# A dataset of temperature, humidity, and liquid water path retrievals from a network of ground-based microwave radiometers dedicated to fog investigation

Pauline Martinet, Vinciane Unger, Frédéric Burnet, Jean-François Georgis, Maxime Hervo, Thierry Huet, Ulrich Löhnert, Eugene Miller, Emiliano Orlandi, Jeremy Price, et al.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

To cite this version:

Pauline Martinet, Vinciane Unger, Frédéric Burnet, Jean-François Georgis, Maxime Hervo, et al. A dataset of temperature, humidity, and liquid water path retrievals from a network of ground-based microwave radiometers dedicated to fog investigation. Bulletin of Atmospheric Science and Technology, 2022, 3 (1-4), pp.6. 10.1007/s42865-022-00049-w. hal-03982587

HAL Id: hal-03982587

https://hal.science/hal-03982587

Submitted on 10 Feb 2023

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# A dataset of temperature, humidity, and liquid water path retrievals from a network of ground-based microwave radiometers dedicated to fog investigation

Pauline Martinet¹ID · Vinciane Unger¹ · Frédéric Burnet¹ · Jean-François Georgis² · Maxime Hervo³ · Thierry Huet⁴ · Ulrich Löhnert⁵ · Eugene Miller⁶ · Emiliano Orlandi⁷ · Jeremy Price⁸ · Mathias Schröder⁹ · Guillaume Thomas¹,¹⁰,¹¹

Received: 18 March 2022 / Accepted: 18 August 2022

© The Author(s) 2022

## Abstract

The database presented in this study has been acquired during the SOuth west FOGs 3D (SOFOG3D) experiment for processes study. This international campaign led by Météo-France during the winter 2019–2020 aimed at deploying a unique network of both in situ and remote sensing measurements in order to document spatial and temporal variabilities of fog events. To support this scientific objective but also to conduct first data assimilation experiments within the French convective scale model AROME, an un-precedented network of 8 ground-based microwave radiometers (MWR) has been deployed in 7 different locations known to be prone to fog occurrences. The database gives access to vertical profiles of temperature and humidity (both absolute and relative) from the surface up to 10 km altitude as well as integrated water vapor and liquid water path estimates. The retrieved profiles offer a very large database that can be exploited for several scientific purposes: fog process studies at specific location, documentation on the variability of fog properties at the regional scale, better understanding of the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) height and dynamics during wintertime conditions, development of nowcasting products dedicated to fog alerts, data assimilation experiments to improve fog forecasts, development of synergetical advanced products, and evaluation of new model configurations with advanced parameterization or resolutions.

**Keywords** Microwave radiometer · Brightness temperatures · Fog · Temperature · Humidity · Liquid water path · Integrated water vapor

All the authors contributed to the instrumental deployment of microwave radiometers. Pauline Martinet and Vinciane Unger conducted the scientific evaluation, data preparation, and the data delivery on the AERIS portal.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>
# 1 Objectives

Though fog events highly affect transport safety with potentially large economical and human losses (Gultepe et al. 2007), accurately forecasting fog occurrence at an exact time and location still remains difficult for the current numerical weather prediction (NWP) model. This is due to the high number of non-linear fine scale processes taking part in the fog life cycle which are not yet all entirely understood. Fog is also known to be highly sensitive to initial conditions especially temperature and humidity initialization (Bergot and Guedalia 1994; Bergot et al. 2005; Hu et al. 2014). However, a significant observation gap is observed in the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) which is undersampled compared to surface observations over continental regions or the free troposphere well sensed by satellite data. In this context, an un-precedented network of 8 ground-based microwave radiometers (MWR) has been deployed in the South-West of France during the SOuth west FOGs 3D (SOFOG3D) experiment for processes study (Martinet et al. 2020). MWRs can provide vertical profiles of temperature and absolute humidity at a very high temporal resolution (1 s to a few minutes) under all-sky conditions but rain up to 10 km altitude (Cimini et al. 2006; Löhnert and Maier 2012; Martinet et al. 2015; 2017). Additionally, MWRs provide reference measurements for highly accurate integrated water vapor (IWV) contents and liquid water path (LWP) also provided in the database. Besides the usefulness of an accurate description of the ABL before fog formation, during fog mature phase and at fog dissipation to better understand physical processes driving the fog life cycle (Temimi et al. 2020), recent studies have highlighted the expected benefit of MWR observations for data assimilation experiments in view of improving fog forecasts (Martinet et al. 2020). This is why, supported by a strong European collaboration through COST Actions ES1303 TOPROF (Illingworth et al. 2019) and CA18235 PROBE (Cimini et al. 2020), an international network of MWRs has been deployed with the primary objective to conduct data assimilation experiments within

