ANIMPROVEDMODELFORTHEMICROWAVE

BRIGHTNESSTEMPERATURESEENFROMSPACE
OVERCALMOCEAN
by
Your name here
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO
MAYAGEZ CAMPUS
2005
Approved by:
________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
Member, Graduate Committee

__________________
Date

________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
Member, Graduate Committee

__________________
Date

________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
President, Graduate Committee

__________________
Date

________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
Representative of Graduate Studies

__________________
Date

________________________________
Sandra L. Cruz-Pol, PhD
Chairperson of the Department

__________________
Date

This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.

ABSTRACT
This thesis was formatted so that you only type on top of it your material and it should redo
the Table of contents automatically by the command on the Menu: Insert>Reference>Index
and Tables.
IMPORTANT: when pasting material to this file be sure to use
Edit>Paste_Special> Unformatted_Text, so that the format given by this file is not
changed. When pasting figures, be sure to use Paste_special>Picture(JPEG) to make the
size of your thesis file as much as 10 times smaller than using just Paste, which usually
utilized the BMP format for figure, making your file huge and not portable. The figures
should be inserted using Insert>References>Caption>(Figure), and typing the caption of
the figure. In some versions of Word you can skip the Reference part. The tables should be
inserted using Insert>References>Caption>(Table). Word should automatically increase
the figure number and add the chapter number to it. The equations are also set so that you do
Insert>References>Caption>(Equation) and the equation number increases automatically.
You can delete the word Equation later, if you prefer to display only the equation number.
Good luck! Hope this saves you a lot of work and time. SCP
This work presents models that predict extinction rates due to atmospheric gases for 35 GHz
and 95 GHz radars as a function of elevation angle.

The minimum detectable radar

reflectivity (dBZemin) is computed for both wavelengths using radiosonde and microwave
radiometer measurements. In general, sensitivity decreases with elevation angle mostly
because water vapor and their corresponding highest extinction rates propagate through the
lower portion of the atmosphere.

ii

This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.

RESUMEN

Este trabajo presenta un modelo que predice la razn de extincin para seales de 33 y 95
GHz debido a los gases atmosfricos en funcin del ngulo de elevacin. Se computo la
mnima reflectividad detectable por el radar (dBZemin) para ambas frecuencias usando medidas
de radiosonda y radimetro de microondas. En general la sensitividad decrece con el ngulo
de elevacin debido principalmente a que el vapor de agua y su correspondiente alta
extincin suceden en la porcin baja de la atmsfera.
.

iii

This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.

To my family . . .

iv

This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
During the development of my graduate studies in the University of Puerto Rico several
persons and institutions collaborated directly and indirectly with my research. Without their
support it would be impossible for me to finish my work. That is why I wish to dedicate this
section to recognize their support.

I want to start expressing a sincere acknowledgement to my advisor, Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol

because she gave me the opportunity to research under her guidance and supervision. I
received motivation; encouragement and support form her during all my studies. With her, I
have learned writing papers for conferences and sharing my ideas to the public. I also want
to thank the example, motivation, inspiration and support I received from Dr. Jos Colom.
From these two persons, I am completely grateful. Special thanks I owe Dr. Stephen M.
Sekelsky for the opportunity of researching under his supervision, his support, guidance, and
transmitted knowledge for the completion of my work.

The Grant from NSF EIA 99-77071 provided the funding and the resources for the
development of this research. At last, but the most important I would like to thank my
family, for their unconditional support, inspiration and love.

This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.

Table of Contents
ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................................................II
RESUMEN......................................................................................................................................................III
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................................................V
TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE LIST......................................................................................................VI
TABLE LIST...............................................................................................................................................VII
FIGURE LIST...........................................................................................................................................VIII
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
2
2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.2
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
3
3.1
3.2
3.2.1
3.3
4

INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................2
MOTIVATION...................................................................................................................................2
LITERATURE REVIEW.....................................................................................................................3
SUMMARY OF FOLLOWING CHAPTERS...........................................................................................5
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND...................................................................................................6
RADIATIVE TRANSFER EQUATIONS................................................................................................6
Equations relating humidity profiles and microwave radiometer data to attenuation............6
Water vapor profile and zenith attenuation statistics at 33 and 95 GHz.................................9
SCAN EQUATIONS.......................................................................................................................12
RADAR SYSTEM CHARACTERISTIC AND MCTEX EXPERIMENT LAYOUT.................................17
Maritime Continent Thunderstorm Experiment (MCTEX)....................................................17
Radar Hardware of Cloud Profiling Radar System (CPRS)..................................................17
MICROWAVE ATMOSPHERIC ABSORPTION MODEL.......................................................19
ATMOSPHERIC ABSORPTION......................................................................................................19
NEW MODEL RETRIEVED PARAMETERS......................................................................................21
Bullet and Bullet Rosettes Toolbox for DDSCAT Program....................................................22
BACKSCATTERING AND DWR ANALYZE WITH IDL PROGRAM AND DDSCAT.....................23
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK.....................................................................................26

APPENDIX A.

