Expand this Topic clickable element to expand a topic
Skip to content
Optica Publishing Group

Measurement method for slant visibility with slant path scattered radiance correction by lidar and the SBDART model

Open Access Open Access

Abstract

Different from the existing methods for estimating averaged slant visibility by lidar and the traditional Koschmieder visibility formula, a measurement method for slant visibility is fundamentally proposed in this paper that considers the correction of slant path scattered radiance. Lidar is adopted to provide aerosol parameters, including optical depth and scattering parameters, and the SBDART (Santa Barbara DISORT Atmospheric Radiative Transfer) model is used to solve the radiative transfer equation to obtain the corresponding radiance distribution; thus, the corrected apparent brightness contrast between the object and background along the slant path is used to achieve accurate slant visibility. Based on the measurement principle of slant visibility, a theoretical simulation and an analysis of the slant path scattered radiance are performed, and the resulting slant visibility is studied in detail in this paper.

© 2021 Optical Society of America under the terms of the OSA Open Access Publishing Agreement

1. Introduction

Four in-built aerosol models under different weather conditions are first theoretically simulated by the SBDART model. The distribution characteristics of the direct solar irradiance and scattered radiance at each atmospheric layer are analyzed, and the contrast ratio of the object and background and the slant visibility results are discussed in detail. The results show that the distribution of atmospheric radiance differs greatly due to absorption and scattering effects for different aerosol models and thus creates different slant visibility distances at the same observation direction, which cannot be ignored in daytime measurements. Different slant visibility distances can also be obtained due to the different scattered radiances at different observation directions. Under a contrast threshold of 0.05, the slant visibility is ∼4.3 km for rural-type aerosols in the direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60°, and the visibility is ∼6.3 km for urban-type aerosols compared with only ∼2.2 km in the direction of an observation zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 40°. The slant visibility under cloudy weather conditions is greatly reduced compared to that under clear weather conditions; taking urban aerosols as an example, the visibility is reduced from 6.3 km to less than 2.0 km.

Furthermore, the method combining the lidar and the SBDART model is validated by simulations under an actual atmosphere. A set of atmospheric aerosol lidar data under hazy weather are used as the simulation model to simulate the actual atmospheric scattered radiance. A list of parameters, including optical depth, single-scattering albedo, asymmetry factor and phase function of a 106-order Legendre matrix expansion, is formed as a customized input file to the SBDART model to obtain accurate slant visibility measurements. When affected by hazy weather, the slant visibility is lower than 4 km, and obvious differences in slant visibility distances are obtained at different observation directions.

The simulation results reveal that different slant visibility distances are directly determined by the differences in atmospheric scattered radiance along the slant path and verify that accurate slant visibility can be obtained by considering the correction of scattering radiation in slant directions. Additionally, the results validate the feasibility of the method combining lidar and SBDART for actual scattered radiance and accurate slant visibility measurements, which is of great scientific significance and application value in the fields of aviation, space flight and air detection.

Visibility or visual range is the distance at which a given standard object can be seen and identified with the unaided eye. Visibility can reflect atmospheric characteristics such as air pollution and air mass properties [14]. Generally, horizontal visibility is adopted; however, slant visibility has important scientific significance and application value in aviation, space flight, and air detection [5,6].

At present, visual observations are still the main measurement method used to assess slant visibility. Recently, several lidar visibility meters have emerged to measure slant visibility, and the retrieved averaged aerosol extinction coefficient or averaged aerosol optical thickness along the slant path by lidar are used to estimate the averaged slant visibility according to the traditional Koschmieder formula [79]. On the one hand, the slant visibility depends on the contrast ratio C * of the apparent brightness between the object and background along the slant path, which is affected greatly by atmospheric scattered radiation during the daytime. On the other hand, atmospheric scattered radiance mainly involves background sky radiance, which requires solving the radiative transfer equation [1012]. This is determined by many factors such as the sun spectrum, geometric position and aerosol parameters. Therefore, further in-depth study of the measurement techniques of slant visibility is required.

Solving the radiative transfer equation directly is complex and difficult. At present, researchers in the world have developed a number of models to solve the Earth's atmospheric radiation transmission, such as Modtran, DISORT and other calculation models [1315]. The intensity of both scattered and thermally emitted radiation can be computed at different heights and directions via these models. In China, Yang C P and Sun Y et al. carried out a series of studies on the characteristics of atmospheric radiation transmission and radiative transfer models [16,17]. Chen S P and Rao R Zh et al. also performed in-depth research in the field of atmospheric radiation measurements [18,19].

Considering the importance of atmospheric scattered radiance in daytime slant visibility measurements, a measurement method is proposed to obtain the slant visibility by the correction of slant path scattered radiance by lidar and the SBDART model, and theoretical simulations and validations are performed in this paper. In the second part, the measurement principle of slant visibility is introduced, and the SBDART model is illustrated to solve the radiative transfer equation to obtain the slant path scattered radiance. In the third part, we perform a detailed simulation of the slant path scattered radiance and the resulting slant visibility distances with different aerosol models under different weather conditions, and the direct and diffuse solar irradiance, scattered radiance per layer, and contrast ratio of the object and background are discussed. In the fourth part, the method combining the lidar and SBDART model is demonstrated under an actual atmosphere. Aerosol data from lidar are inputted to the SBDART model to obtain the actual scattered radiance and slant visibility, and a corresponding discussion is also provided. A summary and discussion are given in the last part.

