the following input parameters; solar zenith
angle was set at 60, ozone column was set at 300 DU and the day of the year
was set at 1. The albedo was changed from 0.0 to 1.0 with interval of 0.1
whilst the other parameters (solar zenith angle, ozone column, day of the
year) were kept constant and at this stage aerosol was not introduced into the
model. The U.S. Standard atmosphere is used in the model .The result of
these studies is shown in Figure (4.5) which shows how the global irradiance
varies with wavelength at different values of the surface albedo.
The global irradiance increases as the surface albedo increases. This is due to
the fact that as the albedo increases, more solar radiation is reflected from the
surface of the ground into space. It should be clear that, when talking about
albedo, we are referring to diffuse radiation; this means that for an ideal
diffuser surface the radiation reflected is independent from the angle of
incidence. The direct beam component of the global irradiance independent of
the albedo. The global irradiance at a solar zenith angle has a value of about
484 mW/m2nm at a wavelength of 330 nm when the albedo is 1.0 but it
decreases to about 276 mW/m2nm at the same wavelength when the albedo is
zero. The irradiance generally decreases from its peak at 330 nm to about zero
at 280 nm.
39
Figure(4.5):The variation of global irradiance with wavelength at

different surface albedo in the absence of aerosol.
The influence of surface albedo on global irradiance was studied again using
the same parameters as before but this time aerosol was introduced into the
model. The same type of aerosols were introduced as in the sensitivity studies
of the effect of solar zenith angle and the result is shown in Figure (4.4)
The irradiance increases as the albedo increases but the irradiance as
compared to the irradiance in Figure (4.6) is significantly reduced due to the
scattering of the radiation by aerosol. The peak value at 330 nm is 209
mW/m2nm whereas it was 484 mW/m2nm in the absence of aerosols.
40
Figure(4.6):the variation of global irradiance with wavelength at

diffrent surface albedo in the presents of aerosols.
4.6.3 Effect of Altitude

The impact of altitude on global irradiance was studied by running the
SMARTS2.9.5 model using the following input parameters; surface albedo
was set at 0.1, ozone column was set at 300 DU, solar zenith angle was set at
60.1 degrees. The altitude was however changed from 0 to 16 km with an
interval of 2 km whereas the other parameters (albedo, solar zenith angle,
ozone column) were kept constant, and at this stage aerosol was not
introduced into the model. The U.S. Standard atmosphere is used in the
model. The result of these studies is shown in Figure (4.7).
41
Figure(4.7):the variation of global irradiance with wavelength at diffrent

altitudes with absence of aerosols
This shows how the global irradiance varies with wavelength at different
altitude. The irradiance generally increases with altitude. The irradiance on
the ground increases from 9.56×10-19 mW/m2nm at a wavelength of 280 nm to
357 mW/m2nm at a wavelength of 329.5 nm. From 330 nm to 350 nm the
irradiance is close to 328 mW/m2nm but there are sharp falls at 337 nm (247
mW/m2nm) and at 344.5 nm (267mW/m2nm). At an altitude of 16 km, the
irradiance increases significantly: the irradiance at 329.5 nm is 575.1
mW/m2nm and those at 337 and 344.5 become 385 mW/m2nm and 396.6
mW/m2nm respectively.
The impact of altitude on global irradiance was studied again using the same
Parameters which were used before but this time aerosol was introduced into
the model and the irradiance decreases sharply on the ground as shown in
figure (4.8).
42
Figure(4.8):The variation of global irradiance with wavelength at diffrent

altitudes with presents of aerosols
The peak value at the wavelength of 377 nm falls to 612 mW/m2nm and the
irradiance in the wavelength region of 320 to 350 nm falls to about 266
mW/m2nm. Also the irradiance at the wavelengths of 337 nm and 344.5 nm
are respectively 200 mW/m2nm and 215 mW/m2nm. The irradiance at the
height below 4 km decreases clearly and this is due to the high loading of
aerosols in region between altitude (4 to 6 km). At a wavelength 329.5 nm the
irradiance falls to 254 mW/m2nm from 357 mW/m2nm (in the absence of
aerosol) at earth surface. At a height of 6 km the irradiance falls to 413
mW/m2nm from 488 mW/ m2nm (in the absence of aerosol) at a wavelength
of 329.5 nm. The irradiance from the height of 8 km to 16 km is not so much
reduced and this suggests that most of the aerosols are located in altitude
ranging from 0 to 6 km and concentrated in range from 4 to 6 km, The
reduction in the irradiance is caused by scattering by aerosols.
43
4.6.4 Effect of Ozone

The impact of ozone on global irradiance was studied by running the
SMARTS2.95 model using the following input parameters; surface albedo
was set at 0.1, solar zenith angle was set at 60 degrees . The ozone column
was however changed from 200 to 400 DU at an interval of 50 DU whilst
the other parameters (albedo, solar zenith angle , day of the year) were kept
constant and at this stage aerosol was not introduced into the model. The
U.S. Standard atmosphere is used in the model. Figure(4-9) shows that
there is a noticeable absorption of global Ultraviolet by ozone with
wavelength ranged between (292-337nm) and also shows a strong
absorption in monochromatic wavelength such as (305,312,318nm)
Figure (4.9):The variation of global irradiance with wavelength at different

total ozone column with absence of aerosols.
The influence of ozone on global irradiance was studied again using the same
parameters as before but this time aerosol was introduced into the model. The
same type of aerosols were introduced as in the sensitivity studies of the
effect of solar zenith angle and the result is shown in Figure (4.10). There is a
44
noticeable absorption of ozone starts with wavelength 292 nm and there is

absorption about (14-19%) in this wavelength for every 50 DU(from total
ozone column (200-400) and the effective ozone absorption ranged between
the wavelength (292-337) nm, According to these two stages which are
shown in the figures, we compare the resulted outputs and we notice that the
aerosols reduction is about (16 %) in global irradiance if we considered the
total ozone column is 300 DU.
Figure(4.10):The variation of global irradiance with wavelength at

diffrent total ozone colunm with presents of aerosol.
The extinction in each layer (1 km) of the atmosphere (stairs) was studied at a
monochromatic wavelength of 305 nm by running SMARTS 2.9.5 model
introduced the result of this studies which shows how extinction coefficient at
a monochromatic wavelength of 305 nm changes with altitude. The extinction
coefficient increases sharply at an altitude of 30 km to 21 km (that is 0.033 to
0.099),this suggests that there is high ozone concentration in this profile
region . The increase in extinction below 7 km to 4 km (that is 0.147 to 0.334)
is due Rayleigh scattering. The extinction coefficient increases sharply at an
45
altitude of 3 km and below from 0.334 to 0.493 at an altitude of 1 km and this

indicates the location of high loading of the aerosols.
Figure (4.11):The variation of exticntion coefficinet at a monochromatic

wavelength of 305 nm with altitude
4.7 Test of Diurnal Behavior of SMARTS Output in UV-

Range.
The accuracy of SMARTS model was tested by comparing model out with
clear sky measured data recorded by Epply ultraviolet Radiometer used in Al-
Jadiriyah location Energy and Environmental research center (Lat 33.34 N,
Long 44.45 E, 34 m a.s.l).
Nearly clear sky condition was observed on 10 January, 11 February, 23
March, 23 June, and 8 July 1998 which is shown in figures (12.4) a, b, c, d
and e. Total ozone column obtained from the data base of TOMS, standard
atmosphere meteorological profile was employed by using the standard
humidity profile, because of the large portion of soil proportion and soot
presence in the air of the town.
46
Urban aerosol type considered, there is no aerosols optical depth

measurement, so averaged conditions are assumed, Global UV irradiance is
measured every hour.
All input parameters were assumed to be constant over the day. As can be
seen in figures (4.12) a, b, c, d and e the values of SMARTS model outputs
are higher than the measured especially with lower solar zenith angle, This
different is the results of uncertainty of the model input parameters.
The main source of these differences is boundary layer aerosol treatment that
has noticeable influence on model output.
There is a clear overestimation ranged between (4.47-6.4%) partially results
from the extinction of UV radiation by clouds the sky way not completely
cloud free i.e. the cloudiness is not an input parameter of SMARTS model
besides the lack of necessary aerosol measurement estimates give confidence
that this model provides a satisfactory presentation of the dentinal behavior of
Global UV reach earth surface.
It was found that the model calculations are slightly higher than the
measurements, and the main source of the difference is lack of necessary
measurement that can provide better input atmospheric conditions.
47
Figure (4.12): Comparison of diurnal behavior of UV global based on measurements and

calculations using SMARTS2.9.5 model presented on sub figures (a, b, c, d
and e) in 10 January, 11 February,26 Mach, 23 June, 8 Julay1998 .
48
4.8 Ozone Influence on UV-B

UV-B radiation values used in this part of the thesis were obtained using
SMARTS 2.9.5 model which calculate the board band radiation with internal
of 280-315 nm.
That corresponds exactly to the UV-B range we have calculated the UV-B
values for a fixed solar zenith angle with different days of the year 2002.
The daily ozone data used in this thesis in Dobson units (DU), were obtained
through TOMS/NASA which is installed on board band of NASA's Earth
probe satellite which has been measuring the total ozone column since 1996
in direct way, through mapping of ultraviolet light emitted by the sun and
scattered by earth's atmosphere back towards the satellite [LONDON, 1985;
NASA/TOMAS, 2000]. After collecting the daily ozone data and calculate
UV-B radiation intensities for each solar zenith (20° - 70°) with five degrees
interval angle with clear sky conditions, the direct comparisons between the
calculations were performed and presented in figure (4.13).
Figure(4.13): UV-B irradiance calculations as a function of Total Ozone
49
The correlation coefficients were calculated by using percentage of ozone

(DU) and UV-B (w/m2) in relation to the average of these parameters in the
analyzed group of the data obtained for each solar zenith angle.
Figure (4.13) and figure (4.14) present parentage variation of UV-B irradiance
and total ozone column for 50˚solar zenith angle which were calculated by
employing the following relations:
∆ (4.9)
∆ (4.10)
In these expressions∆ , and ∆ represent respectively, the deviation in

relation to ozone and UV-B radiation averages in percentage.
is TOMS daily data in Dobson unit, and UV-B in w/m2 for each fixed
solar zenith angle.
For better visualization of anticorrelation behavior, we chose the S.Z.A (50°)
(with A = 0.029 and r = 0.962) a linear fit (Y= A+B*X) adjustment which
was applied for more data points (n=100) for (50°) solar zenith angle, It was
determined that the slope of the line (B) and the point in the line are crossed
by the correlation coefficients (R),these values are presented in the legend of
figure (4.14).
It can be observed from the figure (4.14), that the function fit is a line
crossing closely to origin that the (A) value are very small and this mean that
A is near to zero i.e. (Y≈B×X), thus the (B) values correspond to an
estimation of the increase in UV-B percentage relative to ozone reduction of
about 1.1%.
50
It was also observed that the calculated correlation coefficients presented high
values resulting in R=-0.960 (R2 = 0.92) and lowest R= 0.64 (R2=0.795) for
solar zenith angle 50° and 70° respectively.
Figure(4.14):Correlation for 50˚ solar zenith angle for selected

Clear days of the year 2002.
Fig (4.15) shows the total ozone column and UV-B radiation seasoned
behavior for the solar zenith angle 50° which achieved the heights ant
correlation coefficient (-0.96), one can clearly recognize the opposite
behavior between the plotted data. For instance, a very high ozone value equal
to 358 DU is corresponded to a very low UV-B radiation value equal to 0.435
w/m2, this mean so that the highest value of ozone correspond to the lowest
value of UV-B with clear sky conditions on 23 March 2002.
51
Figure(4.15):Total Ozone Colunm and UV-B irradiance seasonal behavior

for 50˚ solar zenith angel for selected cear days for year 2002.
Figure(4.16): Seasonal behavior of Ozone and UV-B percentage variation

xin realtion to its average for 50˚ solar zenith angel for selected
clear days for year 2002
52
Examining the above statistic analyses, we can expect that the increase of
ozone value is about 1.17% leads to decreasing UV-B values about 1% for
50° solar zenith angle.
Each point group and linear fit corresponds to an analyzed solar zenith angle.
The value, in parenthesis beside each S.Z.A is representing the percentage
variation caused in UV-B for ozone variation of about 1.27%. These values
were determined using the general slope (B) obtained by each fixed S.Z.A
which is shown in table (4-8).
In order to study ozone and UV-B correlations of other factors, a filtering
method was employed to remove the cloud effect (using data obtained only in
clear sky conditions) and geometrical effect of the solar angle (using fixed
solar zenith angle).
With the selection of clear sky conditions data group, considerable
improvements of the correlation coefficients (in relation to those obtained by
Basher et al., (1994) who reported a coefficients between (-0.93) and (-0.66)
for UV-B measurements in clear sky condition and ozone measured by
satellite) are observed
There is a large agreement with anticorrelation founded by Kirchnoff et.al .,
(1997) which achieved anticorrelation obtained by Wang et.al (2002) was
(-0.88) and the decrease of total ozone about 1% enhance UV-B about 1.23%
for 50° solar zenith angle whereas in our study the anticorrelation was (-0.96)
and the decreasing of 1% of total column will produce about 1.55% UV-B
enhancement for the same solar zenith angle.
Decreases in total ozone column values can produce considerable UV-B
enhancements.
This section calculates one percent of the ozone decreasing produced increase
of UV-B between (0.76-1.78 %) relative to the used solar zenith angle.
53
Table (4-8) Correlation coefficient (R) and their confidence levels (CL), A and
B values for linear fit (y=A+Bx) for each solar zenith angle.
S.Z.A A B R CL%
20 0.26 -0.76 -0.902 99
25 0.23 -0.91 -0.880 99
30 0.41 -1.04 -0.903 99
35 0.69 -1.17 -0.930 99
40 0.46 -1.57 -0.910 99
45 0.64 -1.52 -0.910 99
50 0.029 -1.096 -0.9602 99
55 0.11 -1.78 -0.841 99
60 0.7 -1.34 -0.824 99
65 0.170 -1.51 -0.803 99
70 1.7 -1.76 -0.795 99
4.9 Impact of Aerosols and Clouds on Ground Base

Ultraviolet Measurement and the Seasonal Behavior of
UV-B with Seasonal Behavior of Ozone.
The measurement employed in this part is taken from the ultraviolet sensor
maintained above the automatic weather station which is illustrated of the
roof the Department of Atmospheric Sciences building. The UV sensor
measures the UV-doses every 15 minutes during the day.
Radiative transfer models are important complement to measurement,
Models are also an essential aid to identify the causes of observed UV-
changes to carry out sensitivity studies, and ultimately to predict future UV
environments under different atmospheric conditions.
Ultraviolet – B radiation (UV-B) is monitored for Baghdad city (33◦ 34' N,
44◦, 45' E, 34 meters above sea level) using meteor data, the measurements of
UV-B irradiance were collected between 1/1/2002 and 31/12/2002, the
maximum UV-B irradiance measured was 2.94 w/m2. In this section, we will
54
employ these measurements to investigate the seasoned variation of UV-B

radiation to assess its response to ozone values.
The anticorrelation between total ozone column and UV-B radiation is well
established, Besides the sectional variation of the geometrical path length of
solar radiation through the atmosphere plays a dominate role, the objective of
this section is to focus light on the Global UV radiation levels reaching the
earth surface. The Global UV measurements employed in this section were
compared with radiative transfer model (SMARTS 2.9.5) calculation. The
input parameters for this radiative transfer model are date, time ozone
column, and surface albedo, for our calculations, default aerosols model were
used due to the lack of these data in Baghdad city.
The daily total column ozone content between 1/1/2002 to 31/12/2002 over
Baghdad city is measured by TOMS (Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer)
which shown in figure (4.17).
Figure (4.17): The annual course of Total Ozone Column based on

