Articles | Volume 14, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-2441-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-2441-2021
Research article
 | 
29 Mar 2021
Research article |  | 29 Mar 2021

Ångström exponent errors prevent accurate visibility measurement

Hengnan Guo, Zefeng Zhang, Lin Jiang, Junlin An, Bin Zhu, Hanqing Kang, and Jing Wang

Related authors

A new method for calculating average visibility from the relationship between extinction coefficient and visibility
Zefeng Zhang, Hengnan Guo, Hanqing Kang, Jing Wang, Junlin An, Xingna Yu, Jingjing Lv, and Bin Zhu
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 7259–7264, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-7259-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-7259-2022, 2022
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Aerosols | Technique: In Situ Measurement | Topic: Validation and Intercomparisons
Comparison of the LEO and CPMA-SP2 techniques for black-carbon mixing-state measurements
Arash Naseri, Joel C. Corbin, and Jason S. Olfert
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3719–3738, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3719-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3719-2024, 2024
Short summary
Aerosol trace element solubility determined using ultrapure water batch leaching: an intercomparison study of four different leaching protocols
Rui Li, Prema Piyusha Panda, Yizhu Chen, Zhenming Zhu, Fu Wang, Yujiao Zhu, He Meng, Yan Ren, Ashwini Kumar, and Mingjin Tang
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3147–3156, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3147-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3147-2024, 2024
Short summary
Field comparison of dual- and single-spot Aethalometers: equivalent black carbon, light absorption, Ångström exponent and secondary brown carbon estimations
Liangbin Wu, Cheng Wu, Tao Deng, Dui Wu, Mei Li, Yong Jie Li, and Zhen Zhou
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 2917–2936, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2917-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2917-2024, 2024
Short summary
Comparison of the imaginary parts of the atmospheric refractive index structure parameter and aerosol flux based on different measurement methods
Renmin Yuan, Hongsheng Zhang, Jiajia Hua, Hao Liu, Peizhe Wu, Xingyu Zhu, and Jianning Sun
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 2089–2102, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2089-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2089-2024, 2024
Short summary
Two-year intercomparison of three methods for measuring black carbon concentration at a high-altitude research station in Europe
Sarah Tinorua, Cyrielle Denjean, Pierre Nabat, Véronique Pont, Mathilde Arnaud, Thierry Bourrianne, Maria Dias Alves, and Eric Gardrat
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-47,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-47, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

AERONET: Data Download Tool, available at: https://aeronet.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/webtool_inv_v3, last access: 15 February 2019. 
Ångström, A.: On the atmospheric transmission of Sun radiation and on dust in the air, Geogr. Ann., 11, 156–166, 1929. 
Biral: RWS 30-Manual, UK, available at: https://www.biral.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/RWS-30-User-Manual-107384.00B.pdf (last access: 27 January 2021), 2018. 
Bohren, C. F. and Huffman, D. R.: Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles, Wiley, New York, USA, 1983. 
Che, H., Zhang, X., Li, Y., Zhou, Z., and Qu, J. J.: Horizontal visibility trends in China 1981–2005, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L24706, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007gl031450, 2007. 
Download
Short summary
Visibility is an indicator of atmospheric transparency and is widely used in many research fields. Although efforts have been made to improve the performance of visibility meters, a significant error exists in measured visibility data. This is because current methods of visibility measurement include a false assumption, which leads to the long-term neglect of an important source of visibility errors. Without major adjustments to current methods, it is not possible to obtain reliable data.