2. Principle and method for slant visibility

2.1 Measurement principle for slant visibility

To identify an object from its background, it is generally required that there is enough brightness difference between the object and the background. When observing an object through a certain atmospheric distance, the visibility distance is defined as the farthest distance where one can clearly identify an object in a certain background through atmospheric observation, which can be described quantitatively by the apparent brightness contrast C* between the object and background and is given as [2,12,20,21]

$${C^\ast } = \left|{\frac{{L_b^\ast{-} L_o^\ast }}{{L_b^\ast }}} \right|, $$
where Lo* and Lb* are the apparent brightness of the object and background, respectively. The effect of the atmosphere on apparent brightness derives from two factors: (1) the weakening effect of the atmosphere and (2) the scattering effect of the atmosphere, and thus the apparent brightness of the object and background can be given as [1921]
$$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} L_o^\ast \textrm{ = }{\tau_L} \cdot {L_o} + {D_L}\\ L_b^\ast \textrm{ = }{\tau_L} \cdot {L_b} + {D_L} \end{array} \right., $$
where Lo and Lb are the intrinsic brightness of the object and the background, τL is the atmospheric transparency related to atmospheric optical thickness, and DL is the brightness of a certain gas column, which generally can be expressed as [20,21]
$${\tau _L} = \exp \left[ { - \int_0^L {{k_{ex}}(l)dl} } \right], $$
$${D_L} = \int_0^L {A(l)\exp \left[ { - \int_0^{{l^{\prime}}} {{k_{ex}}({l^{\prime}})d{l^{\prime}}} } \right]} dl$$
where kex is the atmospheric extinction coefficient, the sum of the aerosol extinction coefficient and the molecule extinction coefficient, and A(l) is the brightness of the scattered light sent from a certain angle and unit length gas column to the observation direction, which is equivalent to the J element of the radiative transfer equation [20].Combined Eqs. (1)–(4), the apparent brightness contrast C* between the object and background can be obtained. To clearly identify an object, it is required that the apparent brightness contrast C * should be greater than the contrast threshold (0.02 or 0.05). This is the measurement principle for atmospheric visibility.

When observing an object in the horizontal direction, under the assumptions that the atmospheric level is uniform and that the object should be perfectly dark and the background should be perfectly bright, that is, the intrinsic contrast should be 1.0, the relationship between the meteorological visibility and the atmospheric extinction coefficient is obtained directly as follows under a contrast threshold of 0.02 [12,21]:

$${R_m} = \frac{{3.912}}{{{k_{ex}}}}. $$

This is Koschmieder’s visibility formula, which is often used for horizontal visibility measurements. For lidar visibility meters, the averaged slant visibility is generally estimated according to this empirical formula [8,9]. The major problem is that the atmospheric scattering effect along the slant path is neglected, and there is no definite relationship between the slant visibility and the contrast ratio, which thus makes it impossible to obtain accurate slant visibility or may result in incorrect slant visibility results. To overcome this problem, the proposed measurement method in this paper is to achieve accurate slant visibility with the slant path scattered radiance correction technique.

When observing objects in the air or observing ground objects from high altitude, horizontal uniformity will not be satisfied, and thus, the traditional Koschmieder’s visibility formula is not applicable for slant visibility measurements. According to Eqs. (1)–(4), the slant visibility is determined by the intrinsic brightness of the object and background, the atmospheric transparency and the gas column brightness along the slant path.

Assuming that the object and background are Lambertians, their brightness can be expressed as [20]

$$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} {L_o}\textrm{ = }\frac{{{I_0} \cdot {\rho_o}}}{\pi }\\ {L_b}\textrm{ = }\frac{{{I_0} \cdot {\rho_b}}}{\pi } \end{array} \right., $$
where I0 is the total irradiance at the ground, including the direct solar irradiance and scattered irradiance, and ρo and ρb are the reflectivity of the object and background, respectively. Here, the reflection of the object is a ratio of the object radiation to the incoming solar radiation at the object, where the object radiation comes from the background atmosphere to the object along with the viewing direction. Similarly, the reflection of the background is the ratio of the background radiation to the incident solar radiation. Thus, in a certain observation cone and a certain length of gas column, Eq. (2) can be expressed as
$$\left\{ \begin{array}{l} L_o^\ast \textrm{(}R,\theta ,\varphi \textrm{) = }\frac{{{I_0} \cdot {\rho_o}}}{\pi } \cdot \tau (R,\theta ,\varphi ) + D(R,\theta ,\varphi )\\ L_b^\ast \textrm{(}R,\theta ,\varphi \textrm{) = }\frac{{{I_0} \cdot {\rho_b}}}{\pi } \cdot \tau (R,\theta ,\varphi ) + D(R,\theta ,\varphi ) \end{array} \right., $$
where R is the slant range and θ and φ are the zenith angle and azimuth angle of the observation direction, respectively. Placing Eq. (7) into Eq. (1), the contrast ratio C* of the apparent brightness between the object and background along the slant path can be given as
$${C^\ast }(R,\theta ,\varphi ) = \left|{\frac{{{\rho_b} - {\rho_o}}}{{{\rho_b} + \frac{\pi }{{{I_0}}} \cdot \frac{{D(R,\theta ,\varphi )}}{{\tau (R,\theta ,\varphi )}}}}} \right|. $$

Thus, the slant visibility can be determined when the contrast ratio C*(R,θ,φ) is decreased to a value of 0.05 or 0.02. In this measurement method for slant visibility, the atmospheric transparency τ can be obtained by integrating the extinction coefficient from lidar, and the total irradiance I0 at the ground and the gas column brightness D can be provided by the SBDART model. For the reflectivity of the object and background, ρo and ρb, some theoretical values or measured values from a photometer can be adopted.