IDL CODES FOR DBZEMIN............................................................................................29

APPENDIX B

PROGRAMS FOR BULLET AND DWR.........................................................................31

APPENDIX B1 IDL PROGRAM FOR REFRACTION INDEX................................................................................31

vi

This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.

1 Table List
Tables

Page

TABLE 2.1CPRS Parameters............................................................................................10

TABLE 2.2CPRS Operational Models..............................................................................11
TABLE 2.3 Mean values of the regions for CPRS data collected and dBZemin simulated.16

vii

This thesis was auto-formatted by Dr. Sandra Cruz-Pol, please use to ease your life.

Figure List
Figures

Page

Figure 2.1 Passive remote sensing with upward-looking radiometer..................................7

Figure 2.2 Mean specific humidity profile..........................................................................9
Figure 2.3 Profile of extinction rates (--33 GHz and 95 GHz)Profile of extinction rates (-33 GHz and 95 GHz).....................................................................................................10
Figure 2.4 Minimum detectable signal for a single zenith pulse at different modes of radar
pulse width.(a) Mode 1: = 200ns, (b) Mode 2: = 500ns, (c) Mode 3: = 1,000ns......11
Figure 2.5 Flowchart for the IDL routine used for calculating the dBZemin....................13
Figure 2.6 Mnimum detectable dBZe in mode 1 (= 200 ns), (a) 33 GHz, (b) 95 GHz. 14
Figure 2.7 Minimum detectable dBZe in mode in mode 2 (= 500 ns), (a) 33 GHz, (b) 95
GHz....................................................................................................................................14
Figure 2.8 The plot on (a) depicts the radar reflectivity measured at 95GHz with CPRS and
plot on data at same time than CPRS data was collected at 95GHz..................................15
Figure 2.9 Hill ratio comparison between various atmospheric models showing agreement of
the chosen water vapor absorption line shape with the radiometer data. (See text for
explanation of models' acronyms).....................................................................................16
Figure 3.1 Bullet and Bullet Rosettes with different angles of junction............................20
Figure 3.2 Wind speed model relating 0 to wind speed for the MCW algorithm as calibrated
for Topex altimeter.............................................................................................................22
Figure 3.3 Methodology used to create a bullet formed by an array of N dipoles separated by,
(a) General process, (b) bullet 3D-view, and (c) Bullet rosette with 3 bullets.................23
Figure 3.4 Backscattering (10 logb) of different indexes of refraction, (a) Backscattering in
dB to 33GHz with 652 dipoles array, (b) Backscattering in dB to 95GHz .......................24
Figure 3.5 Variation of the number of raob profiles used depending on the limits in space and
time separation imposed on the data..................................................................................25

viii

1 INTRODUCTION
Knowledge of the state of the ocean plays a vital role in weather and ocean wave forecasting
models [Wilheit, 1979a] as well as in ocean-circulation models [Dobson et al., 1987]. One
approach to measuring the state of the ocean is by remote sensing of the oceans surface
emission. Microwave radiometers on satellites can completely cover the earths oceans.
Satellite radiometry offers numerous advantages over ship and buoy data. Some of these
advantages include the vast coverage of global seas, including locations where radiosonde or
buoys cannot be afforded, relatively low power consumption, no maintenance and continuous
operation under a wide range of weather conditions.
Measurements of the microwave brightness seen from the sea are used in the retrieval of
physical parameters such as wind speed, cloud liquid water and path delay. A suitable model
for these measurements includes contributions from atmospheric emission, mainly water
vapor and oxygen, and from ocean emission.

1.1 Motivation
The need to improve the calibration of existing models for atmospheric and ocean emission is
motivated by several current and upcoming satellite remote sensing missions. In the case of
TMR, an improved atmospheric model would enhance the inversion algorithm used to
retrieve path delay information. Another case is the JASON satellite, a joint NASA/CNES
radiometer and altimeter scheduled to be launched in 2000 [JPL, 1998].

For JASON,

absolute calibration is performed by occasionally looking at calm water. This type of

2

calibration reduces the cost in hardware, complexity, size and power. However, the quality of
the calibration depends strongly on the accuracy of a model for the calm water emission. In
contrast, for the TMR an absolute calibration is performed using hot and cold references
carried by the satellite [Ruf et al., 1995].
In this document, a section is devoted to each of these models. In Part I, the development of
an improved microwave atmospheric absorption model is presented. Part II is dedicated to
ocean microwave emission. In both cases, a model is developed and iteratively adjusted to
fit a carefully calibrated set of measurements.

1.2 Literature Review

Seasat was the first satellite designed for remote sensing of the Earth's oceans. It was
launched in 1978 by the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA). The
mission was designed to demonstrate the feasibility of global satellite monitoring of
oceanographic phenomena and to help determine the requirements for an operational ocean
remote sensing satellite system.

It included the Scanning Multichannel Microwave

Radiometer (SMMR) which measured vertical and horizontal linearly polarized brightness
temperatures at 6.6, 10.7, 18, 21 and 37 GHz. The SMMR was used to retrieve surface wind
speed, ocean surface temperature, atmospheric water vapor content, rain rate, and ice
coverage. Unfortunately, the mission only lasted approximately 100 days due to a failure of
the vehicle's electric power system [Njoku et al.,1980].
, cloud water content, and ocean surface wind speeds [Hollinger et al., 1990].

