scholarly journals Comparing model and measured ice crystal concentrations in orographic clouds during the INUPIAQ campaign

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. 4945-4966 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Farrington ◽  
Paul J. Connolly ◽  
Gary Lloyd ◽  
Keith N. Bower ◽  
Michael J. Flynn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wrf Model ◽  
Liquid Water Content ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Ice Crystal ◽  
Field Campaign ◽  
Orographic Clouds ◽  
Ice Multiplication ◽  
Ice Production ◽  
Surface Ice ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds

Abstract. This paper assesses the reasons for high ice number concentrations observed in orographic clouds by comparing in situ measurements from the Ice NUcleation Process Investigation And Quantification field campaign (INUPIAQ) at Jungfraujoch, Switzerland (3570 m a.s.l.) with the Weather Research and Forecasting model (WRF) simulations over real terrain surrounding Jungfraujoch. During the 2014 winter field campaign, between 20 January and 28 February, the model simulations regularly underpredicted the observed ice number concentration by 103 L−1. Previous literature has proposed several processes for the high ice number concentrations in orographic clouds, including an increased ice nucleating particle (INP) concentration, secondary ice multiplication and the advection of surface ice crystals into orographic clouds. We find that increasing INP concentrations in the model prevents the simulation of the mixed-phase clouds that were witnessed during the INUPIAQ campaign at Jungfraujoch. Additionally, the inclusion of secondary ice production upwind of Jungfraujoch into the WRF simulations cannot consistently produce enough ice splinters to match the observed concentrations. A flux of surface hoar crystals was included in the WRF model, which simulated ice concentrations comparable to the measured ice number concentrations, without depleting the liquid water content (LWC) simulated in the model. Our simulations therefore suggest that high ice concentrations observed in mixed-phase clouds at Jungfraujoch are caused by a flux of surface hoar crystals into the orographic clouds.

scholarly journals Comparing model and measured ice crystal concentrations in orographic clouds during the INUPIAQ campaign

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (18) ◽  
pp. 25647-25694 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. J. Farrington ◽  
P. J. Connolly ◽  
G. Lloyd ◽  
K. N. Bower ◽  
M. J. Flynn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wrf Model ◽  
Surface Flux ◽  
Liquid Water Content ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Field Campaign ◽  
Orographic Clouds ◽  
Ice Multiplication ◽  
Ice Production ◽  
Surface Ice ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds

Abstract. This paper assesses the reasons for high ice number concentrations observed in orographic clouds by comparing in-situ measurements from the Ice NUcleation Process Investigation And Quantification field campaign (INUPIAQ) at Jungfraujoch, Switzerland (3570 m a.s.l.) with the Weather Research and Forecasting model (WRF) simulations over real terrain surrounding Jungfraujoch. During the 2014 winter field campaign, between the 20 January and 28 February, the model simulations regularly underpredicted the observed ice number concentration by 103 L−1. Previous literature has proposed several processes for the high ice number concentrations in orographic clouds, including an increased ice nuclei (IN) concentration, secondary ice multiplication and the advection of surface ice crystals into orographic clouds. We find that increasing IN concentrations in the model prevents the simulation of the mixed-phase clouds that were witnessed during the INUPIAQ campaign at Jungfraujoch. Additionally, the inclusion of secondary ice production upwind of Jungfraujoch into the WRF simulations cannot consistently produce enough ice splinters to match the observed concentrations. A surface flux of hoar crystals was included in the WRF model, which simulated ice concentrations comparable to the measured ice number concentrations, without depleting the liquid water content (LWC) simulated in the model. Our simulations therefore suggest that high ice concentrations observed in mixed-phase clouds at Jungfraujoch are caused by a flux of surface hoar crystals into the orographic clouds.

scholarly journals Impacts of Secondary Ice Production on Arctic Mixed-Phase Clouds based on ARM Observations and CESM2