2.2 Calculation method for scattered radiance based on the SBDART model

As illustrated above, the slant visibility is affected to a great extent by the brightness of scattered radiance along a certain slant path, which requires solving the radiative transfer equation. The radiative transfer equation is numerically integrated with DISORT (discrete ordinate radiative transfer) [15]. The discrete ordinate method provides a numerically stable algorithm to solve the equations of plane-parallel radiative transfer in a vertically inhomogeneous atmosphere. SBDART is a software tool that computes plane-parallel radiative transfer in clear and cloudy conditions within the Earth's atmosphere and at the surface. In this paper, we mainly discuss the measurements of slant range visibility within a certain zenith angle, and thus, the SBDART model is adopted to obtain the scattered radiance [2224]. This FORTRAN computer program is designed for the analysis of a wide variety of radiative transfer problems encountered in satellite remote sensing and atmospheric radiation budget studies. The program is based on a collection of well-tested and reliable physical models that have been developed by the atmospheric science community over the past few decades. A height of 100 km is the default for the top of the atmosphere, which is divided into 33 atmospheric layers from 100 km to 0 km. When inputting the initial solar irradiance, surface albedo, aerosol parameters and cloud parameters, the intensity of both scattered and thermally emitted radiation can be computed at different heights and directions.

SBDART can compute the radiative effects of several lower- and upper-atmosphere aerosol types. In the lower atmosphere, typical rural, urban, or marine conditions can be simulated using standard aerosol models. These models differ from one another in the way their extinction efficiency Qext, single-scattering albedo ω, and asymmetry factor g vary with wavelength and to the extent the scattering parameters depend on the surface relative humidity. When aerosol parameters are obtained by lidar, including optical thickness, single-scattering albedo and scattering phase function, an input file with a parameter list can be customized by the user, and the actual atmospheric radiance can be further obtained by the SBDART model. Thus, the proposed measurement method combines lidar and the SBDART model, and, where lidar is adopted to provide aerosol parameters and the SBDART model is used to solve the radiative transfer equation and obtain the corresponding radiance distribution; thus, the apparent brightness contrast between the object and background along the slant path can be corrected, and accurate slant visibility can be achieved. In this paper, both the built-in aerosol models and the actual atmospheric aerosol data are involved in the simulation and analysis, respectively.

It should be mentioned that the current SBDART model is generally used under the assumption of a horizontal homogenous atmosphere, and can only deal with the horizontal homogeneous stratified clouds covering the whole sky. For cumuliform clouds or clouds not covering the whole sky, the simulation will be more complicated, perhaps, a 3-D radiative transfer model is needed to fulfil the task. Also, a spherical homogenous radiative transfer model or pseudo-spherical radiative transfer model should be adopted in theory when the zenith angles are relatively large (> 75°) [25].

3. Simulation and analysis of slant visibility under clear conditions

In this section, we perform a detailed simulation of the slant path scattered radiance and conduct an in-depth analysis on the resulting slant visibility distances with different aerosol models under clear weather conditions. Four aerosol models, including rural-type, urban-type, marine-type and troposphere-type models, are involved, and the direct and diffuse solar irradiance, scattered radiance at each atmospheric layer, and contrast ratio of the object and background are discussed; the slant visibilities in different directions are further simulated and analyzed.

3.1 Simulation process with urban-type aerosols

First, the urban-type aerosol model is taken as an example to illustrate the simulation process. The main simulation parameters are as follows: the solar zenith angle and solar azimuth angle are 60° and 180°, the visibility is 23 km with a wavelength of 0.55 µm, mid-latitude summer model atmospheres are considered, and the number of viewing zenith and azimuth angles in the range of 0° - 180° is set to be 16 and 13, respectively. Figure 1(a) presents the aerosol optical depth distribution for the urban-type aerosol model. The total optical depth is the sum of the layer optical depth, and it is valued ∼0.7. The optical depth increases gradually with height, reaches ∼0.65 at 20 km, and then maintains a slow and steady trend of ∼0.7 to a height of 100 km. The optical depth is determined by aerosol concentrations from high to low ranging from the bottom to the top of the atmosphere. Using the SBDART model, the transmission characteristics of direct and diffuse solar irradiance are obtained and are shown in Fig. 1(b). The direct and diffuse solar irradiance reaching the ground is lower at ∼ 670 w·m-2·um-1 due to the stronger absorption effect for the urban aerosol model.

 figure: Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Height distributions of optical depth and direct and diffuse solar irradiance for the urban-type aerosol model.

Download Full Size | PDF

By specifying IOUT = 22, the atmospheric scattered radiance distribution at each atmospheric layer can be obtained. Figure 2 shows the radiance distribution at different atmospheric layers for the urban-type aerosol model, and the results for altitudes of 0 km, 3 km, 5 km, 10 km, 25 km and 70 km are displayed. The horizontal and longitudinal ordinates of each semicircle denote the azimuth angle and the zenith angle propagating radiation, respectively. Since the radiance is symmetric with respect to the relative azimuth, only the relative azimuth range from 0° to 180° is shown. From the ground to the top of the atmosphere, the atmospheric scattered radiance gradually decreases with increasing altitude. The scattered radiance is the strongest at the ground level of 0 km, as shown in Fig. 2(a), which is caused by the strong scattering effect derived from the high aerosol concentration near the ground. Additionally, the radiance gradually radiates from the position of the sun, and the corresponding brightness gradually decreases. The decreased radiance with increasing altitude is mainly attributed to the aerosol concentration gradually decreasing, and Rayleigh scattering of the molecules begins to dominate.

 figure: Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Atmospheric scattered radiance at different atmospheric layers for the urban-type aerosol model. (a) 0 km, (b) 3 km, (c) 5 km, (d) 10 km, (e) 25 km, (f) 70 km.