In 1991 the European Space Agency launched The ERS-1 satellite. The primary mission of
ERS-1 was to perform remote sensing of the Earth's oceans, ice caps, and coastal regions by
providing global measurements of wind speed and direction, wave height, surface
temperatures, surface altitude, cloud cover, and atmospheric water vapor levels. The mission
included a nadir viewing radiometer operating at 23.8 and 36.5 GHz and co-aligned with the
altimeter to provide range corrections with 2 cm accuracy [Gnther et al., 1993].
In 1998 the US Navy launched the GEOSAT Follow On (GFO), designed to provide realtime ocean topography data. It includes a radar altimeter with 3.5 cm height measurement
precision. In addition, a dual frequency (22 and 37 GHz) water vapor radiometer is included
to provide path delay correction with an accuracy of 1.9 cm [Ruf et al., 1996].
Sekelsky et al. [1998, 1999] used simulations from the ice crystals backscattering at various
millimeter wavelengths using the DDA models on the version 5 of DDSCAT, using a more
realistic density model where ice density is not constant, as in previous studies, but decreases
with the particles diameter. They calculated the dual-wavelength ratio (DWR). Their
findings also agree with previous studies where the shape and orientation are the principal
causes of error on the DWR estimates and other products.
Uncertainties in the improved model for atmospheric emission are significantly improved
over previous published models. The line-strength and width parameters' uncertainties are
reduced to 1% and 1.6%, respectively. The overall uncertainty in the new absorption model
is conservatively estimated to be 3% in the vicinity of 22GHz and approaching 8% at 32
GHz.

The RMS difference between modeled and measured thermal emission by the

atmosphere, in terms of the brightness temperature, is reduced by 23%, from 1.36 K to 1.05
K, compared to one of the most currently used atmospheric models.
The modified ocean dielectric models exhibit significant improvements in the estimate of TB.
Of the two, the modified Ellison et al.[1977] model exhibits superior overall performance,
including the lowest bias at both frequencies, which is a very important attribute indicative of
the accuracy of the model. Its frequency dependence was decreased to 0.30K, which will
allow for more reliable extrapolation to higher frequencies. In addition, this modified model
has the lowest dependence on sea surface temperature and the lowest RMS difference for
both 18GHz and 37GHz. Consequently, this is the model that we recommend for future
remote sensing applications involving microwave emissions from the ocean emissivity of the
ocean. The average error in the modified emissivity model, over the range 18-40 GHz, is
found to be 0.37%, which in terms of brightness temperatures, translates into a model error of
approximately 1K.

1.3 Summary of Following Chapters

We first develop the necessary background theory in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 deals with the
model theory, experiments and data analysis related to the atmospheric absorption model.
The third chapter presents the model theory, data, statement of the problem, and analysis for
the ocean emission model. Conclusions are presented in Chapter 4.

2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.1

Radiative Transfer Equations

2.1.1 Equations relating humidity profiles and microwave radiometer data to

attenuation
The atmosphere receives most of its energy by means of solar electromagnetic radiation.
Some of this energy is absorbed by the atmosphere and some reaches the surface of the Earth
where it can also be absorbed or it can be reflected. Energy absorption implies a rise in
thermal energy and, therefore, temperature of the object. Any object with a temperature
above absolute zero emits electromagnetic radiation. Electromagnetic emission implies a
decrease in the objects temperature.

These processes, i.e. absorption and emission,

altogether help create a balance between the energy absorbed by the Earth and its atmosphere
and the energy emitted by them. The study of these energy transformation processes is called
radiative transfer.
The Planck function for spectral brightness describes the radiation spectrum of a blackbody
at thermal equilibrium. It is given by
B f (T )

2hf 3
1

2
hf / kT
c e
1

2.1

Using the Rosenkranzs model for gaseous attenuation due to oxygen, KO2(I), and a modified
Liebes model for gaseous attenuation due to water vapor, Kwv(l), for every layer (see Fig.
2.1) and for each radar frequency, 33 GHz and 95 GHz [Cruz-Pol, 1998; Keihm, et al. 2002]
6

total gaseous attenuation were calculated. The equation for Kwv(l) is [Cruz-Pol, 1998]. It is
given by shape and continuum terms.

