Applications of the Advanced Radiative Transfer Modeling System (ARMS) to Characterize the Performance of Fengyun–4A/AGRI

This study applies the Advanced Radiative Transfer Modeling System (ARMS), which was developed to accelerate the uses of Fengyun satellite data in weather, climate, and environmental applications in China, to characterize the biases of seven infrared (IR) bands of the Advanced Geosynchronous Radiati...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fei Tang, Xiaoyong Zhuge, Mingjian Zeng, Xin Li, Peiming Dong, Yang Han
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2021-08-01
Series:Remote Sensing
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/13/16/3120
Description
Summary:This study applies the Advanced Radiative Transfer Modeling System (ARMS), which was developed to accelerate the uses of Fengyun satellite data in weather, climate, and environmental applications in China, to characterize the biases of seven infrared (IR) bands of the Advanced Geosynchronous Radiation Imager (AGRI) onboard the Chinese geostationary meteorological satellite, Fengyun–4A. The AGRI data are quality controlled to eliminate the observations affected by clouds and contaminated by stray lights during the mid–night from 1600 to 1800 UTC during spring and autumn. The mean biases, computed from AGRI IR observations and ARMS simulations from the National Center for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Final analysis data (FNL) as input, are within −0.7–1.1 K (0.12–0.75 K) for all seven IR bands over the oceans (land) under clear–sky conditions. The biases show seasonal variation in spatial distributions at bands 11–13, as well as a strong dependence on scene temperatures at bands 8–14 and on satellite zenith angles at absorption bands 9, 10, and 14. The discrepancies between biases estimated using FNL and the European Center for Medium–Range Weather Forecasts Reanalysis–5 (ERA5) are also discussed. The biases from water vapor absorption bands 9 and 10, estimated using ERA5 over ocean, are smaller than those from FNL. Such discrepancies arise from the fact that the FNL data are colder (wetter) than the ERA5 in the middle troposphere (upper–troposphere).
ISSN:2072-4292