TOMS data base over Baghdad city in the year 2002.
55
The line is the best – fit linear trend of the mean value for this year is (296.2)
DU. The maximum value are usually recorded between April and May and
the minimum are between August and October.
The annual course of UV-B in Baghdad city for the year 2002 is shown in
figure (4.18). We presents UV-B irradiance at solar noon for all the days that
we could carry out the measurements the maximum and minimum values of
UV-B radiation are recorded with (2.94) w/m2 and (0.19) w/m2 in 19 August
and in 16 April respectively and this corresponds to the minimum and
maximum records of ozone (401) DU and (260) DU in 17 April and 27
October and this establish a good anticorrelation of UV-B with ozone values.
Figure(4.18): The annual course of UVB irradiance based on Meteor

data base for the year 2002.
And for more virtualization we presents figure (4.19) which shows the clear
effect of ozone on UVB radiation behind the insignificant effect on Global
UV radiation if compared with effective on UVB radiation.
56
Figure(4.19):The anual cource of Global UV,UVB irradiance

and Total Ozone Column for the year 2002.
In this part, we investigated the measurement of UV-sensor which is

maintained above the weather station in Al-Mustansiriyah University, in order
to study the Impact of aerosols and clouds on Global UV reaching earth
surface. But firstly we will make a test for the UV-sensor. We compare the
measurement with model calculation as shown in figure (4.20).
The results show a good agreement with the UV-sensor with slight over
estimation (about 5.4%) which can be considered in reduction calculation.
57
Figure(4.20):Comparison between measured and calculated

durinal variation of global UV radiation on (clear
day) 3 June 2007.
Figure(4.21):Comparison between measured and calculated

durinal variation of global UV radiation on(high
aerosols loading day) 28 June 2007.
58
Unfortunately, aerosols in Baghdad city have not been characterized yet,

making it very difficult draw more than qualitative conclusions. Preliminary
analysis of Global UV-Radiation of consecutive days with high aerosols an
important decrease in UV redaction.
The effect of clouds is focused on Global themselves because they depend on
many factors such as cloud type, thickness, cloud water content, droplet
number density conditions usually changes in short time making it very
difficult to analyze and predict its effect, in order to capture the rapid
variation in irradiance.
Figure(4.22):Comparison between meatured and calculated

durinal variation of global UV radiation on 6 June
2007.
Different effects can be noticed in figure (4.22), one of these effects is the
decrease of intensity with cloudless condition days.
The decrease is the most common one and it can be as large as 38% for
heavily cloudy days. The increase due to case called broken cloud effect is
59
produced on practically cloudy when direct light is present and the diffuse sun
light is increased by scattering on the sites of white clouds.
4.10 Impact of Cloud Cover on Global UV Irradiance.

In this section six months of continuous measurements of UV irradiance
recorded at Baghdad city, were combined with synoptic cloud observations in
order to establish a relative influence of cloud cover on UV irradiance.
At a specific site, the main factor causing variation in solar elevation angle.
The observed daily and yearly variations are dominated by this factor.
The total ozone and clouds cover are of second- order importance for the
variation of the radiative flux. Atmospheric aerosols also affect the UV
irradiance, But their influence is small relative to cloud cover (lorente et
al.,1996; Diaz et al., 2001; wenny et at., 2001). A many of these factors
influencing the UV irradiance, cloud cover present a high temporal and spatial
variability.
It is certain that clouds can cause large year to year variability in UV radiation
and therefore possibility play an important role in determining long term
trends (Seckmeyer et al.,1998).
For the cloud effect, it is necessary to have knowledge of clouds optical
thickness and drop size distributions.
In this part of the thesis, we have examined the effect of cloud on UV
irradiance using the information routinely recorded by radiometric station in
Al-Jadiriyah location with concurrent fractional cloud cover in octas. This
usually recorded on a three hourly basis.
This section was carried out at Baghdad during the period October 1994-
March 1995. After analyzing variations in the UV irradiance due to
presence of cloud. We have studied the effect of cloud on UV irradiance
by considering a cloud modification factor, defined as the ratio between
60
the UV measurement and corresponding clear sky UV irradiance that

would be calculated for the same time period and atmospheric condition.
In our case, we used a model which tested previously to account for UV
irradiance under clear sky conditions. Thus, this model allows estimation
of cloudless UV irradiance.
The UV irradiance data were classified according to cloud cover
observations. Additionally, we split the data in several sun elevation
Categories. Four categories have been considered characterized by sun
elevation angles, θ(60˚< θ1,40˚< θ2 <60˚, 20˚< θ3 <40˚ and 10˚< θ4 <20˚)
for each sun elevation and cloud cover categories, we computed the mean
and standard deviation of UV irradiance Fig (4.22).Presents the
dependence of UV irradiance on cloudiness for the different sun elevation
ranges.
Figure(4.23):Ultraviolet global irradiance vs cloud cover for diffrent

solar elevation angles.
The cloud effect is clear evident during high cloud cover but negligible for
fractional cloud cover below 3 octas suggesting that, for these cloud covers,
61
clouds tend to be located out of the line between the sun and sensor, it also
can be noticed in Fig (4.23). That the combination of high solar elevations
and overcast skies yields similar results to that associated with low solar
elevation and cloudless skies. The performance of UV irradiance under
cloudily conditions is similar to that followed by the solar irradiance in other
spectral rages (kasten and czeplak., 1980 ; alados et al ., 2000). It could be
useful to analyze the performance of a dimensionless ratio like that obtained
as the ratio of UV irradiance to the total solar radiation, G. total solar
irradiance. The ration UV/G provides insight into the relative importance of
UV irradiance of total solar irradiance at the surface. This ratio has been
studied by different authors (Martinez- Lorenzo et al ., 1994 ; Foyo-Monreno
et al., 1998 ; canda et al ., 2000), figure(4.24) shows the dependence of UV/G
on cloud cover for the same sun elevation angel categories considered in
previous analysis of UV irradiance.
A first result, evident from figure (4.24) is that the ratio UV/G increases with
cloud cover, and this increase is more evident for cloud cover greater than 4
octas. This means that there are some differences in the effect of cloud on
total solar irradiance and UV irradiance. The increase demonstrates the
spectral dependence of the cloud radiative extinction.
In this sense, a greater absorption in the near infrared region than in shorter
wavelength (Lenoble, 1993) causes an enhancement of the UV range relative
to the total solar spectrum (Ambach et al., 1991). On other hand, although the
differences are rather small, it seems that for higher solar elevations UV/G
presents greater values than for lower solar elevations, at least for cloudless
and partially cloudless conditions. The increase of UV/G with cloud cover is
greater for lower solar elevations and thus for over cast conditions the mean
UV/G value does not depend on the solar elevation analysis.
62
Figure(4.24):Rati of global ultraviolet irradiance to total solar irradiance

UV/G vs cloud cover for diffrent solar elevation angles.
To study this relationship further we have analyzed the index Ktuv, defined as
the ratio between the UV irradiance reaching the surface level and the
corresponding extraterrestrial flux UVext (Martinz – Lozano et al., 1994). That
is:
(4.9)
Where: UVext is the UV extraterrestrial solar radiation on a horizontal surface

given by:
(4-10)
And is the solar elevation and the sun-earth distance in astronomical

units.
The solar constant for UV, ISCUV, has been taken as 78 w/m2 from spectral
values given by Lenbole, (1993).
Figure (4-25) shows the dependence of UV/G ratio and Kt UV with cloud
coverage for data registered around noon and demonstrates the opposite
trends of this ratio as function of cloudless conditions, the Kt UV index had a
63
value of about 0.45 and the UV/G ratio was close to 4%. The different trends
for this ratio: as the cloud cover increased lead to an overcast value of about
5% for UV/G while the reduced value of Kt UV index was close to 0.2.
Figure(4.25):Ratio of global ultraviolet irradiance to total solar irradianc

UV/G and hemispherical ultraviolet transmittance Ktuv,
vs cloud cover for diffrent solar elevation angles.
Since the global irradiance (Ultraviolet or solar total radiation) varies widely
under different sky conditions, it's convenient to normalize the global
irradiance to minimize variability and maximize the generality of the results.
For this reason, we have analyzed the performance of UV global irradiance
normalized to the value under cloudless sky.
This parameter was defined as , where the subscript (0) refers to
cloudless sky. UV0 can be estimated by application of any simple radiative

transfer model (SMARTS 2.9.5) (Gueymard, 2005). We considered the cases
with zero octas cloud cover. We separated these data in optical air mass
categories, for each category the mean and standard deviation of the UV
64
radiation were computed. The empirical function describing UV0 is obtained

by a weighted fit of this mean values (Figure 4.26).
Figure(4.26):UV global irradiance vs optical air mass.
This UV0 functions has been used to obtain the corresponding FUV index that
can be considered as a cloud modification factor. Figure (4. 27) presents the
performance of this global UV cloud modification factor, as a function of
cloud coverage for different sun elevation angle ranges considered in this
study.
It can be seen that the behavior of FUV is similar for the different ranges of
solar elevations. Similar results were found by Josefsson and Landelius .,
(2000). This can be explained as a result of the reflection enhancement under
partial cloud cover conditions when geometric conditions are most favorable
for the reflection of UV radiation from cloud edges or between base of cloud
and the ground surface. For partial cloud cover, this factor presents greater
values when solar elevation is high.
65
Figure(4.27):Ultraviolet cloud modification factor ,FUV vs cloud cover

for different solar elevation angles.
Under over cast conditions the results obtained for different sun elevation
angle ranges (0.48-0.56) according to solar elevations. Grant and Hersler .,
[2000] analyzed the UVB irradiance under variable cloud conditions and
found a similar trend with an overcast of 0.65, on other hand, Seckmeyer et al
., [1996] obtained a cloud modification factor that varies between 0.45 in the
UVA range and 0.6 in the UVB range.
This difference can be explained by the wavelength dependence of radiation
scattering with the cloud, by redistribution of UV radiation due to the cloud.
The standard deviations of the cloud modification factor in table (4-9), FUV,
increase with increasing of cloudiness, possibly as a result of variation in
cloud opacity. In fact cloud cover alone does not contain explicit information
on the optical transmission of clouds. When the sky is only partly cloudily the
irradiance values will vary depending on whether the sun in the clear or
cloudily portion of sky domes. The nonlinear dependence of FUV with
cloudiness is largely due to the relatively greater value for intermediate
66
cloudiness. Which can be due to reflection from the side of clouds that locally
enhanced the radiation levels?
Table (4-9) Statistical parameters for cloud modification factor for different
cloud covers.
Cloud FUV mean FUVsd FUV mean FUVsd FUV mean FUVsd FUV mean FUVsd
Cover θ1 θ1 θ2 θ2 θ3 θ3 θ4 Θ4
0 1.14 0.086 1.07 0.081 1.03 0.089 1.02 0.11
1 1.16 0.067 1.08 0.064 1.04 0.086 1.01 0.9
2 1.12 0.072 1.05 0.091 1.01 0.120 0.99 0.12
3 1.13 0.088 1.04 0.013 0.97 0.130 0.98 0.132
4 1.04 0.190 1.02 0.132 0.92 0.131 0.96 0.135
5 1.02 0.166 1.01 0.128 0.87 0.160 0.94 0.141
6 0.9 0.163 0.92 0.215 0.77 0.196 0.96 0.143
7 0.87 0.189 0.73 0.221 0.71 0.218 0.74 0.223

8 0.48 0.280 0.52 0.219 0.53 0.230 0.65 0.22
FUV mean: mean values of FUV, FUVsd: corresponding standard deviations

As cloud cover increase beyond 4 or 5 octos, there is a greater chance that the
solar disk will be obscured by clouds and thus the attenuation of UV
irradiance increase.
Inspection of Figure (4.25) and Figure (4.27) reveals the similarity in the
dependence of Kt UV and FUV on cloud cover. This shows the predominance
of the cloud effect on UV radiation, evaluated through, FUV, over the whole
atmospheric effect, evaluated by means of Kt UV.
It is possible to compute a cloud modification factor for total solar irradiance,
FG = G/G0. In order to study the different influences by clouds on both
radiative fluxes in figure (4.28) we show the relation between dimensionless
factors (FUV = UV/UV0 and FG = G/G0).
A procedure similar to that followed in the evaluation of UV0 has been
considered in the estimation of G0. After an extensive examination of various
67
curves fitting option, the following functional dependence was found to be the
most appropriate:
FUV= - 0.016 + 1.106 FG – 0.079 FG2 – 0.05 FG3
For the above relation (R= 0.93 with standard error of estimate =0.09). There
is evident departure from the line 1:1 that represent coincident factors, i.e., the
clouds does not transmit equally the UV global solar irradiance.
Figure(4.28): Ultraviolet cloud modification factor ,FUV vs total

Global cloud modification factor FG.
Figure (4.28) shows that the total global irradiance suffers a proportionally
reduction than the UV global irradiance. A possible explanation for values,
could be the reflection of solar reflection of solar radiation at the edges of
Cumulus clouds (Mims and Frederich ., 1994) or very thin cirrus clouds that
act as UV green house (Madronich , 1987). Other authors have obtained
similar results in their analysis of biologically effective UV radiation; this is
the case Bordewirk et al .,(1995) and Matthijsen et al ., (2000) analyzing data
from the Netherlands.
68
Bodeker and Mckenzie ., (1996) also obtained similar relationship between

the cloud modification factors corresponding to the erythmal UV irradiance
and global irradiance with measurements made at Lauder (New Zealand).
Figure (4.29) shows the relation between the Ultraviolet cloud modification
factor FUV and the global cloud modification factor FG as a function of cloud
cover. In accordance with figure (4.24), clouds do not decrease UV radiation
as much as global radiation, a result also shown by Josefsson and Landelius .,
(2000)
Figure(4.29):Ratio of UV global cloud modification factor FUV to total

global cloud modification factor FG vs cloud cover.
69
Chapter five Conclusion and Suggestions
Chapter Five
Conclusion and Suggestion
5.1 Conclusion
1. There is a noticeable attenuation in direct irradiance when the solar zenith
angle becomes larger than 50˚ and this is due to the thickness of optical path
through the atmosphere which becomes larger for the zenith angle which is
larger than 50˚.
2. There is a clear impact of ozone variation on global irradiance reaching
earth surface especially within the wavelength ranged between (292-337nm)
and there is a strong absorption in monochromatic wavelength such as :
(305,312,and 318nm) and the effect of aerosols in ozone sensitivity
experiment reduces the global ultraviolet irradiance about (16%) and there is
an absorption about (14- 19%) for each 50 DU with (200-400DU) ozone
variation range.
3. The extinction of the atmosphere for monochromatic wavelength of 305 nm
has the largest value (0.33-0.49) for corresponding the altitude which is
ranged between (4-1km) and this is an indicator of high aerosols loading
existence corresponds to this altitude profile.
4. There are a good agreement between the calculated UV doses by
SMARTS2.9.5 and the measured UV doses with correlation coefficient (0.91)
and mean bias deviation (3.6%) and root mean bias deviation (16.1%), this
result also shows a good agreement with the results obtained from the diurnal
test of the SMARTS2.9.5 output in UV range which presents an over
estimation ranged between (4.47-6.4) for selected clear days of the year 1998.
There is an opposite behavior of UVB with ozone i.e. 1% decreasing of ozone
which can produce about 1.1% UVB radiation enhancement.
70
5. From satellite observation (TOMS and Meteosat) we can clearly notice that
the maximum value of UVB radiation (2.94 w/m2) corresponds the minimum
value of ozone (260 DU) and the minimum value of UVB radiation (0.19
w/m2) correspond the maximum value of ozone (401 DU) in 27 October and
17 April respectively and this establish a strong anitcorrelation of UVB with
ozone.
6.There is a clear impact of ozone on UVB radiation beside the insignificant
effect on global UV if compared with effective UVB radiation and this result
is obtained because of the UVB radiation is a part of global Ultraviolet as a
portion which does not exceed than (8.3%) in the best cases.
7. Aerosols can produce extinction about (24-32%) on diurnal behavior of
global ultraviolet.
8. Clouds can attenuate the global ultraviolet by (38%) for heavily cloudy
days.
9. In the final parts of chapter four we investigated the effect of cloudiness on
global UV irradiance intensity correspond with different solar elevation.
The effect of clouds begins with solar zenith angle greater than 20 and
cloudiness correspond with 4 or 5 octas.
10. The UV irradiance with 4 octas cloud cover conditions cannot be affected
because the cloud cover in this amount means separated clouds in the sky.
5.2 Suggestion and Future Works