Figure 2.1 Passive remote sensing with upward-looking radiometer

In this equations we delete the word Equation automatically inserted by Word and we
formatted the text to the Right. You can leave the word Equation if you like. All the body
text is formatted as justified so that the margins are even..
TL 0.0109C L Pwv 3.5 e 2.1431

2.2

1
1

2
2
f z f z f
f z f 2

2.3

TS

TC C C 1.13 10 8 Pwv Pdry 3 3.57 10 7 Pwv 2 10.5

2.4

The absorption model for the water vapor resonance line is accomplished by the addition of
three parameters, given by CL = 1.064, CW = 1.066, and CC = 1.234. These are the parameters
for scaling the line strength, the line width and the continuum, respectively. Here f is the
7

radar frequency in GHz, fz is the water vapor resonant frequency, 22.235 GHz, is the
inverse temperature, Pwv is the water vapor partial pressure, and Pdry is the difference between
total pressure, P, and the water vapor pressure, Pwv. Their respective equations are:
300
t
sh
Pwv
0.7223

2.5
2.6

Pdry P Pwv

2.7

where sh is the specific humidity, t is the air temperature in Kelvin. The width parameter,, is
defined as:

CW 0.002784 Pdry 0.6 4.8 Pwv 1.1

2.8

The oxygen absorption model is defined as:

K O2

Pdry c 3

33

n odd 1

f
f
n

S T

Ln f

2.9

where c=0.5034 x 1012, S(T) is the line strength [Rosenkranz, 1993]

S T S ' T0 2 e 0.0068952n n 1 1

2.10

2.1.2 Water vapor profile and zenith attenuation statistics at 33 and 95 GHz
Maritime Continent Island Thunderstorm Experiment was held during the Australian summer
monsoon. Thunderstorms develop in an environment with low shear and high moisture. The
8

data obtained by the radiosonde were corroborated with radiometer data. Collecting the
radiosonde measurements every day during the experiment, gaseous attenuation, specific
humidity and cumulative attenuation profiles were calculated for the complete experiment.
The average profile is shown in Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.2 Mean specific humidity profile

Gaseous attenuation mean for 33 GHz is 0.11 dB/Km and 0.74 dB/Km for 95 GHz (see Fig.
2.3).

Figure 2.3 Profile of extinction rates (--33 GHz and 95 GHz)Profile of extinction rates
(--33 GHz and 95 GHz)
Equation (2.10) contains all the quantities needed to compute the response of a satellite-based
microwave radiometer to changes in atmospheric and surface variables.
The 33 GHz signal has more peak power than the 95 GHz signal (see Table 2.1) to
compensate for its smaller gain (wide bandwidth).

TABLE 2.1CPRS Parameters

W
band
Frequency (GHz)
Peak power (kW)
Average power (W)
Pulse width (ns)
Gain
Range gate spacing (m)
Pulse repetition freq. (kHz)
Noise figure (dB)
Bandwidth (MHz)
Beam width (deg)

95
1.5
15
500
105.8
75
10
13
2
0.18

Ka band
33
120
120
200
104.83
30
5
11
5
0.50

Thus, the 95 GHz signal has a comparable performance and has similar values of minimum
detectable signal to the 33 GHz signal, obtaining similar resolution and noise immunity for
both signals for a single pulse in zenith angle. This is shown in Figure 2.5. The other modes
parameters are shown in the Table 2.2

10

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 2.4 Minimum detectable signal for a single zenith pulse at different modes of
radar pulse width.(a) Mode 1: = 200ns, (b) Mode 2: = 500ns, (c) Mode 3: = 1,000ns.
TABLE 2.2CPRS Operational Models
Mode 1

Pulse width (ns)

W Band. Pulse Repetition
Frequency (kHz)
Ka Band. Pulse Repetition
Frequency (kHz)
Bandwidth (MHz)

Mode 2

Mode 3

200
10,000

500
10,000

1,000
10,000

2,500

1,000

500

But when the radar scans and many pulses are sent, the radar performance does not behave in
the same way as when as sending a single pulse in zenith angle. So we need to analyze the
performance of scanning radar

2.2 Scan Equations

The one-way path loss, Ag, depends on the frequency being used. For frequencies where the
path loss degrades the signal strongly, higher power was used to minimize this effect.

11

After obtaining the atmospheric attenuation for every layer (see Fig. 2.1), we found the
cumulative gaseous attenuation. This one is calculated for a fixed angle and for every range
gate in which the radar operates. A matrix of radius times angles was used to save the
projected attenuation. Then the cumulative attenuation for specific angle and radius was
computed as:
Ta TUP s Ts e ( 0, H ) sec (1 s )(TDN TC e ( 0, ) sec )e ( 0,H ) sec

2.11

Finally with the cumulative attenuation for every radius at a specific angle, the total path
loss, l, can be calculated. To implement all this procedure we used IDL program. IDL is a
language capable to process great amount of data, and a flow diagram in Figure 2.6 shows
the algorithm implemented in this work.

Figure 2.5 Flowchart for the IDL routine used for calculating the dBZemin
12

Graphs from calculations of the dBZemin when the radar operates in modes 1, 2, and 3, for
every radio and each angle at 33 and 95 GHz are plotted in Figures 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9. The
delta between two lines of the contour is 2 dB. The lightest bar colors represent larger
minimum reflectivity values that can be detected by the radar, i.e. less signal can be detected
in those areas.

(a)

(b)

Figure 2.6 Mnimum detectable dBZe in mode 1 (= 200 ns), (a) 33 GHz, (b) 95 GHz

13

(a)

(b)

Figure 2.7 Minimum detectable dBZe in mode in mode 2 (= 500 ns), (a) 33 GHz, (b) 95
GHz

(a)

Figure 2.8 The plot on (a) depicts the radar reflectivity measured at 95GHz with CPRS
and plot on data at same time than CPRS data was collected at 95GHz.

