Comparing satellite- to ground-based automated and manual cloud coverage observations – a case study

Downloadstatistik des Dokuments (Auswertung nach COUNTER):

Werkmeister, A.; Lockhoff, M.; Schrempf, M.; Tohsing, K.; Liley, B.; Seckmeyer, G.: Comparing satellite- to ground-based automated and manual cloud coverage observations – a case study. In: Atmospheric Measurement Techniques 8 (2015), Nr. 5, S. 2001-2015. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-2001-2015

Version im Repositorium

Zum Zitieren der Version im Repositorium verwenden Sie bitte diesen DOI: https://doi.org/10.15488/7

Zeitraum, für den die Download-Zahlen angezeigt werden:

Jahr: 
Monat: 

Summe der Downloads: 424




Kleine Vorschau
Zusammenfassung: 
In this case study we compare cloud fractional cover measured by radiometers on polar satellites (AVHRR) and on one geostationary satellite (SEVIRI) to ground-based manual (SYNOP) and automated observations by a cloud camera (Hemispherical Sky Imager, HSI). These observations took place in Hannover, Germany, and in Lauder, New Zealand, over time frames of 3 and 2 months, respectively. Daily mean comparisons between satellite derivations and the ground-based HSI found the deviation to be 6 14% for AVHRR and 8 16% for SEVIRI, which can be considered satisfactory. AVHRR’s instantaneous differences are smaller (2 22 %) than instantaneous SEVIRI cloud fraction estimates (8 29 %) when compared to HSI due to resolution and scenery effect issues. All spaceborne observations show a very good skill in detecting completely overcast skies (cloud cover 6 oktas) with probabilities between 92 and 94% and false alarm rates between 21 and 29% for AVHRR and SEVIRI in Hannover, Germany. In the case of a clear sky (cloud cover lower than 3 oktas) we find good skill with detection probabilities between 72 and 76 %. We find poor skill, however, whenever broken clouds occur (probability of detection is 32% for AVHRR and 12% for SEVIRI in Hannover, Germany). In order to better understand these discrepancies we analyze the influence of algorithm features on the satellite-based data. We find that the differences between SEVIRI and HSI cloud fractional cover (CFC) decrease (from a bias of 8 to almost 0 %) with decreasing number of spatially averaged pixels and decreasing index which determines the cloud coverage in each “cloud-contaminated” pixel of the binary map. We conclude that window size and index need to be adjusted in order to improve instantaneous SEVIRI and AVHRR estimates. Due to its automated operation and its spatial, temporal and spectral resolution, we recommend as well that more automated ground-based instruments in the form of cloud cameras should be installed as they cover larger areas of the sky than other automated ground-based instruments. These cameras could be an essential supplement to SYNOP observation as they cover the same spectral wavelengths as the human eye.
Lizenzbestimmungen: CC BY 3.0 Unported
Publikationstyp: Article
Publikationsstatus: publishedVersion
Erstveröffentlichung: 2015-05-06
Die Publikation erscheint in Sammlung(en):Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik

Verteilung der Downloads über den gewählten Zeitraum:

Herkunft der Downloads nach Ländern:

Pos. Land Downloads
Anzahl Proz.
1 image of flag of Germany Germany 219 51,65%
2 image of flag of United States United States 45 10,61%
3 image of flag of Czech Republic Czech Republic 27 6,37%
4 image of flag of Ukraine Ukraine 19 4,48%
5 image of flag of Russian Federation Russian Federation 19 4,48%
6 image of flag of United Kingdom United Kingdom 17 4,01%
7 image of flag of China China 14 3,30%
8 image of flag of India India 8 1,89%
9 image of flag of Thailand Thailand 6 1,42%
10 image of flag of Estonia Estonia 5 1,18%
    andere 45 10,61%

Weitere Download-Zahlen und Ranglisten:


Hinweis

Zur Erhebung der Downloadstatistiken kommen entsprechend dem „COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources“ international anerkannte Regeln und Normen zur Anwendung. COUNTER ist eine internationale Non-Profit-Organisation, in der Bibliotheksverbände, Datenbankanbieter und Verlage gemeinsam an Standards zur Erhebung, Speicherung und Verarbeitung von Nutzungsdaten elektronischer Ressourcen arbeiten, welche so Objektivität und Vergleichbarkeit gewährleisten sollen. Es werden hierbei ausschließlich Zugriffe auf die entsprechenden Volltexte ausgewertet, keine Aufrufe der Website an sich.