1. Measure UV index using the UV sensors above Al-Mustansiriyah weather
station and compare it with values estimated by models in order to use these
models in regions that have a shortage of these sensors.
2. Measuring UV radiation using the sensor mounted on Al-Mustansiriyah
Weather Station for several years in order to obtain a relation with ozone data
71
measured by Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer in order to estimate the

increase in UV doses reaching earth surface and the decrease of the
corresponded ozone values.
3. Installing a number of UV sensors in different regions in IRAQ in order to
create an Ultraviolet atlas for IRAQ.
4. Compare the values of UV dose measured using ground base sensors with
values estimated using Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer in order to
evaluate the results obtained by this satellite sensors.
5. Study the effect of cloud type on Ultraviolet radiation.
6. Employ the SMARTS2.9.5 model in order to estimate irradiance in visible
and infrared bands.
72
73
References
Alados, I., Olma, F.J. FOYO – Moreno .I (2000) Estimation of photo
synthetically active radiation under cloudily conditions. Agricult. Forest
Meteorology. 102,44-50.
Ambach,W., Blumthalar, M., Wendler, G (1991) Comparison of Ultraviolet
radiation at an arctic and an alpine site, solar Energy. 47, 121, - 126.
Andrews,G.D.(,2000) . An Introduction to Atmospheric physics, 61-65.
ASTM. 2000. Standard solar constant and zero air mass solar spectral
irradiance tables. Standard American society for Testing and materials.
Basher, R.E., Xzxeng, S.Nichol ., (1994). Ozone related trends in solar UV-B
series. J. Geophys. Res. 20, 2713-2716.
Bernhard, G., G. Seckmeyer, R.L. Makenzie (2004) Spectral quality control
tools for solar UV measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 28855-28861.
Bird, R.E (1984) A simple solar spectral model for direct normal and diffuse
horizontal irradiance. Solar Energy, 32, 461-471.
Bosca, J.V., J.M. Pinago, J. Canada (1997) Modification of TUV4.4 code
estimation of spectral solar direct irradiation, diffuse and global in proceeding
of VIII congress of proto, Portugal.
Braslau, N., Dave, J.V (1973) Effect of aerosols on the transfer of solar
energy through realistic atmospheric models, J. Meteorological., 30, 601-619.
Canada, G., Pedros, G., Lopez, A., Bosca, J (2000) Influence of the clearness
index for the clearness index for the spectrum and of the relative optical air
mass on UV irradiance for two locations in the Mediterranean area, Valencia
and Cordoba, J. Geophys. 105, 4759-4766.
Ciren, P., Li, Z, Wang (2003) Long-term global earth surface ultraviolet
radiation exposure derived from TOMS satellite measurements. Agriculture
and Forest Meteorology. 120, 51-68.
73
Diaz, j. p., Exposito, F.J., Torres., C.J. Herra (2001) Radiative properties of
aerosols in Saharan dust out breaks using ground based and satellite data, J.
Geophys. Res. Atmos. 106, 18403-18416.
Dubronvsky. M (2000) Analysis of UV-B irradiance measured
simultaneously at two stations in the Czech Republic, J. Geophys. Res, 105,
4907-4913.
Foyo-Moreno, I., vida, J., Alados- Arboledos, L (1998) A simple of all of
weather model to estimate ultraviolet solar radiation (295-385nm),
J.Appl.Meteorol ,38,1020-1026.
Foyo-morrno, I., vida., J., Alados-Arboledos (1998) Ground based
ultraviolet (295-385 nm) and broad bond solar radiation measurements in
south-Eastren Spain. INT. J. climatological, 18, 1389-1400.
Frederick, J, E., Steele, H.D (1995) The transmission of sun light trought
cloudly skies analysis based on standared meteorological information. J.
Appl. Meteorology. 34, 2761-2775.
Frederick, J.E., J.R Sulsser., D.S.Bigelow (2000) Annual and inter annual
behavior of solar ultraviolet irradiance revealed by broad band measurements,
photo chem. photo boil. 72, 488-498.
Fröhlich. C (1981) Spectral distribution of solar irradiance from 25000 nm to
250nm. World Radiation center, Switzer land.
Grant, R.H., Heisler, G.M (2000) Estimation of ultraviolet- B irradiance under
variable cloud conditions. J. Appl. Meteorology, 39, 904-412.
Guarnieri, R. A ( 2004) Ozone and UV-B radiation anticorrelation at fixed
solar zenith angles in southern Brazil. INT, Geophys. 43, 17-22.
Gueymard ,C.,(1998). Turbidity Determination From Broadband Irradiance
measurements, J,Appl.Meteorol,37,414-435.
Gueymard, c., (1993). Development and performance assessment of a clear
sky spectral radiation model, proceeding. 22nd ASES conference. solar., 93,
Washington, DC, American solar Energy society, pp. 433-438.
74
Gueymard, C (1995). SMARTS 2, A simple model of the Atmospheric
Radiative Transfer of sunshine: A logarithms and performance assessment,
Florida, solar Energy center (FSEC),27, 532-538.
Gueymard, C(2003). direct solar transmittance and irradiance predictions
with broadband models. part I: detailed theoretical performance assessment.
Solar Energy, 74, 355-379.
Gueymard, C (2004). solar Radiation & day light models 2nd Edition,
Elsevier.
Gueymard, C (2005). SMARTS code, version 2.9.5, user manual, solar
consulting service, USA.
Herman, J., Bhatia. R.P Mcpetres (1996). Meteor-3 Total Ozone Mapping
Spectrometer (TOMS) Data products User's Guide, NASA Reference
Publications.
Hofgumahaus, A., A. Kraus., M. Mülle (1999). solar actinic flux
spectroradiometer: A tecknique for measuring photolysis frequencies in the
atmosphere, J. APPL. Opt., 38, 4443-4460.
Ilyas, M (1987). Effect of cloudiness on solar ultraviolet radiation reaching
the surface. Atmos. Envirom. 21, 1483-1488.
Iqbal, M (1983). An Introduction to solar Radiation. Academic press. New
York.
Josefsson, W (2004). Ultraviolet measurements in Ncrrköping between 1993-
2003. Report 24. Germany Institute of solar energy.
Josefsson, W., Land elius,T ( 2000). Effect of clouds on UV irradiance. As
estimated from cloud amount, cloud type, precipitation, global radiation and
sunshine duration, J.Geophys. Res. 105, 4927-4935.
Kasten, F., C.Z. eplak, G (1980). Solar and terrestrial radiation dependent on
the amount and type of cloud. Solar Energy, 24, 177-189.
Kirchhoff, V. W., F., zamorano, C. casiccia (1997). UV-B enhancements at
Punta Arenas, Chile. J. photo chem. Photobiol, 38, 174-177.
75
Krzyscin, J.W (2000). Impact of the ozone profile on the surface UV radiation
in Poland, J. Geophy. Res. 105, 5009-5015.
Kuckinke, c., Nunez, M (1999). Cloud transmission estimates of UV
irradiance, Theor. Appl. Climatol. 63, 144-161.
Kudish, A.I., Evseev. E (1997). The analysis of ultraviolet Radiation in the
Dead Sea basin, Int, J. Glimato, 17, 1697-1724.
Kyle, G.T (1991). Atmospheric Transmission, Emission and scattering, pp
111-112.
Kylling, A (1998). Effect of aerosol on solar UV irradiance during the photo-
chemical activity and solar Ultraviolet Radiation campaign J. Appl. Metorl.
26, 115-119.
Kylling, A., T. person., B. Mayer., T, Svenoe (2000). Determination of an
effective spectral surface abledo from ground – based global and direct UV
irradiance measurements, J. Geophys. Res. 105, 4949-4959.
Lakka, K (2001). Spectral UV measurements at Sodankyla during 1990-2001,
J. Geophys. 74, 1535-1541.
Lenoble, J (1993). Atmospheric Radiative transfer, Deepak publishing,
Hampton, VA, pp. 523
LONDON, J (1985). The observed distribution of atmospheric ozone and it's
variations. NEW YORK.pp. 11-18
Lorento. J., Redano. A., Decabo, X (1996). Influence of urban aerosol on
spectral solar irradiance. Appl. Meteorl, 33, 406-415.
Madronich, S (1987). Photo dissociation in the atmosphere, actinic flux and
the effect of ground reflections and clouds, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 9740-4752.
Madronich, S., R. L McKenzie (1998). Changes of biologically active
ultraviolet radiation reaching the earth surface. J. photochemical 40, 5-19.
Malinovic, S., Kapor, D., (2003). Estimating solar ultraviolet irradiance (290-
400 nm) by means of the NEOPLANTA model: model description and
76
validation. Fifth general conference of the Balkan physical Union ,August 25-
29,2003.Vrnjacka.Serbia and Montenegro.
Manuel, N., Chean, Deliany (1998). A comparison of cloudless sky Erythmal
Ultravaviolet radiation at two sites in southwest Sweden, Int, J.
cilmatolclimatol, 18, 915-930.
Martineg-Lozano, J.A., Casanovas, J., Utrills, M.P (1994). Comparison of
global ultraviolet (295-385 nm) and global radiation on measured during
warm season in Valencia, spain.INT. J. climatological, 14, 93-102.
Mayer, B., G, Seckmeyer, A. kylling (1997). Systematic long term
comparison of spectral UV measurements and UVSPEC modeling results, J.
Geophs. Res, 102, 8755-8767.
Meyer, A., Lipson, G (1998). Enhanced absorption of UV radiation due to
multiple scattering clouds Experimental evidence and theoretical explanation,
J. Geophys Res, 103, 31241- 31254.
Miguel, A.H.,J. Bilbao., P. Salvador (2005), A study of UV total solar
irradiation at rural area of Spain, Solaries, 2nd Joint conference, Athens
(Greece), 2-3, May, 2005.
Miguel, E.C (2005). Ultraviolet Radiation measurement at a rural region in
Spain, J. Geophys. Res. 106, 29832-29839.
Mims, F.M., Frederick, L.E (1994). Cumulus clouds and UV-B Nature. Solar
Energy, 71, 291-296.
Müller, M., A. Kraus., A. Hofzumahaus (1996). Photolysis frequencies
determined from spectroradiometeric measurements of solar actinic UV-
radiation. Geophys. Res. Lett. 22, 679-682.
NASA/TOMS (2000). Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer home page on
line <http://Jwocky. gsfc nasa. gov>.
Pinedo. J.F. Mireles., Rios (2006). Spectral signature of ultraviolet solar
irrdiance in Zacatecas, J. Appl. Meteorl, 45, 263-269.
77
Seckmeyer, G., Erbb, R., Albold, A (1996). Transmittance of cloud in wave
length-dependent in the UV-range. Geophy. Res. Lett. 23,714-732.
Shetter, R., Müeller, M (1999). Photolysis frequency measurements using
actinic flux spectroradiomerty in the Tropics: instrumentation description and
some results.J.Geophys. Res, 104, 5647-5659.
Shettle, E.E.P., R.W. Fenn (1979). Models for the aerosols of the lower
atmosphere and effects of humidity variations on the optical properties,
Enviro. Res, 79, 214-219.
Taalas, P., G.T. Amantidis., A., Heikkila (2000). Atmospheric UV radiation
on European region, J. Geophys. Res, 105, 4777-4785.
Tadros, M., Metwally. M., Hamed, A (2005). A comparative study on spectral
2, SPCTR- 1881 and SMARTS2 models using direct normal solar irradiance
in different band on ultraviolet Radiation for Cairo and Aswan, Egypt, J.
Atoms and solar terrestrial physics, 67, 1343-1356.
Tena. F (2000). A preliminary estimation of the direct ultraviolet spectral
irradiance in Valencia (Spain): comparison with measured values. J. Nuclear
Technology, 91, 177-180.
Webb, A, R., Weihs, p., Blumathaler, M (1999). Spectral UV irradiance on
sloping surface: a case study. Photo chembiological , 68, 464-470.
Webb, A.,(2000). Ozone depletion and changes in Environmental UV-B
Radiation on, J, Enviro. Sci, 14, 4366-4372.
Webb, A.R (1998). Ultraviolet Instrumentation and applications. Reading,
UK, ISPN Report 104.
Webb, A.R., Stromberg., I.M., Li, H., Bartlett,. M (2000). Airborne spectral
measurements of surface reflectivity at ultraviolet and visible wave lengths, J.
Geophys. Res. 105., 4645-4948.
Webb, A.R.,B. Gardiner (1998). Guide lines for site quality control UV
monitoring Global atmospheric watch, Report No.126, 39 pp., World
Meteorological Origination.
78
Wendish, M., B. Mayer (2003). Vertical distribution of spectral solar
irradiance in cloudless sky, A case study, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30, 1183-1186.
Wenny, B.N., saxena, V.K (2001). Aerosol optical depth measurements and
their impact on surface level of ultraviolet-B radiation, Geophys.Res. 106,
17311-17319.
WHO (1986): A preliminary cloudless standard Atmosphere for radiation
computation. World climate programs WCP-112. WMO/TD-NO 24.world
meteorological organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
WHO (2002): Global solar UV index. A practical Guide. World Heath
Origination, Geneva, Switzerland.
Willmott , C.J (1982). some comments on the evaluation of model
performance . Bull. American Meteorological Society .64:1309-1313.
WMO (1998): Report of the WMO-WHO meeting of exports on
standardization of UV indicey and their dissemination to the public,
Switzerland, 21-24 July 1997. World Meteorological Organization Global
Atmospheric watch NO.127, WMO/TD-NO. 921.
WMO (2002): scientific assessment of ozone depletion: 2002 Global ozone
and Monitoring. Project, Report no, 47, Geneva, Switzerland
Zenfos, c., Nawi, A (2000). A note on the inter annual variations of UV-B
erythmal doses and solar irradiance from ground-based and satellite
observations. INT, J. climatology, 47, 3828-3834.
79
Appendix A
SMARTS MODEL, Version 2.9.5
C ******************************************************************************************************
C
C CALCULATES CLEAR SKY SPECTRAL SOLAR IRRADIANCES FROM 280 TO 4000 nm.
C
C Research code written by C. GUEYMARD, Solar Consulting Services
c
C Version 2.0: November 1995
c Version 2.8: November 1996
c Version 2.9: February 2002
c Version 2.9.1: May 2002
c Version 2.9.2: March 2003
c Version 2.9.3: July 2004
c Version 2.9.4: November 2004
c Version 2.9.5: December 2005
C
C
C Consult the 'HISTORY.TXT' file and the 'New Features'
C Section of the User's Manual for details about the
C changes that occurred in the successive versions.
C Some input cards may have changed content!
C Consult the User's Manual for details and explanations
C about the INPUT data cards and OUTPUT files!
C
C
Program SMARTS_295
Double Precision
TO3,TAUZ3,DIR,DIF0,DIF,GLOB,GLOBS,DIRH,FHTO,rocb
Double Precision
DIRS,DIFS,DIREXP,DIFEXP,DGRND,HT,DRAY,TH2O,TH2OP
Double Precision
TABS,TDIR,DAER,PFGS,PFD,PFB,GAMOZ,WPHT,GRNS
Double Precision
PPFG,PPFB,PPFD,PPFGS,PhoteV,PFGeV,PFBeV,PFDeV
Double Precision PFGSeV,Avogad,evolt,sumd0,fht1,upward,TTP5
Double Precision
DIRWL,SUMBN,SUMBX,SUMD,SUMDX,SUMBS,Difccs,Glob0
Double Precision
BNORM(2002),GLOBH(2002),GLOBT(2002),DIRX(2002)
Double Precision
Tcoro3,tz3,AO4,TO4,TO4P,TxO3,TABS0,TABS0p,TAAP
Double Precision Julian,dec,Longit,Latit,phi2,xlim,HTa
Double Precision TO2,TO2P,TCO2,TCO2P,NLosch,Bw,Bp,Prod,AbO4
Double Precision
Tmixd,TmixdP,Trace,TraceP,Phot,Rhor,Rhos,Roro,AO3
Double Precision AmO2,AmCO2,tauo2,tauco2,taa,tas,tat
Double Precision AmH2O,wAmw,wAmp,tauw,Bmw,Bmwp,ww02
REAL RB0(4),RB1(4),RB2(4),RB3(4),RDHB(4),limit
REAL VL(515),ETSPCT(2002),Output(54),Xout(54),time(2)
Real Wvla1(3000),Albdo1(3000),Wvla2(3000),Albdo2(3000)
REAL C1(4),C2(4),C3(4),C4(4),C5(4),C6(4),D1(4),D2(4),D3(4),D4(4)
REAL BP00(4),BP01(4),D5(4),D6(4)
REAL BP02(4),BP10(4),BP11(4),BP12(4),BP20(4),BP21(4),BP22(4)
REAL BP30(4),BP31(4),BP32(4),BQ00(4),BQ01(4),BQ02(4)
REAL BQ10(4),BQ11(4),BQ12(4),BQ20(4),BQ21(4),BQ22(4)
REAL BQ0(7),BQ1(7),BQ2(7),AG41(4),AG42(4),WV(2002)
REAL BP0(7),BP1(7),BP2(7),BP3(7),AG0(7),AG1(7),AG2(7),AG3(7)
A‐1

