Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “data quality”

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.

At least 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

Cloud Screening and Quality Control Algorithm for Star Photometer Data: Assessment with Lidar Measurements and with All-sky Images

This paper presents the development and set up of a cloud screening and data quality control algorithm for a star photometer based on CCD camera as detector. These algorithms are necessary for passive remote sensing techniques to retrieve the columnar aerosol optical depth, delta Ae(lambda), and precipitable water vapor content, W, at nighttime. This cloud screening procedure consists of calculating moving averages of delta Ae() and W under different time-windows combined with a procedure for detecting outliers. Additionally, to avoid undesirable Ae(lambda) and W fluctuations caused by the atmospheric turbulence, the data are averaged on 30 min. The algorithm is applied to the star photometer deployed in the city of Granada (37.16 N, 3.60 W, 680 ma.s.l.; South-East of Spain) for the measurements acquired between March 2007 and September 2009. The algorithm is evaluated with correlative measurements registered by a lidar system and also with all-sky images obtained at the sunset and sunrise of the previous and following days. Promising results are obtained detecting cloud-affected data. Additionally, the cloud screening algorithm has been evaluated under different aerosol conditions including Saharan dust intrusion, biomass burning and pollution events.

data quality control algorithm↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗
NASA NTRS2015

Technology Cost and Schedule Estimation (TCASE) Final Report

During the 2014-2015 project year, the focus of the TCASE project has shifted from collection of historical data from many sources to securing a data pipeline between TCASE and NASA's widely used TechPort system. TCASE v1.0 implements a data import solution that was achievable within the project scope, while still providing the basis for a long-term ability to keep TCASE in sync with TechPort. Conclusion: TCASE data quantity is adequate and the established data pipeline will enable future growth. Data quality is now highly dependent the quality of data in TechPort. Recommendation: Technology development organizations within NASA should continue to work closely with project/program data tracking and archiving efforts (e.g. TechPort) to ensure that the right data is being captured at the appropriate quality level. TCASE would greatly benefit, for example, if project cost/budget information was included in TechPort in the future.

Wallace, Jon↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Quality Control Methods of Tower Data at Kennedy Space Center’s Launch Complex 39-B and the USAF Cape Canaveral 500 Foot Tower

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has long used meteorological data from weather towers located at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and the United States Air Force’s Eastern Range(ER) in support of their various launch vehicles and climate studies. Some of the most valuable data is gathered at the Launch Complex 39-B (LC39-B) and the 500 foot tower located approximately two miles west of LC39-B and three miles north of the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB). The data from LC39-B gives NASA Space Launch System (SLS) engineers valuable insight into the weather the vehicle can expect at the pad, while the 500 foot tower has a longer period of record and has been used by the Shuttle and SLS programs. However, numerous data quality (DQ) control issues have arisen when utilizing this data for analysis. In addition, instrumentation tends to deteriorate faster than normal due to the corrosive nature of the high salt content in the air. NASA’s Natural Environments branch has developed several QC databases of these towers, but these studies were for fixed periods of records. EV44 identified a need for a continually updated and QC’ed database of tower data not only to provide along term QC’ed database for vehicle and climate analyses, but also to provide the capability to investigate recent weather events such as downbursts and other high wind events. This study follows the methods developed in prior Natural Environment QC tower databases, which includes variable specific QC thresholds and checks used to generate QC flags. However, this study developed new techniques such as the development and design of the graphical user interface (GUI) for manual verification, and the creation of the final monthly QC files.

Quality Control↗
NASA NTRS2023

A Global Land Cover Training Dataset From 1984 to 2020

State-of-the-art cloud computing platforms such as Google Earth Engine (GEE) enable regional-to-global land cover and land cover change mapping with machine learning algorithms. However, collection of high-quality training data, which is necessary for accurate land cover mapping, remains costly and labor-intensive. To address this need, we created a global database of nearly 2 million training units spanning the period from 1984 to 2020 for seven primary and nine secondary land cover classes. Our training data collection approach leveraged GEE and machine learning algorithms to ensure data quality and biogeographic representation. We sampled the spectral-temporal feature space from Landsat imagery to efficiently allocate training data across global ecoregions and incorporated publicly available and collaborator-provided datasets to our database. To reflect the underlying regional class distribution and post-disturbance landscapes, we strategically augmented the database. We used a machine learning-based cross-validation procedure to remove potentially mis-labeled training units. Our training database is relevant for a wide array of studies such as land cover change, agriculture, forestry, hydrology, urban development, among many others.

