intercalibration of hrdi and windii wind measurements

Clicks: 3
ID: 236923
1997
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #467 of 484 articles by views in journal of food measurement and characterization

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 484 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The High Resolution Doppler Imager (HRDI) and the Wind Imaging Interferometer (WINDII) in- struments, which are both on the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite, measure winds by sensing the Doppler shift in atmospheric emission features. Because the two observation sets are frequently nearly coincident in space and time, each provides a very e.ective validation test of the other. Discrepancies due to geophysical di.erences should be much smaller than for comparisons with other techniques (radars, rockets, etc.), and the very large sizes of the coincident data sets provide excellent statistics for the study. Issues that have been examined include relative systematic o.sets and the wind magnitudes obtained with the two systems. A significant zero wind position di.erence of ~6 m s–1 is identified for the zonal component, and it appears that this arises from an absolute perturbation in WINDII winds of –4 m s–1 and in HRDI of +2 m s–1. Altitude o.sets appear to be relatively small, and do not exceed 1 km. In addition, no evidence is found for the existence of a systematic wind speed bias between HRDI and WINDII. However, considerable day-to-day variability is found in the quality of the agreement, and RMS di.erences are surprisingly large, typically in the range of 20±30 m s–1.
Reference Key
burrage1997annalesintercalibration Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;M. D. Burrage;W. R. Skinner;P. B. Hays
Journal journal of food measurement and characterization
Year 1997
DOI
10.1007/s00585-997-1089-8
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.