REAL AG4(7),AG00(4),AG01(4),AG02(4),AG10(4),AG11(4),AG12(4)
REAL AG20(4),AG21(4),AG22(4),AG30(4),AG31(4),AG32(4),AG40(4)
Real Bmx(2),Bmwx(2),intvl,KW
REAL DECLI(12),RSUN(12)
INTEGER IOUT(54),CIEYr,year,day,DayoYr,DayUT
LOGICAL batch
CHARACTER*2000 Path
CHARACTER*100 FileIn,FileOut,FileExt,FileScn, Usernm
CHARACTER*64 AEROS, Spctrm, Comnt
Character*48 dummy, smart
Character*24 Filen1, Filen2, Lambr1, Lambr2
CHARACTER*24 Load
Character*24 Out(54), Seasn2
Character*12 Filter
CHARACTER*6 SEASON, Area
CHARACTER*4 Atmos, YesNo
COMMON /SOLAR1/ WV,WLMN,wlmx,WV1,WV2
COMMON /SOLAR2/ BNORM,GLOBH,GLOBT,DIRX,ETSPCT
Common /Solar3/
Dir,Aeros,Tauas,Taurl,Rhox,rpd,pinb,pix4,AmR,WVL,
2 wvln,nx,Znr,Zxr,va,vb,RH
Common /Number/ NLosch
c DATA
O3REF/.34379,.33195,.37707,.34512,.37592,.27761,.3,.28,.33,
c 1 .38,.34379/
c DATA UNREF/2.0443E-4,2.1841E-4,1.9867E-4,2.1569E-4,1.8678E-4,
c 1 2.1119E-4,2E-4,1E-4,2E-4,1E-4,2.0443E-4/
DATA A0/-0.897/,A1/4.448/,A2/-2.77/,A3/0.312/,RD0/0.408/
DATA RB0/-3.364,3.96,-1.909,0./
DATA RB1/-12.962,34.601,-48.784,27.511/
DATA RB2/9.164,-18.876,23.776,-13.014/
DATA RB3/-.217,-.805,.318,0./
DATA RDHB/-.323,.384,-.17,0./
DATA C1/.4998,.27999,.049331,.57973/
DATA C2/45.236,55.642,7.9767,65.559/
DATA C3/96.233,1382.3,17.726,206.15/
DATA C4/-13.067,-132.47,-14.555,-26.911/
DATA C5/55.506,108.73,41.369,78.478/
DATA C6/83.115,1500.9,-18.384,166.38/
DATA D1/.86887,.69983,.039871,1.1194/
DATA D2/43.547,39.689,12.397,76.251/
DATA D3/-29.719,-26.736,98.641,129.32/
DATA D4/-1.8192,4.0596,-60.939,-17.537/
DATA D5/33.783,31.674,128.0,55.211/
DATA D6/-24.849,-16.936,-34.736,66.192/
DATA BP0/0.,0.,0.,0.,.84372,.64886,.96635/
DATA BP1/0.,0.,0.,0.,.30206,.13465,.073464/
DATA BP2/0.,0.,0.,0.,-.47838,-.30166,-.071847/
DATA BP3/0.,0.,0.,0.,.15647,.083393,.019774/
DATA BQ0/0.,0.,0.,0.,1.2853,2.9784,2.0006/
DATA BQ1/0.,0.,0.,0.,1.486,.61494,7.111/
DATA BQ2/0.,0.,0.,0.,2.8357,3.3122,3.0136/
DATA AG0/0.,0.,0.,0.,.75141,.66851,.77876/
DATA AG1/0.,0.,0.,0.,-.35648,-.20657,-.13625/
DATA AG2/0.,0.,0.,0.,.29982,.1468,.16092/
DATA AG3/0.,0.,0.,0.,-.081346,-.040565,-.056749/
DATA AG4/0.,0.,0.,0.,7.3038E-3,3.8811E-3,6.1178E-3/
DATA BP00/1.0151,.84946,.94016,.99926/
DATA BP01/-6.0574E-3,-9.7903E-3,-3.5957E-4,-5.0201E-3/
A‐2

DATA BP02/5.5945E-5,1.0266E-4,9.8774E-6,4.8169E-5/
DATA BP10/-1.2901E-1,-2.0852E-1,1.2843E-1,-5.5311E-2/
DATA BP11/2.1565E-2,1.2935E-2,1.2117E-3,1.8072E-2/
DATA BP12/-1.95E-4,-9.4275E-5,-2.7557E-5,-1.693E-4/
DATA BP20/2.0622E-1,3.9371E-1,-1.4612E-1,9.0412E-2/
DATA BP21/-3.1109E-2,-2.3536E-2,-8.5631E-4,-2.3949E-2/
DATA BP22/2.8096E-4,1.8413E-4,2.7298E-5,2.2335E-4/
DATA BP30/-8.1528E-2,-1.3342E-1,3.9982E-2,-3.9868E-2/
DATA BP31/1.0582E-2,7.301E-3,3.7258E-4,7.5484E-3/
DATA BP32/-9.5007E-5,-5.7236E-5,-9.5415E-6,-6.9475E-5/
DATA BQ00/-3.0306,7.5308,-3.7748,-4.4981/
DATA BQ01/.12324,-.15526,.13631,.17798/
DATA BQ02/-6.408E-4,1.0762E-3,-7.6824E-4,-9.9386E-4/
DATA BQ10/1.0949,-.88621,1.5129,-5.0756/
DATA BQ11/5.4308E-3,-7.2508E-2,1.5867E-2,.13536/
DATA BQ12/1.7654E-5,9.8766E-4,-1.2999E-4,-6.7061E-4/
DATA BQ20/2.5572,2.2092,2.8725,6.6072/
DATA BQ21/7.2117E-3,2.9849E-2,2.6098E-3,-8.1503E-2/
DATA BQ22/-2.5712E-5,-2.2029E-4,-9.2133E-6,4.5423E-4/
DATA AG00/.75831,.65473,.77681,.77544/
DATA AG01/9.5376E-4,6.0975E-3,-2.7558E-3,-3.1632E-3/
DATA AG02/-2.3126E-6,-4.3907E-5,3.635E-5,3.577E-5/
DATA AG10/6.5007E-2,1.0582E-2,-3.07E-1,-2.3927E-3/
DATA AG11/-1.9238E-2,-2.0473E-2,5.5554E-3,-3.8837E-3/
DATA AG12/1.6785E-4,1.9499E-4,-4.014E-5,2.8519E-5/
DATA AG20/-2.5092E-2,7.2283E-2,1.1744E-1,-9.6464E-3/
DATA AG21/1.5397E-2,1.3209E-2,3.7471E-4,5.8684E-4/
DATA AG22/-1.3813E-4,-1.3393E-4,-1.5242E-6,-4.3942E-6/
DATA AG30/-4.7607E-4,-3.3056E-2,-7.4695E-3,0./
DATA AG31/-4.0963E-3,-3.0744E-3,-1.0596E-3,0./
DATA AG32/3.6814E-5,3.191E-5,6.5979E-6,0./
DATA AG40/7.4163E-4,3.6485E-3,-1.381E-3,0./
DATA AG41/3.5332E-4,2.4708E-4,1.7037E-4,0./
DATA AG42/-3.146E-6,-2.544E-6,-1.0431E-6,0./
DATA RSUN /1.032,1.025,1.011,.994,.978,.969,.967,.975,.99,
1 1.007,1.022,1.031/
DATA DECLI /-20.71,-12.81,-1.8,9.77,18.83,23.07,21.16,13.65,
1 2.89,-8.72,-18.37,-22.99/
C Fundamental physical constants (CODATA, 1998)
c
c h=6.62606876(52)E-34 J*s (Planck constant)
c c=2.99792458E+08 m*s-1 (speed of light)
c Avogad= Avogadro number=6.02214199(47)E+23 mol-1
c NLosch=Loschmidt number=Avogad/Vm (m-3)
c Vm=22.413996(39)E-03 m3*mol-1
c NLosch converted here to cm-3
c evolt=energy of a photon (J)
c PHOT=1/(h*c) [J-1*m-1]
c
PHOT=5.03411762D+24
evolt=1.602176463D-19
Avogad=6.02214199D+23
NLosch=2.6867775D+19
c
c-------------------------------
c
pinb=3.14159265
pi2=pinb/2.
pix4=pinb*4.
RPD=pinb/180.
A‐3

c
c===================================
c
c To obtain the command-line "batch" version, remove the comment sign
c "c" on line 188!
c
batch=.FALSE.
c batch=.TRUE.
c
c===================================
c
c RANGE1=1./340.85
epsiln=1e-3
epsilm=1e-6
Iwarn1=0
Iwarn2=0
Iwarn3=0
Iwarn5=0
Iwarn6=0
Iwarn7=0
Iwarn8=0
Iwarn9=0
FileIn ='smarts295.inp.txt'
FileOut='smarts295.out.txt'
FileExt='smarts295.ext.txt'
FileScn='smarts295.scn.txt'
C
C
C Files (some with User-defined filenames)
c
c----------------------------------------------------------------------
c
c
c
c
c**********************************************************************
c
smart=' Welcome to SMARTS, version 2.9.5!'
write(6,314,iostat=Ierr1) smart
314 format(/,35('*'),/,a48,/,35('*'))
c
if(batch)goto 313
c
write(6,3001)
3001 format('$$$ SMARTS_295> ',
1 'Use standard mode with default input file?'/,' [If YES (or Y)',
2 ', execution will start immediately',/,'using the default ',
3 'input file smarts295.inp.txt]',/,' (Y/N) ==>')
Read(5,*) YesNo
If(YesNo.eq.'Y'.or.YesNo.eq.'y'.or.YesNo.eq.'yes'.
1 or.YesNo.eq.'YES')goto 3003
312 continue
Write(6,3140)
3140 Format('$$$ SMARTS_295> What is the path to the input file?',/,
1 ' * Type only "." if in the same folder',/,' * Do NOT type ',
2 'the last "/" of the chain',/,' * 2000 characters max. ==>')
Read(5,*) Path
Write(6,315)
315 Format('$$$ SMARTS_295> Generic name for all input/output ',
1 'files ',/,' * without any extension',/,' * 100 characters ',
A‐4

2 'max.)? ==>')
Read(5,*) Usernm
Iname=Index(Usernm,' ') - 1
FileIn =Usernm(1:Iname)//'.inp.txt'
FileOut=Usernm(1:Iname)//'.out.txt'
FileExt=Usernm(1:Iname)//'.ext.txt'
FileScn=Usernm(1:Iname)//'.scn.txt'
Write(6,317,iostat=Ierr3) FILEIN,FILEOUT,FILEEXT,filescn
317 Format('$$$ SMARTS_295> You chose the following filenames:',/,
1 ' Input: ',A100,/,' Output: ',A100,/,' Spreadsheet-',
2 'ready: ',A100,/,' Smoothed results: ',A100,/,
3 '$$$ SMARTS_295> Is this OK? (Y/N) ==>')
Read(5,*) YesNo
If(YesNo.eq.'N'.or.YesNo.eq.'n'.or.YesNo.eq.'no'.
1 or.YesNo.eq.'NO')goto 312
if(Path.eq.'.')goto 3003
mname=Index(Path,' ')-1
FileIn ='/'//FileIn
FileOut='/'//FileOut
FileExt='/'//FileExt
FileScn='/'//FileScn
FileIn =Path(1:mname)//FileIn
FileOut=Path(1:mname)//FileOut
FileExt=Path(1:mname)//FileExt
FileScn=Path(1:mname)//FileScn
goto 3003
313 continue
numarg = iargc()
if(numarg.eq.0)goto 3003
if(numarg.eq.1)goto 3002
write(6,322)
322 format('*** ERROR ***',/,' Too many arguments given to SMARTS. '
1 ,'Only one file name should be given. RUN ABORTED!')
STOP
3002 call getarg (1, Usernm)
Iname=Index(Usernm,' ') - 1
FileIn =Usernm(1:Iname)//'.inp.txt'
FileOut=Usernm(1:Iname)//'.out.txt'
FileExt=Usernm(1:Iname)//'.ext.txt'
FileScn=Usernm(1:Iname)//'.scn.txt'
c
c**********************************************************************
c
c
300 continue
TotTime = etime(time)
OPEN (UNIT=14,FILE=FileIn,STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=16,FILE=FileOut,STATUS='NEW')
OPEN (UNIT=22,FILE='Gases/Abs_O2.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=25,FILE='Gases/Abs_O4.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=26,FILE='Gases/Abs_N2.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=27,FILE='Gases/Abs_N2O.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=28,FILE='Gases/Abs_NO.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=29,FILE='Gases/Abs_NO2.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=30,FILE='Gases/Abs_NO3.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=31,FILE='Gases/Abs_HNO3.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=32,FILE='Gases/Abs_SO2U.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=33,FILE='Gases/Abs_SO2I.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=34,FILE='Gases/Abs_CO.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=35,FILE='Gases/Abs_CO2.dat',STATUS='OLD')
A‐5

