Articles | Volume 14, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-1127-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-1127-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
12 Feb 2021
Research article |
| 12 Feb 2021
| 12 Feb 2021
Arctic observations and numerical simulations of surface wind effects on Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera measurements
Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Department of Engineering Physics, Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, USA
Chaoxun Hang
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
School of Oceanography, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Ahmad Talaei
Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Timothy J. Garrett
Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Related authors
Daniel J. Emmons, Cornelius Csar Jude H. Salinas, Dong L. Wu, Nimalan Swarnalingam, Eugene V. Dao, Jorge L. Chau, Yosuke Yamazaki, Kyle E. Fitch, and Victoriya V. Forsythe
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3731, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3731, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Annales Geophysicae (ANGEO).
Short summary
Short summary
The E-region of the Earth’s ionosphere plays an important role in atmospheric energy balance and High Frequency radio propagation. In this paper, we compare predictions from two recently developed ionospheric models to observations by ionospheric sounders (ionosondes). Overall, the models show reasonable agreement with the observations. However, there are several areas for improvement in the models as well as questions about the accuracy of the automatically processed ionosonde dataset.
Daniel J. Emmons, Cornelius Csar Jude H. Salinas, Dong L. Wu, Nimalan Swarnalingam, Eugene V. Dao, Jorge L. Chau, Yosuke Yamazaki, Kyle E. Fitch, and Victoriya V. Forsythe
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3731, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3731, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Annales Geophysicae (ANGEO).
Short summary
Short summary
The E-region of the Earth’s ionosphere plays an important role in atmospheric energy balance and High Frequency radio propagation. In this paper, we compare predictions from two recently developed ionospheric models to observations by ionospheric sounders (ionosondes). Overall, the models show reasonable agreement with the observations. However, there are several areas for improvement in the models as well as questions about the accuracy of the automatically processed ionosonde dataset.
Thomas D. DeWitt, Timothy J. Garrett, and Karlie N. Rees
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3486, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3486, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
Clouds appear chaotic, but they in fact follow fractal mathematical patterns similar to coastlines. We measured their fractal properties using satellite images and found two key numbers that describe cloud shapes: one for how rough individual cloud edges are, and another for how clouds of different sizes organize together. We recommend methodology that provides objective ways to verify whether climate models accurately simulate real clouds.
Spencer Donovan, Dhiraj K. Singh, Timothy J. Garrett, and Eric R. Pardyjak
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3060, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3060, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate snowfall prediction requires quantifying how snowflakes interact with atmospheric turbulence. Using field-based imaging techniques, we directly measured the mass, size, density, and fall speed of snowflakes in surface-layer turbulence. We found that turbulence and microstructure jointly modulate fall speed, often deviating from the terminal velocity in still air. These results inform new parameterizations for numerical weather and climate models.
Karlie N. Rees, Timothy J. Garrett, Thomas D. DeWitt, Corey Bois, Steven K. Krueger, and Jérôme C. Riedi
Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 31, 497–513, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-31-497-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-31-497-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The shapes of clouds viewed from space reflect vertical and horizontal motions in the atmosphere. We theorize that, globally, cloud perimeter complexity is related to the dimension of turbulence also governed by horizontal and vertical motions. We find agreement between theory and observations from various satellites and a numerical model and, remarkably, that the theory applies globally using only basic planetary physical parameters from the smallest scales of turbulence to the planetary scale.
Dhiraj K. Singh, Eric R. Pardyjak, and Timothy J. Garrett
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 4581–4598, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-4581-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-4581-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate measurements of the properties of snowflakes are challenging to make. We present a new technique for the real-time measurement of the density of freshly fallen individual snowflakes. A new thermal-imaging instrument, the Differential Emissivity Imaging Disdrometer (DEID), is shown to be capable of providing accurate estimates of individual snowflake and bulk snow hydrometeor density. The method exploits the rate of heat transfer during the melting of a snowflake on a hotplate.
Thomas D. DeWitt and Timothy J. Garrett
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 8457–8472, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8457-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-8457-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
There is considerable disagreement on mathematical parameters that describe the number of clouds of different sizes as well as the size of the largest clouds. Both are key defining characteristics of Earth's atmosphere. A previous study provided an incorrect explanation for the disagreement. Instead, the disagreement may be explained by prior studies not properly accounting for the size of their measurement domain. We offer recommendations for how the domain size can be accounted for.
