s3-a olci cyclic performance report€¦ · date: 15/12/2016 page: 4 figure 4: sun geometry during...

PREPARATION AND OPERATIONS OF THE MISSION PERFORMANCE

CENTRE (MPC) FOR THE COPERNICUS SENTINEL-3 MISSION

S3-A OLCI Cyclic Performance Report

Cycle No. 011

Start date: 10/11/2016

End date: 07/12/2016

Ref.: S3MPC.ACR.PR.01-010

Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Contract: 4000111836/14/I-LG

Customer: ESA Document Ref.: S3MPC.ACR.PR.01-010

Contract No.: 4000111836/14/I-LG Date: 15/12/2016

Issue: 1.0

Project: PREPARATION AND OPERATIONS OF THE MISSION PERFORMANCE CENTRE (MPC)

FOR THE COPERNICUS SENTINEL-3 MISSION

Title: S3-A OLCI Cyclic Performance Report

Author(s): OLCI ESLs

Approved by: L. Bourg, OLCI ESL

Coordinator

Authorized by Frédéric Rouffi, OPT Technical

Performance Manager

Distribution: ESA, EUMETSAT, S3MPC consortium

Accepted by ESA S. Dransfeld, MPC Deputy TO

for OPT

P. Féménias, MPC TO

Filename S3MPC.ACR.PR.01-011 - i1r0 - OLCI Cyclic Report 011.docx

Disclaimer

The work performed in the frame of this contract is carried out with funding by the European Union. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of either the European Union or the

European Space Agency.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: iii

Changes Log

Version Date Changes

1.0 15/12/2016 First Version

List of Changes

Version Section Answers to RID Changes

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: iv

Table of content

1 INSTRUMENT MONITORING ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 CCD TEMPERATURES ......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 RADIOMETRIC CALIBRATION ............................................................................................................................... 2

1.2.1 Dark Offsets [OLCI-L1B-CV-230] .............................................................................................................. 2

1.2.2 Instrument response and degradation modelling [OLCI-L1B-CV-250]..................................................... 5

1.2.3 Ageing of nominal diffuser [OLCI-L1B-CV-240] ...................................................................................... 10

1.2.4 Updating of calibration ADF [OLCI-L1B-CV-260] ................................................................................... 10

1.3 SPECTRAL CALIBRATION [OLCI-L1B-CV-400] ..................................................................................................... 10

1.4 SIGNAL TO NOISE ASSESSMENT [OLCI-L1B-CV-620] ........................................................................................... 11

1.4.1 SNR from Radiometric calibration data................................................................................................. 11

1.4.2 SNR from EO data. ................................................................................................................................. 12

1.5 GEOMETRIC CALIBRATION/VALIDATION .............................................................................................................. 12

2 OLCI LEVEL 1 PRODUCT VALIDATION ...........................................................................................................14

3 LEVEL 2 LAND PRODUCTS VALIDATION ........................................................................................................26

4 LEVEL 2 WATER PRODUCTS VALIDATION .....................................................................................................32

5 LEVEL 2 SYN PRODUCTS VALIDATION ...........................................................................................................38

6 EVENTS ........................................................................................................................................................39

7 APPENDIX A .................................................................................................................................................40

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: v

List of Figures

Figure 1: long term monitoring of CCD temperatures using minimum value (top), time averaged values

(middle), and maximum value (bottom) provided in the annotations of the Radiometric Calibration Level

1 products, for the Shutter frames, all radiometric calibrations so far. --------------------------------------------- 1

Figure 2: Same as Figure 1 for diffuser frames. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2

Figure 3: Dark Offset for band Oa1 (top) and Oa21 (bottom), all radiometric calibrations so far except

the first one (orbit 183) for which the instrument was not thermally stable yet. -------------------------------- 3

Figure 4: map of periodic noise for the 5 cameras, for band Oa21. X-axis is detector number (East part,

from 540 to 740, where the periodic noise occurs), Y-axis is the orbit number. The counts have been

corrected from the west detectors mean value (not affected by periodic noise). Periodic noise amplitude

is high in camera 2, 3 and 4. It is lower in camera 4 and small in camera 1. We see that the drift of the

periodic noise tends to stabilize during the last radiometric calibrations. ----------------------------------------- 4

Figure 5: Dark Current for band Oa1 (top) and Oa21 (bottom), all radiometric calibrations so far except

the first one (orbit 183) for which the instrument was not thermally stable yet. -------------------------------- 5