OPEN (UNIT=36,FILE='Gases/Abs_CH4.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=37,FILE='Gases/Abs_NH3.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=38,FILE='Gases/Abs_BrO.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=39,FILE='Gases/Abs_CH2O.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=40,FILE='Gases/Abs_HNO2.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=41,FILE='Gases/Abs_ClNO.dat',STATUS='OLD')
read(22,*)dummy
read(25,*)dummy
read(26,*)dummy
read(27,*)dummy
read(28,*)dummy
read(29,*)dummy
read(30,*)dummy
read(31,*)dummy
read(32,*)dummy
read(33,*)dummy
read(34,*)dummy
read(35,*)dummy
read(36,*)dummy
read(37,*)dummy
read(38,*)dummy
read(39,*)dummy
read(40,*)dummy
read(41,*)dummy
C CARD 1
C
READ(14,*) COMNT
C
C CARD 2
C
READ(14,*) ISPR
IF(ISPR.EQ.1)GOTO 301
IF(ISPR.EQ.2)GOTO 302
C
C CARD 2a if ISPR=0
C
READ(14,*) SPR
if(spr.ge.265.)goto 298
if(spr.ge.4e-3)goto 299
spr=4.1e-4
Altit=0.
Height=99.9
Zalt=99.9
Iwarn1=1
goto 300
C
C APPROXIMATE FUNCTION SPR=F(altit,Latit) ACCORDING TO GUEYMARD
C (SOLAR ENERGY 1993)--Improved in 2.9.3 for altit>10 km
C
299 continue
Zalt=10.+(5.5797-log(spr))/(.14395-.0006335*log(spr))
Altit=0.
Height=Zalt
goto 300
298 continue
pp0=SPR/1013.25
DTA=.014321-.00544*log(pp0)
Zalt=Max(0.,(DTA**.5-.11963)/.00272)
Altit=Zalt
Height=0.
A‐6

if(Zalt.le.4.)goto 300
Altit=0.
Height=Zalt
GOTO 300
301 CONTINUE
C
C CARD 2a if ISPR=1 *** "Height" input added in 2.9.3 ***
C
READ(14,*)SPR,Altit, Height
Zalt=Altit+Height
write(16,1599)
1599 format('*** ERROR #1 ***',/,' The altitude cannot be > 100 km!',
1 /,' RUN ABORTED!')
GOTO 998
302 CONTINUE
C
C CARD 2a if ISPR=2 *** Height added in 2.9.3 ***
C
READ(14,*)Latit,Altit, Height
Zalt=Altit+Height
alati=abs(latit)
write(16,1599)
GOTO 998
281 continue
If(Latit.lt.-90.D00)Latit=45.D00
if(Zalt.lt.10.)goto 295
SPR=exp((5.5797-.14395*(Zalt-10.))/(1.-.0006335*(Zalt-10.)))
goto 300
295 continue
PCOR=1.
IF(abs(alati-45.).lt.epsiln)GOTO 303
PHI2=Latit*Latit
PCOR1=.993+2.0783E-04*alati-1.1589E-06*PHI2
PCOR2=8.855E-03-1.5236E-04*alati-9.2907E-07*PHI2
PCOR=PCOR1+Zalt*PCOR2
303 continue
SPR=1013.25*PCOR*EXP(.00177-.11963*Zalt-.00136*Zalt*Zalt)
300 CONTINUE
pp0=SPR/1013.25
qp=1.-pp0
c ZAlt2=Zalt*Zalt
C
C CARD 3
C
READ(14,*) iAtmos
C
C CARD 3a
C
IF(iAtmos.EQ.0)READ(14,*)TAIR,RH,SEASON,TDAY
IF(iAtmos.EQ.1)READ(14,*)Atmos
C
C*** CARD 4
C
READ(14,*) IH2O
C
311 continue
IF(iAtmos.NE.1)GOTO 320
IF(Atmos.EQ.'USSA')IREF=1
A‐7

IF(Atmos.EQ.'MLS')IREF=2
IF(Atmos.EQ.'MLW')IREF=3
IF(Atmos.EQ.'SAS')IREF=4
IF(Atmos.EQ.'SAW')IREF=5
IF(Atmos.EQ.'TRL')IREF=6
IF(Atmos.EQ.'STS')IREF=7
IF(Atmos.EQ.'STW')IREF=8
IF(Atmos.EQ.'AS')IREF=9
IF(Atmos.EQ.'AW')IREF=10
C
C AVERAGE STRATOSPHERIC TEMPERATURE AND REFERENCE ATMOSPHERIC
C CONDITIONS
C
Call RefAtm(Zalt,Pref,TK,TempA,O3ref,RH,Wref,TO3ini,Iref)
IF(ISPR.EQ.2)SPR=PREF
TAIR=TK-273.15
TKair=TK
Tavg=TK
TT0=Tk/273.15
Season='SUMMER'
if(Iref.eq.3.or.Iref.eq.5.or.Iref.eq.8.or.Iref.eq.10)
1 Season='WINTER'
Call Ozon2(Zalt,Ozmin,Ozmax)
GOTO 321
320 continue
Atmos='USER'
IREF=11
wref=1.4164
TKair=TAIR+273.15
TK=TKair
Tavg=TDAY+273.15
IF(Height.gt.0.0)TK=Tavg
TT0=Tk/273.15
c Estimate ozone temperature at sea level
c
TO3ini=230.87
if(Season.eq.'WINTER')TO3ini=219.25
c
c Converts Temperature at given altitude to ozone temperature
c
Call Ozon(Zalt,TK,Tempa,Tmin,Tmax,Ozmin,Ozmax)
if(tempa.ge.Tmin)goto 397
Iwarn5=1
tempa=Tmin
goto 399
397 continue
if(tempa.le.Tmax)goto 396
Iwarn6=1
tempa=Tmax
396 continue
c
321 continue
Seasn2='SPRING/SUMMER'
if(Season.eq.'WINTER')Seasn2='FALL/WINTER'
w=wref
IF(IH2O.ne.1.or.iAtmos.eq.1)goto 349
Iwarn2=1
Call RefAtm(Zalt,dum1,dum2,dum3,dum4,dum5,W,dum6,1)
A‐8

349 continue
IF(IH2O.NE.2)GOTO 319
C
C SATURATION VAPOR PRESSURE FROM GUEYMARD (J. Appl. Met. 1993)
C
TK1=TK/100.
EVS=EXP(22.329699-49.140396/TK1-10.921853/TK1/TK1-.39015156*TK1)
EV=EVS*RH/100.
C
C W=f(T,RH) USING EMPIRICAL MODEL OF GUEYMARD (SOLAR ENERGY 1994)
C
ROV=216.7*EV/TK
TT=1.+(TAIR/273.15)
HV=.4976+1.5265*TT+EXP(13.6897*TT-14.9188*TT**3)
W=.1*HV*ROV
319 continue
IF(IH2O.NE.0)GOTO 328
C
C CARD 4a if IH2O=0
C
READ(14,*)W
C
328 CONTINUE
if(w.le.12.)goto 327
write(16,1027,iostat=Ierr5)w
1027 format('*** ERROR #2 ***',/,' The value selected or calculated '
1 ,'for precipitable water, w, is ',f10.3,', which is above the '
2 ,'allowed maximum value of 12 cm. RUN ABORTED!')
goto 998
327 continue
if(w.le.0.)goto 776
OPEN (UNIT=21,FILE='Gases/Abs_H2O.dat',STATUS='OLD')
read(21,*)dummy
776 continue
TEMPO=TEMPA
TEMPN=TEMPA
C
C*** CARD 5
C
IALT=0
Thick=1.
329 continue
READ(14,*)IO3
IF(IO3.ne.1)GOTO 331
IF(iAtmos.ne.0)goto 348
Call RefAtm(Zalt,dum1,dum2,dum3,O3ref,dum5,dum6,dum7,1)
Iwarn3=1
348 continue
AbO3=O3REF
UOC=AbO3
OPEN (UNIT=23,FILE='Gases/Abs_O3UV.dat',STATUS='OLD')
OPEN (UNIT=24,FILE='Gases/Abs_O3IR.dat',STATUS='OLD')
read(23,*)dummy
read(24,*)dummy
goto 335
C
c
c Angstrom's alpha =f(RH) for Shettle & Fenn aerosols (modified in 2.9.2)
c
A‐9

XRH=COS(0.9*RH*RPD)
xrh2=xrh*xrh
xrh3=xrh2*xrh
ALPHA1=(C1(IAER)+C2(IAER)*XRH+C3(IAER)*XRH2+c4(IAER)*xrh3)/
1 (1.+C5(IAER)*XRH+c6(iaer)*xrh2)
ALPHA2=(D1(IAER)+D2(IAER)*XRH+D3(IAER)*XRH2+d4(iaer)*xrh3)/
1 (1.+D5(IAER)*XRH+d6(iaer)*xrh2)
if(Iaer.ne.4.or.Height.le.2.0.or.Zalt.lt.6.)goto 3641
alpha1=1.0514
alpha2=1.3623
h2=height*height
Deltau=Max(95.-20.*height,10.)
Tauavg=(.13712-.007152*height+
1 .00011794*h2)/(1.+.12521*height+.072153*h2)
Taumin=(1.-.01*Deltau)*Tauavg
Taumax=(1.+.01*Deltau)*Tauavg
if(Zalt.lt.6.)goto 3642
t550mn=exp(-3.2755-.15078*Zalt)
t500mn=1.14*t550mn
betamn=.441*t550mn
Bschmn=.495*t550mn
alpha1=1.055
alpha2=1.368
goto 3641
3642 continue
if(Season.eq.'SUMMER')goto 3641
alpha1=1.0588
alpha2=1.3736
Tauavg=exp(-3.6752-.13699*height+2.1604/height)
Taumin=(1.-.01*deltau)*Tauavg
Taumax=(1.+.01*Deltau)*Tauavg
3641 continue
RHC=MAX(50.,RH)
RHC2=RHC*RHC
C
C COEFFICIENTS FOR OMEGL (SINGLE SCATTERING ALBEDO)
C
BP0(IAER)=BP00(IAER)+BP01(IAER)*RHC+BP02(IAER)*RHC2
BQ0(IAER)=BQ00(IAER)+BQ01(IAER)*RHC+BQ02(IAER)*RHC2
BQ1(IAER)=EXP(BQ10(IAER)+BQ11(IAER)*RHC+BQ12(IAER)*RHC2)
BQ2(IAER)=BQ20(IAER)+BQ21(IAER)*RHC+BQ22(IAER)*RHC2
C
C COEFFICIENTS FOR GG (ASYMMETRY FACTOR)
C
AG0(IAER)=AG00(IAER)+AG01(IAER)*RHC+AG02(IAER)*RHC2
C
C CARD 9
C
355 continue
READ(14,*) ITURB
C
C SELECT THE APPROPRIATE TURBIDITY INPUT
C
A‐10

if(iturb.le.5) goto 374
write(16,1949)
1949 format(/,'***** ERROR #3!',/,' Input value for ',
1 ' ITURB on Card 9 is > 5. Please specify a ',
2 'smaller value.'/,' RUN ABORTED!')
goto 998
374 continue
IF(ITURB.EQ.1) GOTO 351
if(Iturb.eq.5) goto 3560
C
C*** CARD 9a if ITURB=0
C
READ(14,*)TAU5
if(Zalt.ge.6.)tau5=t500mn
GOTO 359
C
C
351 continue
READ(14,*) BETA
TAU5=BETA/(0.5**ALPHA2)
GOTO 359
352 CONTINUE
C
C
READ(14,*)BCHUEP
TAU5=BCHUEP*2.302585
goto 359
C
C*** CARD 9a if ITURB=5 *** Added in 2.9.3 ***
C
3560 continue
READ(14,*) Tau550
TAU5=Tau550*(1.1**ALPHA2)
359 CONTINUE
if(zalt.ge.6.)goto 357
if(ITURB.ne.5)tau550=Tau5/(1.1**alpha2)
if(Aeros.eq.'USER'.or.Iaer.gt.4.or.tau5.lt.1e-4)goto 1825
Call ALFA(Season,Iaer,Iturb,Iref,alpha1,alpha2,tau5,beta,
1 alf1,alf2,t550,0)
alpha1=alf1
alpha2=alf2
if(ITURB.ne.5)tau550=t550
goto 1824
1825 continue
beta=Tau5*(.5**alpha2)
1824 continue
If(Tau550.lt.5.0)goto 1826
Write(16,1920,iostat=Ierr6)Tau550
1920 Format(/,'***** ERROR #4!',/,' Input value for ',
1 ' turbidity is too large (Tau550 = ',f6.1,'). Please specify a ',
2 'smaller value.'/,' RUN ABORTED!')
goto 998
1826 continue
C
C FUNCTION RANGE=F(BETA,ALPHA) FROM NEW FIT - Modified in 2.9.2
A‐11

C
RANGE=999.
Visi=764.9
If(IAer.ne.1.or.IRef.ne.1)goto 344
If(Iturb.eq.0.or.iturb.eq.2.or.iturb.eq.5)beta=(.5**1.33669)*TAU5
if(iturb.ne.5)Tau550=Tau5/(1.1**.9884)
344 continue
If(tau5.lt.0.001)goto 1355
Call VISTAU(Season,Range,Tau550,0)
VISI=RANGE/1.306
1355 CONTINUE
GOTO 357
354 CONTINUE
C
C
READ(14,*)VISI
RANGE=1.306*VISI
GOTO 356
353 CONTINUE
C
C CARD 9a if ITURB=3
C
READ(14,*)RANGE
356 CONTINUE
C
C FIT BASED ON MODTRAN4 - Modified in 2.9.2
C
if(zalt.ge.6.)goto 357
If(Range.ge.1.0)goto 399
Write(16,192)
192 Format(/,'***** ERROR #5!',/,' Input value for ',
1 ' Meteorological Range is < 1 km. Please specify a larger',
2 ' value.'/,' RUN ABORTED!')
goto 998
399 continue
Range=Min(Range,999.)
VISI=RANGE/1.306
c
Call VISTAU(Season,Range,Tau550,1)
TAU5=Tau550*(1.1**alpha2)
BETA=(0.55**Alpha2)*TAU550
if(Aeros.eq.'USER'.or.Iaer.gt.4)goto 1827
Call ALFA(Season,Iaer,Iturb,Iref,alpha1,alpha2,t5,b,
1 alf1,alf2,tau550,1)
alpha1=alf1
alpha2=alf2
tau5=t5
beta=b
1827 continue
c
357 CONTINUE
IF(ITURB.NE.2)BCHUEP=TAU5/2.302585
ALPHA=(ALPHA1+ALPHA2)/2.
if(zalt.lt.6.)goto 3590
iwarn9=1
tau550=t550mn
tau5=t500mn
beta=betamn
Bchuep=bschmn
A‐12