Download Full Size | PDF

To clearly reveal the effect of scattering radiation on slant visibility, the scattered radiance and the corresponding contrast ratio between the object and background are also simulated in different directions. Here, the object and background are assumed to be a runway and grassland, with their reflectivities of ρo=0.28 and ρb = 0.15, respectively. Figure 3 shows the variation trend of the scattered radiance and the corresponding contrast ratio curves with range in three directions with a fixed zenith angle of 61.71°, and the black, red and blue lines correspond to the azimuth angle results of 40°, 60° and 80°, respectively. Different distributions can be clearly obtained from the sky scattered radiance in the three observation directions, among which the strongest radiance is observed at the observation zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 40°. Figure 3(b) presents the corresponding contrast ratio curves in the three directions. It can be clearly seen that the contrast ratio decreases slowly with range, and it also differs in the three directions, resulting in a difference in the slant visibility distance. Taking the observation of a zenith angle of 61.71° and an azimuth angle of 40° as examples, the oblique slant visibility distance is only 2.2 km under the contrast threshold of 0.05. By comparison, the slant visibility distance can reach 6.3 km for a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60°, and the value can reach > 12 km for a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 80°.

 figure: Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Scattered radiance and contrast ratio curves vs range in different directions with different azimuth angles and a fixed zenith angle of 61.71° for the urban-type aerosol model. (a) Scattered radiance and (b) contrast ratio curves of the object and background.

Download Full Size | PDF

Scattered radiance and contrast ratio curves vs range in different directions with a fixed azimuth angle of 60° are also presented in Fig. 4. Three zenith angles of 30.86°, 46.29° and 61.71° are selected. These results also show that scattered radiance brightness and the resulting slant visibility distances differ with observation directions. As shown in Fig. 4(b), the slant visibility distance can reach 6.8 km and 7.5 km for zenith angle directions of 46.29° and 30.86°, respectively, compared to 6.3 km for a zenith angle direction of 61.71°. Thus, different slant visibility distances are obtained due to the different scattered radiances at different observation directions.

 figure: Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. Scattered radiance and contrast ratio curves vs range in different directions with different zenith angles and a fixed azimuth angle of 60° for the urban-type aerosol model. (a) Scattered radiance and (b) contrast ratio curves of the object and background.

Download Full Size | PDF

3.2 Simulation and analysis for four aerosol models

Scattered radiance and its influence on slant visibility are also discussed and analyzed under different aerosol models. Figure 5 presents the distribution of direct and diffuse solar irradiance under rural-type, urban-type, marine-type and troposphere-type aerosol models [26]. The models are provided with different aerosol optical properties, such as single-scattering albedo and asymmetry factor. Their asymmetry factors are valued at 0.679, 0.715, 0.743 and 0.667, respectively. Their single-scattering albedos are quite different. The highest single- scattering albedo, with a value of 0.9905, is provided by marine-type aerosols. By comparison, the aerosol single-scattering albedo is the lowest, at 0.7398, for the urban-type aerosol model, and the corresponding values are 0.9523 and 0.9683 for the rural-type and troposphere-type aerosol models, respectively. It can be clearly seen that aerosol models have a great effect on the transmission characteristics of solar irradiation. Atmospheric aerosols affect the Earth’s energy balance, primarily through scattering and absorption of solar radiation and through the modification of cloud microphysics. The marine-type aerosol model, shown as the blue line in Fig. 5, has the highest direct and diffuse solar irradiance reaching the ground, with a value of ∼780 W·m-2·um-1 due to the weakest absorption and the strongest scattering. For the urban-type aerosol model, the strongest absorption effect of aerosols leads to the weakest total irradiance to the ground, valued at ∼670 W·m-2·um-1. Obviously, solar radiation transmission in the atmosphere is affected by different absorption and scattering effects of aerosols for different aerosol models.

 figure: Fig. 5.

Fig. 5. Direct and diffuse solar irradiance curves for four aerosol models under clear weather conditions.

Download Full Size | PDF

Figure 6 shows the comparisons of atmospheric scattered radiance distribution observed at the ground for the four aerosol models. On the whole, the scattered radiance reaches the maximum at the solar zenith and radiates from the position of the sun with gradually decreasing brightness. However, different radiance distributions can be obtained for the four aerosol models. Among them, the strongest radiance brightness exists for marine-type aerosols because the single scattering albedo of this model is higher than that of the other models, which is valued at 0.9905. The scattered radiance is valued at >1200 w·m-2·um-1·str-1 and is gradually spread and weakened. For the urban-type aerosol model, the radiance output is the weakest at ∼700 w·m-2·um-1·str-1 because of its lowest single scattering albedo of 0.7398 and the weakest scattering effect. Clearly, the absorption and scattering characteristics of aerosols under different aerosol models directly bring out differences in the scattered radiation distribution.

 figure: Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. Distributions of the scattered radiance observed at the ground for four aerosol models under clear weather conditions. (a) Rural-type, (b) urban-type, (c) marine-type and (d) troposphere-type models.

Download Full Size | PDF

Taking a certain slant direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60°, the variation trend of the atmospheric scattered radiance with range can be obtained, and the results from different aerosol models are presented in Fig. 7. It is clearly shown that the scattering radiation brightness gradually decreases with range, but it differs with different aerosols. By comparison, the weakest scattered radiance is obtained by the urban-type aerosols. Taking the runway as the object and the grassland as the background, the contrast ratio is obtained according to Eq. (8) and shown in Fig. 8. When the contrast threshold is 0.05, different slant visibilities are obtained for different aerosols. For urban-type aerosols, the slant visibility is ∼6.3 km, and one cannot distinguish between the object and background beyond this distance. The slant visibility is ∼4.0 km, 4.3 km and 5.3 km for troposphere-type aerosols, rural-type aerosols, and marine-type aerosols, respectively. The results clearly reveal that large differences in atmospheric scattered radiance are derived from different aerosol absorption and scattering effects for different aerosol models and thus result in different slant visibility distances in the same observation direction.

 figure: Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. Atmospheric scattered radiance curves with range in the slant direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60° for four aerosol models under clear weather conditions.

Download Full Size | PDF

 figure: Fig. 8.

Fig. 8. Contrast ratio of the object and background with range in the slant direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60° for four aerosol models under clear weather conditions.

