1 / 17

CrIMSS DR Status and MX 8.0 Recommendation

CrIMSS DR Status and MX 8.0 Recommendation. April 25, 2013. DR 3084. Description:

ratana
Download Presentation

CrIMSS DR Status and MX 8.0 Recommendation

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

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CrIMSS DR Status and MX 8.0 Recommendation April 25, 2013

  2. DR 3084 • Description: • 32 seconds is too short a granule size. It creates 112.5 granules per hour, 2700 granules per day, 5 million products of a given type over the course of a 5-year mission. Sounder PEATE recommended granule size is 6 minutes. • Investigation: • This is a rather old DR. The users have been using the SNPP mission data without real issues • Recommendation: • Close the DR - no action is needed

  3. DR 3193 • Description: • Currently the operational code uses a value of 4.246 as the ratio of the clear-radiance differences and the NEDN of the channel. The ATBD calls out a value of 3*sqrt(2) or 4.2426 as the value. The code and ATBD should be consistent. Recommend fixing ATBD • Investigation: • ATBD is correct, and the inconsistency is caused by a coding error in the operational code. Checked the latest version (MX7.0) code and confirmed that the error has not been fixed • Tested code change on G-ADA (simple) • Recommendation: • Fix the coding error to make it consistent with the ATBD • Candidate for Build MX 8.0

  4. DR 4088 • Description: • The current operational code (GSIT) for CrIMSS (setcovback) does not match the ATBD, paragraph 5.2.6 • 1. The number of covariance matrices is listed as 6, code has 8 • 2. The tests in Figure 5 (35?) are not used - instead a stratification by brightness temperature of BT(23) with tunable thresholds appears to be used. • 3. There is no mapping accessible that indicates what surface types correspond to igeo values of 1-8 • 4. The code uses a channel difference (demmw) and the figure 35uses a ratio. The ATBD needs to be updated as part of document convergence to reflect the code so that we can understand how to use the tunable parameters • Investigation: • The ATBD (Rev E) has been updated to say there are 8 different surface types • Figure 35 is a flow chart describing the precipitation detection algorithm, not the surface type stratification • Fig 38 describes surface typing algorithm. There seems to be some inconsistency with the code implementation (in part due to post-launch updates) • Recommendation: • Update ATBD to be consistent with the latest code (including the recent updates)

  5. DR 4068 and DR 4069 • Description: • Precipitation detection and flagging (details?) • Investigation: • STAR is working on code update? • May need to update ATBD (section 5.2.5 and Figure 35) • Recommendation: • Candidate for MX8.0 implementation?

  6. DR 7116 • Description: • Noise Amplification factor coding error (details?) • Investigation: • LaRC is working on the fix • NGAS tested it on G-ADA • Recommendation: • Candidate for MX8.0 implementation

  7. DR 7117 • Description: • Spacecraft maneuver flag (details?) • Investigation: • There was extended discussion on this at DRAT; although affects all sensors, IDPS seemed reluctant to pursue a fix; Cember suggested that a flag could be added to code based on viewing geometry provided to CrIMSS; not likely for IDPS implementation for Mx8 but possible if done by CrIMSS team • Recommendation: • Continue to discuss with IDPS for the fix • Evaluate the option of adding a maneuver flag in CrIS SDR product and passing through to CrIMSS EDRs

  8. DR 7118 • Description: • H2O super-saturation thresholds (details?) • Investigation: • LaRC is working on the fix • Recommendation: • Candidate for MX8.0 implementation

  9. DR 7119 • Description: • Cloud path mislabel (details) • Investigation: • LaRC is working on the fix ? • Recommendation: • Candidate for MX8.0 implementation

  10. DR 4923 • Description: • The CrIMSS EDR team has discovered that the surface pressure ancillary input to the CrIMSS EDR appears to have large errors and sometimes (10's of cases per day) exceeds reasonable values. Relative to an off-line calculation using our own DEM there are large differences, mostly over land. The fact that the ocean cases are reasonable we feel that the NWP component of surface pressure is probably computed properly. We suspect (but cannot prove) that there is some kind of error related to the computation of terrain altitude within the IDPS system on the CrIMSS field of regard. Large differences tend to be positive (IDPS values exceed our calculation by 50 mbar 0.1% of the time) and sometimes these differences are unreasonable (~20 cases greater than 1050 mbar in 0.1% of the time, 2 cases on 5/15/2012 exceed 1100 mbar) and occur in locations that are not low terrain). In extreme cases this causes the AVTP and AVMP to have derived values below the surface. The impact of this error on AVTP and AVMP is small; however, it does directly impact the AVPP product, which is a delivered EDR. Also, the EDR reporting layers are derived from surface pressure and in many cases this leads to unreasonable profile shapes in CrIMSS KPP products (the retrieval constrains top of atmosphere radiance and, as such, an error in surface pressure forces the retrieval to assign AVTP and AVMP to the wrong pressure levels). This is related to DR4008 but this DR is explicitly concerned with the unreasonably large values and accuracy of the surface pressure ancillary product. It may also be related to DR4865 (OMPS Psurf > 1.1). The CrIMSS EDR ATBD describes the desired science-code calculation; however, this computation was moved to a higher level within the operational code. We are not certain exactly what was implemented at the system level in the IDPS. We need assistance from Raytheon to understand where (and how) this calculation is done and how to fix it. We have prepared a discussion of what we have learned with our off-line calculation and suggest that the CrIMSS team holds a TIM with Raytheon to determine how to proceed to solve this issue. • Investigation: • Note: CrIS SDR GEO are not terrain corrected, but CrIMSS GEO are. Was the offline calculation using the CrIMSS EDR GEO or CrIS SDR GEO? Nonetheless, the differences are big and • Recommendation: • Awaiting IDPS investigation results – Has it been officially assigned to IDPS? • NGAS can investigate if IDPS can’t get it resolved quickly