goto 3591
3590 continue
if(Tau550.lt.Taumin.or.Tau550.gt.Taumax)Iwarn8=1
3591 continue
C
WRITE(16,194,iostat=Ierr7) COMNT,Atmos,AEROS
194 FORMAT(/,'****************** SMARTS, version 2.9.5 *********'
% ,'**********',//,
%' Simple Model of the Atmospheric Radiative Transfer of Sunshine'
% ,/,5X,'Chris A. Gueymard, Solar Consulting Services',/,20x,
& 'December 2005',//,
1 4X,'This model is documented in FSEC Report PF-270-95',/,
2 ' and in a Solar Energy paper, vol. 71, No.5, 325-346 (2001)',
3 //,' NOTE: These references describe v. 2.8 or earlier!!!',/,
4 ' See the User''s Manual for details on the considerable ',/,
5 ' changes that followed...',//,
%'*************************************************************'
% ,'***'//,2x,' Reference for this run: ',A64,//,64('-'),//,
% '* ATMOSPHERE : ',A4,' AEROSOL TYPE: ',A64,/)
WRITE(16,100,iostat=Ierr8) SPR,Altit,Height,RH,W,UOC,uoc*1000.,
% TAU5,Tau550,BETA,BCHUEP,RANGE,VISI,ALPHA1,ALPHA2,ALPHA,Seasn2
100 FORMAT('* INPUTS:'/,5x,'Pressure (mb) = ',F8.3,' Ground ',
% 'Altitude (km) = ',F8.4,/,5x,'Height above ground (km) = ',f8.4,
2 /,5X,'Relative Humidity (%) = ',F6.3,3X,
3 'Precipitable Water (cm) = ',F7.4,/,5x,'Ozone (atm-cm) = ',F6.4,
1 ' or ',f5.1,' Dobson Units',/,3X,'AEROSOLS: ','Optical Depth at'
# ,' 500 nm = ',F6.4,' Optical depth at 550 nm = ',f6.4,/,
6' Angstrom''s Beta = ',F6.4,' Schuepp''s'
%,' B = ',F6.4,/,5x,'Meteorological Range (km) = ',F6.1,' Visi'
%,'bility (km) = ',F6.1,/,5x,'Alpha1 = ',F6.4,' Alpha2 = ',F6.4,
& ' Mean Angstrom''s Alpha = ',F6.4,/,5x,'Season = ',a24,/)
WRITE(16,134,iostat=Ierr9)TKair,Tavg,TEMPA
134 FORMAT('* TEMPERATURES:',/,5x,'Instantaneous at site''s altitude'
1 ,' = ',F5.1,' K',/,5x,'Daily average (reference) at site''s ',
2 'altitude = ',F5.1,' K',/,5x,'Stratospheric Ozone and NO2 ',
3 '(effective) = ',F5.1,' K',/)
if(Iwarn5.eq.1)write(16,1018,iostat=Ierr10) Tempa, Tmin
1018 format('** WARNING #1',9('*'),/,'\\ The calculated ozone tempe',
1 'rature, ',f5.1,' K, was below the most probable minimum of ',
2 f5.1,'\\ for this altitude. The latter value has been used ',
4 'for optimum results. Suggestion: double check',
3 ' the daily temperature on input Card 3a',/)
if(Iwarn6.eq.1)write(16,1019,iostat=Ierr11) Tempa, Tmax
1019 format('** WARNING #2',9('*'),/,'\\ The calculated ozone tempe',
1 'rature, ',f5.1,' K, was above the most probable maximum of ',
2 f5.1,'\\ for this altitude. The latter value has been used ',
4 'for optimum results. Suggestion: double check',
3 ' the daily temperature on input Card 3a',/)
if(IO3.eq.0.and.(UOC.lt.Ozmin.or.UOC.gt.Ozmax))write(16,1021,
1 iostat=Ierr12) UOC, Ozmin, Ozmax
1021 format('** WARNING #3',9('*'),/,'\\ The ozone columnar amount, ',
1 f6.4,' atm-cm, is outside the most probable limits of ',f6.4,
2 ' and ',f6.4,/,'\\ for this altitude. This may produce ',
3 'inconsistent results.',/,'\\ Suggestion: double check the ',
3 'values of IALT and AbO3 on input Card 5a.',/)
if(Iwarn1.eq.1)write(16,1301)
1301 format('** WARNING #4',9('*'),/,'\\ Pressure cannot be < 0.000',
1 '41 mb and has been increased to this value.',/,'\\ ',/)
1302 format('** WARNING #5',9('*'),/,'\\ Precipitable water was not '
A‐13

1 ,'provided and no reference atmosphere was specified!',/,'\\ ',
2 'USSA conditions have been used here.',/)
1303 format('** WARNING #6',9('*'),/,'\\ The ozone amount was not pro'
1 ,'vided and no reference atmosphere was specified!',/,'\\ USSA',
2 ' conditions have been used here.',/)
1307 format('** WARNING #7',9('*'),/,'\\ The aerosol type has been ',
1 'changed to "S&F_TROPO" because either the receiver''s height ',
2 'above ground',/,'\\ is > 2 km or its elevation is > 6 km ',
3 'above sea level.',/)
if(Iwarn9.eq.1)goto 1311
if(Iwarn8.ne.1.or.height.le.2.0)goto 1311
if(Zalt.lt.15.0.or.Zalt.gt.22.)goto 1310
write(16,1309,iostat=Ierr13)Tau550,Taumin,Taumax
1309 format('** WARNING #8',9('*'),/,'\\ The aerosol optical depth ',
1 'at 550 nm, ',f6.4,' is outside the most probable limits of ',
2 f6.4,' and ',f6.4,/,'\\ for this altitude, assuming a slight ',
3 'background amount of volcanic aerosols. This may produce ',
4 'value of your turbidity input on Card 9a.',/)
goto 1311
1310 continue
write(16,1308,iostat=Ierr14)Tau550,Taumin,Taumax
1308 format('** WARNING #9',9('*'),/,'\\ The aerosol optical depth ',
1 'at 550 nm, ',f6.4,' is outside the most probable limits of ',
2 f6.4,' and ',f6.4,/,'\\ for this altitude. This may produce ',
4 'value of your turbidity input on Card 9a.',/)
1311 continue
1312 format('** WARNING #20',9('*'),/,'\\ Receiver is at more than 6 ',
1 'km above sea level, hence the aerosol optical depth has ',
2 'been fixed to a default value, dependent only on altitude.',/)
c
C*** CARD 10
C
Read(14,*) Ialbdx
Rhox=0.2
If(Ialbdx.lt.0)goto 383
Call Albdat(Ialbdx,Nwal1,Filen1,Lambr1,Wvla1,Albdo1)
Goto 384
C
C*** CARD 10a
C
383 continue
READ(14,*) Rhox
384 Continue
C
C*** CARD 10b
C
Read(14,*)Itilt
Tilt=0.
Rhog=0.
Wazim=0.
If (Itilt.eq.0)Goto 389
if(height.gt.0.5)write(16,1314)
1314 format('** WARNING #21',9('*'),/,'\\ Receiver is at more than ',
1 '0,5 km above ground, hence the calculation of the reflected ',
A‐14

2 'irradiance from the ground to the tilted plane is not',
3 ' accurate.',/)
C
C*** CARD 10c
C
Read(14,*)Ialbdg,TILT,WAZIM
c
Rhog=Rhox
If(Ialbdg.ge.0)Goto 385
C
C*** CARD 10d
C
Read(14,*)Rhog
c
Goto 389
385 Continue
Filen2=Filen1
Lambr2=Lambr1
If(Ialbdg.ne.Ialbdx)Call Albdat(Ialbdg,Nwal2,Filen2,
2 Lambr2,Wvla2,Albdo2)
389 Continue
C
C*** CARD 11 - Modified in 2.9
C
READ(14,*)WLMN,WLMX,Suncor,SolarC
If(Ialbdx.ge.0.and.Ialbdx.ne.2)
2 Call Albchk(Nwal1,Filen1,Wvla1,Albdo1,.001*wlmn,.001*wlmx)
If(Ialbdg.ge.0.and.Ialbdg.ne.2.and.Ialbdg.ne.Ialbdx.and.
2 Itilt.ne.0) Call Albchk(Nwal2,Filen2,Wvla2,Albdo2,
3 .001*wlmn,.001*wlmx)
C
C*** CARD 12
C
READ(14,*) IPRT
IF(IPRT.EQ.0) GOTO 392
C
C*** CARD 12a if IPRT=1 TO 3 - Modified in 2.9
C
READ(14,*)WPMN,WPMX,INTVL
IF(INTVL.LT.0.5)WRITE(16,198)
198 FORMAT(' *** WARNING #18 ***',/,' Parameter INTVL on Card 12a',
& ' is too low and will be defaulted to 0.5 nm.')
IF(IPRT.lt.2)goto 392
OPEN(UNIT=17,FILE=FileExt,STATUS='NEW')
C
C*** CARDS 12b if IPRT=2 TO 3
C
READ(14,*)IOTOT
C
C*** CARDS 12c if IPRT=2 TO 3
C
READ(14,*)(IOUT(i),i=1,IOTOT)
c
c=======================================
Out(1) ='Extraterrestrial_spectrm'
Out(2) ='Direct_normal_irradiance'
Out(3) ='Difuse_horizn_irradiance'
Out(4) ='Global_horizn_irradiance'
A‐15

Out(5) ='Direct_horizn_irradiance'
Out(6) ='Direct_tilted_irradiance'
Out(7) ='Difuse_tilted_irradiance'
Out(8) ='Global_tilted_irradiance'
Out(9) ='Beam_normal_+circumsolar'
Out(10)='Difuse_horiz-circumsolar'
Out(11)='Circumsolar___irradiance'
Out(12)='Global_tilt_photon_irrad'
Out(13)='Beam_normal_photon_irrad'
Out(14)='Difuse_horiz_photn_irrad'
Out(15)='RayleighScat_trnsmittnce'
Out(16)='Ozone_totl_transmittance'
Out(17)='Trace_gas__transmittance'
Out(18)='WaterVapor_transmittance'
Out(19)='Mixed_gas__transmittance'
Out(20)='Aerosol_tot_transmittnce'
Out(21)='Direct_rad_transmittance'
Out(22)='RayleighScat_optic_depth'
Out(23)='Ozone_totl_optical_depth'
Out(24)='Trace_gas__optical_depth'
Out(25)='WaterVapor_optical_depth'
Out(26)='Mixed_gas__optical_depth'
Out(27)='Aeros_spctrl_optic_depth'
Out(28)='Single_scattering_albedo'
Out(29)='Aerosol_asymmetry_factor'
Out(30)='Zonal_ground_reflectance'
Out(31)='Local_ground_reflectance'
Out(32)='Atmosph_back_reflectance'
Out(33)='Global_tilt_reflectd_rad'
Out(34)='Upward_reflctd_radiation'
Out(35)='Glob_horiz_PAR_phot_flux'
Out(36)='Dir_norml_PAR_photn_flux'
Out(37)='Dif_horiz_PAR_photn_flux'
Out(38)='Glob_tilt_PAR_photn_flux'
Out(39)='Spectral_photonic_energy'
Out(40)='Globl_horizn_photon_flux'
Out(41)='Dirct_normal_photon_flux'
Out(42)='Dif_horizntl_photon_flux'
Out(43)='Global_tiltd_photon_flux'
c
Out(46)='DRay'
Out(47)='Daer'
Out(48)='Dif0'
Out(49)='Fda00'
Out(50)='Fdazt'
Out(51)='Rhoa'
c 3. Carbon Monoxide (CO)
c
if(wvln.lt.2310.0.or.wvln.gt.2405.)goto 881
if(ApCO.le.0.0.and.AbCO.le.0.0)goto 881
Call GSCO(ACO,ApCO,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
TCO=Min(TCO*tcor,1.)
TCOP=Min(TCOP*tcorp,1.)
881 continue
C
C** Misc. Trace gases
C
c 1. Nitric acid (HNO3)
c
if(wvln.gt.350.0)goto 882
A‐16

Call GSHNO3(TK,xsHNO3,athno3,ApHNO3,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
THNO3=Min(THNO3*tcor,1.)
THNO3P=Min(THNO3P*tcorp,1.)
882 continue
C
c 2. Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
c
Call GSNO2(TK,xsNO2,atno2,ApNO2,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
TNO2=Min(TNO2*tcor,1.)
TNO2P=Min(TNO2P*tcorp,1.)
883 continue
C
c 3. Nitrogen trioxide (NO3)
c
if(wvln.lt.400.0.or.wvln.gt.703.0)goto 884
if(ApNO3.le.0.0.and.AbNO3.le.0.0)goto 884
Call GSNO3(TK,xsno3,atno3,ApNO3,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
TNO3=Min(TNO3*tcor,1.)
TNO3P=Min(TNO3P*tcorp,1.)
884 continue
C
c 4. Nitric oxide (NO)
c
if(wvln.lt.2645.0.or.wvln.gt.2745.)goto 885
Call GSNO(ANO,ApNO,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
TNO=Min(TNO*tcor,1.)
TNOP=Min(TNOP*tcorp,1.)
885 continue
C
c 5a. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) [UV band]
c
Call GSSO2U(TK,xsSO2,atso2,ApSO2,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
TSO2=Min(TSO2*tcor,1.)
TSO2P=Min(TSO2P*tcorp,1.)
886 continue
C
c 5b. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) [IR band]
c
if(wvln.lt.3955.0)goto 887
Call GSSO2I(ASO2,ApSO2,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
TSO2=Min(TSO2*tcor,1.)
TSO2P=Min(TSO2P*tcorp,1.)
887 continue
C
c 6a. Ozone (O3) [UV and VIS bands]
c
if(ApO3.le.0.0.and.AbO3.le.0.0)goto 889
if(wvln.gt.1091.)goto 888
Call GSO3U(Tref,TK,xso3,a0o3,a1o3,Apo3,AmPOL,tz3,Tcoro3,xo3,AO3)
TO3=Min(TxO3*tcoro3,1.D+00)
tauz3=Max(tauz3+tz3,0.D00)
888 continue
c
c 6b. Ozone (O3) [IR band]
c
if(wvln.lt.2470.)goto 889
TO3=Min(TxO3*exp(-AO3*ApO3*AmPOL),1.D+00)
c tauz3=Max(tauz3+ApO3*AO3,0.)
A‐17

889 continue
C
c 9. Formaldehyde (CH2O)
c
if(WVLN.gt.400.0)goto 890
if(ApCH2O.le.0.0.and.AbCH2O.le.0.0)goto 890
Call GSCH2O(TK,xsCH2O,atCH2O,ApCH2O,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
TCH2O=Min(TCH2O*tcor,1.)
TCH2OP=Min(TCH2OP*tcorp,1.)
890 continue
C
c 10. Nitrous acid (HNO2)
c
if(wvln.lt.300.5.or.WVLN.GT.396.5)goto 891
if(ApHNO2.le.0.0.and.AbHNO2.le.0.0)goto 891
Call GSHNO2(TK,xsHNO2,ApHNO2,AmPOL,Tcor,TcorP,amdif)
THNO2=Min(THNO2*tcor,1.)
THNO2P=Min(THNO2P*tcorp,1.)
891 continue
c
C
c Total gaseous absorption excluding H2O and O3
c
c Mixed gases
c
Tmixd=TO2*TO4*TN2*TN2O*TCO*TCO2*TCH4
TmixdP=TO2P*TO4P*TN2P*TN2OP*TCOP*TCO2P*TCH4P
Trace=TNO*TNO2*TNO3*THNO3*TSO2*TNH3*TBrO*TCH2O*THNO2*TClNO
TraceP=TNOP*TNO2P*TNO3P*THNO3P*TSO2P
2 *TNH3P*TBrOP*TCH2OP*THNO2P*TClNOP
taumix=-log(Tmixd)/AmR
tautrc=-log(Trace)/AmR
C
c-----------------------------------------------
c
C AEROSOL EXTINCTION
C
TAUA=0.
TAUAS=0.
TAA=1.0D00
TAAp=1.0D00
TAS=1.0D00
TAT=1.0D00
IF(IAER.LE.0.OR.IAER.GT.7)GOTO 33
OMEGL=BP0(IAER)+BP1(IAER)*WVL+BP2(IAER)*WVL2+BP3(IAER)*WVL3
IF(wvln.LE.1999.)GOTO 33
BQ=EXP(BQ1(IAER)*(WVL-BQ2(IAER)))
OMEGL=1.-(BQ0(IAER)*BQ)/(1.+BQ)**2
GOTO 34
33 CONTINUE
C
C BRASLAU & DAVE AEROSOL MODEL C1 OR D1
C
IF(IAER.NE.8)GOTO 35
OMEGL=.9441-.08817*EXP(1.-3.3815E-3*wvln)
IF(wvln.GE.2001.)OMEGL=.8569+.0436E-3*wvln
35 CONTINUE
C
C BRASLAU & DAVE AEROSOL MODEL C OR D
C
A‐18