Thomas D. DeWitt, Timothy J. Garrett, Karlie N. Rees, Corey Bois, Steven K. Krueger, and Nicolas Ferlay
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 24, 109–122, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-109-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-109-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Viewed from space, a defining feature of Earth's atmosphere is the wide spectrum of cloud sizes. A recent study predicted the distribution of cloud sizes, and this paper compares the prediction to observations. Although there is nuance in viewing perspective, we find robust agreement with theory across different climatological conditions, including land–ocean contrasts, time of year, or latitude, suggesting a minor role for Coriolis forces, aerosol loading, or surface temperature.
Timothy J. Garrett, Matheus R. Grasselli, and Stephen Keen
Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1021–1028, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1021-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1021-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Current world economic production is rising relative to energy consumption. This increase in
production efficiencysuggests that carbon dioxide emissions can be decoupled from economic activity through technological change. We show instead a nearly fixed relationship between energy consumption and a new economic quantity, historically cumulative economic production. The strong link to the past implies inertia may play a more dominant role in societal evolution than is generally assumed.
Karlie N. Rees and Timothy J. Garrett
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7681–7691, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7681-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7681-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Monte Carlo simulations are used to establish baseline precipitation measurement uncertainties according to World Meteorological Organization standards. Measurement accuracy depends on instrument sampling area, time interval, and precipitation rate. Simulations are compared with field measurements taken by an emerging hotplate precipitation sensor. We find that the current collection area is sufficient for light rain, but a larger collection area is required to detect moderate to heavy rain.
Dhiraj K. Singh, Spencer Donovan, Eric R. Pardyjak, and Timothy J. Garrett
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 6973–6990, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6973-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6973-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This paper describes a new instrument for quantifying the physical characteristics of hydrometeors such as snow and rain. The device can measure the mass, size, density and type of individual hydrometeors as well as their bulk properties. The instrument is called the Differential Emissivity Imaging Disdrometer (DEID) and is composed of a thermal camera and hotplate. The DEID measures hydrometeors at sampling frequencies up to 1 Hz with masses and effective diameters greater than 1 µg and 200 µm.
Karlie N. Rees, Dhiraj K. Singh, Eric R. Pardyjak, and Timothy J. Garrett
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 14235–14250, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14235-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-14235-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate predictions of weather and climate require descriptions of the mass and density of snowflakes as a function of their size. Few measurements have been obtained to date because snowflakes are so small and fragile. This article describes results from a new instrument that automatically measures individual snowflake size, mass, and density. Key findings are that small snowflakes have much lower densities than is often assumed and that snowflake density increases with temperature.
Cited articles
ARM Climate Research Facility: Surface Meteorological Instrumentation
(MET), 11 November 2014 to 9 September 2018, ARM Mobile Facility (OLI) Oliktok Point, Alaska, AMF3 (M1), compiled by: Ritsche, M., Kyrouac, J., Hickmon, N., and Holdridge, D., ARM Data Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, Data set, https://doi.org/10.5439/1025220, 2013. a
ARM Climate Research Facility: Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera (MASC),
29 November 2015 to 28 August 2018, ARM Mobile Facility (OLI) Oliktok Point, Alaska, AMF3 (M1), compiled by: Ermold, B., Shkurko, K., and Stuefer, M., ARM Data Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, Data set, available at: https://adc.arm.gov/discovery/#/results/datastream::olimascM1.a1 (last access: 15 August 2019), 2014. a, b
ARM Climate Research Facility: Active Remote Sensing of CLouds (ARSCL)
