SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Instrument”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 109 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2008

Instrument Display Visual Angles for Conventional Aircraft and the MQ-9 Ground Control Station

Aircraft instrument panels should be designed such that primary displays are in optimal viewing location to minimize pilot perception and response time. Human Factors engineers define three zones (i.e. cones ) of visual location: 1) "Easy Eye Movement" (foveal vision); 2) "Maximum Eye Movement" (peripheral vision with saccades), and 3) "Head Movement (head movement required). Instrument display visual angles were measured to determine how well conventional aircraft (T-34, T-38, F- 15B, F-16XL, F/A-18A, U-2D, ER-2, King Air, G-III, B-52H, DC-10, B747-SCA) and the MQ-9 ground control station (GCS) complied with these standards, and how they compared with each other. Selected instrument parameters included: attitude, pitch, bank, power, airspeed, altitude, vertical speed, heading, turn rate, slip/skid, AOA, flight path, latitude, longitude, course, bearing, range and time. Vertical and horizontal visual angles for each component were measured from the pilot s eye position in each system. The vertical visual angles of displays in conventional aircraft lay within the cone of "Easy Eye Movement" for all but three of the parameters measured, and almost all of the horizontal visual angles fell within this range. All conventional vertical and horizontal visual angles lay within the cone of Maximum Eye Movement. However, most instrument vertical visual angles of the MQ-9 GCS lay outside the cone of Easy Eye Movement, though all were within the cone of Maximum Eye Movement. All the horizontal visual angles for the MQ-9 GCS were within the cone of "Easy Eye Movement". Most instrument displays in conventional aircraft lay within the cone of Easy Eye Movement, though mission-critical instruments sometimes displaced less important instruments outside this area. Many of the MQ-9 GCS systems lay outside this area. Specific training for MQ-9 pilots may be needed to avoid increased response time and potential error during flight. The learning objectives include: 1) Know three physiologic cones of eye/head movement; 2) Understand how instrument displays comply with these design principles in conventional aircraft and an uninhabited aerial vehicle system. Which of the following is NOT a recognized physiologic principle of instrument display design? Cone of Easy Eye Movement 2) Cone of Binocular Eye Movement 3) Cone of Maximum Eye Movement 4) Cone of Head Movement 5) None of the above. Answer: # 2) Cone of Binocular Eye Movement

Kamine, Tovy Haber↗

NASA NTRS2011

The Habitat Demonstration Unit Project: A Modular Instrumentation System for a Deep Space Habitat

NASA is focused on developing human exploration capabilities in low Earth orbit (LEO), expanding to near Earth asteroids (NEA), and finally to Mars. Habitation is a crucial aspect of human exploration, and a current focus of NASA activities. The Habitation Demonstration Unit (HDU) is a project focused on developing an autonomous habitation system that enables human exploration of space by providing engineers and scientists with a test bed to develop, integrate, test, and evaluate habitation systems. A critical feature of the HDU is the instrumentation system, which monitors key subsystems within the habitat. The following paper will discuss the HDU instrumentation system performance and lessons learned during the 2010 Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RaTS). In addition, this paper will discuss the evolution of the instrumentation system to support the 2011 Deep Space Habitat configuration, the challenges, and the lessons learned of implementing this configuration. In 2010, the HDU was implemented as a pressurized excursion module (PEM) and was tested at NASA s D-RaTS in Arizona [1]. For this initial configuration, the instrumentation system design used features that were successful in previous habitat instrumentation projects, while also considering challenges, and implementing lessons learned [2]. The main feature of the PEM instrumentation system was the use of a standards-based wireless sensor node (WSN), implementing an IEEE 802.15.4 protocol. Many of the instruments were connected to several WSNs, which wirelessly transmitted data to the command and data handling system via a mesh network. The PEM instrumentation system monitored the HDU during field tests at D-RaTS, and the WSN data was later analyzed to understand the performance of this system. In addition, several lessons learned were gained from the field test experience, which fed into the instrumentation design of the next generation of the HDU.

