Show simple item record

contributor authorJoro, Sauli
contributor authorHyvärinen, Otto
contributor authorKotro, Janne
date accessioned2017-06-09T16:33:48Z
date available2017-06-09T16:33:48Z
date copyright2010/12/01
date issued2010
identifier issn1558-8424
identifier otherams-70047.pdf
identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4211785
description abstractThe cloud mask is an essential product derived from satellite data. Whereas cloud analysis applications typically make use of information from cloudy pixels, many other applications require cloud-free conditions. For this reason many organizations have their own cloud masks tuned to serve their particular needs. Being a fundamental product, continuous quality monitoring and validation of these cloud masks are vital. This study evaluated the performance of the European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT) Meteorological Products Extraction Facility cloud mask (MPEF), together with the Nowcasting Satellite Application Facility (SAFNWC) cloud masks provided by Météo-France (SAFNWC/MSG) and the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SAFNWC/PPS), in the high-latitude area of greater Helsinki in Finland. The first two used the Spinning Enhanced Visible and Infrared Imager (SEVIRI) instrument from the geostationary Meteosat-8 satellite, whereas the last used the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) instrument on board the polar-orbiting NOAA satellite series. Ceilometer data from the Helsinki Testbed, an extensive observation network covering the greater Helsinki area in Finland, were used as reference data in the cloud mask comparison. A computational method, called bootstrapping, is introduced to account for the strong temporal and spatial correlation of the ceilometer observations. The method also allows the calculation of the confidence intervals (CI) for the results. This study comprised data from February and August 2006. In general, the SAFNWC/MSG algorithm performed better than MPEF. Differences were found especially in the early morning low cloud detection. The SAFNWC/PPS cloud mask performed very well in August, better than geostationary-based masks, but had problems in February when its performance was worse. The use of the CIs gave the results more depth, and their use should be encouraged.
publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
titleComparison of Satellite Cloud Masks with Ceilometer Sky Conditions in Southern Finland
typeJournal Paper
journal volume49
journal issue12
journal titleJournal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology
identifier doi10.1175/2010JAMC2442.1
journal fristpage2508
journal lastpage2526
treeJournal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology:;2010:;volume( 049 ):;issue: 012
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record