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xi Zhao ◽  
Xiaohong Liu ◽  
Vaughan T. J. Phillips ◽  
Sachin Patade
Keyword(s):  
Global Climate Model ◽  
Single Layer ◽  
Ice Nucleation ◽  
Number Concentration ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Cloud Base ◽  
Ice Crystal ◽  
Ice Production ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds

Abstract. For decades, measured ice crystal number concentrations have been found to be orders of magnitude higher than measured ice nucleating particles in moderately cold clouds. This observed discrepancy reveals the existence of secondary ice production (SIP) in addition to the primary ice nucleation. However, the importance of SIP relative to primary ice nucleation remains highly unclear. Furthermore, most weather and climate models do not represent well the SIP processes, leading to large biases in simulated cloud properties. This study demonstrates a first attempt to represent different SIP mechanisms (frozen raindrop shattering, ice-ice collisional break-up, and rime splintering) in a global climate model (GCM). The model is run in the single column mode to facilitate comparisons with the Department of Energy (DOE)'s Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment (M-PACE) observations. We show the SIP importance in the four types of clouds during M-PACE (i.e., multilayer, and single-layer stratus, transition, and front clouds), with the maximum enhancement in ice crystal number concentration by up to 4 orders of magnitude in the moderately-cold clouds. We reveal that SIP is the dominant source of ice crystals near the cloud base for the long-lived Arctic single-layer mixed-phase clouds. The model with SIP improves the occurrence and phase partitioning of the mixed-phase clouds, reverses the vertical distribution pattern of ice number concentration, and provides a better agreement with observations. The findings of this study highlight the importance of considering the SIP in GCMs.

scholarly journals Direct evidence for secondary ice formation at around −15 °C in mixed-phase clouds

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Mignani ◽  
Jessie M. Creamean ◽  
Lukas Zimmermann ◽  
Christine Alewell ◽  
Franz Conen
Keyword(s):  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Ice Formation ◽  
Research Station ◽  
Multiplication Factor ◽  
Ice Crystal ◽  
Narrow Temperature Range ◽  
Snow Crystals ◽  
Ice Multiplication ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds

Abstract. Ice crystal numbers can exceed the numbers of ice-nucleating particles (INP) observed in mixed-phase clouds by several orders of magnitude also at temperatures that are colder than required for the Hallett-Mossop process (−3 °C to −8 °C). These observations provide circumstantial evidence of secondary ice formation. Attempting a more direct observational approach we made use of the fact that planar, branched snow crystals (e.g. dendrites) grow within a relatively narrow temperature range (about −12 °C to −17 °C) and can be analysed individually for INP using a field-suitable drop freezing assay technique. During February and March 2018, we analysed 190 dendritic crystals (an average of ∼3 mm in size and between 1.3 to 7.6 mm) deposited within mixed-phase clouds at the High Altitude Research Station Jungfraujoch (3580 m a.s.l.), Switzerland. Overall, one in eight of these crystals contained an INP active at −17 °C or warmer, while the remaining seven of eight most likely resulted from secondary ice formation within the clouds. The ice multiplication factor we observed was small (8), but relatively stable throughout the course of the experiment. These measurements show that secondary ice can be observed at temperatures around −15 °C in the atmosphere and thus advance our understanding of the extent of secondary ice formation in mixed-phase clouds, even where the multiplication factor is smaller than 10.

scholarly journals New type of evidence for secondary ice formation at around −15 °C in mixed-phase clouds

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 877-886 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Mignani ◽  
Jessie M. Creamean ◽  
Lukas Zimmermann ◽  
Christine Alewell ◽  
Franz Conen
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Ice Formation ◽  
Research Station ◽  
Multiplication Factor ◽  
Ice Crystal ◽  
Activation Temperature ◽  
Individual Crystal ◽  
New Type ◽  
Ice Multiplication ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds

Abstract. Ice crystal numbers can exceed the numbers of ice-nucleating particles (INPs) observed in mixed-phase clouds (MPCs) by several orders of magnitude, also at temperatures that are colder than −8 ∘C. This disparity provides circumstantial evidence of secondary ice formation, also other than via the Hallett–Mossop process. In a new approach, we made use of the fact that planar, branched ice crystals (e.g. dendrites) grow within a relatively narrow temperature range (i.e. −12 to −17 ∘C) and can be analysed individually for INPs using a field-deployable drop-freezing assay. The novelty of our approach lies in comparing the growth temperature encoded in the habit of an individual crystal with the activation temperature of the most efficient INP contained within the same crystal to tell whether it may be the result of primary ice formation. In February and March 2018, we analysed a total of 190 dendritic crystals (∼3 mm median size) deposited within MPCs at the high-altitude research station Jungfraujoch (3580 m a.s.l.). Overall, one in eight of the analysed crystals contained an INP active at −17 ∘C or warmer, while the remaining seven most likely resulted from secondary ice formation within the clouds. The ice multiplication factor we observed was small (8), but relatively stable throughout the course of documentation. These measurements show that secondary ice can be observed at temperatures around −15 ∘C and thus advance our understanding of the extent of secondary ice formation in MPCs, even where the multiplication factor is smaller than 10.

scholarly journals Impacts of secondary ice production on Arctic mixed-phase clouds based on ARM observations and CAM6 single-column model simulations

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 5685-5703
Author(s):  
Xi Zhao ◽  
Xiaohong Liu ◽  
Vaughan T. J. Phillips ◽  
Sachin Patade
Keyword(s):  
Global Climate Model ◽  
Single Layer ◽  
Ice Nucleation ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Cloud Base ◽  
Ice Crystal ◽  
Single Column ◽  
Ice Production ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds

Abstract. For decades, measured ice crystal number concentrations have been found to be orders of magnitude higher than measured ice-nucleating particle number concentrations in moderately cold clouds. This observed discrepancy reveals the existence of secondary ice production (SIP) in addition to the primary ice nucleation. However, the importance of SIP relative to primary ice nucleation remains highly unclear. Furthermore, most weather and climate models do not represent SIP processes well, leading to large biases in simulated cloud properties. This study demonstrates a first attempt to represent different SIP mechanisms (frozen raindrop shattering, ice–ice collisional breakup, and rime splintering) in a global climate model (GCM). The model is run in the single column mode to facilitate comparisons with the Department of Energy (DOE)'s Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment (M-PACE) observations. We show the important role of SIP in four types of clouds during M-PACE (i.e., multilayer, single-layer stratus, transition, and frontal clouds), with the maximum enhancement in ice crystal number concentrations up to 4 orders of magnitude in moderately supercooled clouds. We reveal that SIP is the dominant source of ice crystals near the cloud base for the long-lived Arctic single-layer mixed-phase clouds. The model with SIP improves the occurrence and phase partitioning of the mixed-phase clouds, reverses the vertical distribution pattern of ice number concentrations, and provides a better agreement with observations. The findings of this study highlight the importance of considering SIP in GCMs.

Importance of Secondary Ice Production to Ice Formation and Phase of High-Latitude Mixed-Phase Clouds during SOCRATES and MARCUS

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xi Zhao ◽  
Xiaohong Liu ◽  
Vaughan Phillips ◽  
Sachin Patade ◽  
Minghui Diao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Latitude ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Ice Formation ◽  
Ice Production ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds

scholarly journals Effects of Cloud Condensation Nuclei and Ice Nucleating Particles on Precipitation Processes and Supercooled Liquid in Mixed-phase Orographic Clouds

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiwen Fan ◽  
L. Ruby Leung ◽  
Daniel Rosenfeld ◽  
Paul J. DeMott
Keyword(s):  
Water Content ◽  
Sierra Nevada ◽  
Cloud Condensation Nuclei ◽  
Supercooled Water ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Condensation Nuclei ◽  
Local Circulation ◽  
Orographic Clouds ◽  
Snow Precipitation ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds

Abstract. How orographic mixed-phase clouds respond to the change of cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) and ice nucleating particles (INPs) are highly uncertain. The main snow production mechanism in warm and cold mixed-phase orographic clouds (referred to as WMOC and CMOC, respectively, distinguished here as those having cloud tops warmer and colder than −20 °C) could be very different. We quantify the CCN and INP impacts on supercooled water content, cloud phases and precipitation for a WMOC and a CMOC case with a set of sensitivity tests. It is found that deposition plays a more important role than riming for forming snow in the CMOC, while the role of riming is dominant in the WMOC case. As expected, adding CCN suppresses precipitation especially in WMOC and low INP. However, this reverses strongly for CCN > 1000 cm−3. We find a new mechanism through which CCN can invigorate mixed-phase clouds over the Sierra Nevada Mountains and drastically intensify snow precipitation when CCN concentrations are high (1000 cm−3 or higher). In this situation, more widespread shallow clouds with greater amount of cloud water form in the valley and foothills, which changes the local circulation through more latent heat release that transports more moisture to the windward slope, leading to much more invigorated mixed-phase clouds over the mountains that produce higher amounts of snow precipitation. Increasing INPs leads to decreased riming and mixed-phase fraction in the CMOC but has the opposite effects in the WMOC, as a result of liquid-limited and ice-limited conditions, respectively. However, it increases precipitation in both cases due to an increase of deposition for the CMOC but enhanced riming and deposition in the WMOC. Increasing INPs dramatically reduces supercooled water content and increases the cloud glaciation temperature, while increasing CCN has the opposite effects with much smaller significance.

scholarly journals Effects of Wegener-Bergeron-Findeisen Process on Global Black Carbon Distribution

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Qi ◽  
Qinbin Li ◽  
Cenlin He ◽  
Xin Wang ◽  
Jianping Huang
Keyword(s):  
Transport Model ◽  
Liquid Water Content ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Deposition Flux ◽  
Chemical Transport Model ◽  
Washout Ratio ◽  
Lower Temperature ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds ◽  
Scavenging Efficiency

Abstract. We systematically investigate the effects of Wegener-Bergeron-Findeisen (WBF) on BC scavenging efficiency, surface BCair, deposition flux, concentration in snow (BCsnow, ng g−1), and washout ratio using a global 3D chemical transport model (GEOS-Chem). We differentiate riming- versus WBF-dominated in-cloud scavenging based on liquid water content (LWC) and temperature. Specifically, we relate WBF to either temperature or ice mass fraction (IMF) in mixed-phase clouds. We find that at Jungfraujoch, Switzerland and Abisko, Sweden, where WBF dominates, the discrepancies of simulated BC scavenging efficiency and washout ratio are significantly reduced (from a factor of 3 to 10 % and from a factor of 4–5 to a factor of two). However, at Zeppelin, Norway, where riming dominates, simulation of BC scavenging efficiency, BCair, and washout ratio become worse (relative to observations) when WBF is included. There is thus an urgent need for extensive observations to distinguish and characterize riming- versus WBF-dominated aerosol scavenging in mixed-phase clouds and the associated BC scavenging efficiency. We find the reduction resulting from WBF to global BC scavenging efficiency varies substantially, from 8 % in the tropics to 76 % in the Arctic. The resulting annual mean BCair increases by up to 156 % at high altitudes and at northern high latitudes because of lower temperature and higher IMF. Overall, WBF halves the model-observation discrepancy (from −65 % to −30 %) of BCair across North America, Europe, China and the Arctic. Globally WBF increases BC burden from 0.22 to 0.29–0.35 mg m−2 yr−1, which partially explains the gap between observed and previous model simulated BC burdens over land. In addition, WBF significantly increases BC lifetime from 5.7 days to ~8 days. Additionally, WBF results in a significant redistribution of BC deposition in source and remote regions. Specifically, it lowers BC wet deposition (by 37–63 % at northern mid-latitudes and by 21–29 % in the Arctic) while increases dry deposition (by 3–16 % at mid-latitudes and by 81–159 % in the Arctic). The resulting total BC deposition is lower at mid-latitudes (by 12–34 %) but higher in the Arctic (by 2–29 %). We find that WBF decreases BCsnow at mid-latitudes (by ~15 %) but increases it in the Arctic (by 26 %) while improving model comparisons with observations. In addition, WBF dramatically reduces the model-observation discrepancy of washout ratios in winter (from a factor of 16 to 4). The remaining discrepancies in BCair, BCsnow and BC washout ratios suggest that in-cloud removal in mixed-phased clouds is likely still excessive over land.