Figure 6: Gain Coefficients for band Oa1 (top) and Oa21 (bottom), all diffuser 1 radiometric calibrations

so far except the first one (orbit 183) for which the instrument was not thermally stable yet. -------------- 6

Figure 7: time evolution of the camera-averaged gain coefficients for bands Oa1, Oa7, Oa14 and Oa21

(from left to right and top to bottom). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6

Figure 8: camera averaged gain relative evolution with respect to most recent calibration, as a function

of elapsed time since first calibration acquired after the fix of the Start Trackers issue; one curve for

each band (see colour code on plots), one plot for each module. --------------------------------------------------- 7

Figure 9: Across-track profiles of Gains relative evolution with respect to most recent calibration for time

distance about 2, 6, 13, 19, 27 and 34 weeks (from left to right then top to bottom) -------------------------- 8

Figure 10: same as Figure 8 after normalization by band Oa18. ------------------------------------------------------ 9

Figure 11: Signal to Noise ratio as a function of the spectral band for the 5 cameras. These results have

been computed from radiometric calibration data. All calibrations except first one (orbit 183) are

presents with the colours corresponding to the orbit number (see legend). The SNR is very stable with

time: the curves for all orbits are almost superimposed. --------------------------------------------------------------11

Figure 12: long-term stability of the SNR estimates from Calibration data, example of channel Oa1. -----12

Figure 13: Geometric Validation in-house tool functional breakdown. --------------------------------------------13

Figure 14: location and dates for the five Geometric Validation scenes. ------------------------------------------13

Figure 15: summary results for each product, in meters. -------------------------------------------------------------13

Figure 16: Location of the Cal/Val-test sites used to perform this activity ----------------------------------------17

Figure 17: RGB Quick-Looks from S3A/OLCI over Pacific-NE-Optimum site. Red box indicates the ROI. --17

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: vi

Figure 18: Rayleigh calibration coefficients from S3A/OLCI averaged over two acquisitions over Pacific-

NW-Optimum and SIO_Optimum calval-sites as a function of wavelength. Error bars indicate the

associated uncertainty of the calibration coefficients ------------------------------------------------------------------19

Figure 19: Interband calibration coefficients from S3A/OLCI from one acquisitions over SIO_Optimum

calval-site as a function of wavelength. Error bars indicate the associated uncertainty of the calibration

coefficients ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------20

Figure 20: Quick-looks of ERR-L1B S3A/OLCI products generated by DIMITRI from top-left to bottom-

right over Algeria3, Algeria5, Libya1, Libya4, Mauritania1 and Mauritania2. The red squares indicate the

position of the ROIs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------21

Figure 21: The estimated gain coefficients (observed/simulated signal) from S3A/OLCI over the 6 PICS

sites identified by CEOS (black diamond) as a function of wavelength. Dashed-green, orange and red

lines indicate the 2%, 5% and 10% respectively. Dashed-black lines indicate the significant gaseous

absorption bands which are mis-represented in the BRDF model of PICS method in DIMITRI. Error bars

indicate uncertainty associated to the estimated gain coefficients. ------------------------------------------------22

Figure 22: Time series of the relative difference defined as observed reflectance - simulated one over

the later in per-cent from (black) MSI_A and (blue) OLCI_A for bands 665 nm over (top) Algeria-3,

(middle) Algeria-5 and (bottom) Libya-1 CalVal-sites. Error bars indicate the method uncertainty. -------23

Figure 23: The estimated gain coefficients (observed/simulated signal) from (black) S2A/MSI and (blue)

S3A/OLCI over (top) Algeria-3 and (bottom) Libya-1 PICS as a function of wavelength. Dashed-green,

orange and red lines indicate the 2%, 5% and 10% respectively. Dashed-black and blue lines indicate the

significant gaseous absorption bands which are mis-represented in the BRDF model of PICS method in

DIMITRI. Error bars indicate uncertainty associated to the estimated gain coefficients. ----------------------24

Figure 24: Scatter-plot between match-up OLCI/FAPAR daily values and FAPAR derived from MODIS at

250m. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------29

Figure 25: FAPAR time series from OLCI (blue) and MODIS (green) over the US-Ne1 CV site. ---------------29

Figure 26 FAPAR time series from OLCI (blue) and MODIS (green) over the IT-Cat CV site -------------------30

