Assessing the quality of humidity measurements from global operational radiosonde sensors. Issue 14 (29th July 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Moradi, Isaac; Soden, Brian; Ferraro, Ralph; Arkin, Phillip; Vömel, Holger
• Is Part Of: Journal of geophysical research. Volume 118:Issue 14(2013)
• Page Start: 8040
• Page End: 8053
• Publication Date: 2013-07-29
• Subjects: radiosonde data -- water vapor -- microwave remote sensing -- tropospheric humidity -- satellite data -- radiative transfer; Atmospheric physics -- Periodicals; Geophysics -- Periodicals; 551.5
• DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50589
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2169-897X

Abstract

Abstract : [1] The quality of humidity measurements from global operational radiosonde sensors in upper, middle, and lower troposphere for the period 2000–2011 were investigated using satellite observations from three microwave water vapor channels operating at 183.31±1, 183.31±3, and 183.31±7 GHz. The radiosonde data were partitioned based on sensor type into 19 classes. The satellite brightness temperatures (Tb) were simulated using radiosonde profiles and a radiative transfer model, then the radiosonde simulated Tb's were compared with the observed Tb's from the satellites. The surface affected Tb's were excluded from the comparison due to the lack of reliable surface emissivity data at the microwave frequencies. Daytime and nighttime data were examined separately to see the possible effect of daytime radiation bias on the sonde data. The error characteristics among different radiosondes vary significantly, which largely reflects the differences in sensor type. These differences are more evident in the mid‐upper troposphere than in the lower troposphere, mainly because some of the sensors stop responding to tropospheric humidity somewhere in the upper or even in the middle troposphere. In the upper troposphere, most sensors have a dry bias but Russian sensors and a few other sensors including GZZ2, VZB2, and RS80H have a wet bias. In middle troposphere, Russian sensors still have a wet bias but all other sensors have a dry bias. All sensors, including Russian sensors, have a dry bias in lower troposphere. The systematic and random errors generally decrease from upper to lower troposphere. Sensors from China, India, Russia, and the U.S. have a large random error in upper troposphere, which indicates that these sensors are not suitable for upper tropospheric studies as they fail to respond to humidity changes in the upper and even middle troposphere. Overall, Vaisala sensors perform better than other sensors throughout the troposphere exhibiting the smallest systematic and random errors. Because of the large differences between different radiosonde humidity sensors, it is important for long‐term trend studies to only use data measured using a single type of sensor at any given station. If multiple sensor types are used then it is necessary to consider the bias between sensor types and its possible dependence on humidity and temperature. Key Points: Investigating the quality of operational radiosonde humidity profiles Most humidity sensors fail to measure mid‐upper tropospheric humidity Ddifferent radiosonde sensors introduce temporal and spatial inhomogeneity