product using Ka-band ARM Zenith Radars (ARSCLKAZR1KOLLIAS), 29 November 2015 to
10 September 2018, ARM Mobile Facility (OLI) Oliktok Point, Alaska, AMF3 (M1), compiled by: Johnson, K., Toto, T., and Giangrande, S., ARM Data
Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, Data set, https://doi.org/10.5439/1393437, 2015. a
Balogh, M., Parente, A., and Benocci, C.: RANS simulation of ABL flow over
complex terrains applying an Enhanced k−ε model and wall function
formulation: Implementation and comparison for fluent and OpenFOAM,
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod., 104, 360–368, 2012. a
Besic, N., Gehring, J., Praz, C., Figueras i Ventura, J., Grazioli, J., Gabella, M., Germann, U., and Berne, A.: Unraveling hydrometeor mixtures in polarimetric radar measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 4847–4866, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4847-2018, 2018. a
Böhm, H. P.: A general equation for the terminal fall speed of solid
hydrometeors, J. Atmos. Sci., 46, 2419–2427,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1989)046<2419:AGEFTT>2.0.CO;2, 1989. a, b
Bowman, A. W., and Azzalini, A.: Applied Smoothing Techniques for Data Analysis: The Kernel Approach with S-Plus Illustrations, vol. 18, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, ISBN 978-0198523963, 1997. a
Bringi, V., Kennedy, P., Huang, G.-J., Kleinkort, C., Thurai, M., and
Notaroš, B.: Dual-polarized radar and surface observations of a winter graupel shower with negative Z dr column,
J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 56, 455–470, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-16-0197.1, 2017. a
Caretto, L., Gosman, A., Patankar, S., and Spalding, D.: Two calculation
procedures for steady, three-dimensional flows with recirculation, in:
Proceedings of the third international conference on numerical methods in
fluid mechanics, Springer, 60–68, https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0112677, 1973. a
Chen, G., Xiong, Q., Morris, P. J., Paterson, E. G., Sergeev, A., and Wang, Y.: OpenFOAM for computational fluid dynamics, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 61,
354–363, https://doi.org/10.1090/noti1095, 2014. a
Clothiaux, E. E., Ackerman, T. P., Mace, G. G., Moran, K. P., Marchand, R. T., Miller, M. A., and Martner, B. E.: Objective determination of cloud heights and radar reflectivities using a combination of active remote sensors at the ARM CART sites, J. Appl. Meteorol., 39, 645–665,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(2000)039<0645:ODOCHA>2.0.CO;2, 2000. a
Colli, M., Rasmussen, R., Thériault, J. M., Lanza, L. G., Baker, C. B., and Kochendorfer, J.: An improved trajectory model to evaluate the collection
performance of snow gauges, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim.,
54, 1826–1836, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-15-0035.1, 2015. a
Colli, M., Lanza, L. G., Rasmussen, R., and Thériault, J. M.: The
collection efficiency of shielded and unshielded precipitation gauges, Part
I: CFD airflow modeling, J. Hydrometeorol., 17, 231–243,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-15-0010.1, 2016a. a, b
Colli, M., Lanza, L. G., Rasmussen, R., and Thériault, J. M.: The
collection efficiency of shielded and unshielded precipitation gauges, Part
II: Modeling particle trajectories, J. Hydrometeorol., 17,
245–255, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-15-0011.1, 2016b. a, b
Cooper, S. J., Wood, N. B., and L'Ecuyer, T. S.: A variational technique to estimate snowfall rate from coincident radar, snowflake, and fall-speed observations, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 2557–2571, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-2557-2017, 2017. a, b
Dehbi, A.: A CFD model for particle dispersion in turbulent boundary layer
flows, Nucl. Eng. Des., 238, 707–715, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2007.02.055, 2008. a
Dunnavan, E. L., Jiang, Z., Harrington, J. Y., Verlinde, J., Fitch, K., and
Garrett, T. J.: The Shape and Density Evolution of Snow Aggregates,
J. Atmos. Sci., 76, 3919–3940, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-19-0066.1,
2019. a
Elghobashi, S.: On predicting particle-laden turbulent flows,
Appl. Sci. Res., 52, 309–329, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00936835, 1994. a
Ferrari, G., Federici, D., Schito, P., Inzoli, F., and Mereu, R.: CFD study of Savonius wind turbine: 3D model validation and parametric analysis,
Renew. Energ., 105, 722–734, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.12.077, 2017. a
Fitch, K. E. and Garrett, T. J.: Corrected liquid
water path data and mascpy code, 8 December 2016 to 25 November 2019, The Hive: University of Utah Research Data Repository, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, https://doi.org/10.7278/S50DVA5JK2PD, 2020. a, b