  11. DR 4944 • Description: • Optimize CrIS and ATMS bias correction LUTs • Investigation: • LaRC and NGAS have some new results • Recommendation: • Finalize the updates and submit to DPE/DPA for implementation. LUT updates can be done off IDPS build cycle

  12. DR 7069 - Status • Description: • MW-Only Convergence QF and 2nd Stage MW Chi Square are incorrect when missing MW retrieval • Investigation: • LaRC or STAR are working on this? • NG Proposed fix (following slides) and tested on G-ADA • Recommendation: • Candidate for MX8.0?

  13. DR 7069 – Scene Classification Code Change • Original code • IF (ncldfm >0 .AND. ncldfm <= 3) THEN • crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%qualityFlags(currRet,1) = & • ior(crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%qualityFlags(currRet,1), & • PARTLY_CLOUDY_SCENE) • ELSE IF ((ncldfm == 0 .AND. clrflg(1) .EQV. .false.) .OR. & • ncldfm >= 4) THEN • crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%qualityFlags(currRet,1) = & • ior(crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%qualityFlags(currRet,1), & • CLOUDY_SCENE) • END IF • Updated code • IF(cc(ic) .EQV. .false.) THEN • crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%qualityFlags(currRet,1) = & • ior(crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%qualityFlags(currRet,1), & • CLOUDY_SCENE) • ELSE IF (clrflg(ic) .EQV. .false.) THEN • crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%qualityFlags(currRet,1) = & • ior(crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%qualityFlags(currRet,1), & • PARTLY_CLOUDY_SCENE) • END IF

  14. DR 7069 – Quality Flag Code Change • Original code • IF (writeDebug) THEN • CALL addLine('Overcast case, write out MW retrievals') • END IF • qcflag(1) = 1 • qcflag(4) = 1 • EXIT irLoop • Updated code • IF (writeDebug) THEN • CALL addLine('Overcast case, write out MW retrievals') • END IF • IF(.NOT. (mwOff)) THEN • xgesgO3 = xgesmwsav ! Mw-only retrieval profile • chisq_mw1(1) = chisqmw1 ! chisq for the first stage retrieval • qcflag(1:5) = 1 • crimssRetrLvlDataPtr%profDiff(currRet) = 0.0 ! • qcflag(2) = 0 • if(chisqmw1 <= 1.0 ) qcflag(5) = 0 ! The convergence flag for 1st stage retrieval • END IF • EXIT irLoop

  15. DR 7069 – Quality Flag Code Change (cont’d) • Original code • xgesgO3 = xgesg • xgesgO3(io3g:io3g+no3g-1) = xgesg(io3g:io3g+no3g-1) * 6.035E5 • CALL getchisq_airs(ym,y,airs_err,chisqairs,kchan,nchan) • CALL qc(chisq,chisqmw,chisqairs,nsurf,xgesg,xgesmwsav,plandavg, & • qcflag, iflagqc) • Updated code • IF(CC(ic) .eqv. .true.) THEN • xgesgO3 = xgesg • xgesgO3(io3g:io3g+no3g-1) = xgesg(io3g:io3g+no3g-1) * 6.035E5 • CALL getchisq_airs(ym,y,airs_err,chisqairs,kchan,nchan) • CALL qc(chisq,chisqmw,chisqairs,nsurf,xgesg,xgesmwsav,plandavg, & • qcflag, iflagqc) • END IF

  16. DR 7069 – Test Results • Updated operational code is verified using the following four granules on G-ADA • Four granules with more cloudy FORs are selected • GNUM0639: CrIS_d20120920_t0541139_e0541437.asc <-> NPP000287916685 • GUNM0640: CrIS_d20120920_t0541459_e0542157.asc <-> NPP000287917005 • GNUM0641: CrIS_d20120920_t0542179_e0542477.asc <-> NPP000287917325 • GNUM0827: CrIS_d20120920_t0722019_e0722317.asc <-> NPP000287977159 • Results: • The retrieval profiles are the same from MW-only and MW+IR for the cloudy scenes • chisq_mw1 has reasonable values • chisq_mw2 and chisq_ir have fill-values • ccnaf has fill-values • Ozone profiles have fill-values

More Related