Radost Stanimirova↗
NASA NTRS2010

Examples L-Band Interference will be Presented and Discussed, as well as the Importance of L-Band Soil Moisture Observations

Examples of L-band interference will be presented and discussed, as well as the importance of L-band soil moisture observations, as part of this one-day GEOSS workshop XXXVII on "Data Quality and Radio Spectrum Allocation Impact on Earth Observations" will address the broad challenges of data quality and the impact of generating reliable information for decision makers who are Earth data users but not necessarily experts in the Earth observation field. GEO has initiated a data quality assessment task (DA-09-01a) and workshop users will review and debate the directions and challenges of this effort. Radio spectrum allocation is an element of data availability and data quality, and is also associated with a GEO task (AR-06-11). A recent U.S. National Research Council report on spectrum management will be addressed as part of the workshop. Key representatives from industry, academia, and government will provide invited talks on these and related issues that impact GEOSS implementation.

Kim, Edward↗
NASA NTRS1985

Study of spectral/radiometric characteristics of the Thematic Mapper for land use applications: Objectives, accomplishments, conclusions, and recommendations

The objectives of this investigation are to quantify the performance of the Thematic Mapper, as manifested by the quality of its image data, in order to suggest improvements in data production and to assess the effects of the data quality on its utility for land resources applications. Analyses of radiometric, spatial, spectral, and geometric effects, with primary emphasis on radiometric effects are included. This effort is part of the LANDSAT 4/5 Image Data Quality Analysis (LIDQA) program sponsored by the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

Malila, W. A.↗
DOE OSTI2024

On the predictability of turbulent fluxes from land: PLUMBER2 MIP experimental description and preliminary results

Accurate representation of the turbulent exchange of carbon, water, and heat between the land surface and the atmosphere is critical for modelling global energy, water, and carbon cycles in both future climate projections and weather forecasts. Evaluation of models' ability to do this is performed in a wide range of simulation environments, often without explicit consideration of the degree of observational constraint or uncertainty and typically without quantification of benchmark performance expectations. We describe a Model Intercomparison Project (MIP) that attempts to resolve these shortcomings, comparing the surface turbulent heat flux predictions of around 20 different land models provided with in situ meteorological forcing evaluated with measured surface fluxes using quality-controlled data from 170 eddy-covariance-based flux tower sites. Predictions from seven out-of-sample empirical models are used to quantify the information available to land models in their forcing data and so the potential for land model performance improvement. Sites with unusual behaviour, complicated processes, poor data quality, or uncommon flux magnitude are more difficult to predict for both mechanistic and empirical models, providing a means of fairer assessment of land model performance. When examining observational uncertainty, model performance does not appear to improve in low-turbulence periods or with energy-balance-corrected flux tower data, and indeed some results raise questions about whether the energy balance correction process itself is appropriate. In all cases the results are broadly consistent, with simple out-of-sample empirical models, including linear regression, comfortably outperforming mechanistic land models. In all but two cases, latent heat flux and net ecosystem exchange of CO 2 are better predicted by land models than sensible heat flux, despite it seeming to have fewer physical controlling processes. Land models that are implemented in Earth system models also appear to perform notably better than stand-alone ecosystem (including demographic) models, at least in terms of the fluxes examined here. The approach we outline enables isolation of the locations and conditions under which model developers can know that a land model can improve, allowing information pathways and discrete parameterisations in models to be identified and targeted for future model development.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2021

Application of Gaussian Mixture Regression for the Correction of Low Cost PM2.5 Monitoring Data in Accra, Ghana