Fitch, K. E., Hang, C., Talaei, A., and Garrett, T. J.: MATLAB code for
“Numerical simulations and Arctic observations of surface wind effects on
Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera measurements”, 21 May 2012 to 19 July 2020, The Hive: University of Utah Research Data Repository, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, https://doi.org/10.7278/S50DQTX9K7QY, 2020. a, b
Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S., Collins, W.,
Cox, P., Driouech, F., Emori, S., Eyring, V., Forest, C., Gleckler, P.,
Guilyardi, E., Jakob, C., Kattsov, V., Reason, C., and Rummukainen, M.:
Evaluation of Climate Models, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, USA, 820, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.020, 2013. a
Garrett, T. J., Yuter, S. E., Fallgatter, C., Shkurko, K., Rhodes, S. R., and
Endries, J. L.: Orientations and aspect ratios of falling snow,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 4617–4622, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064040, 2015. a, b, c
Gergely, M. and Garrett, T. J.: Impact of the natural variability in snowflake diameter, aspect ratio, and orientation on modeled snowfall radar
reflectivity, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 12236–12252,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025192, 2016. a
Gergely, M., Cooper, S. J., and Garrett, T. J.: Using snowflake surface-area-to-volume ratio to model and interpret snowfall triple-frequency radar signatures, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 12011–12030, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-12011-2017, 2017. a
Gisen, D.: Generation of a 3D mesh using snappyHexMesh featuring anisotropic
refinement and near-wall layers, ICHE 2014, Proceedings of the 11th
International Conference on Hydroscience & Engineering, 28 September–2 October 2014, Hamburg, Germany, 983–990, 2014. a
Grazioli, J., Genthon, C., Boudevillain, B., Duran-Alarcon, C., Del Guasta, M., Madeleine, J.-B., and Berne, A.: Measurements of precipitation in Dumont d'Urville, Adélie Land, East Antarctica, The Cryosphere, 11, 1797–1811, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-1797-2017, 2017. a
Groisman, P. Y. and Legates, D. R.: The accuracy of United States
precipitation data, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 75, 215–228, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1994)075<0215:TAOUSP>2.0.CO;2, 1994. a
Groisman, P. Y., Koknaeva, V. V., Belokrylova, T. A., and Karl, T. R.:
Overcoming biases of precipitation measurement: A history of the USSR
experience, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 72, 1725–1733,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1991)072<1725:OBOPMA>2.0.CO;2, 1991. a
Hicks, A. and Notaroš, B.: Method for Classification of Snowflakes Based on Images by a Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera Using Convolutional Neural
Networks, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 36, 2267–2282,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-19-0055.1, 2019. a
Higuera, P., Lara, J. L., and Losada, I. J.: Three-dimensional interaction of
waves and porous coastal structures using OpenFOAM®, Part I:
formulation and validation, Coast. Eng., 83, 243–258,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2013.08.010, 2014. a
Huang, G.-J., Kleinkort, C., Bringi, V., and Notaroš, B. M.: Winter
precipitation particle size distribution measurement by Multi-Angle Snowflake
Camera, Atmos. Res., 198, 81–96, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2017.08.005, 2017. a
Iudiciani, P.: Lagrangian particle tracking of spheres and cylinders, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2009. a
Jiang, Z., Verlinde, J., Clothiaux, E. E., Aydin, K., and Schmitt, C.: Shapes
and fall orientations of ice particle aggregates,
J. Atmos. Sci., 76, 1903–1916, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-18-0251.1, 2019. a, b, c, d
Kendall, M. G.: A new measure of rank correlation, Biometrika, 30, 81–93,
https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/30.1-2.81, 1938. a
Kennedy, P., Thurai, M., Praz, C., Bringi, V., Berne, A., and Notaroš,
B. M.: Variations in snow crystal riming and Z DR: A case analysis,
J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 57, 695–707,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-17-0068.1, 2018. a
Kleinkort, C., Huang, G.-J., Bringi, V., and Notaroš, B.: Visual hull
method for realistic 3D particle shape reconstruction based on
high-resolution photographs of snowflakes in free fall from multiple views,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 34, 679–702, https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-16-0099.1, 2017. a
Leinonen, J. and Berne, A.: Unsupervised classification of snowflake images using a generative adversarial network and K-medoids classification, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 2949–2964, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-2949-2020, 2020. a