if(Iaer.ne.9)goto 36
IF(IAER.EQ.9)OMEGL=1.0
goto 34
c
c Desert Aerosol (moderate) *** New in 2.9.3 ***
c
36 continue
omegl=.9
if(wvln.gt.500.)omegl=.96
goto 34
c
c Desert Aerosol (dust storm) *** New in 2.9.3 ***
c
39 continue
omegl=.6
if(wvln.gt.500.)omegl=.7
c
34 CONTINUE
C
IF(BETA.GT.0.0)GOTO 37
OMEGL=1.0
GOTO 38
37 continue
TAUA=BETA/WVL**ALPHA2
IF(wvln.LE.499.) TAUA=BETAC/(WVL**ALPHA1)
IF(wvln.GE.1001.0.AND.IAER.EQ.8)TAUA=BETA/WVL**.825
if(iaer.ne.1.or.iref.ne.1)goto 777
alpha=1.1696-4.6814*wvl+12.96*wvl2
if(abs(wvl-0.3).lt.1e-4)alpha=.93178
if(wvl.gt.0.3.and.wvl.lt.0.337)alpha=1.443-4.6051*wvl+9.6723*wvl2
if(wvl.gt.0.337.and.wvl.lt.0.55)alpha=.98264+.032539*wvl
1 -.040251*wvl2
if(wvl.gt.0.55.and.wvl.lt.0.694)alpha=-32.0108+151.02*wvl-229.75
1 *wvl2+116.83*wvl3
if(abs(wvl-0.694).lt.1e-4)alpha=1.192
if(wvl.gt.0.694.and.wvl.lt.1.06)alpha=-1.9669+9.576*wvl-9.4345
1 *wvl2+3.1621*wvl3
if(abs(wvl-1.06).lt.1e-4)alpha=1.3485
if(wvl.gt.1.06.and.wvl.le.1.536)alpha=-.25628+3.0677*wvl-1.9011
1 *wvl2+.41005*wvl3
if(wvl.gt.1.536.and.wvl.le.2.0)alpha=-1.3018+3.7405*wvl-1.6633
1 *wvl2+.25856*wvl3
if(wvl.gt.2.0.and.wvl.le.2.25)alpha=2.1665-.40189*wvl+.057873
1 *wvl2
if(wvl.gt.2.25.and.wvl.le.2.5)alpha=2.1188-.35073*wvl+.044553*wvl2
if(wvl.gt.2.5.and.wvl.le.2.7)alpha=4.3108-1.5493*wvl+.17324*wvl2
if(wvl.gt.2.7.and.wvl.le.3.0)alpha=2.1947-.33892*wvl+.015213*wvl2
if(wvl.gt.3.0.and.wvl.le.3.39)alpha=-2.993+3.3795*wvl-.86713*wvl2
1 +.073101*wvl3
if(wvl.gt.3.39.and.wvl.le.3.75)alpha=1.6801-.12171*wvl+.0068994
1 *wvl2
if(wvl.gt.3.75)alpha=2.0473-.27977*wvl+.022939*wvl2
Taua=Tau5/(2.*wvl)**alpha
777 continue
TAUAS=OMEGL*TAUA
Tauaa=Taua-Tauas
A‐19

TAS=EXP(-TAUAS*AmAER)
TAT=EXP(-TAUA*AmAER)
TAA=EXP(-TAUAA*AmAER)
38 CONTINUE
C
c-----------------------------------------------
c
C BEAM RADIATION
C
TSCAT=TR*TAS
TABS0=TH2O*Tmixd*Trace*TAA
TAAp=EXP(-TAUAA*Amdif)
TABS0P=TH2OP*TmixdP*TraceP*TAAP
TABS=TABS0*TO3
TDIR=TABS*TSCAT
DIR=H0*TDIR
DIRH=DIR*ZCOS
H0H=H0*ZCOS
FHTO=1.
FHT1=1.
IF(TAUZ3.gt.5d-6)FHTO=EXP(-FHTcz-FHTdx*(TAUZ3-2.D00))
c
c corrected in 2.9.2
c
IF(tauz3.LE.2.D00)FHTO=EXP(-FHTcx*TAUZ3-FHTcy*(TAUZ3**.95))
c
c Improved multiple scattering algorithm--New in 2.9.3, revised in 2.9.5
c
Fda00=1.
Fdazt=1.
Fdif=1.
if(t5.le.0.03)goto 3909
ssaro=Taurl/(Taurl+Tauz3)
Taurf=(ssaro**.5)*Taurl*Taurl
Fda00=(trb0+trb1*Taurf)/(1.+trb2*(Taurf**.5))
if(wvln.gt.294.)Fdazt=tzb0+tzb1*Taurf+tzb2*Taurf**.5
3909 continue
Fda00=1.
if(wvln.le.294.0.or.t5.le.0.03)goto 3908
Fda00=(tra0+tra1*Taurf)/(1.+tra2*Taurf)
3908 continue
FHT1=.962-9.1*tauz3
if(Tauz3.le.0.01D00)goto 3900
FHT1=Min(12.D00,FHTa0+Tauz3*FHTa1)
if(Amo3.le.2.0)goto 3900
FHT1=Min(12.D00,FHTb0+Tauz3*FHTb1)
goto 3900
3907 continue
FHT1=Min(7.D00,FHTc0+Tauz3*FHTc1)
FHT1=Min(6.D00,FHTd0+Tauz3*FHTd1)
goto 3900
3906 continue
if(Tauz3.le.10.D00)goto 3905
FHT1=Min(9.D00,FHTe0+Tauz3*FHTe1)
A‐20

FHT1=Min(8.D00,FHTf0+Tauz3*FHTf1)
goto 3900
3905 continue
ra0=ra00
if(Amo3.gt.2.2)ra0=ra01
ra1=ra10
goto 3912
3910 continue
ra1=ra11
goto 3912
3914 continue
ra1=ra12
3912 continue
FHT1=Min(10.D00,ra0+(Tauz3-6.D00)*ra1)
goto 3900
3904 continue
c
if(Amo3.gt.3.2)goto 3915
ra0=ra02
ra1=ra13
FHT1=Min(2.D00,ra0+Tauz3*ra1)
FHT1x=Min(2.,ra0+2.505*ra1)
goto 3903
3915 continue
ra0=ra03
ra1=ra14
FHT1x=Min(2.,ra0+2.505*ra1)
3903 continue
ra0=FHT1x
ra1=ra15
FHT1=Min(7.5D00,ra0+(Tauz3-2.505D00)*ra1)
goto 3900
3902 continue
xlim=1.D00
if(Amo3.gt.2.)xlim=1.6D00
FHT1=Min(xlim,ra05+Tauz3*ra17)
goto 3900
3901 continue
3900 continue
FHT1=Max(FHT1,.002)
if(Tauz3.lt.5.0D00)FHT1=Max(FHT1,.5)
FHTO=FHTO/FHT1
HT=H0H
IF(Zenit.ge.89.)HT=H0/AmR
HTa=HT*TABS0p*FHTO
C
c--------------------------------------------------
c
C Diffuse radiation (improved in 2.9.5)
A‐21

C
c--------------------------------------------------
c
C Asymmetry and forward scatterance
C
if(IAER.ne.10)goto 40
GG=.71
if(wvln.gt.500.)gg=.675
40 continue
if(IAER.ne.11)goto 44
GG=.89
if(wvln.gt.500.)gg=.85
44 continue
IF(IAER.NE.8.AND.IAER.NE.9)GOTO 42
GG=0.8042
GOTO 43
42 CONTINUE
IF(IAER.LE.0.OR.IAER.GT.7)GOTO 43
GG=AG0(IAER)+AG1(IAER)*WVL+AG2(IAER)*WVL2+AG3(IAER)
% *WVL3+AG4(IAER)*WVL4
43 CONTINUE
GG=MIN(0.99,GG)
ALG=log(1.-GG)
AFS=ALG*(1.459+ALG*(.1595+ALG*.4129))
BFS=ALG*(.0783+ALG*(-.3824-ALG*.5874))
FA1=1.-.5*EXP((AFS+BFS*ZCOS)*ZCOS)
FA1P=1.-.5*EXP((AFS+BFS*.6)*.6)
C
C** 1. DIFFUSE RADIATION FROM RAYLEIGH SCATTERING
C
DRAY=0.D00
FR=0.5
FRP=0.5
IF(TAURL.GE.EPSIR)FR=.5*EXP(-((TAURL-EPSIR)/SIGMAR)**EXPR)
IF(TAURL.GE.EPSIRP)FRP=.5*EXP(-.1957*(TAURL-0.0648)**1.32)
41 CONTINUE
DRAY=HTa*FR*(1.-TR)*(Max(Tas,1e-10)**.167)
c
C
C 2. DIFFUSE RADIATION FROM AEROSOL SCATTERING
C
DAER=0.D00
IF(BETA.gt.0.0)DAER=HTa*FA1*(TR**.167)*(1.-TAS)*Fda00*Fdazt
C
C Sky diffuse before backscattering
C
Fdifz=1.
Fdiftz=1.
Fdifz=fdifa0+fdifa1*wvl
if(zenit.ge.45.)Fdiftz=fdifb0+fdifb1*Ama1+fdifb2*Ama2
7200 continue
DIF0=Fdifz*Fdiftz*(DRAY+DAER)
Glob0=Dirh+Dif0
C
C 3. BACKSCATTERING - reflection from ground to space and back
C
TRP=EXP(-Amdif*TAURL)
TAUAP=TAUA*Amdif
TASP=EXP(-OMEGL*TAUAP)
A‐22

TTp5=Tabs0p**.5
GAMOZ=1.
IF(wvln.LE.379.5)GAMOZ=EXP(-1D+5*(4.8344+23.088*(AbO3+ApO3))
1 *(.38-WVL)**5.8)
Rhob0=Rhox
Rhob=Rhox
Rhod=Rhox
Rhor=0.D00
Rhoa=0.
Rhos=0.D00
Roro=0.
Dgrnd=0.D00
If(Ialbdx.lt.0)goto 411
rocb=0.
if(Glob0.gt.0.D00)rocb=Dirh/Glob0
Call Albdos(Ialbdx,Nwal1,Albdo1,Wvla1,Wvl,Zenit,Zcos,Rhob0,Rhob,
1 Rhod)
411 continue
Rho=Max(Rhob,Rhod)
If(TTP5.le.1D-12) goto 413
RHOR=TTP5*((1.-FRP)**.85)*(TASP**.05)*(1.-TRP)*GAMOZ
c
c New in 2.9.4/revised in 2.9.5
c
Fatau=0.
if(tau550.lt.0.03)goto 3999
if(wvl.gt.0.35)goto 3992
Fatau=exp(alba00+alba01*wvl)
if(t5.le.0.2)goto 3998
Fatau=exp(alba0+alba1*wvl+alba2*wvl2)
goto 3998
3992 continue
if(wvl.gt.0.5)goto 3994
Fatau=exp(albb0+albb1*wvl+albb2*wvl2)
goto 3998
3994 continue
Fatau=(albc0+albc1*wvl+albc2*wvl2+albc3*wvl3)/(1.+albc4*wvl)
3998 continue
c
RHOA=TTP5*((1.-FA1P)**.85)*GAMOZ*Fatau
3999 continue
RHOS=RHOR+RHOA
If(Ialbdx.ge.0)Rho=Rhob*rocb+Rhod*(1.-rocb)
RORO=RHO*RHOS
Upward=Rho*Glob0
DGRND=Upward*RHOS/(1.-RORO)
413 continue
c
DIF=DIF0+DGRND
GLOB=DIRH+DIF
C
c-----------------------------------------------
c
c UV calculations
c
IF(IUV.EQ.1.AND.wvln.LE.400.)CALL UVDAT(ER0,ER1,ER2,
A‐23

# ER3,ER4,DNA,PHO,ECAL,ACG,POL,SIS,PRT,SCUPH,SCUPM,wvln)
GERY0=GLOB*ER0
GERY1=GLOB*ER1
GERY2=GLOB*ER2
GERY3=GLOB*ER3
GERY4=GLOB*ER4
GDNA=GLOB*DNA
GECAL=GLOB*ECAL
GPHO=GLOB*PHO
GACG=GLOB*ACG
GPOL=GLOB*POL
GSIS=GLOB*SIS
GPRT=GLOB*PRT
GSCUPH=GLOB*SCUPH
GSCUPM=GLOB*SCUPM
C
c-----------------------------------------------
c
C** CIRCUMSOLAR CORRECTION FOR A SIMULATED RADIOMETER
C
direxp=dir
difexp=dif
difcc=0.
IF(ICIRC.le.0)GOTO 77
call Circum (Difccs,Iaer,Icirc)
c
c Correction for the diminished aureole close to the horizon
c
cexp=1.
if(Zenit.le.(90.-apert))goto 76
zexp=2.*acos((pi2-zr)/(apert*rpd))
cexp=1.-.5*(zexp-sin(zexp))/pinb
76 continue
difexp=Max(0.1D00*dif,dif-cexp*difccs*zcos)
difcc=(Dif-Difexp)/(cexp*zcos)
direxp=dir+difcc
77 CONTINUE
c
c Calculate current Julian Day
c
liAux1 =(Month-14)/12
LiAux2=(1461*(Year + 4800 + liAux1))/4
1 + (367*(Month- 2-12*liAux1))/12
2 - (3*((Year + 4900+ liAux1)/100))/4+Day-32075
Julian=Float(LiAux2)-0.5+dHour/24.
c
c Calculate difference in days between the current Julian Day
c and JD 2451545.0, which is noon 1 January 2000 Universal Time
c
Elapsd = Julian-2451545.0
c
c Calculate ecliptic coordinates (ecliptic longitude and obliquity of
c the ecliptic in radians) but without limiting the angle to be less
c than 2*Pi (i.e., the result may be greater than 2*Pi)
c
Omega=2.1429-0.0010394594*Elapsd
SunLng = 4.8950630+ 0.017202791698*Elapsd
Anomly = 6.2400600+ 0.0172019699*Elapsd
EclipL = SunLng + 0.03341607*sin(Anomly) + 0.00034894*
1 sin(2.*Anomly)-0.0001134-0.0000203*sin(Omega)
A‐24

