Advertisement

Optical Review

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 493–501 | Cite as

A high sampling rate digital holographic imager instrument for the in situ measurements of hydrometeors

  • Ville A. KaikkonenEmail author
  • Anssi J. Mäkynen
Special Section: Regular Paper The Eleventh Finland-Japan Joint Symposium on Optics in Engineering, (OIE'15), Joensuu, Finland
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. The Eleventh Finland-Japan Joint Symposium on Optics in Engineering, (OIE'15), Joensuu, Finland

Abstract

A novel digital in-line holographic imaging instrument designed for acquiring properties of individual hydrometeors in situ is presented. The instrument has a large measurement volume of 670 cm3. This combined with fast frame rate imaging and software controlled multi-exposure capabilities results in a representative sampling of rain and snowfall events. Hydrometeors are measured and analyzed from the in-focus images with microscopic resolution, and their 3D locations inside the measurement volume are determined. The instrument is designed to operate in cold climates and to produce reliable measurements also during strong winds. The imaging rate of the instrument was designed to be adequately high to observe the dynamic nature of rain and snow falls. By recording multi-exposure holograms, the effective frame rate can be increased. This allows the measurements of the velocities of the fast-falling hydrometeors. The instrument and the hologram processing are described; as well as results from laboratory tests and the first field measurements are shown. As a result, the resolving power of the instrument was measured to vary between 11 and 18 microns inside the measurement volume near the center of the field-of-view. Velocity vectors were measured both from multi-exposure and high frame rate holograms. The measured velocities ranged from 0.1 to 4 m/s. In addition, the projections of a flat-shaped and rotating snowflake imaged at different locations inside the measurement volume demonstrated the possibility to estimate the shape of the hydrometeor from multiple viewing angles.

Keywords

Laser Imaging systems Meteorology Optical instruments Disdrometry 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Mr. Timo Arstila for help in preparing the instrument and the USAF1951 holograms, Mr. Timo Kananen for the instrument and server software programming, Mr. Ilkka Leinonen, Mr. Lasse Rajakangas and Mr. Veijo Sutinen for the mechanical design and implementation of the instrument and both the University of Helsinki and the Finnish Meteorological Institute for the possibility to install our instrument in the measurement field at Hyytiälä Forestry Field Station.

References

  1. 1.
    Chandrasekar, V., Keränen, R., Lim, S., Moisseev, D.: Recent advances in classification of observations from dual polarization weather radars. Atmos. Res. 119, 97–111 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tyynelä, J., Leinonen, J., Moisseev, D., Nousiainen, T.: Radar backscattering from snowflakes: comparison of fractal, aggregate, and soft spheroid models. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 28, 1365–1372 (2011)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Krajewski, W.F., Smith, J.A.: Radar hydrology: rainfall estimation. Adv. Water Resour. 25, 1387–1394 (2002)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Milbrandt, J.A., Yau, M.K., Mailhot, J., Bélair, S., McTaggart-Cowan, R.: Simulation of an orographic precipitation event during IMPROVE-2. Part II: sensitivity to the number of moments in the bulk microphysics scheme. Mon. Weather Rev. 138, 625–642 (2010)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kruger, A., Krajewski, W.F.: Two-dimensional video disdrometer: a description. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 19, 602–617 (2002)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Newman, A.J., Kucera, P.A., Bliven, L.F.: Presenting the snowflake video imager (SVI). J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 26, 167–179 (2009)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garrett, T.J., Fallgatter, C., Shkurko, K., Howlett, D.: Fallspeed measurement and high-resolution multi-angle photography of hydrometeors in freefall. Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss. 5, 4827–4850 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gabor, D.: A new microscopic principle. Nature 161(4098), 777–778 (1948)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schnars, U., Jüptner, W.P.: Digital recording and numerical reconstruction of holograms. Meas. Sci. Technol. 13, R85 (2002)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garcia-Sucerquia, J., Xu, W., Jericho, S.K., Klages, P., Jericho, M.H., Kreuzer, H.J.: Digital in-line holographic microscopy. Appl. Opt. 45, 836–850 (2006)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Silverman, B.A., Thompson, B.J., Ward, J.H.: A laser-fog disdrometer. J. Appl. Meteorol. 3, 792–801 (1964)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Raupach, S.M.F., Vössing, H.J., Curtius, J., Borrmann, S.: Digital crossed-beam holography for in situ imaging of atmospheric ice particles. J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt. 8, 796 (2006)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fugal, J.P., Shaw, R.A., Saw, E.W., Sergeyev, A.V.: Airborne digital holographic system for cloud particle measurements. Appl. Opt. 43, 5987–5995 (2004)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Berg, M.J., Videen, G.: Digital holographic imaging of aerosol particles in flight. J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 112, 1776–1783 (2011)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Knollenberg, R.G.: The optical array: an alternative to scattering or extinction for airborne particle size determination. J. Appl. Meteorol. 9, 86–103 (1970)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lawson, R.P., O’Connor, D., Zmarzly, P., Weaver, K., Baker, B., Mo, Q., Jonsson, H.: The 2D-S (stereo) probe: design and preliminary tests of a new airborne, high-speed, high-resolution particle imaging probe. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 23, 1462–1477 (2006)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kaikkonen, V., Ekimov, D., Makynen, A.J.: A holographic in-line imaging system for meteorological applications. Instrum Meas IEEE Trans 63, 1137–1144 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kaikkonen, V., Makynen, A. J.: A hologram imager instrument for ground plane measurements of hydrometeors. In: Proceedings of the 5th IMEKO TC19 Symposium on Environmental Instrumentation and Measurements, 113–117 (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jameson, A.R., Kostinski, A.B.: What is a raindrop size distribution? Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 82, 1169–1177 (2001)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Junge, C.: The size distribution and aging of natural aerosols as determined from electrical and optical data on the atmosphere. J. Meteorol. 12, 13–25 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim, M. K.: Principles and techniques of digital holographic microscopy. J. Photon. Energy 018005–018005 (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fugal, J.P., Schulz, T.J., Shaw, R.A.: Practical methods for automated reconstruction and characterization of particles in digital in-line holograms. Meas. Sci. Technol. 20, 075501 (2009)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pech-Pacheco, J.L., Cristóbal, G., Chamorro-Martinez, J., Fernández-Valdivia, J.: Diatom autofocusing in brightfield microscopy: a comparative study. In: Pattern Recognition, 2000. Proceedings. 15th International Conference on 3, pp. 314–317 (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Optical Society of Japan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unit of Measurement Technology CEMIS-OuluUniversity of OuluKajaaniFinland
  2. 2.Opto-Electronics and Measurement Techniques, Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical EngineeringUniversity of OuluOuluFinland

Personalised recommendations