<table><caption>**Table 1** Station name (short-name), operating institution, location (latitude and longitude), altitude (Alt) above mean sea level, retrieved variables, MWR type for the 8 units deployed during SOFOG3D</caption><thead><tr><th>Station name</th><th>Operating institution</th><th>Lat. (°)</th><th>Lon. (°)</th><th>Alt. (m)</th><th>Retrieved variables</th><th>MWR type</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Toulouse-ONERA (TON)</td><td>ONERA</td><td>43.51</td><td>1.47</td><td>146</td><td>T,Q, LWP, IWV</td><td>HATPRO G2</td></tr><tr><td>Agen (AGN)</td><td>Météo-France</td><td>44.17</td><td>0.59</td><td>60</td><td>T,Q, LWP, IWV</td><td>HAT-PRO G3</td></tr><tr><td>Bergerac (BRG)</td><td>Laboratoire d'Aérologie</td><td>44.82</td><td>0.52</td><td>60</td><td>T,Q, LWP, IWV</td><td>HAT-PRO G2</td></tr><tr><td>Mont-De-Marsan (MDM)</td><td>MeteoSwiss</td><td>43.90</td><td>-0.50</td><td>57</td><td>T,Q, LWP, IWV</td><td>HAT-PRO G2</td></tr><tr><td>Biscarrosse (BSC)</td><td>RPG GmbH</td><td>44.37</td><td>-1.13</td><td>62</td><td>T,Q, LWP, IWV</td><td>HAT-PRO G5</td></tr><tr><td>Charbonnière (SKO)</td><td>University of Cologne</td><td>44.42</td><td>-0.59</td><td>69</td><td>T,Q, LWP, IWV</td><td>HAT-PRO G5</td></tr><tr><td>Charbonnière (SAT)</td><td>Attex</td><td>44.42</td><td>-0.59</td><td>69</td><td>T</td><td>MTP-5</td></tr><tr><td>UKMO-LE-COUYE (SUK)</td><td>Met-Office</td><td>44.39</td><td>-0.52</td><td>72</td><td>Q, LWP, IWV</td><td>HUM-PRO G4</td></tr></tbody></table>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1** Surface altitude (above see level) extracted from the operational AROME model. Locations of the MWR sites are shown with the crosses (red indicates temperature and humidity profilers, yellow only humidity profilers, and cyan only temperature profilers.)</figcaption></figure>

the French convective scale model AROME (Application of Research to Operations at MEsoscale, Seity et al. (2011)). Assimilation experiments using 3D-Var and advanced 3D-EnVar data assimilation schemes are currently on-going.

## 2 Data description

MWRs can measure brightness temperatures (BT) in two spectral-bands: the K-band from 22.24 to 31 GHz to retrieve humidity (Q) profiles, integrated water vapor (IWV) content and liquid water path (LWP), and the V-band from 51 to 58 GHz to retrieve temperature (T) profiles. Elevation scans are also used to increase the vertical resolution of temperature profiles. This dataset comes from 7 multi-channel MWRs manufactured by Radiometer Physics GmbH (RPG) and a single-channel MWR manufactured by RPO Attex in cooperation and