Figure 27: FAPAR time series from OLCI (blue) and MODIS (green) over the SP-Val CV site. Inner panels

time series are MERIS FAPAR for Summer and Fall 2001 (top panel) and 2009 (bottom panel). ------------30

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 1

1 Instrument monitoring

1.1 CCD temperatures

The monitoring of the CCD temperatures is based on MPMF data extractions not yet operational. In the

meantime, we monitor the CCD temperatures on the long-term using Radiometric Calibration

Annotations (see Figure 1). Variations are very small (0.08 C peak-to-peak) and no trend can be

identified. Data from current cycle (rightmost data points) do not show any specificity.

Figure 1: long term monitoring of CCD temperatures using minimum value (top), time averaged values (middle),

and maximum value (bottom) provided in the annotations of the Radiometric Calibration Level 1 products, for

the Shutter frames, all radiometric calibrations so far.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 2

Figure 2: Same as Figure 1 for diffuser frames.

1.2 Radiometric Calibration

Twelve OLCI Radiometric Calibration Sequences have been acquired during Cycle 011:

S01 sequence on 17/11/2016 06:44 to 06:46 (absolute orbit 3914)









Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 3



and


All these calibrations but one (22/11 06:14) are part of the Yaw Manoeuvres acquisition plan, either as

test sequences (17/11, 22/11 12:58 and 21/11) during which the yaw control procedure was refined, or

as part of the final acquisition set (all those of 07/12, including the S05).

The acquired Sun azimuth angles are presented on below, on top of the nominal values without Yaw

Manoeuvre (i.e. with nominal Yaw Steering control of the satellite).

Figure 3: Sun azimuth angles during acquired Radiometric Calibrations (diffuser frame) on top of nominal yearly

cycle.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 4

Figure 4: Sun geometry during radiometric Calibrations on top of characterization ones (diffuser frame)

This section presents the overall monitoring of the parameters derived from radiometric calibration data

and highlights, if present, specificity of current cycle data.

1.2.1 Dark Offsets [OLCI-L1B-CV-230]

Dark offsets.

Dark offsets are continuously affected by the global offset induced by the Periodic Noise on the OCL

convergence. Current Cycle calibrations (orbits 3531 & 3736) are affected the same way as others. The

amplitude of the shift varies with band and camera from virtually nothing (e.g. camera 2, band 0a1) to

up to 5 counts (Oa21, camera 3). The Periodic Noise itself comes on top of the global shift with its

known signature: high frequency oscillations with a rapid damp. This effect remains more or less stable

with time in terms of amplitude, frequency and decay length, but its phase varies with time, introducing

the global offset mentioned above.

There is no significant evolution of this parameter during the current cycle.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 5

Figure 5: Dark Offset for band Oa1 (top) and Oa21 (bottom), all radiometric calibrations so far except the first

one (orbit 183) for which the instrument was not thermally stable yet.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 6

Figure 6: map of periodic noise for the 5 cameras, for band Oa21. X-axis is detector number (East part, from 540

to 740, where the periodic noise occurs), Y-axis is the orbit number. The counts have been corrected from the

west detectors mean value (not affected by periodic noise). Periodic noise amplitude is high in camera 2, 3 and 4.

It is lower in camera 4 and small in camera 1. We see that the drift of the periodic noise tends to stabilize during

the last radiometric calibrations.

Dark Currents.

Dark Currents are not affected by the global offset of the Dark Offsets, thanks to the clamping to the

average blind pixels value. However, the oscillations of Periodic Noise remain visible. There is no

significant evolution of this parameter during the current cycle.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 7

Figure 7: Dark Current for band Oa1 (top) and Oa21 (bottom), all radiometric calibrations so far except the first

one (orbit 183) for which the instrument was not thermally stable yet.

1.2.2 Instrument response and degradation modelling [OLCI-L1B-CV-250]

Figure 6 below shows the gain coefficients of every pixel for two OLCI channels, Oa1 (400 nm) and Oa21

(1020 nm), highlighting the significant evolution of the instrument response since early mission.