EclipO = 0.4090928 - 6.2140e-9*Elapsd+0.0000396*cos(Omega)
c
c Calculate celestial coordinates (right ascension and declination)
c in radians but without limiting the angle to be less than 2*Pi
c (i.e., the result may be greater than 2*Pi)
c
SinELg= sin(EclipL)
dY = cos(EclipO) * SinELg
dX = cos(EclipL)
RightA = atan2(dY,dX)
if(RightA.lt.0.0) RightA = RightA + twopi
Decli = asin(sin(EclipO)*SinELg)
c
c Calculate local coordinates (azimuth and zenith angle) in degrees
c
GMST = 6.6974243242 + 0.0657098283*Elapsd + dHour
LMST = (GMST*15. + dLong)*rad
HrAngl = LMST - RightA
dRLat = dLat*rad
cosLat = cos(dRLat)
sinLat = sin(dRLat)
cosHA= cos(HrAngl)
Zenith = acos(cosLat*cosHA*cos(Decli) + sin(Decli)*sinLat)
dY = -sin(HrAngl)
dX = tan(Decli)*cosLat - sinLat*cosHA
Azimu = atan2(dY, dX)
if (Azimu.lt. 0.0)Azimu = Azimu + twopi
Azimu = Azimu/rad
c
c Parallax Correction
c
Paralx=(Radius/AUnit)*sin(Zenith)
Zenith=(Zenith + Paralx)/rad
c
c Sun-Earth actual distance in AU (from Michalsky's paper)
c
R=1.00014-.01671*cos(Anomly)-.00014*cos(2.*Anomly)
c
c Equation of Time (in min, from Michalsky's paper)
c
RightA=RightA/rad
SunLng=SunLng/rad
xsun=-aint(abs(SunLng)/360.)
if(Sunlng.lt.0.)xsun=-xsun+1.
SunLng=SunLng+xsun*360.
EOT=(SunLng-RightA)*4.
C
C REFRACTION CORRECTION FOR ACTUAL ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS (P,T)
C
ELD=90.-Zenith
ELD2=ELD*ELD
REFR=0.
PT=P/T
IF(ELD.LT.15.0.AND.ELD.GE.-2.5)REFR=PT*(.1594+.0196*ELD+
# 2E-5*ELD2)/(1.+.505*ELD+.0845*ELD2)
IF(ELD.GE.15.0.AND.ELD.LT.90.)REFR=.00452*PT/TAN(ELD*rad)
Zenith=90.-(ELD+REFR)
zenit=real(zenith)
azim=real(azimu)
c
A‐25

c Declination in degrees
c
Decli=Decli/rad
return
end
C
C
c
SUBROUTINE UVDAT(ERY0,ERY1,ERY2,ERY3,ERY4,DNA,PHO,ECAL,ACG,
% POL,SIS,PRT,SCUPH,SCUPM,wvln)
C
C Calculates different erythema and DNA action/damage curves
C
REAL A(6),B(6)
DATA B/-1.3448,1.2203E4,5.2729E5,-1.33E7,7.4736E7,54.81/
DATA A/41.791,1.3853E4,3.6663E5,-1.1993E7,7.5816E7,53.426/
C
DW=wvln-300.
DW2=DW*DW
DW3=DW*DW2
DW4=DW*DW3
DW5=DW*DW4
DW6=DW*DW5
DW7=DW*DW6
DW8=DW*DW7
DW325=wvln-325.
wvl=wvln/1000.
XL=-log(wvl)
XL2=XL*XL
XL3=XL*XL2
XL4=XL2*XL2
C
C ERYTHEMA SPECTRUM OF CIE 1987 (MCKINLAY & DIFFEY)
C
ERY0=1.0
IF(wvln.GE.299.0.AND.wvln.Lt.329.)ERY0=10.**(.094*(298.-wvln))
IF(wvln.GE.329.)ERY0=10.**(.015*(139.-wvln))
C
C ERYTHEMA SPECTRUM OF KOMHYR AND MACHTA, fitted by GREEN ET AL.
C (1974)
C
EXPL=EXP((DW+3.5)/2.692)
ERY1=.04485/(1.+EXP((DW-11.4)/3.13))+3.9796*EXPL/(1.+EXPL)**2
C
C ERYTHEMA SPECTRUM OF COBLENTZ AND STAIR (1934), fitted by
C GREEN ET AL. (1975)
C
EXPL2=EXP((DW+3.)/3.21)
ERY2=0.
IF(wvln.LE.325.)ERY2=4.*EXPL2/(1.+EXPL2)**2
C
C ERYTHEMA SPECTRUM OF PARRISH ET AL. (1982), AS FITTED BY
C BJORN (1989)
C
ERY3=EXP(-.4232-.1413*DW-.0105*DW2+2E-4*DW3+8.982E-6*DW4-
# 3.921E-7*DW5+5.623E-9*DW6-3.603E-11*DW7+8.759E-14*DW8)
C
C ERYTHEMA SPECTRUM OF DIFFEY (1982) MODIFIED BY BJORN (1989)
C
ERY4=0.
A‐26

IF(wvln.GE.326.0.OR.wvln.LE.284.)GOTO 90
ERY4=.98-.0957*DW
IF(wvln.gt.310.)ERY4=EXP(-5.0188-.118*DW325+9.382E-4*DW325*DW325)
90 CONTINUE
C
C PLANT/DNA SPECTRUM OF SETLOW (1974) AS FITTED BY
C GREEN & MO (1975)
C
DNA=0.
IF(wvln.GE.366.)GOTO 99
DNA=EXP(13.82*(-1.+1./(1.+EXP((wvln-310.)/9.))))
99 CONTINUE
C
C PHOTOSYNTHESIS INHIBITION SPECTRUM OF CALDWELL ET AL. (1986)
C
PHO=0.
IF(wvln.LE.340.)PHO=13.42*EXP(106.219-.6122*wvln
1 +.0008316*wvln*wvln)
C
C CALDWELL (1971) BIOLOGICAL ACTION CURVE, AS FITTED BY
C GREEN ET AL. (1974)
C
ECAL=0.
IF(wvln.LE.313.)ECAL=2.618*(1.-(wvln/313.3)**2)*EXP(-DW/31.08)
C
C ACGIH (1978) SAFETY SPECTRUM, AS FITTED BY WESTER (1981, 1984)
C
ACG=0.
IF(wvln.Lt.300.)ACG=1.-0.36*((wvln-270.)/20.)**1.64
IF(wvln.GE.300.0.AND.wvln.LE.315.)ACG=0.3*0.74**DW
C
C POLYCHROMATIC ACTION FOR HIGHER PLANTS,data fom Caldwell et al.
C (1986); fit by Gueymard
C
POL=EXP(40.355-106.88*XL+59.307*XL2)
C
C SYSTEMATIC IMMUNOSUPPRESSION, data from deFabo et al. (1990);
C fit by Gueymard
C
SIS=EXP(-42.826+45.056*XL-9.3345*XL2)
C
C DNA TO PROTEIN CROSSLINKS, data from Peak & Peak (1986);
C fit by Gueymard
C
PRT=EXP(-1305.8+5287.4*XL-7917.5*XL2+5154.1*XL3-1228.3*XL4)
C
C SKIN CARCINOGENESIS FOR MICE AND HUMANS, data from
C de Gruijl & Van der Leun (1994); fit by Gueymard
C
H=WVL-.299
X=WVL-.293
SH=0.
SX=0.
H1=1.
X1=1.
DO 10 I=1,5
H1=H1*H
X1=X1*X
SH=SH+A(I)*H1
SX=SX+B(I)*X1
A‐27

10 CONTINUE
SCUPH=EXP(-SH/(1.+A(6)*H))
SCUPM=EXP(-SX/(1.+B(6)*X))
C
999 continue
RETURN
END
c Subroutine VISTAU(Season,Range,Tau,index)
c
Real vs1(5),vw1(5),vs2(3),vw2(3),vs3(2),vw3(2)
Character*6 Season
Data vs1 /-3.2998,-5.37,156.14,42.389,48.957/
Data vs2 /.026483,7.133,-6.6238/
Data vs3 /.039987,.43928/
Data vw1 /-3.6629,-6.5109,165.85,44.857,51.968/
Data vw2 /.010149,6.7705,-1.7703/
Data vw3 /.023339,.27928/
c
if(index.eq.1)goto 1
tln=log(Tau)
Range=999.
c
c*** (Index=0) Calculate Range from Tau
c
if(season.eq.'WINTER')goto 345
c
c Calculations for SPRING/SUMMER conditions
c
if(Tau.lt.0.0402)goto 346
if(Tau.le.0.0416)goto 3442
delta1=(vs1(4)*tln-vs1(2))*(vs1(4)*tln-vs1(2))-
1 4.*(vs1(5)*tln-vs1(3))*(tln-vs1(1))
Range=1./(.001+.5*(vs1(2)-vs1(4)*tln-(delta1**.5))/
1 (vs1(5)*tln-vs1(3)))
goto 346
3440 continue
delta2=vs2(2)*vs2(2)+4.*vs2(3)*(Tau-vs2(1))
Range=Min(999.,1./(.001+.5*(vs2(2)-(delta2**.5))/(-vs2(3))))
goto 346
3442 continue
Range=1./(.001+(Tau-vs3(1))/vs3(2))
346 continue
Range=Min(Range,999.)
goto 30
345 continue
c
c Calculations for FALL/WINTER conditions
c
if(Tau.le.0.0245)goto 3446
delta1=(vw1(4)*tln-vw1(2))*(vw1(4)*tln-vw1(2))-
1 4.*(vw1(5)*tln-vw1(3))*(tln-vw1(1))
Range=1./(.001+.5*(vw1(2)-vw1(4)*tln-(delta1**.5))/
1 (vw1(5)*tln-vw1(3)))
goto 346
3444 continue
delta2=vw2(2)*vw2(2)+4.*vw2(3)*(Tau-vw2(1))
Range=Min(999.,1./(.001+.5*(vw2(2)-(delta2**.5))/(-vw2(3))))
A‐28

goto 346
3446 continue
Range=1./(.001+(Tau-vw3(1))/vw3(2))
goto 346
c
1 continue
c
c*** (Index=1) Calculate Tau from Range
c
YVIS=(1./RANGE)-.001
Yvis2=Yvis*Yvis
if(Range.lt.100.)goto 3447
if(Range.gt.320.)goto 3448
Tau=vs2(1)+vs2(2)*Yvis+vs2(3)*Yvis2
if(Season.eq.'WINTER')Tau=vw2(1)+vw2(2)*Yvis+vw2(3)*Yvis2
goto 30
3447 continue
Tau=exp((vs1(1)+vs1(2)*Yvis+vs1(3)*Yvis2)/
1 (1.+vs1(4)*Yvis+vs1(5)*Yvis2))
if(Season.eq.'WINTER')Tau=exp((vw1(1)+vw1(2)*Yvis+
1 vw1(3)*Yvis2)/(1.+vw1(4)*Yvis+vw1(5)*Yvis2))
goto 30
3448 continue
Tau=vs3(1)+vs3(2)*Yvis
if(Season.eq.'WINTER')Tau=vw3(1)+vw3(2)*Yvis
30 continue
c
Return
End
A‐29

‫ﺟﻤﻬﻮﻮرﻳﺔ اﻟﻌﺮاق‬
‫اﻟﻌﻠﻤﻲ‬
‫ﻲ‬ ‫ﺤﺚ‬
‫ﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ واﻟﺒﺤ‬
‫وزاررة اﻟﻌﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﻌ‬
‫ﻨﺼﺮﻳﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﺎﻣﻣﻌﺔ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺼ‬
‫آﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻌﻠﻮم‬
‫ﻋﻠﻮم اﻟﺠﻮﻮ‬‫ﻗﺴﻢ ﻋ‬
‫ﺠﻮﻳﺔ ﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻟﻌﻮاﻣﻣﻞ اﻟﺠ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﻌ‬
‫ﺗﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺾ‬
‫ااﻷﺷﻌﻌﺔ اﻟﻔﻟﻔﻮق اﻟﺒﻨﻔﺴ ﺔ‬
‫ﻔﺴﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫آﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻌﻠﻮم ‪ -‬اﻟﺠﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬
‫ﺠﻮ ‪ -‬ﺔ‬ ‫ﺣﺔ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺔ اﻟﻰ ﻗﺴﻢ ﻋﻠﻮم اﻟﺠ‬
‫أﻃﺮوﺣ‬
‫اﻟﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺼﺮﺮﻳﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻮم اﻟﺠﻮ‬
‫ﺴﻔﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋ‬
‫آﺠﺰء ﻣﻣﻦ ﻣﺘﻄﻠﺒﺒﺎت ﻧﻴﻞ ددرﺟﺔ دآﺘﺘﻮراﻩ ﻓﻠﺴ‬
‫ﻣﻘﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ‬
‫ﺣﻤﻦ اﻟﺼ ﻲ‬
‫ﺼﺎﻟﺤﻲ‬ ‫ﻋﺒﺪاﻟﺮﺣ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻲ ﻣﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻋ‬
‫ﻋ‬
‫ﻜﺎﻟﻮرﻳﻮس ﻋﻠﻮم ﻓﻴﺰﺰﻳﺎء )‪(19994‬‬
‫س‬ ‫ﺑﻜ‬
‫ﺟﻮ )‪(2002‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﺟﺴﺘﻴﺮ ﻋﻠﻮم ﻮ‬
‫ﺮ‬
‫أﺷﺮاف‬
‫أ‪.‬م‪.‬د ﻗﻗﻴﺲ ﺟﻤﻤﻴﻞ اﻟﺠﻤﻤﻴﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﻖ أﺣﻤﺪ ززآﻲ‬
‫أ‪.‬م‪.‬د ﻧﺎﻃﻖ‬
‫رﻣﻀﺎن ‪1428‬‬ ‫ﻷول ‪2007‬‬
‫ﺗﺸﺮﻳﻦ اﻷ‬

PH.D Thesis

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

PH.D Thesis

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Repuublic of IR

Effect of Soome Atmosph heric Factors

A Thesis subm mitted to

Octobber 20077 Ram

We certify that this thesis entitled “Study of Atmospheric

In view of the available recommendation, I forward this

Approved by the council of the college of science, Al-Mustansiryah University

mercy; I am forever grateful to my God.

I would like to seize this opportunity to thank my supervisor,

support during the period of my study in the college. Dr. AlJumaily

has created a deep interest within myself to explore the different

potential in the field of ultraviolet radiation and has also inspired me

to carry out further research in this field.

I am deeply indebted to Assistant professor . Dr. Natiq Ahmed Zaki

Also I would like to express my thanks to the Administration of the

Department of Atmospheric science and College of science for giving

me the chance to complete my study.

I am also grateful to all my classmates for their valuable support.

providing me (TOMS) data from NASA.

Also I would like to express my gratitude to my great friends; Mr.

Mr. Ayad Abdul Karim.

Figure 1.1: Solar Spectrum [WMO, 2002].

1.2 Nature of Ultraviolet Radiation

Figure (1.2): The Ozone concentration with altitude

1.3 Absorbers in the Ultraviolet Spectrum

1.4 Scattering of Direct Solar Radiation

incidence. Greater scattering occurs when incident radiation is of a shorter

Figure (1.3): Scattering of electromagnetic radiation.

1.5 Previews Studies

earth surface and lower atmosphere. Ilyas,(1987) investigated the relation

Josefsson et al., (2000) estimated the effect of hydrometers in the atmosphere

1.6 Aim of Thesis

1.7 Thesis Organization

Thee spectrall irradiancce (monocchromaticc irradiancce) , is the power

t elemennt of solidd angle as shown in figure 2.22 :

Thee irradiannce (or fluux densityy) F(r,n) iss the pow

its unit is Wm-1.

2.2 Extinction and Emission

The quantity is the extinction coefficient; it is the sum of an absorption

Figure 2.33 :A beam,, or pencil’ of radiatioon travellin

Thee extinctioon coefficcient geenerally depends

if spectral radiance equals at the point so the

In the absence of emission the spectral radiance falls exponentially, decreasing

where , is called Angstrom turbidity coefficient, is the wavelength

where ma is the optical path length [Iqbal, 1983].

2.4 Surface Reflection: The BRDF

We note that dIλr+(Ω ) is a first-order differential quantity that balances the

Figure 2.44: Geometrry and symb bols for thee definition

2.55 Ozone Absorpttion

where Is the ozonne optical thickness..

is optical mass, is reducced path length

2.6 Uniformly Mixed Gas Absorption

Some atmospheric constituents known as the "mixed gases" (Principally O2

where is the gas mass, is the spectral absorption coefficients, and is

3.2 Total Ozone mapping spectrometer (TOMS) sensor

Satellites Earth Probe

3.3 TOMS Instrument Description

3.4 Radiometric Calibration

The measured solar irradiance Fm can be written as:

3.5 Epply Pyrometer and Ultraviolet Data Sets

Sensitivity 150 µ volt/wm-2

3.5 Automatic Weather Station and Global UV Sensor

Figure (3.2): Ultraviolet sensor maintained on