Absolute radiance calibration in the UV and visible spectral range using atmospheric observations during twilight
-
Published:2024-01-16
Issue:1
Volume:17
Page:277-297
-
ISSN:1867-8548
-
Container-title:Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Atmos. Meas. Tech.
Author:
Wagner Thomas,Puķīte Jānis
Abstract
Abstract. We present an improved radiance calibration method for UV–Vis spectroscopic instruments with a narrow field of view (up to a few degrees) based on the calibration method by Wagner et al. (2015). The updated method uses only measurements during the twilight period instead of several hours as for the original method. The calibration is based on the comparison of measurements and simulations of the radiance of zenith-scattered sunlight. The main advantage of our method compared to radiance calibration methods in the laboratory is that the calibration can be directly applied in the field. This allows routine radiance calibrations whenever the sky is clear during twilight. The calibration can also be performed retrospectively and will thus be applicable for the large number of existing data sets. Also, potential changes in the instrument properties during transport from the laboratory to the field are avoided. The new version of the calibration method presented here has two main advantages. First, the required measurement period can be rather short (only a few minutes during twilight for cloud-free conditions). Second, even without knowledge of the aerosol optical depth (AOD), the errors in the calibration method are rather small, especially in the UV spectral range where they range from about 4 % at 340 nm to 8 % at 420 nm. If the AOD is known, the uncertainties are even smaller (about 3 % at 340 nm to 4 % at 420 nm). For visible wavelengths, good accuracy is only obtained if the AOD is approximately known with uncertainties from about 4 % at 420 nm to 10 % between about 550 and 700 nm (generally the AOD is nevertheless smaller in the visible than in the UV spectral range). One shortcoming of the method is that it is not possible to determine the AOD exactly at the time of the (twilight) measurements because AOD observations from sun photometer measurements or the MAX-DOAS (Multi-AXis Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy) measurements are usually not meaningful for such high solar zenith angle (SZA). But the related uncertainty can be minimised by repeating the radiance calibrations during the twilight periods of several days.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference25 articles.
1. Clémer, K., Van Roozendael, M., Fayt, C., Hendrick, F., Hermans, C., Pinardi, G., Spurr, R., Wang, P., and De Mazière, M.: Multiple wavelength retrieval of tropospheric aerosol optical properties from MAXDOAS measurements in Beijing, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 3, 863–878, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-3-863-2010, 2010. 2. Deutschmann, T., Beirle, S., Frieß, U., Grzegorski, M., Kern, C., Kritten, L., Platt, U., Pukite, J., Wagner, T., Werner, B., and Pfeilsticker, K.: The Monte Carlo Atmospheric Radiative Transfer Model McArtim: Introduction and Validation of Jacobians and 3D Features, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Ra., 112, 1119–1137, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2010.12.009, 2011. 3. Dubovik, O., Smirnov, A., Holben, B. N., King, M. D., Kaufman, Y. J., Eck, T. F., and Slutsker, I.: Accuracy assessments of aerosol optical properties retrieved from Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) sun and sky radiance measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 9791–9806, 2000. 4. Frieß, F., Monks, P. S., Remedios, J. J., Rozanov, A., Sinreich, R., Wagner, T., and Platt, U.: MAX-DOAS O4 measurements: A new technique to derive information on atmospheric aerosols. (II) Modelling studies, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D14203, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006618, 2006. 5. Holben, B. N., Eck, T. F., Slutsker, I., Tanré, D., Buis, J. P., Setzer, A., Vermote, E., Reagan, J. A., Kaufman, Y. J., Nakajima, T., Lavenu, F., Jankowiak, I., and Smirnov, A.: AERONET – A federated instrument network and data archive for aerosol characterization, Remote Sens. Environ., 66, 1–16, 1998.
|
|