Locatelli, J. D. and Hobbs, P. V.: Fall speeds and masses of solid
precipitation particles, J. Geophys. Res., 79, 2185–2197,
https://doi.org/10.1029/JC079i015p02185, 1974. a
Matrosov, S. Y.: Evaluations of the spheroidal particle model for describing
cloud radar depolarization ratios of ice hydrometeors,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 32, 865–879, https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-14-00115.1, 2015. a
Matrosov, S. Y., Reinking, R. F., and Djalalova, I. V.: Inferring fall
attitudes of pristine dendritic crystals from polarimetric radar data,
J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 241–250, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-3356.1, 2005. a
Matrosov, S. Y., Schmitt, C. G., Maahn, M., and de Boer, G.: Atmospheric ice
particle shape estimates from polarimetric radar measurements and in situ
observations, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 34, 2569–2587,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-17-0111.1, 2017. a
Matrosov, S. Y., Maahn, M., and De Boer, G.: Observational and modeling study
of ice hydrometeor radar dual-wavelength ratios,
J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 58, 2005–2017, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-19-0018.1,
2019. a
Maxey, M. R. and Riley, J. J.: Equation of motion for a small rigid sphere in a nonuniform flow, Phys. Fluids, 26, 883–889, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.864230, 1983. a
Menter, F.: Zonal two equation k-ω turbulence models for aerodynamic
flows, 23rd fluid dynamics, plasmadynamics, and lasers Conference, 6–9 July 1993, Orlando, Florida, 2906, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1993-2906, 1993. a
Moat, B. I., Yelland, M. J., Pascal, R. W., and Molland, A. F.: Quantifying
the airflow distortion over merchant ships, Part I: Validation of a CFD
model, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 23, 341–350,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH1858.1, 2006. a
Morrison, H. and Milbrandt, J. A.: Parameterization of cloud microphysics
based on the prediction of bulk ice particle properties, Part I: Scheme
description and idealized tests, J. Atmos. Sci., 72,
287–311, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-14-0065.1, 2015. a
Newman, A. J., Kucera, P. A., and Bliven, L. F.: Presenting the Snowflake
Video Imager (SVI), J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 26,
167–179, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JTECHA1148.1, 2009. a
Nielsen, P.: Mean and variance of the velocity of solid particles in
turbulence, in: Particle-Laden Flow, Springer,
385–391, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6218-6_30, 2007. a
Notaroš, B. M., Bringi, V. N., Kleinkort, C., Kennedy, P., Huang, G. J.,
Thurai, M., Newman, A. J., Bang, W., and Lee, G.: Accurate Characterization
of Winter Precipitation Using Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera, Visual Hull,
Advanced Scattering Methods and Polarimetric Radar, Atmosphere, 7, 81,
https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos7060081, 2016. a
Oue, M., Kollias, P., Ryzhkov, A., and Luke, E. P.: Toward exploring the
synergy between cloud radar polarimetry and Doppler spectral analysis in deep
cold precipitating systems in the Arctic,
J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 123, 2797–2815, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD027717, 2018. a, b, c
Praz, C., Roulet, Y.-A., and Berne, A.: Solid hydrometeor classification and riming degree estimation from pictures collected with a Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 1335–1357, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-1335-2017, 2017. a
Rasmussen, R., Dixon, M., Hage, F., Cole, J., Wade, C., Tuttle, J., McGettigan, S., Carty, T., Stevenson, L., Fellner, W., Knight, S., Karplus, E., and Rehak, N.: Weather Support to Deicing Decision Making (WSDDM): A winter weather nowcasting system, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc.,
82, 579–596, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(2001)082<0579:WSTDDM>2.3.CO;2, 2001. a, b, c
Rasmussen, R., Baker, B., Kochendorfer, J., Meyers, T., Landolt, S., Fischer,
A. P., Black, J., Thériault, J. M., Kucera, P., Gochis, D., Smith, C., Nitu, R., Hall, M., Ikeda, K., and Gutmann, E.: How
well are we measuring snow: The NOAA/FAA/NCAR winter precipitation test bed,
B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 811–829, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00052.1, 2012. a, b, c, d
Ritsche, M. T.: ARM Surface Meteorology Systems Handbook, techreport
DOE/SC-ARM/TR-086, US Department of Energy, Office of Science,
https://doi.org/10.2172/1019409, 2011. a
