1 / 25

SABER Instrument Performance and Measurement Requirements

SABER Instrument Performance and Measurement Requirements. Experiment Status. - SABER instrument is performing in orbit as designed - FPA temperatures are being held steady at ~ 74K by the cooler - Cooler performance excellent and stable

garvey
Download Presentation

SABER Instrument Performance and Measurement Requirements

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SABER Instrument Performance and Measurement Requirements

  2. Experiment Status -SABER instrument is performing in orbit as designed - FPA temperatures are being held steady at ~ 74K by the cooler - Cooler performance excellent and stable - Scan system is performing well - Noise performance is excellent - Data collection is routine • No instrument anomalies SABER Instrument In-Orbit Performance Is Excellent 75 kg, 77 watts, 77 x 104 x 63 cm, 4 kbs

  3. SABER Instrument Focal Plane Temperature Stability

  4. SABER Instrument Refrigerator Cold Link Efficiency Trend

  5. SABER Instrument Refrigerator Compressor Stroke Time Trend

  6. January 2002 to January 2003 January 2003 to January 2004 SABER Instrument Limb Scan Mirror Subsystem Performance Scan mirror changes usually affect < ~ 100 scans per day and cause no data loss. No time trend evident.

  7. SABER Noise Performance In-Orbit is Stable * RMS Counts Gains set to noise = 3 counts. All channels met or exceeded specifications. In-orbit performance slightly better than laboratory.

  8. SABER temperature and constituent accuracies inferred from correlative data comparisons * Qualitative comparison only

  9. Coincidence 0.4 hour 1o latitude 2o longitude SABER LTE Temperature Compared With Lidar at Mauna Loa on April 19, 2002

  10. SABER and UKMO temperatures at 10 mb (~30 km) show close agreement SABER UKMO

  11. SABER V1.04 mapped geopotential height and derived geostrophic winds at ~65 km Geopotential Height Geostrophic Winds February 5, 2002 February 12, 2002

  12. SABER Energetics (Energy Loss Rate) Accuracies Based on Laboratory and In-Flight Calibration * Applies to daytime, nighttime and twilight Potential - High altitudes still contaminated by “hysteresis” and off-axis scatter. Corrections expected to reduce uncertainty to “potential” values

  13. SABER Temperature and Constituent Estimated and Observed Precisions

  14. SABER Energetics (Energy Loss Rate) Estimated and Observed Precisions

  15. SABER Instrument understanding near a mature stage • Substantial progress made in removing known artifacts arising due to instrument effects - Made important corrections to IFC BB emissivities; T, O3, H2O - Knowledge of channel vertical alignment shown to be accurate - Moon scans provided excellent knowledge of off-axis signals due to FOV side lobes and mirror scatter - Detector focal plane ice build-up due to “trapped” water vapor “in-hand” - High altitude radiance bias in short wave channels; 20 x noise up, 7 x noise down scan - Possible O3 spectral effect remaining

  16. # 4 O3 9.3m # 5 H2O6.8m # 6 NO5.3m # 1 CO2- N15.2m # 2 CO2- W15.0m # 3 CO2- W15.0m # 7 CO2 4.26m 1.49o # 8 OH(A) 2.07m # 9 OH(B)1.64m # 10 O2(1) 1.28m 2 km @ 60 km SABER Focal Plane Channel Locations

  17. Effects of off-axis scatter on high altitude Signals in the OH and O2(1) channels

  18. SABER O3 channel Lunar scan FOV Data

  19. SABER CO2W channel Lunar scan FOV Data

  20. SABER Lunar and Laboratory derived FOV functions Lunar Laboratory

  21. Calculated water ice transmission compared to observed SABER values 1 m thick ice layer

  22. SABER CO2 W Responsitivity Changes Since Launch

  23. SABER responsivity slopes are steadily decreasing after each power down Responsivity slope Time

  24. Date: 2002185, Orbit 03094Channel 10 Day SABER Up and Down Scan Radiance Comparison for the O2(1) channel

  25. SABER O3 channel spectral response data O3 Relative Spectral Response Wavenumber cm-1

More Related