1989
DOI: 10.1364/ao.28.004735
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Revised optical air mass tables and approximation formula

Abstract: We correct an error in a widely used air mass table by recalculating the values on the basis of the ISO Standard Atmosphere (1972) and revise its approximation formula.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
466
0
18

Year Published

2003
2003
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 992 publications
(522 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
4
466
0
18
Order By: Relevance
“…For the calculation of the airmass, m, we used the formula suggested by Hansen and Travis (1974). Results from different formulas (Young, 1994;Kasten and Young, 1989;Rosenberg, 1966), also taking into account atmospheric refraction and the effects of a spherical Earth on the atmospheric path of radiance, were compared. The average percentage difference of each airmass value calculated by the different formulae from their mean increased from 0.2% to 1.7% for the airmass range of 2-6 that we used.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the calculation of the airmass, m, we used the formula suggested by Hansen and Travis (1974). Results from different formulas (Young, 1994;Kasten and Young, 1989;Rosenberg, 1966), also taking into account atmospheric refraction and the effects of a spherical Earth on the atmospheric path of radiance, were compared. The average percentage difference of each airmass value calculated by the different formulae from their mean increased from 0.2% to 1.7% for the airmass range of 2-6 that we used.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This introduces a negative fair weather bias in the recorded IWVs, since cloudy conditions are often associated with higher IWV values. The reported IWV value in the AERONET database is the zenith value, but the solar slant value can easily be returned using the optical air mass table based on a standard atmosphere (Kasten and Young, 1989).…”
Section: Cimel Sun Photometermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One way forward is to compare coincident IWV values in the direction of the Sun (the so-called solar slant IWV). These solar slant IWVs are one step back in the CIMEL data process to obtain IWVs from the measured slant transmittance and are obtained by multiplying the (zenith) IWVs with the optical air mass as defined in Kasten and Young (1989). These CIMEL solar slant IWVs should then have no contributions from clouds, by definition.…”
Section: Solar Slant Integrated Water Vapour Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the atmospheric parameters, air mass (AM) corrected with site elevation [13], aerosol optical depth (AOD), and precipitable water (PW) are considered to be the main factors impacting DNI spectrum, while others such as ambient temperature, air pressure, ozone and others have a minor impact [14]. Nevertheless, the impact of such atmospheric condition on the MJ device performance cannot be directly calculated, but it is necessary to estimate the spectral distribution of DNI first by means of a radiative transfer model and then calculate the performance of the device through its spectral response.…”
Section: Mapping the Solar Resource With The Spectral Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%