2011
DOI: 10.5194/hess-15-151-2011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effective roughness modelling as a tool for soil moisture retrieval from C- and L-band SAR

Abstract: Abstract. Soil moisture retrieval from Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) using state-of-the-art backscatter models is not fully operational at present, mainly due to difficulties involved in the parameterisation of soil surface roughness. Recently, increasing interest has been drawn to the use of calibrated or effective roughness parameters, as they circumvent issues known to the parameterisation of fieldmeasured roughness. This paper analyses effective roughness parameters derived from C-and L-band SAR observati… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

2
63
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
2
63
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the active SM products, errors may have originated because the sensitivity of backscattering to SM is less than to surface roughness [39], as well as from the uncertainty in the time series algorithm. Parameterization and estimation soil surface roughness from radar observation before SM estimation may be a promising approach to improve SMAP_A SM inversion [40]. The error in SMAP_AP SM products may be caused by: (1) the uncertainties in active and passive observations, respectively; and (2) the uncertainties caused by the scale issue when merging the radar and radiometer observations [35,36,41,42].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the active SM products, errors may have originated because the sensitivity of backscattering to SM is less than to surface roughness [39], as well as from the uncertainty in the time series algorithm. Parameterization and estimation soil surface roughness from radar observation before SM estimation may be a promising approach to improve SMAP_A SM inversion [40]. The error in SMAP_AP SM products may be caused by: (1) the uncertainties in active and passive observations, respectively; and (2) the uncertainties caused by the scale issue when merging the radar and radiometer observations [35,36,41,42].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figures 8 and 9 compare the IEM model with measured radar data, at 36° incidence (HH and VV polarizations) and at 26° incidence (HH polarization). Using X-band data and various incidence angles in the range between 25° and 52°, Baghdadi et al, [30] observed that the IEM correctly simulates the values of σ 0 HH and σ 0 VV for the following two cases: Hrms < 1.5 cm with an exponential correlation function; and Hrms >1.5 cm with a Gaussian function.…”
Section: Iem Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Zribi and Dechambre [31] proposed the introduction of a new parameter, Zs, equal to Hrms 2 /l, which combines the effects of two roughness descriptions (rms height and correlation length) in one single parameter, and Zribi et al [32] proposed a global parameter combining the influence of three conventional parameters (rms height, height correlation length, and correlation function shape). Lievens et al [30] showed that roughness parameters can vary from one SAR acquisition to another, since they are related to the observed backscatter coefficients, and to variations in local incidence angle. A statistical model was thus developed to estimate effective roughness parameters from radar observations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, it is common to retrieve the geophysical parameters of interest, such as soil moisture and roughness, from the scattering measurements [4][5][6][7], based on analyzing the sensitivity of the scattering behavior and mechanisms. Additionally, by knowing the scattering patterns, one could effectively avoid undesired parameters, while accordingly devising a means to retrieve the parameters of interest.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%