14

The radar begins to detect the cloud from a radius of 13 km and from an angle between 8 and
76 degrees. To the W band, the cloud looks much smaller than the one shown by the Ka
band. These data validate the simulation and confirm the effect of the attenuation of the W
band in angles smaller than 50 degrees (see Fig. 2.11a). Figures 2.10 and 2.11 show three
regions, these are the dBZemin that represent the CPRS data. We can see here that the radar
received a greater reflectivity than the minimum estimated reflectivity. We can see that this is
also true for the 95 GHz signal.
These results strongly suggest that VVW is the preferred choice for vapor absorption line
shape at 22 GHz. Note that the same finding was obtained by Hill [1986] when the ratio test
was applied to the original Becker and Autler [1946] laboratory data.

Figure 2.9 Hill ratio comparison between various atmospheric models showing
agreement of the chosen water vapor absorption line shape with the radiometer data.
(See text for explanation of models' acronyms).

15

The other regions behave in the same way. All the reflectivity mean values are within the
limits of the mean dBZemin simulated for both, the 33 GHz as for the 95 GHz. The other mean
values are listed in Table 2.3.
TABLE 2.3 Mean values of the regions for CPRS data collected and dBZemin simulated
Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

Mean dBZemin33GHz (dB)

Mean Reflectivity at 33GHz (dB)

-27.9162
3.718391

-28.8563
7.22807

-29.1437
-2.63717

Mean dBZemin95GHz (dB)

Mean Reflectivity at 95GHz (dB)

-12.9728
-8.31193

-17.7505
-7.19231

-23.7513
-3.61205

Radar System Characteristic and MCTEX Experiment

Layout
2.3

2.3.1 Maritime Continent Thunderstorm Experiment (MCTEX)

The MCTEX experiment was performed in the North Coast of Australia, and in the Bathurst
and Melville Islands. The principal objective of this experiment was to better understand the
physical processes, such as humidity balance over tropical islands on a maritime continent.
For this reason, the experiment was held between November 13th and December 10th, 1995;
season on which the transition phases occurs between the dry and wet seasons. The data of
this experiment were collected with different sensors. One set was collected by means of the
Cloud Profiling Radar System (CPRS). This one collected data on the Ka frequency band
(33.12 GHz) and W frequency band (94.92 GHz). Data from the W frequency band, 95 GHz,
16

also was collected by the Airborne Cloud Radar. The NOAA radar collected data on the S
frequency band, at 2.8 GHz.

2.3.2 Radar Hardware of Cloud Profiling Radar System (CPRS)

The CPRS is a dual-frequency polarimetric Doppler radar system that works with two subsystems at 33 and 95 GHz. This was fully developed by the University of Massachusetts
Microwave Remote Sensing Laboratory (MIRSL).
Table 2.1 shows the CPRS parameter. The CPRS has a programmable structure that allows
working in different modes of scanning. It has a high-speed VXI-bus-based data acquisition
and digital signal processing (DSP) system. A radome protects the system from atmospheric
effects. Both the 33 and 95 GHz sub-systems simultaneously transmit and receive by means
of a single aperture and not producing pointing errors between both frequencies. Table 2.1
shows other typical characteristics of the CPRS operation.

The CPRS works in three

different operational modes, changing the pulse width and by consequence the pulse
repetition frequency and the bandwidth change. These values are shown in 2. 2. The CPRS
measures can obtain the reflectivity (Ze), mean fall velocity (u) linear depolarization ratio
(LDR), velocity spectral width (v), and the full Doppler spectrum (S(v)) [Firda, 1997;
Lohmeire, et al. 1997].

17

Microwave Atmospheric Absorption Model

An improved model for the absorption of the atmosphere near the 22 GHz water vapor line is
presented. The Van-Vleck-Weisskopf line shape is used with a simple parameterized version
of the model from Liebe for the water vapor absorption spectra and a scaling of the model
from Rosenkranz for the 20-32 GHz oxygen absorption. Radiometric brightness temperature
measurements from two sites of contrasting climatological properties San Diego, CA and
West Palm Beach, FL were used as ground truth for comparison with in situ radiosonde
derived brightness temperatures. The retrieval of the new models four parameters, related
to water vapor line strength, line width and continuum absorption, and far-wing oxygen
absorption, was performed using the Newton-Raphson inversion method.

3.1 Atmospheric Absorption

Various shapes of the bullet rosettes are observed (see Fig. 3.1). The angles among the
bullets within the rosette are random between 70 and 90. Each bullet has a longitude
relation [Heymsfield, 1972], L (mm), versus wide, w (mm), (twice times the apothem) for
temperatures between 18 and 20 C given by

18

 TB1
C
L

T
B
2

C L
J TB 3

C L

T
Bn
C L

TB1
CW
TB 2
CW
TB 3
CW

TBn
CW

TB1
CC
TB 2
CC
TB 3
CC
TBn
CC

TB1
C X

TB 2
C X
TB 3

C X

TBn

C X

3.12

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

u ( z / L' )

1 7 z / L'
(1 18 z / L' 3 ).25
u

for z / L' 0 (neutral conditions)

for z / L' 0(stable conditions)
for z / L' 0(unstable conditions)

3.13

Although DDA can describe any geometry, it is limited by a minimum distance d that should
exist between dipoles. This distance should be inversely proportional to any structural
longitude on the target and to the wavelength. Previous studies [Draine and Flatau, 1994]
sum up the two criteria in equation 3.6.