Rojdev, Kristina↗

NASA NTRS2012

Analysis of Fine-Mode Aerosol Retrieval Capabilities by Different Passive Remote Sensing Instrument Designs

Remote sensing of aerosol optical properties is difficult, but multi-angle, multi-spectral, polarimetric instruments have the potential to retrieve sufficient information about aerosols that they can be used to improve global climate models. However, the complexity of these instruments means that it is difficult to intuitively understand the relationship between instrument design and retrieval success. We apply a Bayesian statistical technique that relates instrument characteristics to the information contained in an observation. Using realistic simulations of fine size mode dominated spherical aerosols, we investigate three instrument designs. Two of these represent instruments currently in orbit: the Multiangle Imaging SpectroRadiometer (MISR) and the POLarization and Directionality of the Earths Reflectances (POLDER). The third is the Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor (APS), which failed to reach orbit during recent launch, but represents a viable design for future instruments. The results show fundamental differences between the three, and offer suggestions for future instrument design and the optimal retrieval strategy for current instruments. Generally, our results agree with previous validation efforts of POLDER and airborne prototypes of APS, but show that the MISR aerosol optical thickness uncertainty characterization is possibly underestimated.

Knobelspiesse, Kirk↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lightning Instrumentation System

A new comprehensive lightning instrumentation system has been designed for the Mobile Launcher 1 (ML-1) at the Kennedy Space Center, Florida. This new instrumentation system includes the synchronized recording of three B-dot, 3-axis measurement stations, one D-dot sensor and eighteen vehicle measurement channels. Each vehicle measurement channel is comprised of two currents and one voltage measurements. The instrumentation system is composed of centralized transient recorders and digitizers, connected to the transient recorders via fiber optic cables. The transient recorders are triggered by the B-dot or D-dot sensors. When the Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle is present at the ML-1, the transient recorders record data on a dual sampling rate mode, continuous slow 5 kilo-samples per second (per channel) and event driven fast 100 mega-samples per second (per channel). Without the presence of the vehicle at the ML-1, the instrumentation system operates only as an event driven fast 100 mega-samples per second (per channel). In the absence of the vehicle, the only measurements recorded are the B-dot and D-dot stations. Additionally, a portable Lightning Monitoring System (LMS) is temporarily installed inside the Orion Crew Capsule module monitoring one portable B-dot, 3-axis measurement station, and 2 Crew Capsule BUS voltages. The portable LMS has a transient recorder independent of the ML-1 transient recorders, that is triggered by the portable B-dot sensor or transients on the vehicle BUS voltages. This portable instrumentation is removed while performing close out operations before the vehicle launch. For the ML-1 lightning instrumentation system, new custom B-dot and D-dot sensors were designed and prototypes were tested at the International Center for Lightning Research and Testing (ICLRT) at Camp Blanding, Florida. The Ground Special Power (GSP) vehicle measurement channels monitoring on the ML-1 is done via 1) Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) current shunts and 2) custom Voltage Dividers. The new ML-1 lightning instrumentation system was designed, fabricated, deployed, and tested prior to the summer of 2019, in preparation for the first NASA's SLS mission to be launched from the Launch Complex 39B (LC-39B). The ML-1 lightning instrumentation was designed to complement the LC-39B lightning instrumentation system providing electromagnetic measurements closer to the vehicle, at different heights and inside the Crew capsule module.

Angel G Mata↗

NASA NTRS1994

Basic principles of flight test instrumentation engineering, volume 1, issue 2

Volume 1 of the AG 300 series on ´Flight Test Instrumentation´ gives a general introduction to the basic principles of flight test instrumentation. The other volumes in the series provide more detailed treatments of selected topics on flight test instrumentation. Volume 1, first published in 1974, has been used extensively as an introduction for instrumentation courses and symposia, as well as being a reference work on the desk of most flight test and instrumentation engineers. It is hoped that this second edition, fully revised, will be used with as much enthusiasm as the first edition. In this edition a flight test system is considered to include both the data collection and data processing systems. In order to obtain an optimal data flow, the overall design of these two subsystems must be carefully matched; the detail development and the operation may have to be done by separate groups of specialists. The main emphasis is on the large automated instrumentation systems used for the initial flight testing of modern military and civil aircraft. This is done because there, many of the problems, which are discussed here, are more critical. It does not imply, however, that smaller systems with manual data processing are no longer used. In general, the systems should be designed to provide the required results at the lowest possible cost. For many tests which require only a few parameters, relatively simple systems are justified, especially if no complex equipment is available to the user. Although many of the aspects discussed in this volume apply to both small and large systems, aspects of the smaller systems are mentioned only when they are of special interest. The volume has been divided into three main parts. Part 1 defines the main starting points for the design of a flight test instrumentation system, as seen from the points of view of the flight test engineer and the instrumentation engineer. In Part 2 the discussion is concentrated on those aspects which apply to each individual measuring channel, and in Part 3 the main emphasis is on the integration of the individual data channels into one data collection system and on those aspects of the data processing which apply to the complete system.

channels (data transmission)↗

NASA NTRS2017

Training Early Career Scientists in Flight Instrument Design Through Experiential Learning: NASA Goddard's Planetary Science Winter School.