Low-cost sensors (LCSs) for air quality monitoring have enormous potential to improve air quality data coverage in resource-limited parts of the world such as sub-Saharan Africa. LCSs, however, are affected by environment and source conditions. To establish high-quality data, LCSs must be collocated and calibrated with reference grade PM2.5 monitors. From March 2020, a low-cost PurpleAir PM2.5 monitor was collocated with a Met One Beta Attenuation Monitor 1020 in Accra, Ghana. While previous studies have shown that multiple linear regression (MLR) and random forest regression (RF) can improve accuracy and correlation between PurpleAir and reference data, MLR and RF yielded suboptimal improvement in the Accra collocation (R2 = 0.81 and R2 = 0.81, respectively). We present the first application of Gaussian mixture regression (GMR) to air quality data calibration and demonstrate improvement over traditional methods by increasing the collocated PM2.5 correlation and accuracy to R2 = 0.88 and MAE = 2.2 μg/cu. m. Gaussian mixture models (GMMs) are a probability density estimator and clustering method from which nonlinear regressions that tolerate missing inputs can be derived. We find that even when given missing inputs, GMR provides better correlation than MLR and RF performed with complete data. GMR also allows us to estimate calibration certainty. When evaluated, 95% confidence intervals agreed with reference PM2.5 data 96% of the time, suggesting that the model accurately assesses its own confidence. Additionally, clustering within the GMM is consistent with climate characteristics, providing confidence that the calibration approach can learn underlying relationships in data.

Sensors↗
DOE OSTI2024

Grid Edge Waveform Analytics Framework for Event Detection and Classification

This paper provides a grid edge waveform analytics framework for power system event detection and classification in the local as well as in the wide area. This framework overviews data excellence for event detection and classification. The data excellence describes the data acquisition process and requirements, data processing, data quality, and data integrity. Power system event detection in the local area based on different features such as energy-based, cyclostationary approach, template matching, and wavelet transform are also discussed. Furthermore, local area event detection and classification using approaches such as statistical, signal processing, artificial intelligence, and hybrid are also discussed. Moreover, an overview of wide-area event detection and classification along with several other aspects such as wide-area events, wide-area event detection approaches, event location and system performance, event pattern recognition, inter-area oscillation, and wide-area frequency response under variable deployment of inverter-based resources are also provided. The proposed framework is the first step toward the goal of developing appropriate tools and methodologies to detect and classify local as well as wide-area events using waveform analytics. The appropriate event detection and classification framework development is especially important now as more and more grid edge devices with communication capabilities are being deployed in the modern power grid than ever before.

Bhusal, Narayan↗
DOE OSTI2024

Ocean surface radiation measurement best practices

Ocean surface radiation measurement best practices have been developed as a first step to support the interoperability of radiation measurements across multiple ocean platforms and between land and ocean networks. This document describes the consensus by a working group of radiation measurement experts from land, ocean, and aircraft communities. The scope was limited to broadband shortwave (solar) and longwave (terrestrial infrared) surface irradiance measurements for quantification of the surface radiation budget. Best practices for spectral measurements for biological purposes like photosynthetically active radiation and ocean color are only mentioned briefly to motivate future interactions between the physical surface flux and biological radiation measurement communities. Topics discussed in these best practices include instrument selection, handling of sensors and installation, data quality monitoring, data processing, and calibration. It is recognized that platform and resource limitations may prohibit incorporating all best practices into all measurements and that spatial coverage is also an important motivator for expanding current networks. Thus, one of the key recommendations is to perform interoperability experiments that can help quantify the uncertainty of different practices and lay the groundwork for a multi-tiered global network with a mix of high-accuracy reference stations and lower-cost platforms and practices that can fill in spatial gaps.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1974

Skylab Medical Data Center and Archives

The founding of the Skylab medical data center and archives as a central area to house medical data from space flights is described. Skylab program strip charts, various daily reports and summaries, experiment reports and logs, status report on Skylab data quality, raw data digital tapes, processed data microfilm, and other Skylab documents are housed in the data center. In addition, this memorandum describes how the data center acted as a central point for the coordination of preflight and postflight baseline data and how it served as coordinator for all data processing through computation and analysis. Also described is a catalog identifying Skylab medical experiments and all related data currently archived in the data center.

Spross, F. R.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Status of the national transonic facility

The National Transonic Facility at NASA Langley Research Center, scheduled for completion in July, 1982, is described with emphasis on model and instrumentation activities, calibration plans and some initial research plans. Performance capabilities include a Mach number range of 0.2-1.2, a pressure range of 1-9 atmospheres, and a temperature range of 77-350 K, which will produce a maximum Reynolds number of 120 million at a Mach number of 1.0, based on a 0.25 m chord. A comprehensive tunnel calibration program is planned, which will cover basic tunnel calibration, data qualities, and data comparisons with other facilites and flights.

