4.6 Article

UV-B optical thickness observations of the atmosphere

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES
卷 106, 期 D3, 页码 2963-2973

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2000JD900506

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The optical thickness of the atmosphere, tau, was deduced from measurements of narrowband direct solar W-B radiation. A measurement campaign was organized to obtain the radiation at three different sites, during the month of August 1999, using the same methods and instruments, in order to deduce the atmospheric optical thickness in the spectral UV-B range (280320 nm). The three observation sites were chosen to cover a wide range of measurement conditions; located near the tropical Atlantic Ocean (Natal, 5.8 degreesS, 35.2 degreesW), on the Andes mountains (La Pat, 16.5 degreesS, 68.1 degreesW), and in the biomass burning area of central Brazil (Campo Grande, 19.2 degreesS, 54.3 degreesW). The UV-B measurements were made with a Brewer spectrophotometer at each site. Since the instrument measures atmospheric ozone and SO2 simultaneously, it is possible, from the total atmospheric optical thickness tau to deduce the aerosol optical thickness tau (aerosol). The results have been combined in different ways to compare with satellite data, showing good performance. Time variations as short as about 10 min can be seen. On clear days the time variations are relatively small, as expected. On the other hand, for the biomass burning site, for conditions of mixed air masses (the instrument is not looking directly at plumes) one can see very large variations in tau in relatively short time intervals, for example, for one case, from 3.5 to 7.0 in about 30 min. Absolute values for tau at Natal and La Pat were near 2.0 and at Campo Grande, between 2.5 and 3.0, but with occasional highs of about 4.5. For tau (aerosol) Natal and La Pat had values between 0.0 and 0.4, whereas Campo Grande had most values near 0.4, with occasional highs near 1.0, 1.2, and 2.2.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据