• Acta Optica Sinica
  • Vol. 40, Issue 18, 1828001 (2020)
Xingwei He, Qi Han*, Xiaohu Feng, and Ning Kang
Author Affiliations
  • National Satellite Meteorological Center, China Meteorological Administration, Beijing, 100081, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/AOS202040.1828001 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Xingwei He, Qi Han, Xiaohu Feng, Ning Kang. Calibration Accuracy Evaluation of Visible and Near-Infrared Bands of FY-3B MERIS[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2020, 40(18): 1828001 Copy Citation Text show less
    Distribution of six pseudo-invariant targets
    Fig. 1. Distribution of six pseudo-invariant targets
    Time series of TOA reflectance observed by SeaWiFS versus BRDF modeling over Libya-4
    Fig. 2. Time series of TOA reflectance observed by SeaWiFS versus BRDF modeling over Libya-4
    Time series of BRDF modeling errors and statistical factors over Libya-4
    Fig. 3. Time series of BRDF modeling errors and statistical factors over Libya-4
    SRF of SeaWiFS and MERSI, as well as simulated TOA spectral radiance for four different scenarios of gaseous absorption over desert
    Fig. 4. SRF of SeaWiFS and MERSI, as well as simulated TOA spectral radiance for four different scenarios of gaseous absorption over desert
    Mean of the bias between modeled TOA reflectance and MERSI L1 TOA reflectance of the six pseudo-invariant targets (the error bar represents the standard deviation of the bias). (a) Algeria-3; (b) Algeria-5; (c) Libya-1; (d) Libya-4; (e) Mauritania-1; (f) Mauritania-2
    Fig. 5. Mean of the bias between modeled TOA reflectance and MERSI L1 TOA reflectance of the six pseudo-invariant targets (the error bar represents the standard deviation of the bias). (a) Algeria-3; (b) Algeria-5; (c) Libya-1; (d) Libya-4; (e) Mauritania-1; (f) Mauritania-2
    ρTOA time series obtained by calibration
    Fig. 6. ρTOA time series obtained by calibration
    Time series of monthly mean relative deviation from 2011 to 2015 between cross-calibration reflectance and MERSI L1 calibration data. (a) Algeria-3; (b) Algeria-5; (c) Libya-1; (d) Libya-4; (e) Mauritania-1; (f) Mauritania-2
    Fig. 7. Time series of monthly mean relative deviation from 2011 to 2015 between cross-calibration reflectance and MERSI L1 calibration data. (a) Algeria-3; (b) Algeria-5; (c) Libya-1; (d) Libya-4; (e) Mauritania-1; (f) Mauritania-2
    InstrumentBandCentral wavelength /μmBandwidth /μmSpatial resolution /m
    80.4120.021000
    90.4430.021000
    100.4900.021000
    110.5200.021000
    MERSI120.5650.021000
    130.6500.021000
    140.6850.021000
    150.7650.021000
    160.8650.021000
    10.4120.024000
    20.4430.024000
    30.4900.024000
    SeaWiFS40.5100.024000
    50.5550.024000
    60.6700.024000
    70.7650.044000
    80.8650.044000
    Table 1. Spectral band specifications for MERSI and SeaWiFS
    BandRMSE of each site /%
    Algeria-3Algeria-5Libya-1Libya-4Mauritania-1Mauritania-2
    Band 12.0141.9071.9521.2012.5012.730
    Band 22.3522.2822.1031.0982.8153.136
    Band 32.6152.4302.0461.1542.8003.216
    Band 42.3242.1871.8811.1092.5372.935
    Band 51.6001.6101.4891.1471.9672.055
    Band 60.9921.0310.8330.9201.4451.480
    Band 71.0031.0210.8400.9121.3651.379
    Band 81.1761.0670.8950.9901.4081.397
    Table 2. RMSE of BRDF fitting for different bands over different sites
    Simulation conditionContent
    SurfaceDesert
    Aerosol modelDesert
    Solar zenith angle /(°)0 to 60(step: 15)
    Viewing zenith angle /(°)0 to 60(step: 10)
    Relative azimuth angle /(°)0 to 180(step: 36)
    Total water vapor content /(g·cm-2)0 to 5.0(step: 1.0)
    Total ozone content /(DU)0 to 400(step: 100)
    Table 3. Simulation condition of MODTRAN
    ParameterBand 8Band 9Band 10Band 11Band 12Band 13Band 14Band 15Band 16
    P11.7046381.27348341.0842282.2738392.6547991.2869871.8188531.0716871.076728
    P2-1.0202-0.3986542-0.12324-1.78536-2.28282-0.24861-0.99434-0.06433-0.07037
    P30.5750160.219671030.0691090.9896521.2512650.1274150.5432270.086580.057175
    P4-0.14385-0.0531473-0.01697-0.23772-0.29688-0.02819-0.12874-0.02126-0.00996
    P50.0130540.004686850.0015060.0205990.0254140.0021710.0107250.0152860.038343
    P6-0.0828-0.5411471-0.214920.3408051.0922470.0155433.770866-0.03278-0.02993
    P70.083510.78068280.308001-0.53791-1.62312-0.0736-5.383170.0095280.005455
    P8-0.04019-0.4158658-0.162880.3035550.8770550.0553582.834560.00017-0.0086
    P90.0051710.09606450.037296-0.07609-0.20681-0.01846-0.643970.0048140.006614
    P10-4.8×10-5-0.0081476-0.003140.0068580.0176850.001870.053729-0.00176-0.00123
    P11-0.000240.000677
    P12-0.00022-0.00052
    P130.0001149.82×10-5
    Table 4. SBAF model parameters for nine spectral channels
    BandBias meanRMSE /%Bias maxBias min
    Band 80.01091.04272.5898-3.1593
    Band 90.00040.20320.5175-0.5880
    Band 100.00010.11850.2919-0.3660
    Band 110.00530.73152.3717-2.0748
    Band 120.00630.80132.8750-2.5399
    Band 130.02061.43044.6135-4.7072
    Band 140.01941.39055.6749-5.3018
    Band 150.00760.88468.7129-2.3706
    Band 160.00110.33772.4990-0.9414
    Table 5. Bias between parameterized and simulated SBAFs
    Bandk0k1
    Band 8-1.78160.02002
    Band 9-2.59080.02008
    Band 10-2.74690.0202
    Band 11-1.90510.02005
    Band 12-3.22410.02015
    Band 13-2.03010.0203
    Band 14-2.40530.02021
    Band 15-2.00370.02024
    Band 16-2.45070.02042
    Table 6. FY-3B MERSI calibration coefficient
    Xingwei He, Qi Han, Xiaohu Feng, Ning Kang. Calibration Accuracy Evaluation of Visible and Near-Infrared Bands of FY-3B MERIS[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2020, 40(18): 1828001
    Download Citation