19

Figure 3.10 Bullet and Bullet Rosettes with different angles of junction
In this way the equations were determined for the bulk density, , of the bullet, considering
the solid ice density as 0.9 g cm-3 and using the volume of ice in individual crystals
[Heymsfield, 1972]
As the Wieners theorem states [Oguchi, 1983], the complex index of refraction, m, depends
of the bulk density when dealing with dry ice particles:
Ln is proportional to the shape of the lines
.

Y ( f f )
n
n
n

Ln

n2 f fn 2

n Yn ( f f n )

Equation 3.14

n f f n
2

The pressure-broadened line half-width is,

n 0.001w Pdry .8 11
. PH2 O

Equation 3.15
The O2 resonant lines are very close to each other and troposphere pressures are high enough
( > 100 mbars) to cause the lines to broaden and overlap.

This is called collisional

broadening and is taken into account through the interference parameter.

3.2 New Model Retrieved Parameters

The final retrieved parameters, CL, CW, CC and CX, are shown in Table 2.1. As the table
indicates, the nominal parameters used in the L87R93 model are 3 to 7 percent lower.
Figures 2.7a-c depict plots of the brightness temperature for three climatological conditions.
Each graph has a plot corresponding to the L87R93 and new models. Also shown are the
radiometer measured brightnesses. The new estimated parameters show better agreement
20

with the WVR data. L87R93 model as the reference (therefore, by definition the L87R93
model is . In these figures we have included the L93 model which, as explained above, is
similar to L87R93 except that it has a higher water vapor line
Although DDA can describe any geometry, it is limited by a minimum distance d that should
exist between dipoles. This distance should be inversely proportional to any structural
longitude on the target and to the wavelength. Previous studies [Draine and Flatau, 1994]
sum up the two criteria in equation 3.6.

Figure 3.11 Wind speed model relating 0 to wind speed for the MCW algorithm as
calibrated for Topex altimeter.

3.2.1 Bullet and Bullet Rosettes Toolbox for DDSCAT Program

We developed two toolboxes for DDSCAT where we implemented the most common shapes
of the cirrus ice crystals, i.e. the bullet and bullet rosettes.

Using a single DDSCAT

environment by means of the ddscat.par file [Draine and Flatau, 2000], we specified which

21

one of the geometries we wanted to use and parameters such as size, dielectric constant of the
material, and in general all the parameters related to the target to be analyzed.

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 3.12 Methodology used to create a bullet formed by an array of N dipoles separated
by, (a) General process, (b) bullet 3D-view, and (c) Bullet rosette with 3 bullets.

3.3 Backscattering with DDSCAT

Once the bullet toolbox was created in DDSCAT, we proceeded to use it to simulate the
crystals backscattering at 33 and 95 GHz. Figure 3.4 shows the backscattering for one bullet
22

crystal of different sizes using several models for index of refraction and crystal density. The
figure shows the sensitivity of the backscattering to the index of refraction, showing the
necessity of considering the index of refraction for each size and density of the ice crystal,
and not assuming a constant density for all the bullets sizes.

(a)

(b)

Figure 3.13 Backscattering (10 log b) of different indexes of refraction, (a) Backscattering in dB to
33GHz with 652 dipoles array, (b) Backscattering in dB to 95GHz .

It can also be seen that the backscattering obtained when varying the index of refraction
according to the particle size is not significantly different to the results obtained when using
constant indexes of refraction for different particle sizes.
Given that one of the objectives is to analyze the DWR, we designed an interface between
DDSCAT and IDL program. We developed a routine that iteratively collects data from IDL
such as the index of refraction, m, which is computed according to the particles size and the
index of refraction of the solid ice, ni, and saving m in DDSCAT to compute the
23

backscattering and again this value is saved in IDL to obtain the DWR. The DWR is defined
as [Sekelsky, et al. 1999]

l K I h

3.67

b D, l , D 2 e

D0

dD

DWR 10 log

3.67

4 K 2 D, , D 2 e
I l
b
h
h

D0

3.16

dD

where l and h are the values of the smaller wavelength and greater respectively, KI is an
dimensionless quantity that depends on the index of refraction and on the density. For ice we
used 0.176 for both frequencies [Sekeslky, et al. 1999].

Figure 3.14 Variation of the number of raob profiles used depending on the limits in space and time
separation imposed on the data

24

4 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

Recent work to determine the sea water dielectric coefficient was based on laboratory
measurements of sea water samples from different parts of the ocean. Although these
measurements should render good understanding of the emission from a calm ocean surface,
their accuracy in providing values of the ocean still needed to be examined. Our present
investigation of the specular sea emission seen from space provides field verification of the
sea water specular emissivity over broader regions of the oceans.