Schaer, M., Praz, C., and Berne, A.: Identification of blowing snow particles in images from a Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera, The Cryosphere, 14, 367–384, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-367-2020, 2020. a
Schirle, C. E., Cooper, S. J., Wolff, M. A., Pettersen, C., Wood, N. B.,
L'Ecuyer, T. S., Ilmo, T., and Nygård, K.: Estimation of Snowfall
Properties at a Mountainous Site in Norway Using Combined Radar and In Situ
Microphysical Observations, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim.,
58, 1337–1352, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-18-0281.1, 2019. a, b
Shkurko, K., Talaei, A., Garrett, T., and Gaustad, K.: Multi-Angle Snowflake
Camera Particle Analysis Value-Added Product, Tech. Rep.,
USDOE Office of Science Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program, available at: https://www.arm.gov/publications/tech_reports/doe-sc-arm-tr-187.pdf, last access: 16 August 2018. a, b, c, d
Shupe, M. D., Kollias, P., Persson, P. O. G., and McFarquhar, G. M.: Vertical
motions in Arctic mixed-phase stratiform clouds,
J. Atmos. Sci., 65, 1304–1322, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JAS2479.1, 2008. a
Stuefer, M. and Bailey, J.: Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera Instrument Handbook,
Tech. Rep., USDOE Office of Science Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM)
Program, https://doi.org/10.2172/1261185, 2016. a
Thériault, J. M., Rasmussen, R., Petro, E., Trépanier, J.-Y., Colli, M., and
Lanza, L. G.: Impact of wind direction, wind speed, and particle
characteristics on the collection efficiency of the Double Fence
Intercomparison Reference, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim.,
54, 1918–1930, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-15-0034.1, 2015. a, b, c, d, e, f
Thompson, G., Field, P. R., Rasmussen, R. M., and Hall, W. D.: Explicit
forecasts of winter precipitation using an improved bulk microphysics scheme,
Part II: Implementation of a new snow parameterization,
Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 5095–5115, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2387.1, 2008. a
Vignon, E., Besic, N., Jullien, N., Gehring, J., and Berne, A.: Microphysics of snowfall over coastal East Antarctica simulated by Polar WRF and observed by radar, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 11452–11476,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031028, 2019. a
Vivekanandan, J., Adams, W., and Bringi, V.: Rigorous approach to polarimetric radar modeling of hydrometeor orientation distributions,
J. Appl. Meteorol., 30, 1053–1063,
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1991)030<1053:RATPRM>2.0.CO;2, 1991. a
Vivekanandan, J., Bringi, V. N., Hagen, M., and Meischner, P.: Polarimetric
radar studies of atmospheric ice particles,
IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 32, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1109/36.285183, 1994. a
Voth, G. A. and Soldati, A.: Anisotropic particles in turbulence,
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 49, 249–276, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-010816-060135, 2017. a
Widener, K., Bharadwaj, N., and Johnson, K.: Ka-band ARM Zenith Radar (KAZR)
instrument handbook, Tech. Rep., USDOE Office of Science Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program, https://doi.org/10.2172/1035855, 2012.
a
Wilks, D. S.: Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences, edition 3, vol. 100,
International Geophysics Series, Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2011. a
Wolff, M. A., Isaksen, K., Petersen-Øverleir, A., Ødemark, K., Reitan, T., and Brækkan, R.: Derivation of a new continuous adjustment function for correcting wind-induced loss of solid precipitation: results of a Norwegian field study, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 951–967, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-951-2015, 2015. a
Yang, D., Kane, D., Zhang, Z., Legates, D., and Goodison, B.: Bias corrections of long-term (1973–2004) daily precipitation data over the northern regions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L19501, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL024057, 2005. a, b, c
Short summary
Snow measurements are very sensitive to wind. Here, we compare airflow and snowfall simulations to Arctic observations for a Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera to show that measurements of fall speed, orientation, and size are accurate only with a double wind fence and winds below 5 m s−1. In this case, snowflakes tend to fall with a nearly horizontal orientation; the largest flakes are as much as 5 times more likely to be observed. Adjustments are needed for snow falling in naturally turbulent air.
Snow measurements are very sensitive to wind. Here, we compare airflow and snowfall simulations...