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2** Data availability of each MWR unit through the whole experimental campaign period</figcaption></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 2** Number of fog events observed during the whole SOFOG3D experiment at each instrumented site</caption><thead><tr><td>Site</td><td>Period of availability of visibility measurements</td><td>Total number of fog events</td><td>Visibility sensor</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>TON</td><td>20191001–20200501</td><td>34</td><td>Météo-France operational network PWD22, DF320 or FS11</td></tr><tr><td>AGN</td><td>20191001–20200501</td><td>103</td><td>Météo-France operational network PWD22, DF320 or FS11</td></tr><tr><td>BRG</td><td>20191001–20200501</td><td>88</td><td>Météo-France operational network PWD22, DF320 or FS11</td></tr><tr><td>MDM</td><td>20191001–20200501</td><td>74</td><td>Météo-France operational network PWD22, DF320 or FS11</td></tr><tr><td>BSC</td><td>20191001–20200501</td><td>15</td><td>Météo-France operational network PWD22, DF320 or FS11</td></tr><tr><td>SKO, SAT</td><td>20191009–20200402</td><td>46</td><td>PWD 22</td></tr><tr><td>UKMO</td><td>20191001–20200415</td><td>64</td><td>CS120A</td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 3** Flow chart of data processing for the RPG HATPRO multi-channel radiometer. Pressure profile (p(z)), temperature profile (T(z)), humidity profile (Q(z)), and liquid water content profile (LWC(z)) are necessary to perform radiative transfer model (RTM) calculations. ANN corresponds to artificial neural network</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 4** Flow chart of data processing for the Attex MTP-5 single-channel radiometer</figcaption></figure>

support with IfU GmbH. Optionally, a broadband infrared radiometer measuring the downwelling emission between 9.6 and 11.5 µm is attached to the RPG radiometer housing to improve LWP retrievals through an improved cloud base detection. During the SOFOG3D experiments, all temperature and humidity RPG MWRs were alternating boundary layer scans in 10 elevation angles<fnref n="1" /> every 10 min with zenith measurements at 1-s time resolution.

The Attex MTP-5 instrument is measuring BT at 56.6 GHz and is dedicated to the temperature profiling up to 1 km altitude with a time resolution of 5 min (Troitsky et al. 1993; Westwater et al. 1999). To improve the vertical resolution, the MTP-5 radiometer was scanning in 9 elevation angles.<fnref n="2" />

The location, operating institution, MWR generation, and retrieved variables at each site are defined in Table 1. The position of the different MWR units is shown in Fig. 1. Figure 2 shows the data availability for each MWR unit through the whole period of the field campaign. Following the definition of fog events provided by Tardif and Rasmussen (2007), Table 2 provides a synthesis of the total number of fog events observed at each instrumented site. Please note that the total number of fog events detected depends on the availability of visibility measurements, which might differ from one site to another. The period of availability of visibility measurements is thus provided as an additional information in Table 2 as well as the type of visibility sensor deployed at each site. The database thus contains a total of approximately 424 fog events observed at different locations, the site of Agen being the most prone to fog occurrences with a total number of 103 fog events detected while only 15 fog events have been observed at the site of Biscarrosse.

Level1 products correspond to raw BT measurements for each MWR site as well as the infrared radiometer brightness temperatures when this optional instrument is available and

<footnote n="1">¹ 90', 30', 19.2', 14.4', 11.4', 8.4', 6.6', 5.4', 4.8', 4.2</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² 89.5', 59.5', 44.6', 32.7', 23.8', 14.9', 6', 3', 1</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 3** Description of level1 dataset</caption><thead><tr><th>Label</th><th>Name of data file</th><th>File types</th><th>Data repository and identifier</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Data set 1<br>Boundary Layer<br>scan BT</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>_CNRM_MWR-<br>MWR_TYPE<sup>b</sup>-<br>TBBL_L1_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>c</sup>_<br>Vn<sup>d</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>CHARBONNIERE HATPRO:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/149<br>CHARBONNIERE MTP-5<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/158<br>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/139<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/143<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/147<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/141<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/145</td></tr><tr><td>Data set 2<br>Zenith<br>BT</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>_CNRM_MWR-<br>MWR_TYPE<sup>b</sup>-<br>TB_L1_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>c</sup>_<br>Vn<sup>d</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>CHARBONNIERE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/148<br>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/138<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/142<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/146<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/140<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/144<br>UKMO-LE-COUYE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/150</td></tr><tr><td>Data set 3<br>Infrared<br>radiometer</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>CNRM_MWR-<br>HATPRO-<br>INFRARED_L1_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>c</sup>_<br>Vn<sup>d</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/248<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/250<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/258<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/252<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/256<br>UKMO-LE-COUYE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/260</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote><sup>a</sup> SITE being the name of MWR location in the following list: CHARBONNIERE, AGEN, BERGERAC, UKMO-LECOUYE, TOULOUSE-ONERA, BISCARROSSE, MONT-DE-MARSAN</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup> MWR_TYPE being: HATPRO or MTP-5</footnote>