Figure 7 on the other hand displays the time evolution of the cross-track averaged gain, for each

module, as a function of time. It shows that if a significant evolution occurred during the early mission,

the trends tend to stabilize, with a noticeable exception during the Yaw manoeuvres, pointing at the

dependency of the BRDF model performance with Sun azimuth. In particular all calibrations since

beginning of August provide very stable results, within 0.5% for all bands. This is further illustrated on

Figure 10. The latter shows that radiometric gains are becoming very stable over this period but starts to

vary again when the first Yaw Manoeuvre tests come into play, illustrating the influence of geometry.

Figure 11 further explore the geometry dependency at almost constant time, over the Yaw Manoeuvre

day, focusing on 2 calibration with almost identical geometry as the chosen reference (22/11) and 4

more with increasing azimuth differences in both directions. The impact is clearly seen, with a significant

evolution that can be seen globally as a “white” curvature of the AC profile, increasing with azimuth

difference, and with opposite curvature according to the sign of the azimuth difference. On the other

hand, the 3 calibrations with almost identical geometries (SAA 0.02 degree) compares extremely

well, within 0.06% (camera FOV averages, the central left and central right panes of Figure 11 show

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 8

slightly higher peak values). The same figure allows to qualitatively verify the very small impact on the

nominal diffuser of the Yaw manoeuvres (7 exposures, representing the equivalent of 3.5 months of

mission at nominal acquisition rate) by comparing central left pane (acquired last of the series) with

central right (acquired first of the series).

Figure 8: Gain Coefficients for band Oa1 (top) and Oa21 (bottom), all diffuser 1 radiometric calibrations so far

except the first one (orbit 183) for which the instrument was not thermally stable yet.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 9

Figure 9: time evolution of the camera-averaged gain coefficients for bands Oa1, Oa7, Oa14 and Oa21 (from left

to right and top to bottom).

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 10

Figure 10: camera averaged gain relative evolution with respect to most recent nominal yaw steering calibration

(22/11), as a function of elapsed time since first calibration acquired after the fix of the Start Trackers issue; one

curve for each band (see colour code on plots), one plot for each module.

Figure 11: Across-track profiles of Gains relative evolution with respect to most recent nominal yaw steering

calibration for an almost constant time distance (about 2 weeks) but for varying geometries thanks to Yaw

Manoeuvres (from left to right then top to bottom, SAA differences with that of the reference calibration of

22/11 are 8.4, 5.6, 0.02, 0.02, -6.8, -3.7)

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 11

In order to get rid of the white variability (not spectrally dependant) caused by the BRDF model, all

bands are normalized by band Oa18. Oa18 was chosen because NIR degrades slowest and because Oa20

and Oa21 are subject to Periodic Noise, e- leaks, etc … Results are presented Figure 10.

Figure 12: same as Figure 8 after normalization by band Oa18.

In Figure 12, we see that the ugly oscillations of Figure 8 have disappeared. However it is still surprising

that some bands show an increase of sensitivity with time, while a decrease is expected since we are

monitoring a ‘degradation’ of the instrument. Using the diffuser 2 results, we can say that this sensitivity

increase cannot be explained by the ageing of diffuser 1. Moreover, we have checked that the spectral

assignment drift cannot explain either this increase of sensitivity. Figure 13, compared to Figure 11,

allows to verify the performance of the BRDF error correction on AC profiles.

Thus there is still something that remains unexplained concerning the evolution of the sensitivity of the

instrument. Investigations are on-going.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 12

Figure 13: same as Figure 11 after normalization by band Oa18.

The time elapsed until the beginning of the mission is still too small to be able derive a degradation

model, but Yaw Manoeuvres will allow a direct quantification of the instrument sensitivity evolution

between pairs of calibration with identical or close to identical geometries. This work is still on-going

and will be presented in the next Cyclic Report.

1.2.3 Ageing of nominal diffuser [OLCI-L1B-CV-240]

There has been a new calibration sequence S05 (reference diffuser) acquired during cycle 011, as part of

the Yaw Manoeuvre (last sequence, aiming at assessing the impact of the overall Yaw Manoeuvre

comparing S05 with first and last S01 of the YM, those three being acquired at identical geometries).

Ageing estimates have been derived using the 5 available reference diffuser acquisitions so far (the very

first one is used as reference and thus does not make an ageing measurement by itself). They are

displayed against wavelength on Figure 14 below. Despite significant variability above 650 nm, the

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 13

expected spectral shape is well captured, as well as the time trend (increasing ageing with time at a

given wavelength). However, the 30/05 measurement appears as an outlier with ageing values higher

than for the two later dates. As the latter has been acquired at a very extreme SAA, it may suggest that

extreme azimuth angles may be considered with care. This is under study.

