Results from the NASA GSFC and LaRC Ozone Lidar Intercomparison: New Mobile Tools for Atmospheric Research

John T. Sullivan Department of Atmospheric Physics, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and Joint Center for Earth Systems Technology, Baltimore, Maryland

Search for other papers by John T. Sullivan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Thomas J. McGee Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland

Search for other papers by Thomas J. McGee in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Russell DeYoung Science Directorate, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia

Search for other papers by Russell DeYoung in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Laurence W. Twigg Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, Maryland

Search for other papers by Laurence W. Twigg in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Grant K. Sumnicht Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, Maryland

Search for other papers by Grant K. Sumnicht in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Denis Pliutau Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, Maryland

Search for other papers by Denis Pliutau in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Travis Knepp Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Lanham, Maryland

Search for other papers by Travis Knepp in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
William Carrion Coherent Applications Inc., Hampton, Virginia

Search for other papers by William Carrion in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

During a 2-week period in May 2014, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center Tropospheric Ozone Differential Absorption Lidar (GSFC TROPOZ DIAL) was situated near the NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Mobile Ozone Lidar (LMOL) and made simultaneous measurements for a continuous 15-h observation period in which six separate ozonesondes were launched to provide reference ozone profiles. Although each of these campaign-ready lidars has very different transmitter and receiver components, they produced very similar ozone profiles, which were mostly within 10% of each other and the ozonesondes. The observed column averages as compared to the ozonesondes also agree well and are within 8% of each other. A robust uncertainty analysis was performed, and the results indicate that there is no statistically significant systematic bias between the TROPOZ and LMOL instruments. With the extended measurements and ozonesonde launches, this intercomparison has yielded an in-depth evaluation of the precision and accuracy of the two new lidars. This intercomparison is also the first (to the best of the authors’ knowledge) reported measurement intercomparison of two ground-based tropospheric ozone lidar systems within the United States.

Current affiliation: Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Branch, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, and Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Corresponding author address: John T. Sullivan, Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Branch, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Mail Code 614, Greenbelt, MD 20771. E-mail: john.t.sullivan@nasa.gov

Abstract

During a 2-week period in May 2014, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center Tropospheric Ozone Differential Absorption Lidar (GSFC TROPOZ DIAL) was situated near the NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Mobile Ozone Lidar (LMOL) and made simultaneous measurements for a continuous 15-h observation period in which six separate ozonesondes were launched to provide reference ozone profiles. Although each of these campaign-ready lidars has very different transmitter and receiver components, they produced very similar ozone profiles, which were mostly within 10% of each other and the ozonesondes. The observed column averages as compared to the ozonesondes also agree well and are within 8% of each other. A robust uncertainty analysis was performed, and the results indicate that there is no statistically significant systematic bias between the TROPOZ and LMOL instruments. With the extended measurements and ozonesonde launches, this intercomparison has yielded an in-depth evaluation of the precision and accuracy of the two new lidars. This intercomparison is also the first (to the best of the authors’ knowledge) reported measurement intercomparison of two ground-based tropospheric ozone lidar systems within the United States.

Current affiliation: Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Branch, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, and Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

