当前位置: X-MOL 学术Adv. Space Res. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
A global grid model for calibration of zenith hydrostatic delay
Advances in Space Research ( IF 2.6 ) Pub Date : 2021-07-02 , DOI: 10.1016/j.asr.2021.06.044
Fei Yang 1 , Jiming Guo 2 , Xiaolin Meng 3 , Jun Li 1 , Lv Zhou 4
Affiliation  

The determination of zenith hydrostatic delay (ZHD) is a key step to obtain water vapor information using GNSS technique, and it can be used to separate zenith wet delay (ZWD) with high accuracy from GNSS measurements. Estimates of ZHD are generally of higher accuracy when obtained from accurate pressure information and using the Saastamoinen model rather than when obtained from climatology. To improve this model, we analyzed the differences between the integrated ZHD and the Saastamoinen modeled ZHD, explored the relationship between the ZHD differences and meteorological parameters, and proposed a calibration model based on a global 2.5°×2° grid using the 5 years of pressure levels from the ERA5 reanalysis data provided by European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF). The performance of the calibration model was assessed against the Saastamoinen model using different data sources in 2016, i.e., the ERA5 data and globally distributed radiosonde data. The numerical results show that the calibration model outperforms the Saastamoinen model with a global 59%/89% improvement of RMSE and bias in the ECMWF comparison. In comparison with the radiosonde data, the mean bias/RMSE of the calibration model improves by 5.14/3.24, 1.73/1.47 and 3.15/2.84 mm against the Saastamoinen model in the latitude zones of <30°, 30–60°, and >60°, respectively.



中文翻译:

天顶静水延迟校准的全局网格模型

天顶静水延迟 (ZHD) 的确定是使用 GNSS 技术获取水汽信息的关键步骤,可用于从 GNSS 测量中高精度分离天顶湿延迟 (ZWD)。当从准确的压力信息和使用 Saastamoinen 模型而不是从气候学获得时,ZHD 的估计通常具有更高的准确度。为改进该模型,我们分析了综合ZHD与Saastamoinen模型ZHD之间的差异,探讨了ZHD差异与气象参数之间的关系,并利用5年的全球2.5°×2°网格提出了一种基于全球2.5°×2°网格的校准模型。来自欧洲中期天气预报中心 (ECMWF) 提供的 ERA5 再分析数据的压力水平。使用 2016 年的不同数据源,即 ERA5 数据和全球分布的无线电探空仪数据,对照 Saastamoinen 模型评估了校准模型的性能。数值结果表明,校准模型优于 Saastamoinen 模型,在 ECMWF 比较中,RMSE 和偏差提高了 59%/89%。与无线电探空仪数据相比,校准模型的平均偏差/RMSE 在 <30°、30-60° 和 > 60°,分别。数值结果表明,校准模型优于 Saastamoinen 模型,在 ECMWF 比较中,RMSE 和偏差提高了 59%/89%。与无线电探空仪数据相比,校准模型的平均偏差/RMSE 在 <30°、30-60° 和 > 60°,分别。数值结果表明,校准模型优于 Saastamoinen 模型,在 ECMWF 比较中,RMSE 和偏差提高了 59%/89%。与无线电探空仪数据相比,校准模型的平均偏差/RMSE 在 <30°、30-60° 和 > 60°,分别。

更新日期:2021-07-02
down
wechat
bug