The NASA Goddard Planetary Science Winter School (PSWS) is a Goddard Space Flight Center-sponsored training program, managed by Goddard's Solar System Exploration Division (SSED), for Goddard-based postdoctoral fellows and early career planetary scientists. Currently in its third year, the PSWS is an experiential training program for scientists interested in participating on future planetary science instrument teams. Inspired by the NASA Planetary Science Summer School, Goddard's PSWS is unique in that participants learn the flight instrument lifecycle by designing a planetary flight instrument under actual consideration by Goddard for proposal and development. They work alongside the instrument Principal Investigator (PI) and engineers in Goddard's Instrument Design Laboratory (IDL; idc.nasa.gov), to develop a science traceability matrix and design the instrument, culminating in a conceptual design and presentation to the PI, the IDL team and Goddard management. By shadowing and working alongside IDL discipline engineers, participants experience firsthand the science and cost constraints, trade-offs, and teamwork that are required for optimal instrument design. Each PSWS is collaboratively designed with representatives from SSED, IDL, and the instrument PI, to ensure value added for all stakeholders. The pilot PSWS was held in early 2015, with a second implementation in early 2016. Feedback from past participants was used to design the 2017 PSWS, which is underway as of the writing of this abstract.

Flight↗

NASA NTRS2020

Calibrating a 3-Axis Accelerometer Instrument with a Less Accurate Calibration Device Part 1: Mathematical Methodology

A three-axis accelerometer instrument (3xAI) can provide the angular attitude of a 3D object using the gravity vector (g) as the sole reference. Calibrating such an instrument requires placing it at known (to some accuracy plus uncertainty) angular articulations with respect to g. This paper will show a potential process for calibrating a 3xAI by using a 2-axis rotary system (calibration device) to provide these articulations. Any calibration device (CD) with such capacity will contain internal misalignments. These misalignments, even if made relatively small or approximated to zero in the kinematics model (KM), can be detrimental to the calibration of the instrument when high measurement accuracy is required. This is especially true if the selected set of articulations chosen for calibration do not include their symmetrical counterpoints (a point where the misalignment has equal magnitude but is opposite in direction to a point chosen). The consequence of not including the combination, point and counterpoint, for any misalignment involved in the calibration, results in a biased instrument. This paper will demonstrate a calibration of the instrument using symbolic math resulting in a closed-form solution of the instrument coefficients. The main objective is to show the impact of all the CD misalignments to the instrument coefficients. This process is the basis for a more sophisticated method (shown in a future paper) for obtaining the instrument coefficients while simultaneously obtaining an estimate of the calibration device internal misalignments.

Angle↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Managing Multi-Instrument Data Streams in Secure Environments

The capture and curation of all primary instrument data is a potentially valuable source of added insight into experiments or diagnostics in laboratory experiments. The data can, when properly curated, enable analysis beyond the current practice that uses just a subset of the as-measured data. Complete curated data can also be input for machine learning and other data exploration tools. Conveniently storing and accessing instrument data requires that the instruments are connected to databases and users through a networking infrastructure. This infrastructure needs to accommodate a wide array of instruments which can range from single laboratory mounted probes for environment monitoring to computers managing multiple instruments. These resources may also include mobile devices on which researchers record instrument and experiment state related notes. These varied data sources bring with them the challenges of different communications capabilities and protocols as well as the primary data typically being produced in proprietary formats. These challenges are further compounded when the instruments need to operate in secure environments such as required in national laboratories. We will discuss the SmartLab, an ongoing effort to set up a system for instrument and simulation data curation at NASA Langley Research Center. We will outline the challenges faced in managing the data sources required for ongoing research activities and the solutions that are being considered and implemented to address those challenges.

