Development of High Performance Computing Tools for Estimation of High-Resolution Surface Energy Balance Products Using sUAS Information.

sUAS (small-Unmanned Aircraft System) and advanced surface energy balance models allow detailed assessment and monitoring (at plant scale) of different (agricultural, urban, and natural) environments. Significant progress has been made in the understanding and modeling of atmosphere-plant-soil interactions and numerical quantification of the internal processes at plant scale. Similarly, progress has been made in ground truth information comparison and validation models. An example of this progress is the application of sUAS information using the Two-Source Surface Energy Balance (TSEB) model in commercial vineyards by the Grape Remote sensing Atmospheric Profile and Evapotranspiration eXperiment - GRAPEX Project in California. With advances in frequent sUAS data collection for larger areas, sUAS information processing becomes computationally expensive on local computers. Additionally, fragmentation of different models and tools necessary to process the data and validate the results is a limiting factor. For example, in the referred GRAPEX project, commercial software (ArcGIS and MS Excel) and Python and Matlab code are needed to complete the analysis. There is a need to assess and integrate research conducted with sUAS and surface energy balance models in a sharing platform to be easily migrated to high performance computing (HPC) resources. This research, sponsored by the National Science Foundation FAIR Cyber Training Fellowships, is integrating disparate software and code under a unified language (Python). The Python code for estimating the surface energy fluxes using TSEB2T model as well as the EC footprint analysis code for ground truth information comparison were hosted in myGeoHub site https://mygeohub.org/ to be reproducible and replicable.

Implications of Soil and Canopy Temperature Uncertainty in the Estimation of Surface Energy Fluxes Using TSEB2T and High-resolution Imagery in Commercial Vineyards.

Estimation of surface energy fluxes using thermal remote sensing-based energy balance models (e.g., TSEB2T) involves the use of local micrometeorological input data of air temperature, wind speed, and incoming solar radiation, as well as vegetation cover and accurate land surface temperature (LST). The physically based Two-source Energy Balance with a Dual Temperature (TSEB2T) model separates soil and canopy temperature (Ts and Tc) to estimate surface energy fluxes including Rn, H, LE, and G. The estimation of Ts and Tc components for the TSEB2T model relies on the linear relationship between the composite land surface temperature and a vegetation index, namely NDVI. While canopy and soil temperatures are controlling variables in the TSEB2T model, they are influenced by the NDVI threshold values, where the uncertainties in their estimation can degrade the accuracy of surface energy flux estimation. Therefore, in this research effort, the effect of uncertainty in Ts and Tc estimation on surface energy fluxes will be examined by applying a Monte Carlo simulation on NDVI thresholds used to define canopy and soil temperatures. The spatial information used is available from multispectral imagery acquired by the AggieAir sUAS Program at Utah State University over vineyards near Lodi, California as part of the ARS-USDA Agricultural Research Service's Grape Remote Sensing Atmospheric Profile and Evapotranspiration eXperiment (GRAPEX) project. The results indicate that LE is slightly sensitive to the uncertainty of NDVIs and NDVIc. The observed relative error of LE corresponding to NDVIs uncertainty was between -1% and 2%, while for NDVIc uncertainty, the relative error was between -2.2% and 1.2%. However, when the combined NDVIs and NDVIc uncertainties were used simultaneously, the domain of the observed relative error corresponding to the absolute values of |ΔLE| was between 0% and 4%.

To What Extend Does the Eddy Covariance Footprint Cutoff Influence the Estimation of Surface Energy Fluxes Using Two Source Energy Balance Model and High-Resolution Imagery in Commercial Vineyards?

Validation of surface energy fluxes from remote sensing sources is performed using instantaneous field measurements obtained from eddy covariance (EC) instrumentation. An eddy covariance measurement is characterized by a footprint function / weighted area function that describes the mathematical relationship between the spatial distribution of surface flux sources and their corresponding magnitude. The orientation and size of each flux footprint / source area depends on the micro-meteorological conditions at the site as measured by the EC towers, including turbulence fluxes, friction velocity (ustar), and wind speed, all of which influence the dimensions and orientation of the footprint. The total statistical weight of the footprint is equal to unity. However, due to the large size of the source area / footprint, a statistical weight cutoff of less than one is considered, ranging between 0.85 and 0.95, to ensure that the footprint model is located inside the study area. This results in a degree of uncertainty when comparing the modeled fluxes from remote sensing energy models (i.e., TSEB2T) against the EC field measurements. In this research effort, the sensitivity of instantaneous and daily surface energy flux estimates to footprint weight cutoffs are evaluated using energy balance fluxes estimated with multispectral imagery acquired by AggieAir sUAS (small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) over commercial vineyards near Lodi, California, as part of the ARS-USDA Agricultural Research Service's Grape Remote Sensing Atmospheric Profile and Evapotranspiration eXperiment (GRAPEX) project. The instantaneous fluxes from the eddy covariance tower will be compared against instantaneous fluxes obtained from different TSEB2T aggregated footprint weights (cutoffs). The results indicate that the size, shape, and weight of pixels inside the footprint source area are strongly influenced by the cutoff values. Small cutoff values, such as 0.3 and 0.35, yielded high weights for pixels located within the footprint domain, while large cutoffs, such as 0.9 and 0.95, result in low weights. The results also indicate that the distribution of modelled LE values within the footprint source area are influenced by the cutoff values. A wide variation in LE was observed at high cutoffs, such as 0.90 and 0.95, while a low variation was observed at small cutoff values, such as 0.3. This happens due to the large number of pixel units involved inside the footprint domain when using high cutoff values, whereas a limited number of pixels are obtained at lower cutoff values.