270 likes | 447 Views
Evaluation of ALOS PALSAR for Operational Ice Monitoring Preliminary Observations. Roger De Abreu, Matt Arkett, Dean Flett Canadian Ice Service Pablo Clemente-Colón, Sean Helfrich, Brian Melchior U.S. National Ice Center. Outline. Overview of PALSAR L-Band Expectations
E N D
Evaluation of ALOS PALSAR for Operational Ice Monitoring • Preliminary Observations Roger De Abreu, Matt Arkett, Dean Flett Canadian Ice Service Pablo Clemente-Colón, Sean Helfrich, Brian Melchior U.S. National Ice Center
Outline • Overview of PALSAR • L-Band Expectations • Motivation, Obectives • Data Collection • Preliminary Observations • Final Words
PALSAR Overview ScanSAR Modes Only • Launched October 2006 • L-Band SAR PALSAR • Primary difference is wavelength • Strong basis for comparison of ScanSAR modes
Expectations for L-Band • Dierking and Busche (TGARS, 2006) -- Sea Ice Monitoring by L-Band SAR: An Assessment Based on Literature and Comparisons of JERS-1 and ERS-1 Imagery • L-Band and C-Band SAR Scattering Signature of Sea Ice for Operational Applications -- Son Nghiem, JPL, 2007. • Very good at mapping ice deformation, e.g. ridges, rubble fields • Better penetration into sea ice could yield unique and complementary information to C-band information • L-band signatures are significantly less sensitive to wet snow than C-band • However, less capable of identifying thin ice and separating FYI and MYI, especially at high incidence angles.
Study Objectives • Identify what unique and complementary sea ice information PALSAR can provide compared to C-band SARs (focus on RADARSAT-1) • Identify the role(s) PALSAR data could play in NAIS operational programs • Complementary role to RADARSAT? • Contingency role to C-band SARs? • Better understand the potential for future multi-frequency SAR platforms/missions
Data Collection • Collect concurrent RADARSAT-1/2 and PALSAR ScanSAR image pairs • Collect seasonally over major operational ice regimes • Collect under range of wind conditions • Collect over various incidence angles and polarizations • Where possible, collect in situ data to support analysis
Case Study Locations • 4 case studies from two PALSAR and R-1 pairs • All HH polarization • Collected June 10 (spring) and July 15/16 (smmer) • ASF Convert tool used to ingest and geoproject data
June 10th 2007 Spring Thick FYI Regime (9+ Thick FYI w/ traces of old ice; Vast floes) ALOS-PALSAR RADARSAT-1 • Rough interfloe areas more apparent in wet conditions in L-band • Thick FYI floes more easily identifiable in L-Band
R-1 Beaufort Sea 20070610 15:00:21 SWB HH R-1 Baffin Bay 20070715 22:14:27 SWA HH
July 15/16 2007 Summer FYI - MYI ALOS-PALSAR 2:13:57 UTC RADARSAT-1 22:14:27 UTC • Floes appear much more homogeneous in R-1 • PALSAR appears to provide considerable more contrast within and between floes • Aids in identifying FYI and MYI concentrations
June 10th 2007 – Mackenzie Delta RADARSAT-1: 15:00:21 UTC ALOS-PALSAR: 20:41:12 UTC • Wet ice lost in clutter at C- band – Better at L-band • Need to understand the ocean clutter better
R-1 July 15, 2007 22:14:27 SWA HH R-1 Feb. 25, 2007 21:56 SWB
PALSAR July 16, 2007 2:13:57 WB1 HH R-1 July 15, 2007 22:14:27 SWA HH
PALSAR July 16, 2007 2:13:57 WB1 HH R-1 July 15, 2007 22:14:27 SWA HH • L-band has better penetration in melt conditions • Improved separation of second year ice from FYI
Summary • Preliminary examination of summer scenes indicates that PALSAR does appear to be “seeing” more of the ice surface under wet snow • In melt conditions, when C-band monitoring is challenged, PALSAR appears to do a better job typing and characterizing ice. • Better floe definition in FYI and MYI regimes • Better separation of FYI and MYI floes
Next Steps • Quantitatively characterize these differences • Involve ice analysts to further/validate visual assessment • Extend to PALSAR VV data • Incorporate R-2 data (HH/HV) and possibly TerraSAR X. • Collect field-validated datasets – e.g. Southern Beaufort Sea – IPY CFL. • Focus on winter freeze-up and PALSAR’s ability to type thin ice types • Collect and analyze Great Lakes dataset • Icebergs in ice
Acknowledgements • CIS JAXA AO --- Evaluation of L-Band ScanSAR Data for Regional Ice Monitoring in Support of Navigation • NESDIS/NIC AO • Alaska SAR Facility – ALOS North American Node
Analysis Objectives Separately and combined with C-band, assess PALSAR’s ability to: • Separate sea ice from open water • Type (classify) sea ice over a broad range of thicknesses • Provide other information • floe size, floe shape • surface deformation • surface melt conditions Focus on situations where C-band does not work well • Spring and summer ice typing • Ice and water separation under windy conditions
Analysis Methodology • Pre-launch assessment of L-band SAR based on airborne data sets and backscatter modelling Completed -- L-Band and C-Band SAR Scattering Signature of Sea Ice for Operational Applications -- Son Nghiem, JPL, 2007.
Nghiem, JPL, 2007 L-band modelled and observed backscatter
Nghiem, JPL, 2007 C-band modelled and observed backscatter