论文部分内容阅读
Two wind algorithms of ENVISAT advanced synthetic aperture radar (ASAR), i. e. CMOD4 model from the European Space Agency (ESA) and CMOD IFR2 model from Quilfen et al., are compared in this paper. The wind direction is estimated from orientation of low and linear signatures in the ASAR imagery. The wind direction has inherently a 180° ambiguity since only a single ASAR image is used. The 180° ambiguity is eliminated by using the buoy data from the NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) buoys moored in the Pacific. Wind speed is obtained with the two wind algorithms using both estimated wind direction and normalized radar cross section (NRCS). The retrieved wind results agree well with the data from Quikscat. The root mean square error (RMSE) of wind direction is 2.80? The RMSEs of wind speed from CMOD4 model and CMOD_IFR2 model are 1.09 m/s and 0.60 m/s, respectively. The results indicate that the CMOD_IFR2 model is slight better than CMOD4 model at high wind.
Two wind algorithms of ENVISAT advanced synthetic aperture radar (ASAR), ie CMOD4 model from the European Space Agency (ESA) and CMOD IFR2 model from Quilfen et al., Are compared in this paper. The wind direction is estimated from orientation of low and linear signatures in the ASAR imagery. The wind direction has inherently a 180 ° ambiguity since only a single ASAR image is used. The 180 ° ambiguity is eliminated by using the buoy data from the NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) buoys moored in the Pacific. Wind speed is obtained with the two wind algorithms using both estimated wind direction and normalized radar cross section (NRCS). The retrieved wind results agree well with the data from Quikscat. The root mean square error (RMSE) of wind direction is 2.80 The RMSEs of wind speed from CMOD4 model and CMOD_IFR2 models are 1.09 m / s and 0.60 m / s, respectively. The results indicate that the CMOD_IFR2 model is slightly better than CMOD4 model at high wind.