<footnote><sup>c</sup> YYYYMMDD being the start of the data file as YYYY=year, MM=month, and DD=day</footnote>

<footnote><sup>d</sup> Vn being the version of the data set starting with V1</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 5** Example of level1 brightness temperature data observed on the 25th of December 2019 at the main site Charbonnière. **a** BT spectrum as a function of the channel frequency observed at 0 UTC, **b** time series of BT observed at 22.24 GHz and 90° elevation angle, **c** time series of BT observed at 52.28 GHz and 90° elevation angle, **d** time series of BT observed at 58 GHz and all elevation angles from 90° down to 42.°. Blue crosses show times when a rain event is detected by the instrument</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 6** Example of level2 products for the 25th of December 2019. From top left to bottom right: a boundary layer temperature profiles, **b** composite temperature profile, **c** absolute humidity profiles, **d** relative humidity profiles, **e** integrated water vapor, and **f** liquid water path</figcaption></figure>
are described in Table 3. Examples of level1 data from the RPG and Attex instruments are shown in Figs. 5 and 7.

The MTP-5 single-channel radiometer has its own continuous self-calibration procedure ensuring a good stability of BT measurement. For HATPRO multi-channel radiometers, a liquid nitrogen calibration needs to be performed at the minimum twice per year in order to get the most optimal calibration coefficients to convert detected intensities into BTs. A liquid nitrogen calibration was thus performed for all radiometers on-site at the beginning of the experimental campaign. The quality of BT measurements from HATPRO MWRs, which accuracy depends on liquid nitrogen calibration, was thus monitored during clear-sky periods through the comparison of observations minus BT simulations from the AROME model. The method is described in De Angelis et al. (2017) and Martinet et al. (2015, 2017, 2020). Only channel 3 (23.84 GHz) of the MWR deployed at Charbonniere was found to be affected by a hardware failure. This channel has thus been removed in all level2 processing. For all the other HATPRO MWRs, only channel 5 (26.24 GHz) of the MWR deployed at Mont-de-Marsan was found to be affected by a large bias of 5 K. Contrary to the MWR at Charbonniere, this bias does not come from a hardware failure. It is roughly constant in time and can easily be corrected before the retrieval of level2 products. This first dataset release does not apply any bias correction of BT before level2 processing; the impact of a bias correction applied to BT measurements will be investigated in the future and may lead to a revised dataset release.

MWR measurements of BTs are then inverted into temperature and humidity profiles as well as IWV and LWP products. In this dataset, neural networks were developed for the RPG MWRs in collaboration with the manufacturer. Neural networks were trained from 3 years (25,000 profiles) of 1-h forecasts extracted from the french convective scale AROME model converted into the equivalent BT with a radiative transfer model taking into account an instrumental noise dependent on the instrument generation. The algorithm used is a feed-forward neural network with one hidden layer. The transfer function is tangent hyperbolic and the number of neurons in the hidden layer depends on the variable to be retrieved, the number of channel used, and the number of angles in the case of elevation scans (5 for LWP and IWV, 15 for temperature profiles with elevation scan, 15 for humidity profiles, 12 for temperature profiles zenith-only). Training of the neural network is done with standard backpropagation algorithm and adaptive learning parameters (self-written software, proprietary code).

Three temperature retrieval files are provided:

* TABL files correspond to boundary layer temperature profiles every 10 min on 54 discrete levels up to 2500 m;

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 7** Example of level1 and level2 data obtained on the 25th of December 2019 with the MTP-5 MWR deployed at the main site Charbonniere. a Time series of BT observed at 56.6 GHz and all elevation angles from 90° down to 1°, b boundary layer temperature profile</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_13.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 8** Vertical profiles of (left) temperature and (right) absolute humidity bias (solid line) and root-mean-square-error (dashed lines) collected by the RPG HATPRO radiometer (black line) or the Attex MTP-5 radiometer (red line). Statistics performed over 50 radiosonde profiles at Charbonnière (top), 49 radiosonde profiles at Agen (middle), and 26 radiosonde profiles at Toulouse (bottom)</figcaption></figure>
* TAT files correspond to full troposphere temperature profiles every second on 93 discrete vertical levels up to 10 km altitude. This product only uses zenith measurements;

* TACOMP files correspond to composite temperature profiles on 93 vertical levels up to 10 km altitude obtained by combining the TABL profiles with the TAT profiles.

