PDF《RSS SMAP Salinity:》

RSS Technical Report

091316 1 RSS Technical Report

091316 September 13,

2016 RSS SMAP Salinity: Version

2 Validated Release Release Notes Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document (ATBD) Validation Data Format Specification Thomas Meissner + Frank Wentz Remote Sensing Systems, Santa Rosa, CA Validation results provided by: Tony Lee, JPL Justino Martínez and BEC Team, SMOS Barcelona Expert Centre, Spain RSS Technical Report

091316 2 1.

Release Date.4 2. Data Access

4 3. Citation and DOI.4 4. Summary of Updates from V1.0.4 5. Processing Schedule and Distribution.5 6. Spatial Resolution.5 7. Level

2 Processing

5 7.1 Input Data.5 7.2 Optimum Interpolation (OI) onto Fixed Earth Grid (L2A)5 7.3 Ancillary Fields (L2B)5 7.4 Salinity Retrieval (L2C)6 8. SMAP Salinity Retrieval Algorithm

6 8.1 Surface Roughness Correction

7 8.2 Correction for Emissive SMAP Antenna

8 8.3 Correction for Reflected Galaxy

9 8.4 Tuning of Land Correction.11 8.5 Quality Control (Q/C) Flag

11 9. Antenna Pattern Correction and Absolute Calibration.12 9.1 Spillover Adjustment.13 9.2 Reflector Emissivity

13 9.3 Dynamic Calibration Drift Correction for V/H

13 9.4

3 rd and

4 th Stokes Calibration Offset.14 10. Level

3 Processing.14 11. Validation.15 11.1 Level 2C.15 11.2 Level

3 8-day Running Average Maps.15 11.3 Level

3 Monthly Average Maps

16 11.4 Known Issues

18 12. References

18 13. Data Format Specification.19 13.1 Level 2C.19 13.2 Level 3.22 RSS Technical Report

091316 3 Figure 1: Flow diagram of the SMAP salinity retrieval algorithm.7 Figure 2: Physical temperature . phys ant T of the SMAP mesh antenna: JPL thermal model.8 Figure 3: Physical temperature of the SMAP mesh antenna with empirical adjustment: , . phys ant phys ant T T

9 Figure 4: Reflected galaxy for the SMAP aft look. Left: using the geometric optics (GO) model. Right: based on the SMAP for C aft look.10 Figure 5: TA measured C expected for the SMAP look. Left: using the geometric optics (GO) model for the reflected galaxy. Right: using the updated galaxy model based on the SMAP for C aft look analysis. The residual biases in the right figure are mainly caused by the emissive reflector. The adjustment for the physical reflector temperature (section 8.2) has not been included in this figure. Figure

5 only shows the effect of the changed reflected galaxy.10 Figure 6: Left: Land correction for V1.0 (full lines) and V2.0 (dashed lines). Right: TA measured minus expected using the land correction in V1.0 (full lines), using no land correction (dashed lines) and using the mitigated land correction in V2.0 (dotted lines)11 Figure 7: Running 3-day averages of TA measured C expected v-pol and h-pol over the open ocean.14 Figure 8: Latitudinal mean SMAP SSS C FOAM SSS. Left: V1.0 (BETA). Right: V2.0. Provided by J. Martínez, BEC.....15 Figure 9: SMAP SSS C FOAM SSS as function of time and distance from the coast. Upper: V1.0 (BETA). Lower: V2.0. Provided by J. Martínez, BEC.15 Figure 10: Global [60S;

60N] standard deviation of SMAP SSS C FOAM SSS for the 0.25 o x0.25 o L3 8-day running averages maps. Red: V1.0 (BETA). Blue: V2.0. Provided by J. Martínez, BEC.16 Figure 11: Comparison of zonally averaged statistics: time-mean difference, RMS, Standard Deviation of SMAP C ARGO SSS. Left: for V1.0 (BETA). Right: V2.0. Provided by T. Lee, JPL.16 Figure 12: Seasonal distribution of zonally averaged biases between SMAP and ARGO SSS. Left: V1.0 (BETA). Right: V2.0. Provided by T. Lee, JPL.17 Figure 13: Seasonal distribution of zonally averaged biases between SMAP and HYCOM SSS. Left: V1.0 (BETA). Right: V2.0.18 Table 1: Ancillary data sources.5 Table 2: 32- bit Level