Solar spectral irradiance at earth's TOA

  • Thread starter Thread starter everetthitch
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Irradiance Solar
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the challenge of reproducing the solar spectrum at Earth's top of atmosphere (TOA) using black-body radiation equations. The user notes that their calculated irradiance is significantly higher than measured data, specifically from the ASTMG173 standard. They detail the formula used to convert radiance to irradiance and express skepticism about the validity of adjusting the result with a cosine factor based on Earth's tilt. The user is seeking clarification on what might be missing in their calculations to align their results with the measured values. The conversation highlights the complexities of accurately modeling solar irradiance.
everetthitch
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to reproduce a plot of Sun's black-body behavior like this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_Spectrum.png
Problem is, after I convert the black-body radiance to irradiance, its curve is way too high as compared with measurement. The measurement data is taken from:
http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/spectra/am1.5/ASTMG173/ASTMG173.html

The top of atmosphere (TOA) irradiance at Earth's distance is obtained in the following way:
radiance (W/m^2/nm/Sr) L=2*h*c^2/(lamda^5*exp(h*c/(kB*lamda*T)-1))
where:
c=3e8 m/s (speed of light)
h=6.625e-34 Joul Second (Planck's)
kB=1.38e-23 Joul/Kelvin (Boltzman's)
omega=pi*r_sun^2/D_sun_earth^2 (Sun disk solid angle as seen from Earth)
r_sun=6.96e8 m (Sun's radius)
D_sun_earth=1.496e11 m (1AU)
Finally irradiance is E=L*omega (W/m^2/nm) (and one needs to multiply 1e9 to be in nm)

My curve is roughly twice above the measurement, so if I do:
E=L*omege*cos(67-deg)
I can get something close to the picture in the wiki link. This 67-deg is roughly Earth's spin inclination. However I really doubt multiplying cos(67-deg) makes sense, as we are talking about TOA irradiance, not anywhere on Earth surface.

What I'm missing here?

Thanks!
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
try square root.
 
Chronos said:
try square root.

That doesn't work, making the spectrum broader, let alone w/o any physical meanings...
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top