Article

Comparison of MISR and MODIS cloud-top heights in the presence of cloud overlap

Department Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics, Columbia University/GISS, 2880 Broadway, New York, NY 10025, United States; NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, United States; NOAA/NESDIS, United States; CIMSS, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI 53706, United States
Remote Sensing of Environment 01/2007; DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2006.09.030

ABSTRACT Coincident MISR and MODIS cloud-top heights retrieved above two vertically pointing radar sites (ARM-SGP and UK-CFARR) are compared for 54 scenes between March 2000 and October 2003. The difference between MODIS and MISR cloud-top heights is assessed in situations where multiple cloud layers are present in a vertical column (i.e., cloud overlap or multilayered cloud). MISR stereo cloud-top heights are known to be sensitive to low-level clouds of high contrast (between two camera views) even if high clouds with a wide range of optical thicknesses are also present in the scene. MODIS retrieved cloud-top heights do not experience this problem as long as the highest cloud layer has a visible optical thickness greater than approximately 1. Consequently, the difference in cloud-top heights between MODIS and MISR is often large and positive in cloud overlap conditions. In cloud overlap conditions, small differences between MODIS and MISR cloud-top heights can be found where both instruments detect the highest cloud layer or, on the contrary, where they both fail to detect the highest cloud but instead detect some lower level cloud. The comparison with radar cloud-top heights on a 21-scene subset confirmed that large differences are associated with cloud overlap, but also showed that small differences can be found in similar situations if the highest layer is of large contrast (both instruments detect the highest cloud layer) or of extremely small optical thickness (both instruments fail to detect the highest cloud layer). With the use of a cloud-typing technique applied to MODIS data that can also identify areas containing cloud overlap, small differences were found to occur for 60–70% of all overlap pixels examined here, highlighting the weakness of using the MODIS-MISR cloud-top height differences as a sole indicator for automated cloud overlap detection. While the accuracy of the MODIS cloud-top pressure/height algorithm decreases as the cirrus optical thickness becomes less than 1, the MISR approach may still be able to infer an accurate cloud-top height depending on the cloud contrast between two view angles. However, synergy between the difference in MODIS-MISR cloud-top height analysis and the MODIS cloud-typing method could improve overlap detection for thin cirrus over low cloud situations and provide additional information on the cloud-top height of two distinct layers.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
66 Views
  • Source
    03/2010, Degree: diploma
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study investigates the cloud top height estimation using nonlinear methods to Meteosat imagery. The suggested approach aims to develop an integrated statistical methodology to estimate the cloud top height on a pixel basis using Meteosat Second Generation water vapor imagery. Radiosonde measurements are used as reference dataset and a spatio-temporal correlation with Meteosat images is performed in order to collect a representative sample for the statistical analysis. Here, we apply Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) and Support Vector Machines (SVM) and we compare the results to the Linear Regression model. The best results are achieved using SVM for regression. The proposed approach is very promising as it can be used for future in-depth analysis so as to develop a robust approach for geometrical height estimation on a pixel basis of the operational data of Meteosat imagery. It is noted that an accurate estimation of cloud top height can help to eliminate geometric restrictions (e.g. Parallax phenomenon) of the Meteosat satellite imagery, improving its usefulness in a wide area of applications and especially in satellite-based weather forecast.
    SPACOMM 2013 : The Fifth International Conference on Advances in Satellite and Space Communications; 04/2013
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study presents results of the intercomparison of cloud-top height (CTH) and cloud-bottom height (CBH) obtained from a space-borne active sensor Cloud Profiling Radar (CPR), the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization (CALIOP), the space-borne passive sensor Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and ground-based Lidar measurements. Three selected cases (one daytime and two night-time cases) involving various cloud conditions such as semi-transparent thin cirrus, opaque thick tropospheric clouds and multi-layered clouds are studied, with special attention to CBH. The space-based CALIOP provides reliable heights of thin high-altitude cirrus clouds containing small ice particles, but the 94 GHz CPR has low sensitivity to these clouds. The CTHs retrieved from the CPR and CALIOP for thick tropospheric clouds are in good agreement with each other. Discrepancies between the CPR and the CALIOP values of the CBH for thick opaque clouds arise from strong Lidar signal attenuations. In cloud-overlap conditions (i.e. multi-layered clouds are present), the CALIOP has difficulties in determining the cloud vertical structure (CVS) for thick clouds underlying thin cirrus clouds due to signal attenuations, whereas the CPR detects the CTH and CBH of both the cloud layers. This fact is also confirmed by the comparison of seasonal variations of occurrences of CBH and CTH retrieved from 1 year measurements. The CBHs derived from the CPR and ground-based Lidar are generally in good agreement with each other. Especially, comparison of CBH between the ground-based Lidar and CPR retrieved from June 2006 to October 2008 shows an excellent linear relationship (coefficient of determination, R ∼ 0.996).
    International Journal of Remote Sensing 01/2011; 32(4):1179-1197. · 1.36 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
26 Downloads
Available from
May 20, 2014