instrument data management↗

NASA NTRS1974

LST and instrument considerations

In order that the LST meet its scientific objectives and also be a National Astronomical Space Facility during the 1980's and 1990's, broad requirements have been levied by the scientific community. These scientific requirements can be directly translated into design requirements and specifications for the scientific instruments. The instrument ensemble design must be consistent with a 15-year operational lifetime. Downtime for major repair/refurbishment or instrument updating must be minimized. The overall efficiency and performance of the instruments should be maximized. Modularization of instruments and instrument subsystems, some degree of on-orbit servicing (both repair and replacement), on-axis location, minimizing the number of reflections within instruments, minimizing polarization effects, and simultaneous operation of the F/24 camera with other instruments, are just a few of the design guidelines and specifications which can and will be met in order that these broader scientific requirements be satisfied.-

Levin, G. M.↗

NASA NTRS1975

An evolution of X-ray astronomy instrumentation

This paper describes the growth of X-ray astronomy instrumentation from simple, single function, instruments performing survey measurements with crude spectral, spatial and temporal resolution to complex, multiple detector, instruments capable of observing selected phenomena and sources with extremely fine resolution. Examples of solar X-ray instrumentation that are discussed include OSO-IV, Apollo Telescope Mount and proposed Solar Maximum Mission instruments. Stellar X-ray instrumentation examples include UHURU, Astronomy Netherlands Satellite and HEAO-B instruments. Design details are provided and instrument parameters are compared to illustrate the evolutionary process.

Jagoda, N.↗

NASA NTRS1976

Investigation of the thermal control of instruments mounted in the Space Shuttle cargo bay

Results are presented for an investigation intended to examine the orbital averaged thermal response of a number of instruments, each being representative of a class of scientific instrumentation, when they are individually mounted on pallets and operated in the cargo bay of the Shuttle. The discussion covers mainly the Shuttle Orbiter thermal models, the solar viewing instrument, and the high-energy instrument. One approach to thermal insulation of smaller instruments is to provide a thermal canister insulated from the cargo bay and equipped with variable conductance heat pipes. Two approaches are proposed for larger instruments. One approach is to provide a thermal curtain across the top of the pallet which shields the pallet cavity from direct sunlight, while the second approach is to provide a fluid system to transfer heat from a specified location on an instrument to either a space viewing radiator on the pallet or instrument or the orbiter cooling system. These thermal control design concepts represent several ideas for standard reusable thermal control systems.

Bartoszek, J. T.↗

NASA NTRS1987

Earth observing system instrument pointing control modeling for polar orbiting platforms

An approach to instrument pointing control performance assessment for large multi-instrument platforms is described. First, instrument pointing requirements and reference platform control systems for the Eos Polar Platforms are reviewed. Performance modeling tools including NASTRAN models of two large platforms, a modal selection procedure utilizing a balanced realization method, and reduced order platform models with core and instrument pointing control loops added are then described. Time history simulations of instrument pointing and stability performance in response to commanded slewing of adjacent instruments demonstrates the limits of tolerable slew activity. Simplified models of rigid body responses are also developed for comparison. Instrument pointing control methods required in addition to the core platform control system to meet instrument pointing requirements are considered.

Briggs, H. C.↗

NASA NTRS1987

The imaging of extra-galactic low-energy gamma-ray sources prospects, techniques, and instrumentation

Improved understanding of the nature of active galaxies will require detailed observations of 10 to 20 sources, while understanding of their gamma ray luminosity function and its evolution will require the detection of approximately 100 sources. Instruments capable of detecting 100 active galaxies at low-energy, gamma ray energies are achievable. The angular resolution of an instrument, as well as its sensitivity, can limit the number of sources it can observe. An investigation of the angular resolution requirements for future low-energy gamma ray instruments is presented. It was found that the strictest requirements arise not from the need to resolve detectable sources, but from the need to control the level of direction-to-direction fluctuations in the diffuse background level. It was concluded that gamma-ray instruments capable of detecting 100 active galaxies must have sub-degree angular resolution. The use of the coded aperture imaging technique is proposed as a method of achieving accurate control of systematic errors and fine angular resolution without unduly increasing the time needed to conduct full sky surveys. An analysis of coded aperture imaging is presented for instruments that employ masks based on hexagonal uniformly redundant arrays. An instrument, the gamma-ray imaging payload, was built that employs these imaging techniques. The design and testing of the instrument is described in detail. Preliminary results from a balloon flight of the instruments are shown, demonstrating its imaging performance.