In this work, we

investigate and adjust two ocean dielectric models using well calibrated radiometer data from
the TOPEX/Poseidon satellite mission, paying particular attention to reducing the overall
bias of the estimated brightness. In addition, we evaluate the performance of several models
for their dependence on salinity and sea temperature.
The modified models exhibit significant improvements in the estimate of TB. Of the two
modified models, ModE exhibits superior overall performance. It has the lowest bias at both
frequencies (0.16 and 0.14K, respectively), which is indicative of the accuracy of the model.
Its frequency dependence was decreased from -2.3 to 0.30K. In addition, ModE has the
lowest dependence on sea surface temperature and the lowest RMS difference of 2.58K and
3.52K for 18GHz and 37GHz, respectively. For these reasons, we recommend this model for
future remote sensing applications involving microwave emissions from the ocean.

25

REFERENCES
Altshuler, E. E. and R. A. Marr, A comparison of experimental and theoretical values of
atmospheric absorption at the longer millimeter wavelengths, IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propagat., vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 1471-1480, Oct. 1988.
Aydin, K. and C. Tang, Millimeter wave radar scattering from model ice crystal
distributions, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 35, pp. 140-146, 1997 a.
Cruz-Pol, S. L., C. S. Ruf and S. J. Keihm, Improved 20-32 GHz Atmospheric Absorption
Model, Radio Sci., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 1319-1333, 1998.
Draine, B. T. and P. J. Flatau, Discrete-dipole approximation for scattering calculations, J.
Opt. Soc. Am. A, vol. 11, pp. 1491-1499, 1994.
Doviak, R. J.and D. S. Zrnic, Doppler Radar and Weather Observations, Second edition,
Academic Press, San Diego, 1993.
Evans, K. F. and J. Vivekanandan, Multiparameter radar and microwave radiative transfer
modeling of nonspherical atmospheric ice particles, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sensing.,
vol. 28, pp. 423-437, July 1990
Keihm, S. J., C. Ruf, V. Zlotnicki and B. Haines, TMR Drift Analysis, Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, Internal Report, October 6, 1997.
Klein, L. A., and C. T. Swift, An Improved Model for the Dielectric constant of Sea Water at
Microwave Frequencies, IEEE Trans. on Antennas Propagation, Vol. AP-25, No. 1, 1977.
Hogan, R. J. and A. J. Illingworth, The potential of spaceborne dual-wavelength radar to
make global measurements of cirrus clouds, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., vol. 16, 518-531.
1999
Keihm, S. J., Y. Bar-Server, and J. C. Liljegren, WVR-GPS Comparison Measurement and
Calibration of the 20-32 GHz Tropospheric Water Vapor Absorption Model, IEEE Trans.
Geosci. Remote Sensing. 2002, 40, No. 6, pp. 1199-1210
26

Lhermitte, R., A 95 GHz Doppler radar of cloud observations, J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol.,
vol. 4, pp. 36-48, 1987.
Li, L., S.M. Sekelsky, S.C. Reising, C.T. Swift, S.L. Durden, G.A. Sadowy, S.J. Dinardo,
F.K. Li A. Huffman, G.L. Stephens D.M. Babb, and H.W. Rosenberger, Retrieval of
Atmospheric Attenuation Using Combined Ground-based and Airborne 95 GHz Cloud Radar
Measurements, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., vol. 18, 1345-1353. 2001
Matrosov, S. Y. Radar reflectivity in snowfall, IEEE. Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens., vol. 30,
pp. 454-461, 1992.
Oguchi, T. Electromagnetic wave propagation and scattering in rain and other
hydrometeors, Proc. IEEE, vol. 71, pp. 1029-1078, 1983
Ray, P. S., Broadband complex refractive indices of ice and water, Appl. Opt., vol. 11, pp.
1836-1844, 1972
Rosenkranz, P. W., Absorption of Microwaves by Atmospheric Gases, In: Atmospheric
Remote Sensing by Microwave Radiometry, Chapter 2, Ed. By Jansen, Wiley, New York,
1993.
Sekelsky, S. M., Multi-frequency radar Doppler Spectrum Measurements of Cirrus Clouds,
Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. IGARSS '01., vol. 2, 697 699 2001.
Ulbrich, C. W., Natural variations in the analytical form of the raindrop size distribution, J.
Climate Appl. Meteor., vol. 22, pp. 1764-1775, 1983.
Wilheit, T.T., The Effect of Wind on the Microwave Emission From the Oceans Surface at
37 GHz, J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 84, No. C8, pp. 244-249, 1979.

27

APPENDIX A.

