기관회원 [로그인]
소속기관에서 받은 아이디, 비밀번호를 입력해 주세요.
개인회원 [로그인]

비회원 구매시 입력하신 핸드폰번호를 입력해 주세요.
본인 인증 후 구매내역을 확인하실 수 있습니다.

회원가입
서지반출
SST와 CALIPSO 자료를 이용한 DCD 방법으로 정의된 안개화소 분석
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • SST와 CALIPSO 자료를 이용한 DCD 방법으로 정의된 안개화소 분석
저자명
신대근,박형민,김재환,Shin. Daegeun,Park. Hyungmin,Kim. Jae Hwan
간행물명
대기
권/호정보
2013년|23권 4호|pp.471-483 (13 pages)
발행정보
한국기상학회
파일정보
정기간행물|
PDF텍스트
주제분야
기타
이 논문은 한국과학기술정보연구원과 논문 연계를 통해 무료로 제공되는 원문입니다.
서지반출

기타언어초록

Nighttime sea fog detection from satellite is very hard due to limitation in using visible channels. Currently, most widely used method for the detection is the Dual Channel Difference (DCD) method based on Brightness Temperature Difference between 3.7 and 11 ${mu}m$ channel (BTD). However, this method have difficulty in distinguishing between fog and low cloud, and sometimes misjudges middle/high cloud as well as clear scene as fog. Using CALIPSO Lidar Profile measurements, we have analyzed the intrinsic problems in detecting nighttime sea fog from various satellite remote sensing algorithms and suggested the direction for the improvement of the algorithm. From the comparison with CALIPSO measurements for May-July in 2011, the DCD method excessively overestimates foggy pixels (2542 pixels). Among them, only 524 pixel are real foggy pixels, but 331 pixels and 1687 pixels are clear and other type of clouds, respectively. The 514 of real foggy pixels accounts for 70% of 749 foggy pixels identified by CALIPSO. Our proposed new algorithm detects foggy pixels by comparing the difference between cloud top temperature and underneath sea surface temperature from assimilated data along with the DCD method. We have used two types of cloud top temperature, which obtained from 11 ${mu}m$ brightness temperature (B_S1) and operational COMS algorithm (B_S2). The detected foggy 1794 pixels from B_S1 and 1490 pixel from B_S2 are significantly reduced the overestimation detected by the DCD method. However, 477 and 446 pixels have been found to be real foggy pixels, 329 and 264 pixels be clear, and 989 and 780 pixels be other type of clouds, detected by B_S1 and B_S2 respectively. The analysis of the operational COMS fog detection algorithm reveals that the cloud screening process was strictly enforced, which resulted in underestimation of foggy pixel. The 538 of total detected foggy pixels obtain only 187 of real foggy pixels, but 61 of clear pixels and 290 of other type clouds. Our analysis suggests that there is no winner for nighttime sea fog detection algorithms, but loser because real foggy pixels are less than 30% among the foggy pixels declared by all algorithms. This overwhelming evidence reveals that current nighttime sea fog algorithms have provided a lot of misjudged information, which are mostly originated from difficulty in distinguishing between clear and cloudy scene as well as fog and other type clouds. Therefore, in-depth researches are urgently required to reduce the enormous error in nighttime sea fog detection from satellite.