Finger, Mark Harold↗

NASA NTRS1991

Intercomparisons of the solar irradiance measurements from the Nimbus-7 SBUV, the NOAA-9 and NOAA-11 SBUV/2, and the STS-34 SSBUV instruments - A preliminary study

Results are presented of solar irradiance measurements in the spectral range 160-400 nm at approximately 0.15-0.20-nm intervals and at 1-nm resolution performed continually since November 1978. Solar irradiance data from the Nimbus-7 SBUV satellite instrument, the SBUV/2 instruments on the NOAA-9 and NOAA-11 satellites, and the October 1989 flight of the Shuttle SBUV instrument are presented and compared. Uncertainties in the instruments' absolute and long-term radiometric calibrations, which vary among the four instruments, are discussed. Comparisons of the initial solar spectra from the four instruments show agreement to within approximately 10 percent, with spectral biases on the order of +/-4 percent. Irradiances measured by the two NOAA instruments and SSBUV agree to within about 5 percent overall from 270 to 360 nm, with spectral biases on the order of about +/-2 percent. The Nimbus-7 SBUV irradiances are an additional 5-10 percent lower in this region than those measured by the other three instruments.

Cebula, R. P.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Vacuum ultraviolet instrumentation for solar irradiance and thermospheric airglow

A NASA sounding rocket experiment was developed to study the solar extreme ultraviolet (EUV) spectral irradiance and its effect on the upper atmosphere. Both the solar flux and the terrestrial molecular nitrogen via the Lyman-Birge-Hopfield bands in the far ultraviolet (FUV) were measured remotely from a sounding rocket on October 27, 1992. The rocket experiment also includes EUV instruments from Boston University (Supriya Chakrabarti), but only the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)/University of Colorado (CU) four solar instruments and one airglow instrument are discussed here. The primary solar EUV instrument is a 1/4 meter Rowland circle EUV spectrograph which has flown on three rockets since 1988 measuring the solar spectral irradiance from 30 to 110 nm with 0.2 nm resolution. Another solar irradiance instrument is an array of six silicon XUV photodiodes, each having different metallic filters coated directly on the photodiodes. This photodiode system provides a spectral coverage from 0.1 to 80 nm with about 15 nm resolution. The other solar irradiance instrument is a silicon avalanche photodiode coupled with pulse height analyzer electronics. This avalanche photodiode package measures the XUV photon energy providing a solar spectrum from 50 to 12,400 eV (25 to 0.1 nm) with an energy resolution of about 50 eV. The fourth solar instrument is an XUV imager that images the sun at 17.5 nm with a spatial resolution of 20 arc-seconds. The airglow spectrograph measures the terrestrial FUV airglow emissions along the horizon from 125 to 160 nm with 0.2 nm spectral resolution. The photon-counting CODACON detectors are used for three of these instruments and consist of coded arrays of anodes behind microchannel plates. The one-dimensional and two-dimensional CODACON detectors were developed at CU by Dr. George Lawrence. The pre-flight and post-flight photometric calibrations were performed at our calibration laboratory and at the Synchrotron Ultraviolet Radiation Facility (SURF) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Gaithersburg, Maryland.

Woods, Thomas N.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Database of proposed payloads and instruments for SEI missions

A database of all payloads and instruments proposed for lunar and Mars missions was compiled by the author for the Exploration Programs Office at NASA's Johnson Sapce Center. The database is an outgrowth of the document produced by C. J. Budney et al. at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in 1991. The present database consists not only of payloads proposed for human exploratory missions of the Moon and Mars, but also experiments selected or proposed for robotic precursor missions such as Lunar Scout, Mars Observer, and MESUR. The database consists of two parts: a written payload description and a matrix that provides a breakdown of payload components. Each payload description consists of the following information: (1) the rationale for why the instrument or payload package is being proposed for operation on the Moon or Mars; (2) a description of how the instrument works; (3) a breakdown of the payload, providing detailed information about the mass, volume, power requirements, and data rates for the constituent pieces of the experiment; (4) estimates of the power consumption and data rate; (5) how the data will be returned to Earth and distributed to the scientific community; (6) any constraints on the location or conditions under which the instrument can or cannot operate; (7) what type of crew interaction (if any) is needed; (8) how the payload is to be delivered to the lunar or martian surface (along with alternative delivery options); (9) how long the instrument or payload package will take to set up; (10) what type of maintenance needs are anticipated for the experiment; (11) stage of development for the instrument and environmental conditions under which the instrument has been tested; (12) an interface required by the instrument with the lander, a rover, an outpost, etc.; (13) information about how often the experiment will need to be resupplied with parts or consumables, if it is to be resupplied; (14) the name and affiliation of a contact person for the experiment; and (15) references where further information about the experiment can be found.

