Modified the issue with the calibration coefficient indices for FY-3 satellite data reader#2959
Modified the issue with the calibration coefficient indices for FY-3 satellite data reader#2959mraspaud merged 4 commits intopytroll:mainfrom
Conversation
Fixed bugs related to incorrect "calibration_index" values for each visible band (from band 5 to band 19) with 1 km spatial resolution. Xuanhan Lai, 2024-10-31
Fixed bugs related to incorrect "calibration_index" values for each visible band (from band 5 to band 19) with 1 km spatial resolution. Xuanhan Lai, 2024-10-31
djhoese
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks!
I think this makes sense to me so I'm OK with the index changes, but why the removal of the "radiance" calibration?
Also, do you have an example of what one of the visible channels looked like before and after these changes? Is there an obvious improvement?
|
Are these indexes still valid/correct when the other coefficient list is used: satpy/satpy/readers/mersi_l1b.py Line 110 in e0eb086
|
Fix bugs related to the incorrect removal of radiance calculations.
|
I have already checked the fy3a_mersi1_l1b.yaml, fy3b_mersi1_l1b.yaml, and fy3a_mersi1_l1b.yaml files before the pull request, and I did not find any obvious errors with the calibration index. |
|
https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/12/1123/2020/essd-12-1123-2020-f04-web.png
And for ocean water spectra, there typically should not be an absorption dip at 443 nm. The common shape of water body spectra can be referred to: https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/12/1123/2020/essd-12-1123-2020-f04-web.png |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2959 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 96.09% 96.08% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 377 377
Lines 55125 55125
==========================================
- Hits 52975 52967 -8
- Misses 2150 2158 +8
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 11622341982Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.
Details
💛 - Coveralls |
|
@sgxl thanks for your work! We are just waiting for @simonrp84 to review this PR as he has been working with the FY3 data and readers... |
|
Reminder to myself to look at this early next week! |
mraspaud
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approving this as I got the green light from @simonrp84 !


"There were issues with etc/readers/mersi2_l1b.yaml and etc/readers/mersi3_l1b.yaml. Minor code changes have been made:
According to the MERSI data document, the 'calibration_index' in Satpy was incorrect. The VIS_Cal_Coeff dataset includes calibration coefficients for both 250m (Data/EV_250_Aggr.1KM_RefSB) and 1km (Data/EV_1KM_RefSB) bands. The calibration coefficients are ordered by band sequence. Previously, the calibration indices for Data/EV_1KM_RefSB started from 0, which is incorrect; they should start after the last index of the 250m visible band.
Xuanhan Lai