Mckinney, L. W.↗
NASA NTRS1984

Satellite land remote sensing advancements for the eighties; Proceedings of the Eighth Pecora Symposium, Sioux Falls, SD, October 4-7, 1983

Among the topics discussed are NASA's land remote sensing plans for the 1980s, the evolution of Landsat 4 and the performance of its sensors, the Landsat 4 thematic mapper image processing system radiometric and geometric characteristics, data quality, image data radiometric analysis and spectral/stratigraphic analysis, and thematic mapper agricultural, forest resource and geological applications. Also covered are geologic applications of side-looking airborne radar, digital image processing, the large format camera, the RADARSAT program, the SPOT 1 system's program status, distribution plans, and simulation program, Space Shuttle multispectral linear array studies of the optical and biological properties of terrestrial land cover, orbital surveys of solar-stimulated luminescence, the Space Shuttle imaging radar research facility, and Space Shuttle-based polar ice sounding altimetry.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1989

The US National Transonic Facility, NTF

The construction of the National Transonic Facility was completed in September 1982 and the start-up and checkout of tunnel systems were performed over the next two years. In August 1984, the Operational Readiness Review (ORR) was conducted and the facility was declared operational for final checkout of cryogenic instrumentation and control systems, and for the aerodynamic calibration and testing to commence. Also, the model access system for the cryogenic mode of operation would be placed into operation along with tunnel testing. Since the ORR, a host of operating problems resulting from the cryogenic environment were identified and solved. These range from making mechanical and electrical systems functional to eliminating temperature induced model vibration to coping with the outgassing of moisture from the thermal insulation. Additionally, a series of aerodynamic tests have demonstrated data quality and provided research data on several configurations. Some of the more significant efforts are reviewed since the ORR and the NTF status concerning hardware, instrumentation and process controls systems, operating constraints imposed by the cryogenic environment, and data quality are summarized.

Bruce, Walter E., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Expert systems and advanced automation for space missions operations

Increased complexity of space missions during the 1980s led to the introduction of expert systems and advanced automation techniques in mission operations. This paper describes several technologies in operational use or under development at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Goddard Space Flight Center. Several expert systems are described that diagnose faults, analyze spacecraft operations and onboard subsystem performance (in conjunction with neural networks), and perform data quality and data accounting functions. The design of customized user interfaces is discussed, with examples of their application to space missions. Displays, which allow mission operators to see the spacecraft position, orientation, and configuration under a variety of operating conditions, are described. Automated systems for scheduling are discussed, and a testbed that allows tests and demonstrations of the associated architectures, interface protocols, and operations concepts is described. Lessons learned are summarized.

Durrani, Sajjad H.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Assessing the Geomorphic Evolution and Hydrographic Changes Induced by Winter Storms along the Louisiana Coast

The influence that cold front passages have on Louisiana coastal environments, including land loss and land building processes, has been the primary topic of this multidisciplinary research. This research has combined meteorological, remote sensing, and coastal expertise from the University of Wisconsin (UW) and Louisiana State University (LSU). Analyzed data sets include remotely sensed radiometric data (AVHRR on NOAA-12,13,14, Multispectral Atmospheric Mapping Sensor (MAMS) and MODIS Airborne Simulator (MAS) on NASA ER-2), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) water level data, water quality data from the Coastal Studies Institute (CSI) at LSU, USACE river discharge data, National Weather Service (NWS) and CSI wind in sitzi measurements, geomorphic measurements from aerial photography (NASA ER-2 and Learjet), and CSI ground based sediment burial pipes (for monitoring topographic change along the Louisiana coast) and sediment cores. The work reported here-in is a continuation of an initial investigation into coastal Louisiana landform modification by cold front systems. That initial effort demonstrated the importance of cold front winds in the Atchafalaya Bay sediment plume distribution (Moeller et al.), documented the sediment transport and deposition process of the western Louisiana coast (Huh et al.) and developed tools (e.g. water types identification, suspended solids estimation) from multispectral radiometric data for application to the current study. This study has extended that work, developing a Geomorphic Impact Index (GI(sup 2)) for relating atmospheric forcing to coastal response and new tools to measure water motion and sediment transport.

Menzel, W. Paul↗