Barlow, N. G.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Ground-based intercomparisons of SBUV/2 flight instruments the world standard Dobson spectrophotometer 83 and overpass observations from Nimbus-7 TOMS and NOAA-11 SBUV/2

Total ozone data obtained during summers at Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii, with Dobson Spectrophotometer 83 are routinely compared with overpass total ozone data from the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS) and the Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet (SBUV) spectrometer launched aboard the Nimbus 7 satellite in 1978. Results from the TOMS/Dobson instrument comparisons through 1990 have been presented by McPeters and Komhyr (1991). Dobson spectrophotometer 83 was established as the standard instrument for the U.S.A. Dobson instrument station network in 1962. In 1980, the instrument was designated by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) as the Standard Dobson Spectrophotometer for the World. Long-term ozone measurement precision of the instrument has been maintained at plus or minus 0.5 percent (Komhyr et al., 1989). On an absolute scale, the ozone measurement accuracy of the instrument is estimated to plus or minus 3 percent. In early April, 1990, comparison of total ozone and vertical distribution (Umkehr) observations were made for the first time with Dobson spectrophotometer 8.3. The work was conducted at the NOAA Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory (CMDL) in Boulder, Colorado, and at the research and instrument manufacturing facility of the Ball Aerospace System Division located about 2 km east of Boulder. (The SBUV-2 S/N-2 instrument, built by Ball Aerospace Systems Division, is scheduled for launch aboard the NOAA-13 satellite). We present results of the comparisons which include ozone vertical distribution data obtained with a balloon-borne electrochemical concentration cell (ECC) ozonesonde (Komhyr, 1969).

Heath, D. F.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Evaluating the design of an Earth Radiation Budget Instrument with systen simulations. Part 1: Instantaneous estimates

A set of system simulations has been performed to evaluate candidate scanner designs for an Earth Radiation Budget Instrument (ERBI) for the Earth Observing System (EOS) of the late 1990s. Five different instruments are considered: (1) the Active Cavity Array (ACA), (2) the Clouds and Earth's Radiant Energy System-Instrument (CERES-I), (3) the Conically Scanning Radiometer (CSR), (4) the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment Cross-Track Scanner (ERBE), and (5) the Nimbus-7 Biaxial Scanner (N7). Errors in instantaneous, top-of-the-atmosphere (TOA) satellite flux estimates are assumed to arise from two measurement problems: the sampling of space over a given geographic domain, and sampling in angle about a given spatial location. When angular sampling errors vanish due to the application of correct angular dependence models (ADMs) during inversion, the accuracy of each scanner design is determined by the instrument's ability to map the TOA radiance field in a uniform manner. In this regard, the instruments containing a cross-track scanning component (CERES-I and ERBE) do best. As errors in ADMs are encountered, cross-track instruments incur angular sampling errors more rapidly than biaxial instruments (N7, ACA, and CSR) and eventually overtake the biaxial designs in their total error amounts. A latitude bias (north-south error gradient) in the ADM error of cross-track instruments also exists. This would be objectionable when ADM errors are systematic over large areas of the globe. For instantaneous errors, however, cross-track scanners outperform biaxial or conical scanners for 2.5 deg latitude x 2.5 deg longitude target areas, providing that the ADM error is less than or equal to 30%. A key issue is the amount of systematic ADM error (departures from the mean models) that is present at the 2.5 deg resolution of the ERBE target areas. If this error is less than 30%, then the CERES-I, ERBE, and CSR, in order of increasing error, provide the most accurate instantaneous flux estimates, within 2-3 W/sq m of each other in reflected shortwave flux. The magnitude of this error is near the 10 W/sq m accuracy requirement of the user community. Longwave flux errors have been found to have the same space and time characteristics as errors in shortwave radiation, but only about 25% as large.

Stowe, Larry↗