Julia Remmers
Max Planck Society
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Julia Remmers.
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques | 2016
Holger Sihler; Peter Lübcke; R. Lang; Steffen Beirle; Martin de Graaf; Christoph Hörmann; Johannes Lampel; Marloes Penning de Vries; Julia Remmers; Ed Trollope; Yang Wang; Thomas Wagner
Knowledge of the field of view (FOV) of a remote sensing instrument is particularly important when interpreting their data and merging them with other spatially referenced data. Especially for instruments in space, information on the actual FOV, which may change during operation, may be difficult to obtain. Also, the FOV of ground-based devices may change during transportation to the field site, where appropriate equipment for the FOV determination may be unavailable. This paper presents an independent, simple and robust method to retrieve the FOV of an instrument during operation, i.e. the two-dimensional sensitivity distribution, sampled on a discrete grid. The method relies on correlated measurements featuring a significantly higher spatial resolution, e.g. by an imaging instrument accompanying a spectrometer. The method was applied to two satellite instruments, GOME-2 and OMI, and a ground-based differential optical absorption spectroscopy (DOAS) instrument integrated in an SO2 camera. For GOME-2, quadrangular FOVs could be retrieved, which almost perfectly match the provided FOV edges after applying a correction for spatial aliasing inherent to GOME-type instruments. More complex sensitivity distributions were found at certain scanner angles, which are probably caused by degradation of the moving parts within the instrument. For OMI, which does not feature any moving parts, retrieved sensitivity distributions were much smoother compared to GOME-2. A 2-D super-Gaussian with six parameters was found to be an appropriate model to describe the retrieved OMI FOV. The comparison with operationally provided FOV dimensions revealed small differences, which could be mostly explained by the limitations of our IFR implementation. For the ground-based DOAS instrument, the FOV retrieved using SO2-camera data was slightly smaller than the flat-disc distribution, which is assumed by the stateof-the-art correlation technique. Differences between both methods may be attributed to spatial inhomogeneities. In general, our results confirm the already deduced FOV distributions of OMI, GOME-2, and the ground-based DOAS. It is certainly applicable for degradation monitoring and verification exercises. For satellite instruments, the gained information is expected to increase the accuracy of combined products, where measurements of different instruments are integrated, e.g. mapping of high-resolution cloud information, incorporation of surface climatologies. For the SO2-camera community, the method presents a new and efficient tool to monitor the DOAS FOV in the field. Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. 882 H. Sihler et al.: In-operation field-of-view retrieval (IFR)
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques | 2013
Thomas Wagner; Arnoud Apituley; Steffen Beirle; S. Dörner; Udo Friess; Julia Remmers; R. Shaiganfar
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques | 2015
Y. Wang; M. Penning de Vries; Pinhua Xie; Steffen Beirle; S. Dörner; Julia Remmers; Ang Li; Thomas Wagner
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques | 2017
Yang Wang; Steffen Beirle; F. Hendrick; Andreas Hilboll; Junli Jin; Aleksandra A. Kyuberis; Johannes Lampel; Ang Li; Yuhan Luo; Lorenzo Lodi; Jianzhong Ma; Monica Navarro; Ivan Ortega; Enno Peters; Oleg L. Polyansky; Julia Remmers; Andreas Richter; O. Puentedura; Michel Van Roozendael; André Seyler; Jonathan Tennyson; R. Volkamer; Pinhua Xie; Nikolai F. Zobov; Thomas Wagner
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques | 2016
Enno Peters; Gaia Pinardi; André Seyler; Andreas Richter; F. Wittrock; Tim Bösch; Michel Van Roozendael; F. Hendrick; Theano Drosoglou; A. F. Bais; Yugo Kanaya; X. Zhao; Kimberly Strong; Johannes Lampel; R. Volkamer; Theodore K. Koenig; Ivan Ortega; O. Puentedura; Mónica Navarro-Comas; Laura Gómez; Margarita Yela González; Ankie Piters; Julia Remmers; Yang Wang; Thomas Wagner; Shanshan Wang; Alfonso Saiz-Lopez; David García-Nieto; Carlos A. Cuevas; Nuria Benavent
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques Discussions | 2017
Yang Wang; Steffen Beirle; F. Hendrick; Andreas Hilboll; Junli Jin; Aleksandra A. Kyuberis; Johannes Lampel; Ang Li; Yuhan Luo; Lorenzo Lodi; Jianzhong Ma; Monica Navarro; Ivan Ortega; Enno Peters; Oleg L. Polyansky; Julia Remmers; Andreas Richter; Olga Puentedura Rodriguez; Michel Van Roozendael; André Seyler; Jonathan Tennyson; R. Volkamer; Pinhua Xie; Nikolai F. Zobov; Thomas Wagner
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques | 2016
Thomas Wagner; Steffen Beirle; Julia Remmers; R. Shaiganfar; Yang Wang
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques | 2015
Thomas Wagner; Steffen Beirle; S. Dörner; M. Penning de Vries; Julia Remmers; A. Rozanov; R. Shaiganfar
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques Discussions | 2018
Thomas Wagner; Steffen Beirle; Nuria Benavent; Tim Bösch; Kai Lok Chan; Sebastian Donner; S. Dörner; C. Fayt; U. Frieß; David García-Nieto; Clio Gielen; David González-Bartolome; Laura Gómez; F. Hendrick; Bas Henzing; Jun Li Jin; Johannes Lampel; Jianzhong Ma; Kornelia Mies; Mónica Navarro; Enno Peters; Gaia Pinardi; Olga Puentedura; J. Puķīte; Julia Remmers; Andreas Richter; Alfonso Saiz-Lopez; R. Shaiganfar; Holger Sihler; Michel Van Roozendael
Living Planet Symposium 2016 | 2016
Gaia Pinardi; Michel Van Roozendael; J.-C. Lambert; J. Granville; F. Hendrick; Clio Gielen; Alexander Cede; Ygo Kanaya; Hitoshi Irie; F. Wittrock; Andreas Richter; Enno Peters; Thomas Wagner; Myojeong Gu; Julia Remmers; Johannes Lampel; Udo Friess; Tim Vlemmix; Ankie Piters; Nan Hao; Martin Tiefengraber; Jay R. Herman; Nader Abuhassan; Robert Holla; Alkis Bais; Dimitris Balis; Theano Drosoglou; N. Kouremeti; Jari Hovila; Jihyo Chong