Humidity profiles are retrieved on 93 vertical levels with a variable spacing from surface up to 10 km altitude.

For the LWP product, an offset correction has been included to improve the LWP accuracy. This correction is based on the identification of clear-sky periods during which a clear-sky LWP offset is calculated. To correct the original LWP values, a linear interpolation between the two closest LWP offset corrections is performed and this offset is subtracted from the original value.

For the Attex MTP-5 MWR, a statistical regularization method (Ilyin and Troitsky 2017) has been used to retrieve temperature profiles on 23 vertical levels. This retrieval method uses pre-calculated auto-correlation temperature matrices obtained from WMO radiosoundings depending on seasons. Figures 3 and 4 provide a flow chart synthesizing the data processing from raw BT measurements to retrieved products for both types of radiometers.

Table 6 provides a full description of all available level2 dataset with corresponding DOI (Fig. 5). Figures 6 and 7 provide an example of the main level2 products available for the RPG and Attex instruments.

The data quality of temperature and humidity products has been validated thanks to radiosonde comparison over 125 profiles launched at three sites: Charbonniere, Agen, and Toulouse (Fig. 8). Please note that radiosoundings are co-located with MWRs at Charbonniere and Agen while they are launched at a distance of 8 kms from the MWR at Toulouse.

MWR temperature retrievals agree well with RS measurements within 1.5 K RMSE below 2 km and 2.5 K below 6 km. Biases are below 0.5 K in absolute value for all sites below 2 km altitude but increase up to 1.5 K at Charbonniere and Toulouse above 4 km and 2 km altitude respectively. For absolute humidity, RMSE are below 1.8 g.m⁻³ for all sites up to 6 km altitude with biases below 1.4 g.m⁻³.

Table 4 shows that IWV can be retrieved with a RMSE below 0.6 kg.m⁻² at Charbonniere and Agen and below 1.4 kg.m⁻² at Toulouse.

The LWP accuracy has been validated in clear-sky conditions and has shown errors between 1 and 14 g.m⁻² depending on the site which is within the expected LWP product accuracy defined in the literature (Crewell and Löhnert 2003; Marke et al. 2016). The validation of LWP retrievals in cloudy-conditions is a much more complex task where in situ measurements from a cloud droplet probe have to be used. This is beyond the scope of this data paper and will be part of deeper investigation in the future.

The biases and uncertainties obtained from the SOFOG3D MWRs are consistent with those from other datasets for temperature profiles (Cimini et al. 2006; 2011; 2015; Martinet et al. 2015; 2020; Turner and Löhnert 2021). The uncertainty for humidity profiles is also consistent with other studies, while reported biases are either smaller (Cimini et al. 2006; 2011; 2015) or larger (Temimi et al. 2020; Turner and Löhnert 2021) than those obtained

<table><caption>**Table 4** Bias and root-mean-square-errors of IWV retrievals with respect to radiosonde measurements for the sites of Charbonniere, Agen, and Toulouse</caption><thead><tr><td>Site</td><td>Bias (kg.m<sup>-2</sup>)</td><td>RMSE (kg.m<sup>-2</sup>)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>CHARBONNIERE</td><td>0.36</td><td>0.42</td></tr><tr><td>AGEN</td><td>0.52</td><td>0.59</td></tr><tr><td>TOULOUSE</td><td>1.01</td><td>1.39</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Table 5** Description of level2 temperature files</caption><thead><tr><th>Label</th><th>Name of data file</th><th>File types</th><th>Data repository and identifier</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Data set 4<br>Boundary Layer<br>Temperature<br>TABL</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>_CNRM_MWR-<br>MWR_TYPE<sup>b</sup>-<br>TABL_L2_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>c</sup>-<br>Vn<sup>d</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>CHARBONNIERE HATPRO:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/175<br>CHARBONNIERE MTP-5:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/159<br>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/170<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/172<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/174<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/171<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/173</td></tr><tr><td>Data set 5<br>Composite<br>Temperature<br>TACOMP</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>_CNRM_MWR-<br>-HATPRO-<br>TACOMP_L2_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>c</sup>-<br>Vn<sup>d</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>CHARBONNIERE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/187<br>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/182<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/184<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/186<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/183<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/185</td></tr><tr><td>Data set 6<br>Zenith<br>Temperature<br>TAT</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>_CNRM_MWR-<br>HATPRO-TAT_L2_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>c</sup>-<br>Vn<sup>d</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>CHARBONNIERE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/181<br>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/176<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/178<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/180<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/177<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/179</td></tr></tbody></table>

here for the SOFOG3D dataset. One possible contribution to the observed humidity bias in the lowest layers may be the use of the lowest V-band channels, which are affected by

