Hi Renish/Stefan,
Looking at the controlfile Stefan recommends I have a couple of
concerns/questions. Firstly, it looks to me that the Oxygen absorption set-up
is using line parameters from the catalog file (which I'm assuming is
HITRAN-2012?), but does not have any line mixing. I would expect this to lead
to problems in the 50-60GHz oxygen band and have an impact out into the 89GHz
window region. My understanding was that it was simplest to use the "O2-TRE05"
complete absorption model for oxygen which does include the line mixing effects?
The water vapour set-up is probably fine, although my preference is to use the
values from the AER catalog which has a couple of tweaks to better fit some
atmospheric observations. I think the recent releases are almost the same as
HITRAN-2016, but maybe not HITRAN-2012? Recent versions of ARTS also have the
CKDMT320 continuum (courtesy of Emma Turner) and I've found that seems to give
a reasonable match to much of our airborne data.
Regards,
Stuart
-Original Message-
From: arts_users.mi-boun...@lists.uni-hamburg.de
On Behalf Of
arts_users.mi-requ...@lists.uni-hamburg.de
Sent: 12 November 2020 11:00
To: arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de
Subject: arts_users.mi Digest, Vol 53, Issue 1
This email was received from an external source. Always check sender details,
links & attachments.
Send arts_users.mi mailing list submissions to
arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://mailman.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/mailman/listinfo/arts_users.mi
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
arts_users.mi-requ...@lists.uni-hamburg.de
You can reach the person managing the list at
arts_users.mi-ow...@lists.uni-hamburg.de
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re:
Contents of arts_users.mi digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Choosing the right Continua models/spectroscopy data
(Thomas,Renish)
2. Re: Choosing the right Continua models/spectroscopy data
(Stefan Buehler)
--
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 04:13:56 +
From: "Thomas,Renish"
To: "arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de"
Subject: [arts-users] Choosing the right Continua models/spectroscopy
data
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
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.
Cheers,
Renish
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mailman.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/pipermail/arts_users.mi/attachments/20201112/83ef4936/attachment-0001.html>
--
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:58:47 +0100
From: "Stefan Buehler"
To: "Thomas,Renish"
Cc: "arts_users.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de"
Subject: Re: [arts-users] Choosing the right Continua
models/spectroscopy data
Message-ID: <62af22b7-302e-4e9f-a067-1f586d683...@uni-hamburg.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
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,
Stefan
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
