Advertisement

CO2 DIAL Sensitivity Studies for Measurements of Atmospheric Trace Gases

  • P. Brockman
  • R. V. Hess
  • C. H. Bair
Part of the Springer Series in Optical Sciences book series (SSOS, volume 39)

Abstract

There is great need for atmospheric trace constituent measurements with higher resolution than attainable with passive radiometers. Infrared (IR) differential absorption lidar (DIAL), which depends on Mie scattering from aerosols, has special advantages for tropospheric and lower stratospheric applications and has great potential importance for measurements from Shuttle and aircraft (refs. 1, 2, 3, 4). DIAL data reduction involves comparing large amplitude signals which have small differences. The accuracy of the trace constituent concentration inferred from DIAL measurements depends strongly on the errors in determining the amplitude of the signals. Thus, the commonly used SNR expression (signal divided by noise in the absence of signal) is not adequate to describe DIAL-measurement accuracy and must be replaced by an expression which includes the random coherent (speckle) noise within the signal (refs. 5, 6). A comprehensive DIAL computer algorithm (ref. 7) is modified to include heterodyne and direct detection with speckle noise. Results of studies for monitoring vertical distribution of O3, H2O, and NH3 from ground aircraft and Shuttle platforms are extended to include measurements of ground level plumes with larger than ambient densities, from ground and aircraft platforms. Results are shown for plumes of NH3 but these results can be generalized in terms of the plume optical depth.

Keywords

Direct Detection Speckle Noise Pulse Pair Heterodyne Detection Ground Reflection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Brockman, P; Hess, R.V.; Staton, L.D.; and Bair, C.H.: DIAL with Heterodyne Detection Including Speckle Noise: Aircraft/Shuttle Measurement of O3, H2O and NH3 with Pulsed Tunable Lasers. Heterodyne Systems and Technology Part II, p. 557 NASA CP 2138, March 1980.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hardesty, R.M.: A Comparison of Heterodyne and Direct Detection CO2 DIAL Systems for Ground Based Humidity Profiling. NOAA Technical Memorandum ERL WPL-64, October 1980.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Megie, G. and Menzies, R.T.: Complementarity of UV and IR Differential Absorption Lidar for Global Measurement of Atmospheric species. Applied Optics, Vol 19, p. 1773, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hess, R.V.: CO2 Lidar for Measurements of Trace Gases and Wind Velocities. SPIE 25th Annual Technical Symposium, Physics and Technology of Coherent Infrared Radar. Paper 300–05, August 1981.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elbaum, M. and Teich, M.C.: Heterodyne Detection of Random Gaussian Signals in the Optical and Infrared: Optimization of Pulse Duration. Opt. Commun., Vol 27, no. 2, pp. 257–261, Nov. 1978.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rye, B.J.: Differential Absorption Lidar System Sensitivity with Heterodyne Reception. Appl. Opt., Vol. 17, no. 24, pp. 3862–3864, Dec. 1978.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Remsberg, E.E. and Gordley, L.L.: Analysis of Differential Absorption Lidar from the Space Shuttle. Appl. Opt., Vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 624–630, Feb. 1978.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sonnenschein, CM. and Horrigan, F.A. : Signal-to-Noise Relationships of Coaxial Systems that Heterodyne Backscatter from the Atmosphere. Appl. Opt., Vol. 10, p. 1600, July 1971.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clifford, S.F. and Wandzura, S.: Monostatic Heterodyne Lidar Performance, The Effect of the Turbulent Atmosphere. Appl. Opt., Vol 20, p. 514, Feb. 1980.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hardesty, R.M.; Keeler, R.J.; Post, M.J.; and Richter, R.A.: Characteristics of Coherent Lidar Returns from Calibration Targets and Aerosols. Appl. Opt., Vol. 20, p. 3763, Nov. 1981.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Killinger, D.K. and Menyuk, N.: Remote Probing of the Atmosphere Using a CO2 DIAL System. IEEE Jl. Quantum Electronics, p. 1917, Sep. 1981.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kjelaas, A.G.; Nodal, P.E.; and Bjerkestand A.: Scintillation and Multi-wavelength Coherence Effects in a Long Path Laser Absorption Spectrometer. Appl. Opt., Vol. 17, p. 277, 1978.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blouke, M.M.; Burgett, C.B.; and Williams, R.L.: Sensitivity Limits for Extrinsic and Intrinsic Infrared Detectors. Infrared Physics, Vol. 13, pp. 61–77, 1973.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Park, J.H.: Optical Measurement in the Middle Atmosphere. Pure & Appl. Geophys., Vol. 117, no. 3, pp. 395–429, 1978–1979.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Deirmendjian, D.: Electromagnetic Scattering on Spherican Polydispersions. American Elsevier Publishing Co., New York, NY, 1969.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    McClatchey, Robert A. and Shelby, John E. A.: Atmospheric Attentuation of Laser Radiation from 0.76 to 31.25 μm. AFCRL-TR-74–0003, U.S. Air Force, Jan. 1974.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hardesty, R.M.: Feasibility of Combined DIAL — Doppler Coherent Lidar Systems for Moisture Flux Measurement. Topical Meeting on Coherent Laser Radar for Atmospheric Sensing, Aspen, July 1980.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Menzies, R.T. and Chahine, M.T.: Remote Atmospheric Sensing with an Airborne Laser Absorption Spectrometer. Appl. Opt., Vol. 13, no. 12, Dec. 1974.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Brockman
    • 1
  • R. V. Hess
    • 1
  • C. H. Bair
    • 1
  1. 1.NASA Langley Research CenterHamptonUSA

Personalised recommendations