Figure 14: FOV-averaged ageing estimates using the 5 available reference diffuser acquisitions so far (the very

first one is used as reference and thus does not make an ageing measurement by itself).

1.2.4 Updating of calibration ADF [OLCI-L1B-CV-260]

A number of OL_1_CAL_AX have been generated during cycle 011, for the purpose of the S3VT

reprocessing. These OL_1_CAL_AX are modified with respect to the current baseline as follows:

1. A unique set of radiometric gains for all, based on “best available inflight geometry”, identified

as the S01 sequence of 22/11/2016

2. Frequent update of the Dark Offset and Dark Current LUTs to minimise the impact of Periodic

Noise: all calibrations with OCL ON have been selected, except those too close to their

immediate predecessor (in practice this eliminates mostly the S05 of ageing sequences, 1 orbit

later than S04 or S01). Validity dates have been set starting from the used calibration sequence

and ending at next selected one, i.e. without any overlap.

The list of generated ADfs is: 1. S3A_OL_1_CAL_AX_20160425T095210_20160502T105515_20161202T094437___________________MPC_O_AL_R01.SEN3

2. S3A_OL_1_CAL_AX_20160502T105515_20160509T111321_20161202T094437___________________MPC_O_AL_R01.SEN3



Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 14



















1.3 Spectral Calibration [OLCI-L1B-CV-400]

There has been no Spectral Calibration acquisition during cycle 011.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 15

1.4 Signal to Noise assessment [OLCI-L1B-CV-620]

1.4.1 SNR from Radiometric calibration data.

Figure 15: Signal to Noise ratio as a function of the spectral band for the 5 cameras. These results have been

computed from radiometric calibration data. All calibrations except first one (orbit 183) are presents with the

colours corresponding to the orbit number (see legend). The SNR is very stable with time: the curves for all orbits

are almost superimposed.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 16

Figure 16: long-term stability of the SNR estimates from Calibration data, example of channel Oa1.

1.4.2 SNR from EO data.

There has been no update on SNR assessment from EO data during the cycle. Last figures (cycle 9) are

considered valid.

1.5 Geometric Calibration/Validation

There has been no update on Geometric Calibration quantitative assessment during the cycle. Last

figures (cycle 10) are considered valid.

Qualitative assessment by product inspection showed no detectable performance evolution.

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 17

2 OLCI Level 1 Product validation

[OLCI-L1B-CV-300], [OLCI-L1B-CV-310] – Radiometric Validation

There has been no update on Radiometric Validation quantitative assessment during the cycle. Last



Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 18

3 Level 2 Land products validation

There has been no update on Land products validation quantitative assessment during the cycle. Last



Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 19

4 Level 2 Water products validation

[OLCI-L2WLR-CV-300, OLCI-L2WLR-CV-310, OLCI-L2WLR-CV-32, OLCI-L2WLR-CV-330, OLCI-L2WLR-CV-

340, OLCI-L2WLR-CV-350, OLCI-L2WLR-CV-360 and OLCI-L2WLR-CV-370] – Level 2 Water-leaving

Reflectance product validation

There has been no update on Land products validation quantitative assessment during the cycle. Last



Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 20

5 Level 2 SYN products validation

[SYN-L2-CV-100]

There has been no update on SYN products validation quantitative assessment during the cycle. Last



Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 21

6 Events

Twelve OLCI Radiometric Calibration Sequences have been acquired during Cycle 011:












and


All these calibrations but one (22/11 06:14) are part of the Yaw Manoeuvres acquisition plan, either

as test sequences (17/11, 22/11 12:58 and 21/11) during which the yaw control procedure was

refined, or as part of the final acquisition set (all those of 07/12, including the S05).

Sentinel-3 MPC


Cycle No. 011


Issue: 1.0

Date: 15/12/2016

Page: 22

7 Appendix A

Other reports related to the Optical mission are:

S3-A SLSTR Cyclic Performance Report, Cycle No. 011 (ref. S3MPC.RAL.PR.02-011)

All Cyclic Performance Reports are available on MPC pages in Sentinel Online website, at:

https://sentinel.esa.int

End of document

https://sentinel.esa.int/

s3-a olci cyclic performance report€¦ · date: 15/12/2016 page: 4 figure 4: sun geometry during...

Documents