Download Full Size | PDF

4. Simulation and analysis of slant visibility under cloudy conditions

If there are clouds throughout the sky, the atmospheric scattering radiation effect will change again. We simulate the radiance results under cloudy conditions, with a cloud height of 5 km and a cloud optical depth of 2. The distribution curves of direct and diffuse solar irradiance are obtained as shown in Fig. 9. The direct and diffuse solar irradiance decline dramatically from 900 to 600 W·m-2·um-1 at a cloud height of 5 km due to the strong Mie-scattering effect of particles in the clouds, and then it decreases gradually to the ground. The total irradiance is much lower under cloud cover than under clear weather conditions (Fig. 5). Additionally, the direct and scattering irradiance for the marine-type aerosol model is still higher than that for the other three aerosol models.

 figure: Fig. 9.

Fig. 9. Direct and diffuse solar irradiance curves for four aerosol models under cloudy conditions.

Download Full Size | PDF

The distribution of atmospheric scattered radiance observed at the ground is displayed in Fig. 10. Higher scattered radiation can also be obtained from marine-type aerosols because of its higher single scattering albedo, as shown in Fig. 10(c). According to Eq. (8), the contrast ratio between the runway and the grass can be simulated. Taking a certain slant direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60°, the contrast ratio curves vs range are shown in Fig. 11. We can see that these four curves are relatively close to each other, and the slant visibility is relatively lower, ranging from 1.6-1.8 km under a contrast threshold of 0.05. The slant visibility is obtained at ∼4.5 km and 5.2 km for urban-type and marine-type aerosols under the contrast threshold of 0.02, respectively. Overall, the slant visibility is greatly reduced compared with the results under clear weather. Taking urban-type aerosols as an example, slant visibility can reach > 20 km under clear weather, while it can reach only 4.5 km under cloudy weather in the same direction under a contrast threshold of 0.02. Obviously, the scattering effect of clouds has a great impact on slant visibility. Aerosol models and weather conditions both have a great influence on the scattered radiance and thus affect the slant visibility.

 figure: Fig. 10.

Fig. 10. Distributions of the scattered radiance observed at the ground for four aerosol models under cloudy conditions. (a) Rural-type, (b) urban-type, (c) marine-type and (d) troposphere-type models.

Download Full Size | PDF

 figure: Fig. 11.

Fig. 11. Contrast ratio of the runway and grass with range in the slant direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60° for four aerosol models under cloudy conditions.

Download Full Size | PDF

5. Simulation and discussion of slant visibility under actual atmosphere

To investigate the influence of scattered radiance on slant visibility under actual atmospheric conditions, the method combining lidar and SBDART is further validated in this section. A set of atmospheric aerosol data under hazy weather by lidar is employed as the simulation model to simulate the actual atmospheric scattered radiance. Via a multiple wavelength Mie-scattering lidar built at the Xi'an University of Technology (34.233°N, 108.911°E), the aerosol optical parameters, microphysical parameters and scattering parameters can be obtained by lidar [27]. A list of parameters, including optical depth, single-scattering albedo, asymmetry factor and phase function of a 106-order Legendre matrix expansion, is formed as a customized input file for the SBDART model. The actual atmospheric radiance can be obtained for the analysis of slant visibility under an actual atmosphere.

Figure 12 presents the simulation model results for the aerosol extinction coefficient and backscattering coefficient profiles at 355 nm, 532 nm and 1064 nm. The corresponding weather conditions are as follows: the visibility is 4.4 km, the concentrations of PM2.5 and PM10 are 138 µg/cm3 and 194 µg/cm3, respectively, and the ground relative humidity is 56%. Figure 13 presents the obtained particle size distributions of 33 atmospheric layers by the regularization method, and Figs. 13(a)–13(c) corresponds to those in the height ranges of 0-10 km, 11-20 km and 21-100 km, respectively. As shown in Fig. 13(a), obvious double-peak size distribution spectra can be found below 9 km, and the peaks are located at 0.25 µm and ∼3 µm, indicating the dominance of coarse mode particles. A single-peak size distribution is clearly seen with a peak of 0.25 µm above the height of 10 km, as shown in Fig. 13(b) and Fig. 13(c). In addition, it is clearly seen that the total particle concentration gradually decreases with height, from >200 below 5 km to <100 at 9 km, and then decreases to < 5 at the upper heights. By using Mie theory, the variation in the asymmetric factor and the single-scattering albedo with height can be obtained, and the results are shown in Fig. 14. The asymmetric factor and single-scattering albedo average 0.82 and 0.99 under a height of 4 km, respectively. At a height range of 4-9 km, the asymmetric factor increases considerably from 0.82 to 0.94, and the single-scattering albedo declines considerably from 0.999 to 0.557. Then, they both remain stable to the top of the atmosphere at 100 km. The single-scattering albedo represents the proportion of scattering and extinction effects of aerosols, and the asymmetry factor reflects anisotropy of the scattered energy transfer by a particle. Both can reflect the effect of the actual atmospheric aerosols on the direct and diffuse solar irradiance and scattered radiance.

 figure: Fig. 12.

Fig. 12. Model results for atmospheric aerosol extinction coefficient and backscattering coefficient profiles under hazy weather.

Download Full Size | PDF

 figure: Fig. 13.

Fig. 13. Model results for particle size distribution vs height. (a) 0-10 km (b)11-20 km (c) 21-100 km

Download Full Size | PDF

 figure: Fig. 14.

Fig. 14. Model results for aerosol scattering parameters vs height: (a) asymmetry factor and (b) single-scattering albedo.

Download Full Size | PDF

Additionally, the phase function is obtained by a 106-order Legendre matrix expansion; thus, a list of parameters, including optical depth, single-scattering albedo, asymmetry factor and phase function, is formed as a customized input file to the SBDART model to obtain the actual radiance distribution, and then the contrast ratio of apparent brightness between the object and the background is analyzed. Figure 15(a) presents the aerosol optical depth curve. During hazy weather, the optical depth reaches a value of ∼1.8 within the whole layer. The radiance output is obtained by specifying IOUT = 22, and the distribution trend of direct and diffuse solar irradiance is shown in Fig. 15(b). The direct and diffuse solar irradiance gradually decreases from the top of the atmosphere to the ground due to the absorption and scattering of aerosols and molecules. Combined with the output of the direct irradiance, the scattered irradiance at the ground can also be obtained, as shown in Fig. 15(c). Scattered irradiance is obtained with an average value of > 400 w·m-2·um-1 at a height of 4 km, and it decreases gradually with height, from ∼350 w·m-2·um-1 at 5 km to 120 w·m-2·um-1 at 10 km and then to less than 0.1 w·m-2·nm at 100 km, which reveals that abundant aerosols in the troposphere contribute to strong atmospheric scattered irradiance.

 figure: Fig. 15.

Fig. 15. Height distributions of optical depth, direct and diffuse solar irradiance and scattered irradiance under hazy weather.

Download Full Size | PDF

According to Eq. (8), the contrast ratio curve of apparent brightness between the object and the background is obtained, and the results in different directions are shown in Fig. 16. These two graphs present two sets of results: one is for three different observation directions with a fixed zenith angle of 61.71°, and the other is for three different observation directions with a fixed azimuth angle of 60°. The contrast of apparent brightness decreases mostly with range in any observation direction. As shown in Fig. 16(a), different slant visibility distances can be obtained with values of 1.4 km, 2.0 km and 4.0 km at azimuth angles of 50°, 60° and 70° when the zenith angle is 61.71°. We also made preliminary evaluations on the results. In the slant direction of zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 70°, the averaged slant visibility by the classical Koschmieder’s formula is 5.12 km, which is higher than the obtained 4.0 km by our measurement method. By comparisons, it is thought that the result is reasonable because of considering the correction of scattering radiation along the slant path. Further, the systematic error for the contrast ratio is also presented as error-bar. In the direction of zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 70°, the measurement error is 8.4% under the contrast threshold of 0.05, and the resulting measurement error of slant visibility is 13.6%. In the same way, slant visibility distances differ from different zenith directions, as presented in Fig. 16(b). Three observation zenith angles of 30.86°, 46.29° and 61.71° are selected. When the azimuth angle is 60°, the slant visibility distance reaches 2.4 km for a zenith angle of 46.29°, compared to that of 2.9 km for a zenith angle of 30.86° under a contrast threshold of 0.05. Corresponding error bars are also shown in the direction of zenith angle of 30.86° and azimuth angle of 60°, and the measurement error of the contrast is ∼10.4% under the contrast threshold of 0.05, and the corresponding measurement error for slant visibility is 10.6%. Obviously, different slant visibility distances are obtained at different observation directions under actual weather conditions.

 figure: Fig. 16.

Fig. 16. Contrast ratio curves at different observation directions under hazy weather. (a) with different azimuth angles (b) with different zenith angles.

Download Full Size | PDF

6. Conclusion

Atmospheric scattered radiance plays an important role in the fields of space target detection and recognition and directly affects accurate measurements of daytime slant visibility. In this paper, according to the measurement principle of slant visibility, a measurement method for slant visibility is fundamentally proposed that considers the correction of slant path scattered radiance, and the combination of lidar and a SBDART model is adopted to obtain the actual scattered radiance and correct the apparent brightness contrast between the object and background, in which lidar is adopted to provide the actual aerosol data, and the SBDART model is used to solve the radiative transfer equation.

First, theoretical simulations and analyses of the slant path scattered radiance are performed, and the resulting slant visibility is studied in detail in this paper. Four in-built aerosol models under clear and cloudy weather conditions are involved, including rural-type, urban-type, marine-type and troposphere-type aerosols. The distribution of the direct and diffuse solar irradiance and the scattered radiance at different atmospheric layers are simulated by the SBDART model, and the contrast ratio of the object and background and the slant visibility distances in different directions are further obtained and discussed. The results can be summarized as follows:

  • (1) The distribution of atmospheric scattered radiance differs greatly due to different absorption and scattered effects for different aerosol models, and the strongest scattered radiance occurs for marine-type aerosols.
  • (2) Large differences in atmospheric radiance for different aerosol models under clear weather conditions result in different slant visibility distances in the same observation direction. The slant visibility is ∼6.3 km for urban-type aerosols, while it is ∼4.3 km for rural-type for a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60° under a contrast threshold of 0.05.
  • (3) Different slant visibility distances are obtained due to the different scattered radiances at different observation directions. Under a contrast threshold of 0.05, the oblique slant visibility distance is only 2.2 km for a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 40°, compared to 6.3 km for a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60° for urban-type aerosols under clear weather conditions.
  • (4) The slant visibility will be greatly reduced compared to that under clear weather due to the strong absorption and scattering effect of particles in the clouds. Taking urban-type aerosols as an example, slant visibility can reach 6.3 km under clear weather, while it is lower than 2.0 km under cloudy weather under a contrast threshold of 0.05. The above simulation results from the SBDART model reflect that large differences in slant path scattered radiance in different directions result in different slant visibilities, which directly indicates that slant path scattered radiation correction is necessary in daytime slant visibility measurements.

Second, the method is validated by simulations under an actual atmosphere. A set of lidar data under hazy weather conditions is further employed in a simulation model. The obtained atmospheric aerosol optical parameters, microphysics parameters and scattering parameters are inputted into the SBDART model, and the direct and diffuse solar irradiance and the scattered radiance of 33 atmospheric layers are obtained. The corresponding slant visibility is calculated from the contrast threshold curve of the object and background. When affected by hazy weather, the slant visibility is lower than 4.0 km, and obvious differences in slant visibility distances are obtained in different observation directions. The above results verify the feasibility of the method combining lidar and SBDART for actual scattered radiance and accurate slant visibility measurements. The study of accurate measurements of slant visibility is of great scientific significance and application value in the fields of aviation, space flight and air detection.

In the future, there are still several key technologies to be further developed. The proposed measurement method for slant visibility will be further evaluated and analyzed by theoretical analysis or experimental validation. A comparison experiment must be carried out, and the results should be compared with those by visual observation or other methods. In addition, further research on the pseudo-spherical radiative transfer model should be conducted to improve the current method. By combining atmospheric pseudo-spherical approximation and the existing SBDART model, accurate slant visibility measurements will be achieved with arbitrary zenith angles.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China (U1733202, 41627807); Shaanxi High-Level Talent Innovation Program (2020-TD014).

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Prof. Mao Jietai of Peking University for assistance in the measurement principle of slant visibility and the SBDART model.

Disclosures

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

1. L. Shen and C. Zhao, “Dominance of Shortwave Radiative Heating in the Sea-Land Breeze Amplitude and its Impacts on Atmospheric Visibility in Tokyo, Japan,” J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 125(8), e2019JD031541 (2020). [CrossRef]  

2. H. Horvath, “Atmospheric visibility,” Atmos. Environ. 15(10-11), 1785–1796 (1981). [CrossRef]  

3. R. J. Charlson, “Atmospheric visibility related to aerosol mass concentration: review,” Environ. Sci. Technol. 3(10), 913–918 (1969). [CrossRef]  

4. X. Sun, T. Zhao, D. Liu, S. Gong, J. Xu, and X. Ma, “Quantifying the Influences of PM2.5 and Relative Humidity on Change of Atmospheric Visibility over Recent Winters in an Urban Area of East China,” J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 125(8), 1–12 (2020). [CrossRef]  .

5. P. Alexandros and P. Alexandros, “Set of Algorithms and Techniques for Accurate 3D, Single Beam-Single Pointing, Lidar Measurements for Slant Range Visibility, Planetary Boundary Layer Height and Wind Speed Retrieval Atmospheric Layers Spatial Distribution and Categorization in Real Time,” EPJ Web of Conferences, 237 (2020)

6. P. Alexandros, P. Alexandros, and G. Georgios, “Lidar algorithms for atmospheric slant range visibility, meteorological conditions detection, and atmospheric layering measurements,” Appl. Opt. 56(23), 6440–6449 (2017). [CrossRef]  

7. Y. Z. Ma, J. Q. Liu, and Q. Q. Wang, “Inversion of Aerosol Lidar Ratio and Its Effect on Slant Visibility Based on Fernald-PSO Method,” Acta Photonica Sinica 48(3), 301001 (2019). [CrossRef]  

8. F. Tian, J. Luo, D. P. Hu, and Y. D. Ye, “Inversion Algorithm for Slant Visibility Based On Lidar Technique,” Laser & Infrared 42(11), 1239–1243 (2012).

9. X. Xinglong, L. Wenjing, J. Lihui, L. Mingda, and F. Shuai, “Slant-range visibility retrieve considering multiple-scattering effects,” J. Optoelectron. Laser 25(9), 1742–1748 (2014).

10. C. Haskell R, O. Svaasand L, T. Tsay T, C. Feng T, S. McAdams M, and J. Tromberg B, “Boundary conditions for the diffusion equation in radiative transfer,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11(10), 2727–2741 (1994). [CrossRef]  

11. P. J. Coelho, “Discrete Ordinates Solution of the Radiative Transfer Equation In Media With Strong Forward And Backward Scattering Subjected to Collimated Irradiation,” J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. 254, 107087 (2020). [CrossRef]  

12. Z. Lee and S. Shang, “Visibility: How Applicable is the Century-Old Koschmieder Model?” J. Atmos. Sci. 73(11), 4573–4581 (2016). [CrossRef]  

13. A Berk, L S Bernstein, and D C Robertson, “MODTRAN: a moderate resolution model for LOWTRAN 7,” Report GL-TR-89-0122, (1989)

14. L. S. Rothman, R. R. Gamache, A. Goldman, L. R. Brown, R. A. Toth, H. M. Pickett, R. L. Poynter, J. M. Flaud, C. Camy-Peyret, A. Barbe, N. Husson, C. P. Rinsland, and M. A. H. Smith, “The HITRAN database: 1986 edition,” Appl. Opt. 26(19), 4058–4097 (1987). [CrossRef]  

15. P. Ricchiazzi, S. Yang, C. Gautier, and D. Sowle, “SBDART: A research and Teaching Software Tool for Plane-Paraller Radiative Transfer in the Eearth’s Atmosphere,” Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 79(10), 2101–2114 (1998). [CrossRef]  

16. S. Yu, L. Longfu, Z. Zengliang, Y. Wei, and Y. Zhigang, “Cloud Radiative Transfer Simulation Using LibRadtran and Comparisons with SBDART,” J. Atmospheric and Environ. Opt. 5(1), 19–25 (2010).

17. C. P. Yang, X. L. Ma, J. Guo, M. W. Ao, Y. T. Ye, Z. J. Qu, and Z. Y. Xu, “Atmospheric Radiative Transfer Model for Spherical Atmosphere in Geodetic Coordinate System,” J. Univ. Electronic Sci. Technol. China 45(2), 301–305 (2016). [CrossRef]  

18. P. Chen S, Y. Sun F, Q. Xun W, and L. Wei H, “Development of Spectral Radiance Measurement System for Sky Background,” J. Atmospheric and Environ. Opt. 14(4), 241–249 (2019).

19. S. Fengying, M. Haiping, W. Pengfei, and R. Ruizhong, “Current Situation and Prospect of Ground-Based Background Sky Radiance Measurement Technique and Its Applications,” J. Atmospheric and Environ. opt. 12(2), 81–92 (2017).

20. P. X. Sheng, J. T. Mao, J. G. Li, Z. M. Ge, C. A. Zhang, J. G. Sang, N. X. Pan, and S. H. Zhang, “atmospheric physics,”[M]. 2th ed. Beijing University Press, 2013: 439–441.

21. R. Ruizhong, “Vision Through Atmosphere and Atmospheric Visibility,” Acta Opt. Sin. 30(9), 2486–2492 (2010). [CrossRef]  

22. Y. Fu, J. Zhu, Y. Yang, R. Yuan, G. Liu, T. Xian, and P. Liu, “Grid-cell Aerosol Direct Shortwave Radiative Forcing Calculated Using the SBDART Model with MODIS and AERONET Observations: An Application in Winter and Summer in Eastern China,” Adv. Atmos. Sci. 34(8), 952–964 (2017). [CrossRef]  

23. M. A. Obregón, A. Serrano, M. J. Costa, and A. M. Silva, “Validation of libRadtran and SBDART models under different aerosol conditions,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 28, 012010 (2015). [CrossRef]  

24. Z. Weikang M H, Z. Zhengrong, H. Zhuochen, and Z. Guoqing, “Automatic detection of night time radiation fog based on SBDART radiative transfer model and the analysis of time series,” Remote Sens. Land & Res. 26(2), 80–86 (2014).

25. C. Emde, R. Buras-Schnell, A. Kylling, B. Mayer, J. Gasteiger, U. Hamann, J. Kylling, B. Richter, C. Pause, T. Dowling, and L. Bugliaro, “The libRadtran software package for radiative transfer calculations (version 2.0.1),” Geosci. Model Dev. 9(5), 1647–1672 (2016). [CrossRef]  

26. W. Qian, B. Yanmeng, and Y. Zhongdong, “Simulation analysis of aerosol effect on shortwave infrared remote sensing detection of atmospheric CO2,” Acta Phys. Sin. 67(3), 039202 (2018).

27. H. Di, H. Hua, Y. Cui, D. Hua, T. He, Y. Wang, and Q. Yan, “Vertical distribution of optical and microphysical properties of smog aerosols measured by multi-wavelength polarization lidar in Xi’an, China,” J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. 188, 28–38 (2017). [CrossRef]  

Cited By

Optica participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from Optica Publishing Group journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (16)

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Height distributions of optical depth and direct and diffuse solar irradiance for the urban-type aerosol model.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Atmospheric scattered radiance at different atmospheric layers for the urban-type aerosol model. (a) 0 km, (b) 3 km, (c) 5 km, (d) 10 km, (e) 25 km, (f) 70 km.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Scattered radiance and contrast ratio curves vs range in different directions with different azimuth angles and a fixed zenith angle of 61.71° for the urban-type aerosol model. (a) Scattered radiance and (b) contrast ratio curves of the object and background.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. Scattered radiance and contrast ratio curves vs range in different directions with different zenith angles and a fixed azimuth angle of 60° for the urban-type aerosol model. (a) Scattered radiance and (b) contrast ratio curves of the object and background.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5. Direct and diffuse solar irradiance curves for four aerosol models under clear weather conditions.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 6. Distributions of the scattered radiance observed at the ground for four aerosol models under clear weather conditions. (a) Rural-type, (b) urban-type, (c) marine-type and (d) troposphere-type models.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 7. Atmospheric scattered radiance curves with range in the slant direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60° for four aerosol models under clear weather conditions.
Fig. 8.
Fig. 8. Contrast ratio of the object and background with range in the slant direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60° for four aerosol models under clear weather conditions.
Fig. 9.
Fig. 9. Direct and diffuse solar irradiance curves for four aerosol models under cloudy conditions.
Fig. 10.
Fig. 10. Distributions of the scattered radiance observed at the ground for four aerosol models under cloudy conditions. (a) Rural-type, (b) urban-type, (c) marine-type and (d) troposphere-type models.
Fig. 11.
Fig. 11. Contrast ratio of the runway and grass with range in the slant direction with a zenith angle of 61.71° and azimuth angle of 60° for four aerosol models under cloudy conditions.
Fig. 12.
Fig. 12. Model results for atmospheric aerosol extinction coefficient and backscattering coefficient profiles under hazy weather.
Fig. 13.
Fig. 13. Model results for particle size distribution vs height. (a) 0-10 km (b)11-20 km (c) 21-100 km
Fig. 14.
Fig. 14. Model results for aerosol scattering parameters vs height: (a) asymmetry factor and (b) single-scattering albedo.
Fig. 15.
Fig. 15. Height distributions of optical depth, direct and diffuse solar irradiance and scattered irradiance under hazy weather.
Fig. 16.
Fig. 16. Contrast ratio curves at different observation directions under hazy weather. (a) with different azimuth angles (b) with different zenith angles.

Equations (8)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

C = | L b L o L b | ,
{ L o  =  τ L L o + D L L b  =  τ L L b + D L ,
τ L = exp [ 0 L k e x ( l ) d l ] ,
D L = 0 L A ( l ) exp [ 0 l k e x ( l ) d l ] d l
R m = 3.912 k e x .
{ L o  =  I 0 ρ o π L b  =  I 0 ρ b π ,
{ L o ( R , θ , φ ) =  I 0 ρ o π τ ( R , θ , φ ) + D ( R , θ , φ ) L b ( R , θ , φ ) =  I 0 ρ b π τ ( R , θ , φ ) + D ( R , θ , φ ) ,
C ( R , θ , φ ) = | ρ b ρ o ρ b + π I 0 D ( R , θ , φ ) τ ( R , θ , φ ) | .
Select as filters


Select Topics Cancel
© Copyright 2024 | Optica Publishing Group. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.