<footnote><sup>a</sup> SITE being the name of MWR location in the following list: CHARBONNIERE, AGEN, BERGERAC, TOULOUSE-ONERA, BISCARROSSE, MONT-DE-MARSAN</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup> MWR_TYPE being: HATPRO or MTP-5</footnote>

<footnote><sup>c</sup> YYYYMMDD being the start of the data file as YYYY=year, MM=month, DD=day</footnote>

<footnote><sup>d</sup> Vn being the version of the data set starting with V1</footnote>
<table><caption>**Table 6** Description of humidity and LWP level2 files</caption><thead><tr><th>Label</th><th>Name of data file</th><th>File types</th><th>Data repository and identifier</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Data set 7<br>Humidity<br>Profiles</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>_CNRM_MWR-<br>HATPRO-HU_L2_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>b</sup>_<br>Vn<sup>c</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>CHARBONNIERE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/193<br>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/188<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/190<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/192<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/189<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/191<br>UKMO-LE-COUYE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/194</td></tr><tr><td>Data set 8<br>IWV</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>_CNRM_MWR-<br>HATPRO-IWV_L2_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>b</sup>_<br>Vn<sup>c</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>CHARBONNIERE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/200<br>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/195<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/197<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/199<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/196<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/198<br>UKMO-LE-COUYE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/201</td></tr><tr><td>Data set 9<br>LWP</td><td>SOFOG3D_SITE<sup>a</sup><br>_CNRM_MWR-<br>HATPRO-LWP_L2_<br>YYYYMMDD<sup>b</sup>_<br>Vn<sup>c</sup>.NC</td><td>netcdf</td><td>CHARBONNIERE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/207<br>AGEN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/202<br>BERGERAC:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/204<br>TOULOUSE-ONERA:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/206<br>BISCARROSSE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/203<br>MONT-DE-MARSAN:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/205<br>UKMO-LE-COUYE:<br>https://doi.org/10.25326/208</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote><sup>a</sup> SITE being the name of MWR location in the following list: CHARBONNIERE, AGEN, BERGERAC, UKMO-LECOUYE, TOULOUSE-ONERA, BISCARROSSE, MONT-DE-MARSAN</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup> YYYYMMDD being the start of the data file as YYYY=year, MM=month, and DD=day</footnote>

<footnote><sup>c</sup> Vn being the version of the data set starting with V1</footnote>
larger uncertainties in absorption models (Cimini et al. 2018). A bias correction of level1 data will be investigated in the future and may lead to a revised dataset (Tables 5 and 6).

# 3 Limitations

As part of a research project, some MWR units had to face electrical failures as well instru-
mental breakdown during the experiment. Missing data are thus present within the database.

Abbreviations

**ABL:** Atmospheric Boundary Layer; **ANN:** Artificial Neural Network; **BT:** Brightness Temperature; **IWV:** Integrated Water Vapor; **LWP:** Liquid Water Path; **MWR:** Microwave Radiometer; **NWP:** Numerical Weather Prediction; **Q:** Humidity; **RMSE:** Root-mean-square-error; **RTM:** Radiative transfer model; **T:** Temperature; **WMO:** World Meteorological Organization

**Acknowledgements** Data are managed by the French national center for Atmospheric data and services AERIS. This article is based upon work from COST actions ES1303 TOPROF and CA18235 PROBE supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology, www.cost.eu). We thank Domenico Cimini for supporting this project since the beginning and for helpful discussions during the review process. We also acknowledge the helpful comments from two anonymous reviewers to improving the article.

**Funding** The SOFOG3D field campaign was supported by METEO-FRANCE and ANR through grant AAPG 2018-CE01-0004. The MWR network deployment was carried out thanks to support by IfU GmbH, the University of Cologne, the Met-Office, Laboratoire d'Aérologie, Meteoswiss, ONERA, and Radiometer Physics GmbH.

