首页> 外文OA文献 >On the correspondence between surface UV observations and TOMS determinations of surface UV: a potential method for quality evaluating world surface UV observations
【2h】

On the correspondence between surface UV observations and TOMS determinations of surface UV: a potential method for quality evaluating world surface UV observations

机译:关于表面紫外线观测和汤姆斯表面紫外线测定的对应关系:一种质量评价世界表面UV观测的潜在方法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

A comparison of erythemally weighted surface UV irradiance observations with similar NASA TOMS surface UV determinations is described. Comparisons are made for two observation periods: the Robertson-Berger (R-B) meter period from 1974 to the late 1980s and the current period from 1996 to the present when more sophisticated UVB-1 instruments were used. The more primitive R-B meter observations that comprised the fi rst U.S. UV network are seen to drift downward with respect to those of the TOMS. While the UVB-1 observations did not appear to drift, a substantial bias is noted to exist between the TOMS and the UVB-1 stations collecting observations; the TOMS estimations tend to be higher. A portion of the bias may be attributed to errors in calibration, total ozone, and cosine response of the surface instrumentation. Unaccounted aerosol effects, although not considered to be large in the TOMS estimations, present another source of error. Comparisons are fi rst done for all sky conditions and then for clear sky conditions. The biases typically agree for all sky conditions within the uncertainties of the surface instruments' calibrations, liberally defi ned as ± 5%, implying that the TOMS cloud correction scheme performs reasonably well. Snow cover severely impacts the TOMS observations, giving considerably higher estimations. The biases for clear sky conditions ranged from 15% to 19% with no obvious drifts between the satellite and surface observations. The variation in the biases among stations is within the calibration uncertainties of the instruments, but the absolute bias is unexpectedly large. The standard deviations of the clear sky comparisons among all stations are steady at 4.8% ± 0.7%. A plot of the TOMS/UVB-1 ratio versus TOMS cloud refl ectivity observations is noisy, but qualitatively suggestive of a possible slight increase (~ 5% or greater) over the range of clear to overcast skies. The results from these comparisons is believed to be relevant to a WMO goal of uniformly assuring the quality of UV observations made by networks in many countries. The results for clear sky comparisons suggest that a satellite observing system such as TOMS, which provides global coverage daily, might partially serve as a fi rst-order check to quality assure UV observations being made by networks worldwide. Future research should concentrate on determining the causes of the large differences seen between the UVB-1 and TOMS and the range of uncertainties, using a larger array of stations.
机译:与类似NASA汤姆表面UV的红斑加权表面UV辐照度观察的比较 描述了确定。对两个观察期进行比较:Robertson-Berger(R-B)仪表期 从1974年到20世纪80年代后期和1996年的当期到现在,当更复杂的UVB-1仪器时 被使用了。更原始的R-B仪表观察,其包括UV网络的uV网络被视为向下漂移 关于汤姆的人。虽然UVB-1观察结果似乎没有漂移,但注意到存在大量偏差 汤姆和UVB-1电台之间收集观察;汤姆斯估计往往更高。一部分 偏差可能归因于校准,总臭氧和表面仪器的余弦响应的错误。不明意 气溶胶效应,虽然汤姆斯估计中不被认为是大的,但呈现另一个错误源。比较 为所有天空条件做好了,然后为清晰的天空条件完成。偏差通常同意所有天空条件 在表面仪器校准的不确定性范围内,达到±5%的自由化,暗示汤姆云 校正方案相当不错。雪覆盖严重影响汤姆的观察,大大 估计更高。清晰的天空条件的偏差范围从15%到19%,卫星之间没有明显漂移 和表面观察。站之间的偏差变化在仪器的校准不确定性范围内, 但绝对偏差意外大。清晰的天空比较在所有站点中的标准偏差稳定 以4.8%±0.7%。汤姆/ uvb-1比例的情节与汤姆云反射率观察是嘈杂的,但定性 暗示在清晰的阴云密布天空范围内可能轻微增加(〜5%或更高)。这些结果 据信比较与WMO的目标是统一保证网络制造的UV观测质量的目标 在许多国家。明确的天空比较的结果表明,田园等卫星观察系统,如汤姆 每天提供全球覆盖范围,可能部分地用作质量保证紫外线观测的FI RST订单检查 全球网络。未来的研究应该专注于确定在差异之间看到的巨大差异的原因 使用更大的车站UVB-1和汤姆和不确定性范围。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号