On producing sea ice deformation data sets from SAR-derived sea ice motion

Bouillon, S.; Rampal, P.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-663-2015

Articles | Volume 9, issue 2

https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-663-2015

© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-9-663-2015

© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 9, issue 2

Research article

| Highlight paper

|

09 Apr 2015

Research article | Highlight paper |

| 09 Apr 2015

On producing sea ice deformation data sets from SAR-derived sea ice motion

S. Bouillon and P. Rampal

Download

Final revised paper (published on 09 Apr 2015)
Preprint (discussion started on 10 Oct 2014)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC C2269: 'Review of "On producing a sea ice deformation dataset from SAR-derived sea ice motion"', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Nov 2014
- AC C3009: 'Response to referee #1', Sylvain Bouillon, 02 Feb 2015
  - AC C3011: 'Differences between the original and revised manuscript', Sylvain Bouillon, 02 Feb 2015
RC C2360: 'Anonymous review', Anonymous Referee #2, 19 Nov 2014
- AC C3010: 'Response to referee #2', Sylvain Bouillon, 02 Feb 2015
  - AC C3012: 'Differences between the original and revised manuscript.', Sylvain Bouillon, 02 Feb 2015

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Sylvain Bouillon on behalf of the Authors (02 Feb 2015) Author's response

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (18 Feb 2015) by Daniel Feltham

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (23 Feb 2015)

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (01 Mar 2015)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

The manuscript is much improved over the initial submission and the authors have made detailed and well thought out responses to our many comments.

However I still do not accept that the spatial scale of the measurement is unchanged using your kernel smoother. The fact that the shear does not change with n in your artificial example doesn’t change the fact that you use a larger area to estimate the deformation for all cells that are smoothed equal to the total area of the triangles used in the smoothing. The deformation patterns seen in Figures 7-9 have many features that do not appear to be LKF’s and even the LKF’s that are apparent may not be as linear as you assume (see the comments from reviewer 2). There are some areas with generalized deformation and with nothing linear about them so that the area used must play an important roll in the deformation estimates in these areas. This means you need to keep track of the actual area used for each filtered deformation estimate and also account for the fact that the deformation from adjacent triangles are not at all independent. Estimates from overlapping kernels should be discarded for the purposes of the scaling analysis. This may or may not change some of your conclusions about the scaling relationships.

Thorndike (1978) is in the list of references but is never cited. Please discuss this landmark work in the introduction. What did he do and how is his discussion of errors different from yours?

Line 2-13: …widely used “4-point deformation” RGPS data set. (to emphasize what is different in RGPS)

Line 4-4: 10-km “square” cell (since you are suggesting using a triangular cell)

Line 7-25: See above my comments above.

Line 8-5: Maybe add …selected “contiguous” cells… to make it clear the crack must be continuous. And in Line 11: …built using “contiguous cells” ensures…

Line 8-17: Remind us just how the error is computed. Over what cells?

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (Editor review) (03 Mar 2015) by Daniel Feltham

AR by Sylvain Bouillon on behalf of the Authors (11 Mar 2015) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (12 Mar 2015) by Daniel Feltham

AR by Sylvain Bouillon on behalf of the Authors (13 Mar 2015)

Short summary

We present a new method to compute sea ice deformation fields from satellite-derived motion. The method particularly reduces the artificial noise that arises along discontinuities in the sea ice motion field. We estimate that this artificial noise may cause an overestimation of about 60% of sea ice opening and closing. The constant overestimation of the opening and closing could have led in previous studies to a large overestimation of freezing in leads, salt rejection and sea ice ridging.