Corresponding author address: John T. Sullivan, Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Branch, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Mail Code 614, Greenbelt, MD 20771. E-mail: john.t.sullivan@nasa.gov
Save
  • Bland, J. M., and Altman D. G. , 1999: Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat. Methods Med. Res., 8, 135160, doi:10.1177/096228029900800204.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Browell, E. V., Ismail S. , and Shipley S. T. , 1985: Ultraviolet DIAL measurements of O3 profiles in regions of spatially inhomogeneous aerosols. Appl. Opt., 24, 28272836, doi:10.1364/AO.24.002827.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Danielsen, E. F., 1968: Stratospheric–tropospheric exchange based on radioactivity, ozone and potential vorticity. J. Atmos. Sci., 25, 502518, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1968)025<0502:STEBOR>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Deshler, T., and Coauthors, 2008: Atmospheric comparison of electrochemical cell ozonesondes from different manufacturers, and with different cathode solution strengths: The balloon experiment on standards for ozonesondes. J. Geophys. Res., 113, D04307, doi:10.1029/2007JD008975.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fromzel, V., Prasad C. , Petrosyan K. , Liaw Y. , Yakshin M. , Shi W. , and De Young R. , 2010: Tunable, narrow linewidth, high repetition frequency ce:LiCAF lasers pumped by the fourth harmonic of a diode-pumped Nd:YLF laser for ozone DIAL measurements. Advances in Optical and Photonics Devices, K. Y. Kim, Ed., INTECH, 101–116.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Godin, S., and Coauthors, 1999: Ozone differential absorption lidar algorithm intercomparison. Appl. Opt., 38, 62256236, doi:10.1364/AO.38.006225.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Haner, D., and McDermid I. , 1990: Stimulated Raman shifting of the Nd:YAG fourth harmonic (266 nm) in H2, HD, and D2. IEEE J. Quantum Electron., 26, 12921298, doi:10.1109/3.59670.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Holben, B., and Coauthors, 1998: AERONET—A federated instrument network and data archive for aerosol characterization. Remote Sens. Environ., 66, 116, doi:10.1016/S0034-4257(98)00031-5.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Johnson, B. J., Oltmans S. J. , Vömel H. , Smit H. G. J. , Deshler T. , and Kröger C. , 2002: Electrochemical concentration cell (ECC) ozonesonde pump efficiency measurements and tests on the sensitivity to ozone of buffered and unbuffered ECC sensor cathode solutions. J. Geophys. Res., 107, 4393, doi:10.1029/2001JD000557.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lampton, M., and Bixler J. , 1985: Counting efficiency of systems having both paralyzable and nonparalyzable elements. Rev. Sci. Instrum., 56, 164165, doi:10.1063/1.1138462.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Malicet, J., Daumont D. , Charbonnier J. , Parisse C. , Chakir A. , and Brion J. , 1995: Ozone UV spectroscopy. II. Absorption cross-sections and temperature dependence. J. Atmos. Chem., 21, 263273, doi:10.1007/BF00696758.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McDermid, I. S., and Coauthors, 1990: Measurement intercomparison of the JPL and GSFC stratospheric ozone lidar systems. Appl. Opt., 29, 46714676, doi:10.1364/AO.29.004671.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McGee, T. J., Whiteman D. N. , Butler J. J. , Burris J. F. , and Ferrare R. A. , 1991: STROZ LITE: Stratospheric Ozone Lidar Trailer Experiment. Opt. Eng., 30, 3139, doi:10.1117/12.55771.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Measures, R. M., 1984: Laser Remote Sensing: Fundamentals and Applications. Wiley, 510 pp.

  • Megie, G. J., Ancellet G. , and Pelon J. , 1985: Lidar measurements of ozone vertical profiles. Appl. Opt., 24, 34543463, doi:10.1364/AO.24.003454.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mulcahy, J., O’Dowd C. , and Jennings S. , 2009: Aerosol optical depth in clean marine and continental northeast Atlantic air. J. Geophys. Res., 114, D20204, doi:10.1029/2009JD011992.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Papayannis, A., Ancellet G. , Pelon J. , and Mégie G. , 1990: Multiwavelength lidar for ozone measurements in the troposphere and the lower stratosphere. Appl. Opt., 29, 467476, doi:10.1364/AO.29.000467.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pliutau, D., and De Young R. , 2013: UV lidar receiver analysis for tropospheric sensing of ozone. NASA Tech. Memo. NASA/TM-2013-2018038, 18 pp.

  • Savitzky, A., and Golay M. J. E. , 1964: Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least squares procedures. Anal. Chem., 36, 16271639, doi:10.1021/ac60214a047.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smit, H. G. J., and ASOPOS Panel, 2011: Quality assurance and quality control for ozonesonde measurements in GAW. Global Atmospheric Watch Rep. 201, 87 pp.

  • Smit, H. G. J., and Coauthors, 2007: Assessment of the performance of ECC-ozonesondes under quasi-flight conditions in the environmental simulation chamber: Insights from the Juelich Ozone Sonde Intercomparison Experiment (JOSIE). J. Geophys. Res., 112, D19306, doi:10.1029/2006JD007308.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Steinbrecht, W., McGee T. J. , Twigg L. W. , Claude H. , Schönenborn F. , Sumnicht G. K. , and Silbert D. , 2009: Intercomparison of stratospheric ozone and temperature profiles during the October 2005 Hohenpeißenberg Ozone Profiling Experiment (HOPE). Atmos. Meas. Tech., 2, 125145, doi:10.5194/amt-2-125-2009.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sullivan, J. T., McGee T. J. , Sumnicht G. K. , Twigg L. W. , and Hoff R. M. , 2014: A mobile differential absorption lidar to measure sub-hourly fluctuation of tropospheric ozone profiles in the Baltimore–Washington, D.C. region. Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 35293548, doi:10.5194/amt-7-3529-2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sullivan, J. T., McGee T. J. , Leblanc T. , Sumnicht G. K. , and Twigg L. W. , 2015: Optimization of the GSFC TROPOZ DIAL retrieval using synthetic lidar returns and ozonesondes—Part 1: Algorithm validation. Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., 8, 4273–4305, doi:10.5194/amtd-8-4273-2015.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 543 168 13
PDF Downloads 388 111 14