Hi Stephan,

I am using Rayleigh jeans. As I need to activate cloud box in some instances.

I understand that RJBT instead of Planck can cause a dip in the brightness 
temperatures. Is this the only factor that can cause a bias, or does pressure 
levels, lat/lon grid resolution also cause a bias?


-------- Original message --------
From: Stefan Buehler <stefan.bueh...@uni-hamburg.de>
Date: 4/20/21 6:11 AM (GMT-06:00)
To: "Thomas,Renish" <renish.tho...@colostate.edu>
Cc: "arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de" 
Subject: Re: [arts-users] Calculated brightness temperature bias causes.

Dear Renish,

do you use Planck or Rayleigh-Jeans brightness temperature? For Planck,
you should indeed approach the ambient temperature if you go low enough.



On 20 Apr 2021, at 12:46, Thomas,Renish wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
> I had some questions about the calculated brightness temperature in
> When I calculate the brightness temperature for an atmospheric
> scenario in "horizon looking mode" and in clearsky. I get a brightness
> temperature at 183.31 GHz (Water vapor absorption line), which is
> about 3 to 6 degrees lower than the ambient temperature.
> I would assume that at the water vapor absorption line and at low
> altitudes (~2 km above sea level), I should measure very close to the
> ambient temperature (Due to high absorption).
> So, my questions are:
> 1.)  Is this brightness temperature bias expected?, or can something
> else cause this?
> Thanks,
> Renish
> _______________________________________________
> arts_users.mi mailing list
> arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailman.rrz.uni-hamburg.de%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Farts_users.mi&amp;data=04%7C01%7CRenish.Thomas%40colostate.edu%7C8bb1cd94b52a4724954408d903ed19cb%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637545139171957024%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=7Qr43Du%2B54FAx%2FWFOIMnjdaHFegsWnBRslp2jGQYxb8%3D&amp;reserved=0
arts_users.mi mailing list

Reply via email to