280 likes | 399 Views
Retrieving Liquid Water Contents of Boundary-layer Clouds Using Dual-frequency Cloud Radars. Courtney Laughlin 1 , Dong Huang 2 , Eugene Clothiaux 1 , Johannes Verlinde 1 , Kultegin Aydin 1 1 The Pennsylvania State University 2 Brookhaven National Laboratory. Objectives.
E N D
Retrieving Liquid Water Contents of Boundary-layer Clouds Using Dual-frequency Cloud Radars Courtney Laughlin1, Dong Huang2, Eugene Clothiaux1, Johannes Verlinde1, Kultegin Aydin1 1The Pennsylvania State University 2Brookhaven National Laboratory
Objectives • Retrieve accurate cloud LWCs of boundary-layer stratus and stratocumulus via an improved dual-frequency attenuation approach • Analyze and quantify possible sources of error and assess any means to correct for them
Brief History of Dual-frequency Retrieval • Atlas 1954 • Sekelsky 2000 • Hogan et al. 2005 • Huang et al. 2009
Instruments Liquid water cloud
Instruments Liquid water cloud
Instruments Liquid water cloud
Possible Retrieval Sources of Error • Precision of reflectivity measurements • Overlap of sample volumes • Radar separation • Radar pointing differences • Radar range gate offsets • Accuracy of radiosonde measurements • Temperature dependent absorption coefficients of oxygen, water vapor, and liquid water • Cloud drop size assumption
Possible Assessment Sources of Error • Precision of LWP measurements • Beam-filling effects • Accuracy of radiosonde measurements • Temperature dependent absorption coefficients of oxygen, water vapor, and liquid water
Results Mean = -0.0065(-0.0015) MAGIC Standard Dev. = 0.14(0.10) Mean = 0.09(0.09) NSA Standard Dev. = 0.09(0.09) Mean = 0.54 (0.052) TCAP Standard Dev. = 0.12(0.12) Mean = -0.17(-0.037) SGP Standard Dev. = 0.64(0.23)
Also… • Assess satellite retrievals of cloud properties in the vicinity of the MAGIC ship tracks
What about the next MAGIC period? There were 3! • July 07, 2013 ~ 21 UTC • August 18, 2013 ~ 21 UTC • August 19, 2013 ~ 21 UTC
What about the next MAGIC period? • July 07, 2013 Leg 14A – Just left Los Angeles • August 18, 2013 No MWACR Data • August 19, 2013
Conclusions • Multiple errors arise using this dual-frequency retrieval approach • More work and analysis will be done to fully understand reasons for these errors to correct for them • Once accurate LWC measurements are achieved and corresponding retrieved LWPs are comparable to radiometer LWPs, we will extend approach to retrieve LWCs from all directions
Future Work • Evaluate retrieval response to beam offsets from KAZR • Study beamwidth differences between MWR3C and radars in more detail - especially in broken cloud periods • Start analysis on the coincident time with CALIPSO/CloudSat soon
Acknowledgements • Eugene Clothiaux • Dong Huang • Johannes Verlinde • Ernie Lewis • Maria Caddedu • Karen Johnson • Kultegin Aydin • Seiji Kato