IDL CODES FOR DBZEMIN

;********dBZemin Program********
;********MAIN PROGRAM*********
LoadCT, 5
sondefilename='c:/jorgemvg/prog-idl/DataAustralia/Radiosonde/sonde.951127.025800.cdf'
mwrfilename='c:/jorgemvg/prog-idl/DataAustralia/Radiometer/mwr.951127.000020.cdf'
;**Function to read microwave-radiometer data
get_mwr_cdfdata, mwrfilename, VAPcm, LIQcm, DEWflag, t_begin$, $
date$,unix_time,sec_into_UTCday
;**Function to read radiosonde data
get_sonde_cdfdata, sondefilename, tdry, sh, rh, dp, h, pres, $
wspd, deg, t_begin$, date$,unix_time,sec_into_UTCday
;**Function to read Radar data
Radar,z_mask_range_33,z_mask_range_95
;;********************************************************************************
h = h/1000. ;altitude [Km]
pres = pres/0.1 ;pressure [Kpascales]
; a extrapol le debe entrar h en (Km) y pres en (KPascales)
extrapol_general,z_mask_range_33,h,tdry,pres,sh,altura,temperatura,presion,humedad_especifica
altura = altura*1000.;altitude [m]
presion = presion*0.1 ;pressure
[ mbars]
tdry = temperatura ;temperature [deg C]
sh = humedad_especifica ;specific humidity [gm^-3]
pres = presion
h = altura
;omit radiosonde data above 35 km to speed up processing
alt=30000.
hlimit=max(where(h LT alt))
tdry=tdry(0:hlimit) & sh=sh(0:hlimit)
h=h(0:hlimit) & pres=pres(0:hlimit)
;setup regular height grid for profiles
num_elem=500
del=alt/num_elem
h_prof = findgen(num_elem) * del ; 0-35km

28

tdry = INTERPOL(tdry, h, h_prof) ; regrid profiles

sh = INTERPOL(sh, h, h_prof) > 0.
pres = INTERPOL(pres, h, h_prof)
h = h_prof
; compare radiosonde and mwr data
L=0
FOR i=0,n_elements(h)-2 DO L=L+sh(i)*(h(i+1)-h(i))
L=0.001*L ; mm of water vapor in column from radiosonde profile
L = L*0.1 ; cm of vapor ... compare to Vapcm from microwave radiometer
; probably will not be exactly the same since different meas. locations
; if mwr data valid then use to correct radiosonde humidity profiles
indx = where(dewflag LT 1) ; filter out flagged data
sh = sh*mean((vapcm(indx)))/L ; scale radiosonde profile by mwr total
prSH=fltarr(2,n_elements(sh)/2)
FOR par=0,(n_elements(sh)/2)-1 DO BEGIN
prSH(0,par)=sh(par*2)
prSH(1,par)=h(par*2)/1000.
ENDFOR
for the gases atten. SLCP June 2001
PRO atten_humidity_liebe, sh,tdry,pres,fi, h, AGASEOUS,Agas_liebe, KGASEOUS
_ground(n,rg) = extinction rate at ground level [dBkm^-1]
height=h/1000. ; h esta en metros , height esta en kilometros
rangesamples = size(height)
rangesamples = rangesamples(1)
AH2O_liebe(i, j) = TOTAL(KH2O_liebe(i, 0:j)*ABS((height(1:j+1)-(height(0:j))) > 0.))
ENDFOR
ENDFOR
AH2O_liebe(*,rangesamples -1 ) = AH2O_liebe(*,rangesamples -2 )
PRO scanning_new2, sh,tdry,pres,fi, h, AGASEOUS,Agas_liebe, KGASEOUS,LF1,LF0,ATKF1,ATKF0
ATKF1(zeta,altura)=TOTAL(KGASEOUS_EQUIf1(zeta,0:altura)*ABS(((proyeccion_radio(zeta,1:altura+1)proyeccion_radio(zeta,0:altura))/sin(angles(zeta) * !pi/180)) > 0.))

ATKF0(zeta,altura)=total(KGASEOUS_EQUIf0(zeta,0:altura)*abs(((proyeccion_radio(zeta,1:altura+1)proyeccion_radio(zeta,0:altura))/sin(angles(zeta) * !pi/180)) > 0.))

dbz0=imgpolrec(dbz0, 0., 91., 0., 40., 0., 25., .03, 0., 25., .03)
ocu95=intarr(n_elements(ymax),20)
Position = [0.1, 0.9, 0.9, 0.95], Color=!P.Background
stop
END

29

APPENDIX B PROGRAMS FOR BULLET AND DWR

APPENDIX B1 IDL PROGRAM FOR REFRACTION INDEX

;****IDL PROGRAM***
;*** Refraction Index
n=200 ;
index=complexarr(2,n)
D=fltarr(n)
aeff=fltarr(n)
p=fltarr(n)
fi=fltarr(n)
for i=0, n-1 DO BEGIN
D(i)=(i+1)*1E-2

;D[mm]

p(i)=0.78*D(i)^(-0.0038) ;Heymsfield density relationship bullet

pi=0.916 ; pi[g*cm^-3]
fi(i)=p(i)/pi
ni=[complex(1.785, 0.000235),complex(1.784, 0.00010)] ; 33GHz , 95GHz paper Ray 1972
f=fi(i)
for k=0, n_elements(ni)-1 DO BEGIN
n=ni(k)
index(k,i)=(2.+(n^2)+2.*f*(n^2-1))/(2.+(n^2)+f*(1-n^2))
end
aeff(i)=1e+3*D(i)/2 ;[um]
END
END