Declarations

**Competing interests** The authors declare no competing interests.

**Open Access** This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

References

Bergot T, Guedalia D (1994) Numerical forecasting of radiation fog. Part I: numerical model and sensitivity tests. Mon Weather Rev 122(6):1218–1230

Bergot T, Carrer D, Noilhan J, Bougeault P (2005) Improved site-specific numerical prediction of fog and low clouds: a feasibility study. Weather Forecast 20(4):627–646

Cimini D, Hewison TJ, Martin L, Güldner J, Gaffard C, Marzano FS (2006) Temperature and humidity profile retrievals from ground-based microwave radiometers during TUC. Meteorol Z 15(1):45–56
Cimini D, Campos E, Ware R, Albers S, Giuliani G, Oreamuno J, Joe P, Koch SE, Cober S, Westwater E (2011) Thermodynamic atmospheric profiling during the 2010 winter olympics using ground-based microwave radiometry. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 49(12):4959–4969

Cimini D, Nelson M, Güldner J, Ware R (2015) Forecast indices from a ground-based microwave radiometer for operational meteorology. Atmosp Meas Techn 8(1):315–333

Cimini D, Rosenkranz PW, Tretyakov MY, Koshelev MA, Romano F (2018) Uncertainty of atmospheric microwave absorption model: impact on ground-based radiometer simulations and retrievals. Atmos Chem Phys 18 (20):15231–15259

Cimini D, Haeffelin M, Kotthaus S, Löhnert U, Martinet P, O’Connor E, Walden C, Collaud-Cohen M, Preissler J (2020) Towards the profiling of the atmospheric boundary layer at European scale – introducing the cost action probe. Bull Atmos Sci Technol

Crewell S, Löhnert U (2003) Accuracy of cloud liquid water path from ground-based microwave radiometry 2. Sensor accuracy and synergy. Radio Sci 38(3):7–1

De Angelis F, Cimini D, Löhnert U, Caumont O, Haefele A, Pospichal B, Martinet P, Navas-Guzman F, Klein-Baltink H, Dupont J-C (2017) Long-term observation minus background monitoring of ground-based microwave radiometer network. Part 1: brightness temperatures. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques Discussion in review. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2017-112

Gultepe I, Tardif R, Michaelides S, Cermak J, Bott A, Bendix J, Müller MD, Pagowski M, Hansen B, Ellrod G et al (2007) Fog research: a review of past achievements and future perspectives. Pure Appl Geophys 164(6-7):1121–1159

Hu H, Zhang Q, Xie B, Ying Y, Zhang J, Wang X (2014) Predictability of an advection fog event over North China. Part I: sensitivity to initial condition differences. Mon Weather Rev 142(5):1803–1822

Ilyin G, Troitsky A (2017) Determining the tropospheric delay of a radio signal by the radiometric method. Radiophysics Quantum Electron 60(4):291–299

Illingworth AJ, Cimini D, Haecele A, Haeffelin M, Hervo M, Kotthaus S, Löhnert U, Martinet P, Mattis I, O’Connor E et al (2019) How can existing ground-based profiling instruments improve European weather forecasts? Bull Am Meteorol Soc 100(4):605–619

Löhnert U, Maier O (2012) Operational profiling of temperature using ground-based microwave radiometry at Payerne: prospects and challenges. Atmos Meas Tech 5(5):1121–1134

Marke T, Ebell K, Löhnert U, Turner DD (2016) Statistical retrieval of thin liquid cloud microphysical properties using ground-based infrared and microwave observations. J Geophys Res Atmos 121(24):14–558

Martinet P, Dabas A, Donier JM, Douffet T, Garrouste O, Guillot R (2015) 1D-Var temperature retrievals from microwave radiometer and convective scale model. Tellus A 67(1):27925

Martinet P, Cimini D, De Angelis F, Canut G, Unger V, Guillot R, Tzanos D, Paci A (2017) Combining ground-based microwave radiometer and the AROME convective scale model through 1DVAR retrievals in complex terrain: an Alpine valley case study. Atmos Meas Tech 10:3385–3402. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3385-2017

