International Photolysis Frequency Measurement and Model Intercomparison (IPMMI): Spectral actinic solar flux measurements and modeling
International Photolysis Frequency Measurement and Model Intercomparison (IPMMI): Spectral actinic solar flux measurements and modeling
复制标题
国际光解频率测量和模型比对 (IPMMI)：光谱光化太阳通量测量和建模
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Schmitt
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Bais;S. Madronich;J. Crawford;S. Hall;B. Mayer;M. Weele;J. Lenoble;J. Calvert;C. Cantrell;R. Shetter;A. Hofzumahaus;P. Koepke;P. Monks;G. Frost;R. McKenzie;N. Krotkov;A. Kylling;W. Swartz;S. Lloyd;G. Pfister;T. Martin;E. Roeth;E. Griffioen;A. Ruggaber;M. Krol;A. Kraus;G. Edwards;M. Mueller;B. Lefer;P. Johnston;H. Schwander;D. Flittner;B. Gardiner;J. Barrick;R. Schmitt
[1]1998年6月15日至19日在科罗拉多的博尔德举行了国际光解频率测量和模型相互比较，目的是调查光解频率和光谱下行光化通量测量的准确程度，并探讨辐射转移模型再现测量结果的能力。在此期间，选择了2天来比较模型计算与测量，一个无云，一个多云。还进行了一系列辅助测量，并提供了所需的参数作为模型的输入。测量和建模都是盲目的，在这个意义上，参与者之间不允许交换数据或计算，结果由两名独立的裁判进行客观分析和比较。本文的目的是，第一，目前的测量和建模的下沉光化通量和辐照度光谱之间的比较结果，第二，调查的原因，其中一些模型或测量偏离其他。对于晴朗的天空，16个模型之间的相对一致性在很大程度上取决于太阳天顶角（SZA）和波长以及所使用的输入参数，如地外（ET）太阳通量和吸收截面。大多数模型（11）同意在大约+/-6%的太阳天顶角小于类似60度。测量光谱之间的一致性取决于仪器的光学特性（例如，狭缝功能、杂散光抑制和灵敏度）。在将测量转换为共同的光谱分辨率后，三个参与的分光辐射计中的两个在波长大于310 nm和所有太阳天顶角的情况下都同意在10%以内，而当移动到较短的波长时，它们的差异会增加。大多数模型与测量结果（包括下沉光化通量和全球辐照度）吻合良好，特别是在当地中午，该协议是在几个百分点之内。一些模型表现出显着的偏差，无论是波长或太阳天顶角。使用大气应用和科学实验室3（ATLAS-3）太阳通量的模型与测量光谱吻合得更好，这表明ATLAS-3可能更适合于紫外辐射传输建模。
[1] The International Photolysis Frequency Measurement and Model Intercomparison (IPMMI) took place in Boulder, Colorado, from 15 to 19 June 1998, aiming to investigate the level of accuracy of photolysis frequency and spectral downwelling actinic flux measurements and to explore the ability of radiative transfer models to reproduce the measurements. During this period, 2 days were selected to compare model calculations with measurements, one cloud-free and one cloudy. A series of ancillary measurements were also performed and provided parameters required as input to the models. Both measurements and modeling were blind, in the sense that no exchanges of data or calculations were allowed among the participants, and the results were objectively analyzed and compared by two independent referees. The objective of this paper is, first, to present the results of comparisons made between measured and modeled downwelling actinic flux and irradiance spectra and, second, to investigate the reasons for which some of the models or measurements deviate from the others. For clear skies the relative agreement between the 16 models depends strongly on solar zenith angle (SZA) and wavelength as well as on the input parameters used, like the extraterrestrial (ET) solar flux and the absorption cross sections. The majority of the models (11) agreed to within about +/-6% for solar zenith angles smaller than similar to60degrees. The agreement among the measured spectra depends on the optical characteristics of the instruments (e.g., slit function, stray light rejection, and sensitivity). After transforming the measurements to a common spectral resolution, two of the three participating spectroradiometers agree to within similar to10% for wavelengths longer than 310 nm and at all solar zenith angles, while their differences increase when moving to shorter wavelengths. Most models agree well with the measurements (both downwelling actinic flux and global irradiance), especially at local noon, where the agreement is within a few percent. A few models exhibit significant deviations with respect either to wavelength or to solar zenith angle. Models that use the Atmospheric Laboratory for Applications and Science 3 (ATLAS-3) solar flux agree better with the measured spectra, suggesting that ATLAS-3 is probably more appropriate for radiative transfer modeling in the ultraviolet.