scholarly journals Small Cloud Particle Shapes in Mixed-Phase Clouds

2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 1277-1293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg M. McFarquhar ◽  
Junshik Um ◽  
Robert Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Water Content ◽  
Detection Threshold ◽  
Liquid Water Content ◽  
Area Ratio ◽  
Mixed Phase ◽  
Liquid Droplets ◽  
Cloud Particle ◽  
Particle Images ◽  
Mixed Phase Clouds ◽  
Particle Shapes

AbstractThe shapes of cloud particles with maximum dimensions Dmax between 35 and 60 μm in mixed-phase clouds were studied using high-resolution particle images collected by a cloud particle imager (CPI) during the Mixed-Phase Arctic Cloud Experiment (M-PACE) and the Indirect and Semi-Direct Aerosol Campaign (ISDAC). The area ratio α, the projected area of a particle divided by the area of a circle with diameter Dmax, quantified particle shape. The differing optical characteristics of CPIs used in M-PACE and ISDAC had no effect on derived α provided that Dmax > 35 μm and CPI focus > 45. The fraction of particles with 35 < Dmax < 60 μm with α > 0.8 increased with the ratio of liquid water content (LWC) to total water content (TWC). The average αmean of small particles in each 10-s interval in mixed-phase clouds was correlated with LWC/TWC with a correlation coefficient of 0.60 for M-PACE and 0.43 for ISDAC. The stronger correlation seen during M-PACE was most likely associated with the presence of more liquid droplets that were larger than the CPI detection threshold contributing to αmean; the modal effective radius was larger (11 vs 6 μm), and drops with D > 35 μm had concentrations during M-PACE that were 6 times as large as those of ISDAC. This study hence suggests that area ratio can be used to identify the phase of particles with 35 < Dmax < 60 μm and questions the assumption used in previous studies that all particles in this size range are supercooled droplets.

Empirical Formulation for number of ice crystal fragments by sublimational breakup

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akash Deshmukh ◽  
Vaughan Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Relative Humidity ◽  
Cloud Model ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Ice Crystal ◽  
Initial Size ◽  
Sublimation Process ◽  
Numerical Formulation ◽  
High Concentrations ◽  
Ice Multiplication ◽  
Ice Production

&lt;p&gt;There is much uncertainty about high concentrations of ice observed in clouds and their origins. In the literature, there have been previous experimental studies reported about the sublimation process of an ice crystal causes emission of fragments by breakup. &amp;#160;&amp;#160;Such sublimational breakup is a type of secondary ice production, which in natural clouds can cause ice multiplication.&amp;#160;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;To represent this process of sublimation breakup in any cloud model, the present study proposes a numerical formulation of the number of ice fragments generated by sublimation of pristine ice crystal. This is done by amalgamating laboratory observations from previous published studies. The number of ice fragments determined by relative humidity (RH) and initial size of the ice particle were measured in the published experiments, and by simulating them we are able to infer parameters of a sublimation breakup scheme.&amp;#160;&amp;#160; At small initial sizes, the dependency on size prevails, whereas at larger sizes both dependencies are comparable. This formulation is compared with observations to see the behaviour of it.&lt;/p&gt;

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document