Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics

, Volume 129, Issue 1, pp 57–70 | Cite as

A novel, optimized approach of voxel division for water vapor tomography

Original Paper

Abstract

Water vapor information with highly spatial and temporal resolution can be acquired using Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) water vapor tomography technique. Usually, the targeted tomographic area is discretized into a number of voxels and the water vapor distribution can be reconstructed using a large number of GNSS signals which penetrate the entire tomographic area. Due to the influence of geographic distribution of receivers and geometric location of satellite constellation, many voxels located at the bottom and the side of research area are not crossed by signals, which would undermine the quality of tomographic result. To alleviate this problem, a novel, optimized approach of voxel division is here proposed which increases the number of voxels crossed by signals. On the vertical axis, a 3D water vapor profile is utilized, which is derived from radiosonde data for many years, to identify the maximum height of tomography space. On the horizontal axis, the total number of voxel crossed by signal is enhanced, based on the concept of non-uniform symmetrical division of horizontal voxels. In this study, tomographic experiments are implemented using GPS data from Hong Kong Satellite Positioning Reference Station Network, and tomographic result is compared with water vapor derived from radiosonde and European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF). The result shows that the Integrated Water Vapour (IWV), RMS, and error distribution of the proposed approach are better than that of traditional method.

References

  1. Adavi Z, Mashhadi-Hossainali M (2014) 4D tomographic reconstruction of the tropospheric wet refractivity using the concept of virtual reference station, case study: northwest of Iran. Meteorol Atmos Phys 126(3–4):193–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adeyemi B, Joerg S (2012) Analysis of water vapor over Nigeria using radiosonde and satellite data. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 51:1855–1866. doi:10.1175/JAMC-D-11-0119.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alber C, Ware R, Rocken C, Braun J (2000) Obtaining single path phase delays from GPS double differences. Geophys Res Lett 27(17):2661–2664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bender M, Dick G, Ge M et al (2011) Development of a GNSS water vapour tomography system using algebraic reconstruction techniques. Adv Space Res 47:1704–1720. doi:10.1016/j.asr.2010.05.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bevis M, Businger S, Herring TA et al (1992) GPS meteorology: remote sensing of atmospheric water vapor using the global positioning system. J Geophys Res 97:15787–15801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bi YM, Mao J, Li C (2006) Preliminary results of 4d water vapor tomography in the troposphere using GPS. Adv Atmos Sci 23:551–560. doi:10.1007/s00376-006-0551-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brenot HV, Ducrocq A, Walpersdorf C et al (2006) GPS zenith delay sensitivity evaluated from high-resolution numerical weather prediction simulations of the 8–9 September 2002 flash flood over southeastern France. J Geophys Res 111:D15105. doi:10.1029/2004JD005726 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8.  Champollion C, Flamant C, Bock O et al (2009) Mesoscale GPS tomography applied to the 12 June 2002 convective initiation event of IHOP 2002. Q J R Meteorol Soc 135:645–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Champollion C, Masson F, Bouin MN et al (2005) GPS water vapour tomography:preliminary results from the ESCOMPTE field experiment. Atmos res 74(1):253–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen BY, Liu ZZ (2014) Voxel-optimized regional water vapor tomography and comparison with radiosonde and numerical weather model. J Geod 88:391–703. doi:10.1007/s00190-014-0715-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elósegui P, Ruis A, Davis JL, Ruffini G, Keihm SJ, Bürki B, Kruse LP (1998) An experiment for estimation of the spatial and temporal variations of water vapor using GPS data. Phys Chem Earth 23:125–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Flores A, Ruffini G, Rius A (2000) 4D tropospheric tomography using GPS slant wet delays. Ann Geophys 18:223–234. doi:10.1007/s00585-000-0223-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Herring TA, King RW, McClusky SC (2010) Documentation of the GAMIT GPS Analysis Software release 10.4. Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu YX, Chen YQ, Liu JN (2001) Determination of weighted mean tropospheric temperature using ground meteorological measurements. Geospatial Inf Sci 4(1):14–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Liu ZZ, Wong MS, Nichol J, Chan PW (2013) A multi-sensor study of water vapour from radiosonde, MODIS and AERONET: a case study of Hong Kong. Int J Climatol 33:109–120. doi:10.1002/joc.3412 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mendes VB (1999) Modeling the neutral-atmosphere propagation delay in radiometric space technique. PhD dissertation, University of New Brunswick, Frederiction, New Brunswick, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  17. Mohanakumar K (2008) Structure and composition of the lower and middle atmosphere. Stratosphere Troposphere Interactions:An Introduction, Springer, Netherlands p 1–53Google Scholar
  18. Niell AE, Coster AJ, Solheim FS et al (2001) Comparison of measurements of atmospheric wet delay by radiosonde, water vapor radiometer, GPS, and VLBI. J Atmos Ocean Technol 18:830–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Notarpietro R, Cucca M, Gabella M et al (2011) Tomographic reconstruction of wet and total refractivity fields from GNSS receiver networks. Adv Space Res 47:898–912. doi:10.1016/j.asr.1012.12.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Perler D, Geiger A, Hurter F (2011) 4D GPS water vapour tomography: New parameterized approaches. J Geophys Res 85:539–550Google Scholar
  21. Ran BY, Ge WZ (1997) Singular value decomposition method compared with damping least square method. Geophys Comput Technol 1:46–49Google Scholar
  22. Rocken C, Hove TV, Johnson J, Solheim F, Ware R, Bevis M, Businger S (1995) GPS/STORM-GPS sensing of atmospheric water vapor for meteorology. J Atmos Ocean Technol 12(3):468–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rohm W, Bosy J (2009) Local tomography troposphere model over mountains area. Atmos Res 93:777–783. doi:10.1016/j.atmosres.2009.03.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rohm W, Zhang K, Bosy J (2014) Limited constraint, robust Kalman filtering for GNSS troposphere tomography. Atmos Meas Tech 7(5):1475–1486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Saastamoinen J (1972) Atmospheric correction for the troposphere and stratosphere in radio ranging satellites. The use of artificial satellites for geodesy, p 247–251Google Scholar
  26. Skone S, Hoyle V (2005) Troposphere modeling in a regional GPS network. J Glob Position Syst 4:230–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Song S, Zhu W, Ding J, Peng J (2006) 3D water vapor tomography with Shanghai GPS network to improve forecasted moisture field. Chin Sci Bull 51:607–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Troller M, Bürki B, Cocard M, Geiger A, Kahle H-G (2002) 3-D refractivity field from GPS double difference tomography. Geophys Res Lett 29:2149–2152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wan R (2014) Research progress of the unconventional observing technology and the data used in the study of rainstorm in China. Adv Meteorol Sci Technol 4:24–35Google Scholar
  30. Wang JK, Han SQ, Bian H et al (2014) Characteristics of the three-dimensional GPS tomography water vapor field during the rainstorm. Acta Sci Nat Univ Pekin 50:1053–1064Google Scholar
  31. Yao YB, Zhao QZ, Zhang B (2016) A method to improve the utilization of GNSS observation for water vapor tomography. Ann Geophys 34:143–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Geodesy and GeomaticsWuhan UniversityWuhanChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Geospace Environment and Geodesy, Ministry of EducationWuhan UniversityWuhanChina
  3. 3.Collaborative Innovation Center for Geospatial TechnologyWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations