Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Radar sensor data”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

96 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Clarifying remotely-retrieved precipitation of shallow marine clouds from the NSF/NCAR Gulfstream V

Precipitation is a key process within the shallow cloud lifecycle. The Cloud System Evolution in the Trades (CSET) campaign included the first deployment of a 94 GHz Doppler radar and 532 nm lidar. Despite a larger sampling volume, initial mean radar/lidar retrieved rain rates (Schwartz et al. 2019) based on the upward-pointing remote sensor datasets are systematically less than those measured by in-situ precipitation probes in the cumulus regime. Subsequent retrieval improvements produce rainrates that compare better to in-situ values, but still underestimate. Retrieved shallow cumulus drop sizes can remain too small and too few, with an overestimated shape parameter narrowing the raindrop size distribution too much. Three potential causes for the discrepancy are explored: the gamma functional fit to the dropsize distribution, attenuation by rain and cloud water, and an underaccounting of Mie dampening of the reflectivity. A truncated exponential fit may represent the dropsizes below a showering cumulus cloud more realistically, although further work would be needed to fully evaluate the impact of a different dropsize representation upon the retrieval. The rain attenuation is within the measurement uncertainty of the radar. Mie dampening of the reflectivity is shown to be significant, in contrast to previous stratocumulus campaigns with lighter rain rates, and may be difficult to constrain well with the remote measurements. An alternative approach combines an a priori determination of the dropsize distribution width based on the in-situ data with the mean radar Doppler velocity and reflectivity. This can produce realistic retrievals, although a more comprehensive assessment is needed to better characterize the retrieval errors.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Validation of the Cloud_CCI (Cloud Climate Change Initiative) cloud products in the Arctic

The role of clouds in the Arctic radiation budget is not well understood. Ground-based and airborne measurements provide valuable data to test and improve our understanding. However, the ground-based measurements are intrinsically sparse, and the airborne observations are snapshots in time and space. Passive remote sensing measurements from satellite sensors offer high spatial coverage and an evolving time series, having lengths potentially of decades. However, detecting clouds by passive satellite remote sensing sensors is challenging over the Arctic because of the brightness of snow and ice in the ultraviolet and visible spectral regions and because of the small brightness temperature contrast to the surface. Consequently, the quality of the resulting cloud data products needs to be assessed quantitatively. In this study, we validate the cloud data products retrieved from the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) post meridiem (PM) data from the polar-orbiting NOAA-19 satellite and compare them with those derived from the ground-based instruments during the sunlit months. The AVHRR cloud data products by the European Space Agency (ESA) Cloud Climate Change Initiative (Cloud_CCI) project uses the observations in the visible and IR bands to determine cloud properties. The ground-based measurements from four high-latitude sites have been selected for this investigation: Hyytiälä (61.84°N, 24.29°E), North Slope of Alaska (NSA; 71.32°N, 156.61°W), Ny-Ålesund (Ny-Å; 78.92°N, 11.93°E), and Summit (72.59°N, 38.42°W). The liquid water path (LWP) ground-based data are retrieved from microwave radiometers, while the cloud top height (CTH) has been determined from the integrated lidar–radar measurements. The quality of the satellite products, cloud mask and cloud optical depth (COD), has been assessed using data from NSA, whereas LWP and CTH have been investigated over Hyytiälä, NSA, Ny-Å, and Summit.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

A globally sampled high-resolution hand-labeled validation dataset for evaluating surface water extent maps

Effective monitoring of global water resources is increasingly critical due to climate change and population growth. Advancements in remote sensing technology, specifically in spatial, spectral, and temporal resolutions, are revolutionizing water resource monitoring, leading to more frequent and high-quality surface water extent maps using various techniques such as traditional image processing and machine learning algorithms. However, satellite imagery datasets contain trade-offs that result in inconsistencies in performance, such as disparities in measurement principles between optical (e.g., Sentinel-2) and radar (e.g., Sentinel-1) sensors and differences in spatial and spectral resolutions among optical sensors. Therefore, developing accurate and robust surface water mapping solutions requires independent validations from multiple datasets to identify potential biases within the imagery and algorithms. However, high-quality validation datasets are expensive to build, and few contain information on water resources. For this purpose, we introduce a globally sampled, high-spatial-resolution dataset labeled using 3 m PlanetScope imagery. Our surface water extent dataset comprises 100 images, each with a size of 1024×1024 pixels, which were sampled using a stratified random sampling strategy covering all 14 biomes. We highlighted urban and rural regions, lakes, and rivers, including braided rivers and coastal regions. We evaluated two surface water extent mapping methods using our dataset – Dynamic World, based on Sentinel-2, and the NASA IMPACT model, based on Sentinel-1. Dynamic World achieved a mean intersection over union (IoU) of 72.16 % and F1 score of 79.70 %, while the NASA IMPACT model had a mean IoU of 57.61 % and F1 score of 65.79 %. Performance varied substantially across biomes, highlighting the importance of evaluating models on diverse landscapes to assess their generalizability and robustness. Our dataset can be used to analyze satellite products and methods, providing insights into their advantages and drawbacks. Our dataset offers a unique tool for analyzing satellite products, aiding the development of more accurate and robust surface water monitoring solutions. The dataset can be accessed via https://doi.org/10.25739/03nt-4f29.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

CROCUS Forward Scatter Disdrometer Data at Argonne National Laboratory Prairie Site

The Vaisala FD70 is a multi-parameter present weather and visibility sensor designed to measure precipitation type, intensity, and visibility with high accuracy in diverse environmental conditions. It uses a combination of forward-scatter measurement and optical disdrometer technologies to detect drop size, fall speeds, and optical properties, enabling the classification of various precipitation types such as rain, snow, sleet, and freezing rain along is visibility estimates. The FD70 provides quantitative estimates of liquid-equivalent precipitation rate and meteorological optical range (MOR), supporting applications in meteorological research, aviation, and road weather monitoring. These measurements are collected at the Argonne Testbed for Multiscale Observational Science (ATMOS), a 20 acre prairie site at Argonne National Lab, located in Lemont, IL. Data is available in netcdf format. Each file contains one second interval data, for approximately 24 hrs each day. File naming convention includes the project (CROCUS), location (ATMOS), instrument name, data level (raw, a1), and date (year, month, day).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Review of Existing Test Methods for Occupancy Sensors

One of the key new features of connected lighting systems (CLS) is their ability to collect data from various types of integral sensors and share that data with other lighting or building systems. Occupancy and vacancy sensors have been widely adopted as an energy-saving strategy in buildings, yet published test methods for reproducibly characterizing their performance remain few and limited in their sophistication. As a result, it has been difficult to predict their performance in a specific application, and in practice, they frequently do not meet energy-savings expectations. Occupants at times remove or otherwise bypass occupancy sensors that hinder their work or otherwise do not perform as expected, thereby compromising the sensors’ potential to reduce energy consumption. Poor performance can result from multiple causes – ranging from fundamental limitations of the sensor technology, to misconfiguration, to poor placement in the room or space. Innovative occupancy sensors, some of them combining multiple sensing technologies, have come on the market over the years, with claims of improved performance compared to their predecessors; yet in practice, their performance has led to neither high deployment nor high user satisfaction in any significant application, nor has it differed enough from the performance of previous products to necessitate a test method that facilitated comparison between them. While the performance of both common and novel occupancy sensors has been the subject of many published research articles, the test methods that have been employed for them have typically been loosely described and incorporated custom equipment or techniques that render them difficult to reproduce, or have been limited in their ability to fairly characterize devices that utilize varying sensor technology. The lack of a well-described, technology-agnostic test method that yields reproducible results across different implementations has been a barrier to the commercial success of new occupancy sensor products, as users and specifiers who have been disappointed with previous products are often unwilling to take a chance with new ones. Motivated by a desire to fairly characterize new technologies that continue to enter the market and claim not only improved occupancy detection but, in some cases, also additional capabilities (e.g., the ability to measure traffic or discern between different object types), this report presents the results of a literature review of recent published, well-described test methods for characterizing occupancy sensor performance, as well as research articles containing ad-hoc test methods. The review also identifies and consolidates the best techniques for characterizing sensor performance in indoor spaces and identifies test method gaps that need to be filled in order to evaluate emerging technologies and products.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2026

Field and Model Data Associated with the Manuscript “Drivers of Streamflow Intermittency in Humid Regions: 1. Evaluating Above- and Below-ground Controls of Flow Persistence in a Forested Catchment”

This package contains field data, modeling files, and scripts supporting the investigation of the drivers of streamflow intermittency in a forested catchment. It includes the field data collected from electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) surveys, ground penetrating radar (GPR), continuous self-potential (SP) monitoring, electromagnetic (EM) imaging, groundwater and stilling well. In addition, it contains the data and results of the coupled water- and electrical-flow model developed using the COMSOL Multiphysics and Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), as well as software files and Jupyter notebooks used to process the data and generate figures in the manuscript submitted for peer review. The data archive is organized in the following directories: 1) Climate Includes hourly precipitation and daily evapotranspiration time series (2024 – 2025) provided as CSV files, alongside a text file detailing dataset units. 2) Coupled_model Contains two subfolders: Synthetic and Field_Application subfolder. Synthetic subfolder contains the ATS XML input script (can be opened using any code editor) for the four synthetic hydrological cases tested (Connected and gaining, Connected and losing, Disconnected and losing, and dry stream). It also includes other experimental cases to test the influence of precipitation and concentration gradient. For each synthetic case, the flow model simulation is executed using the ATS XML scripts and the included Python script (generate_data_set.py) to convert ATS output to COMSOL-ready input. COMSOL Multiphysics template (.mph can be opened with the commercial software COMSOL and requires a license) is executed using the ATS output data to simulate the potential field. It also includes the Synthetic_model_plot.ipynb (can be opened using any code editor) to visualize the SP result and generate manuscript figures. The data subfolder contains mesh files to run both the ATS (.exo and .stl files can be viewed using Paraview; .h5 files can be opened using HDFView software and h5py Python package) and COMSOL models. Field_Application subfolder contains two subfolders: ES_MDA_inversion and Final_Model. ES_MDA_inversion contains the Python script (.py can be opened using any code editor) and SP observation data used to run the Ensemble Smoother with Multiple Data Assimilation (ES-MDA) inversion sequence to get the optimal model parameters. The Final_model subfolder contains the ATS XML input scripts, data files, output data for the two SP sites. The same workflow steps outlined for the Synthetic subfolder apply here. It also contains the Jupyter notebook (Plot_final_calib.ipynb) to visualize the results of the modeled SP, stream-groundwater exchange and moisture content. 3) Discharge Includes the electrical conductivity (EC) time series (provided as CSV files) from salt slug injections. It also includes the Jupyter notebook (Discharge_process.ipynyb) used to estimate discharge. All discharge measurements collated into rating_curve_processed.csv 4) EM Contains the CSV file of the EM data from the DUALEM-42, including spatial coordinates (x, y, z), apparent conductivity, and in-phase measurements at 2 m coil separations for horizontal coplanar (HCP) and perpendicular (PRP) geometries. 5) ERT Contains raw resistivity data (provided as CSV files), spatial location of each of the electrodes (provided as CSV files), and files used for the resistivity inversion (.resipy can be opened with the open-source ResIPy software). 6) GPR Includes GPR field datasets collected at 100 MHz and 250 MHz antenna frequencies, along with the processing/interpretation project file (GPR_process.gpz can be viewed using EKKO_Project 6, a commercial software by Sensors & Software that requires a license). 7) Slug_test Includes the slug test data at all the groundwater wells provided as CSV files, as well as the Jupyter notebook (Slug_test.ipynb) for calculating hydraulic conductivity. 8) SP Contains the SP data collected in field at the two SP sites (one in the perennial reach and the other in the intermittent reach), provided as DAT files. 9) Well_data Contains two subfolders: 1) Raw, which provides unprocessed pressure, electrical conductivity and temperature timeseries downloaded from the loggers in all the groundwater and stilling wells, and 2) Processed, which contains sorted, QA/QC timeseries data for each well. The data archive also contains data_process.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook used for field data analysis and generating figures (plotting well, SP, climate, and discharge data, as well as calculating head gradient at sites with nested groundwater wells). It also includes DTW.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook containing the code for the dynamic time warping (DTW) with sliding window to evaluate SP signal synchronicity.

ATS↗