Dear Renish,

for microwave water vapor instruments I would recommend the settings from controlfiles/instruments/metmm (in the ARTS distro), which were developed by Alex Bobryshev and used for this paper:

Bobryshev, O., S. A. Buehler, V. O. John, M. Brath, and H. Brogniez (2018), Is there really a closure gap between 183.31 GHz satellite passive microwave and in-situ radiosonde water vapor measurements?, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 56(5), 2904–2910, doi:10.1109/TGRS.2017.2786548.

Best wishes,


On 12 Nov 2020, at 5:13, Thomas,Renish wrote:

Hi Everyone,

I had a question about selecting the best Continua models/spectroscopy lines for the most accurate simulation results.

My main species of interest is "H2O" and I am simulating an airborne sensor. The difference in brightness temperatures when I use the "H2O-PWR98" vs. "H2O" lines from the Perrin database along with the PWR98 model is greater than about 10 degrees around the 183 GHz water vapor lines.

So, my question is, what is the best strategy on choosing the continua models and spectroscopic data around the absorption lines and in the window region (Away from absorption lines).

My region of interest is 50-300 GHz.

Also, what are the recommended spectroscopic lines and for what applications are they most suited for. Example : Perrins, HITRAN.


arts_users.mi mailing list
arts_users.mi mailing list

Reply via email to