Martinet P, Cimini D, Burnet F, Ménétrier B, Michel Y, Unger V (2020) Improvement of numerical weather prediction model analysis during fog conditions through the assimilation of ground-based microwave radiometer observations: a 1D-Var study. Atmos Meas Tech 13(12):6593–6611

Seity Y, Brousseau P, Malardel S, Hello G, Bénard P, Bouttier F, Lac C, Masson V (2011) The AROME-France convective-scale operational model. Mon Weather Rev 139(3):976–991

Tardif R, Rasmussen RM (2007) Event-based climatology and typology of fog in the New York City region. J Appl Meteorol Climat 46(8):1141–1168

Temimi M, Fonseca RM, Nelli NR, Valappil VK, Weston MJ, Thota MS, Wehbe Y, Yousef L (2020) On the analysis of ground-based microwave radiometer data during fog conditions. Atmos Res 231:104652

Troitsky AV, Gajkovich KP, Gromov VD, Kadygrov EN, Kosov AS (1993) Thermal sounding of the atmospheric boundary layer in the oxygen absorption band center at 60 ghz. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 31(1):116–120. https://doi.org/10.1109/36.210451

Turner DD, Löhnert U (2021) Ground-based temperature and humidity profiling: combining active and passive remote sensors. Atmos Meas Techn 14 (4):3033–3048

Westwater E, Han Y, Irisov V, Leuskiy V, Kadygrov E, Viazankin S (1999) Remote sensing of boundary layer temperature profiles by a scanning 5-mm microwave radiometer and RASS: comparison experiments. J Atmos Oceanic Tech 16 (7):805–818

**Availability of data and material** The data described in this data note can be freely and openly accessed on https://sofog3d.aeris-data.fr/catalogue/. Please see Tables 3 and 6 for details and links to each dataset.

**Publisher's note** Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Authors and Affiliations

Pauline Martinet<fnref n="1" /> ID · Vinciane Unger<fnref n="1" /> · Frédéric Burnet<fnref n="1" /> · Jean-François Georgis<fnref n="2" /> ·

Maxime Hervo<fnref n="3" /> · Thierry Huet<fnref n="4" /> · Ulrich Löhnert⁵ · Eugene Miller⁶ · Emiliano Orlandi⁷ ·

Jeremy Price⁸ · Mathias Schröder⁹ · Guillaume Thomas<fnref n="1" />,¹⁰,¹¹

Vinciane Unger

vinciane.unger@meteo.fr

Frédéric Burnet

frederic.burnet@meteo.fr

Jean-François Georgis

jean-francois.georgis@aero.obs-mip.fr

Maxime Hervo

Maxime.Hervo@meteoswiss.ch

Thierry Huet

Thierry.Huet@onera.fr

Ulrich Löhnert

ulrich.loehnert@uni-koeln.de

Eugene Miller

tissary@gmail.com

Emiliano Orlandi

Emiliano.Orlandi@radiometer-physics.de

Jeremy Price

jeremy.price@metoffice.gov.uk

Mathias Schröder

msc@ifu.de

Guillaume Thomas

guillaume.thomas@meteo.fr

<footnote n="1">¹ CNRM, Université de Toulouse, Météo-France, CNRS, 42 avenue Gaspard Coriolis, Toulouse 31057, France</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Université de Toulouse, Laboratoire d'Aérologie, CNRS UMR 5560, 14 avenue Edouard Belin, Toulouse 31400, France</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology MeteoSwiss, Chemin de l'Aérologie 1, Payerne 1530, Switzerland</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ The French Aerospace Lab ONERA, 2 avenue Edouard Belin, Toulouse 31055, France</footnote>
5 Institute for Geophysics and Meteorology, University of Cologne, Pohligstraße 3, Cologne 50969, Germany

6 RPO ATTEX Ltd, Dolgoprudny 141700, Russia

7 RPG Radiometer Physics GmbH, Werner-von-Siemens-Straße 4, Meckenheim 53340, Germany

8 Met-Office, Fitzroy Road, Exeter EX1 3PB, UK

9 IfU GmbH Private Institute for Environmental Analysis, Lichtenau 09244, Germany

10 CNR-IMAA, C.da S.Loja, Tito Scalo, Potenza 85050, Italy

11 CETEMPS, University of l'Aquila, Via Vetoio 1, L'Aquila 67100, Italy