|
|
(IN)DEPENDENCE OF AEROSOL ACTIVATION ON CLOUD POSITION
Zíková, Naděžda ; Pokorná, Petra ; Sedlák, Pavel ; Sokol, Zbyněk ; Ždímal, Vladimír
Five in situ campaigns focused on aerosol-cloud interactions were conducted at Mount Milešovka in the Czech Republic to gain more insight into aerosol activation and its dependence on meteorological parameters, mainly vertical air velocity and position within the cloud. The activated fraction was calculated from the difference of concentrations measured behind the whole air inlet and the PM2.5 inlet. The liquid water content (LWC) was calculated from visibility, cloud base position was estimated from ceilometer data. Vertical air velocity was estimated from cloud radar. No strong dependence was found between visibility and vertical velocity, suggesting that the clouds at the station are mostly of advection or inversion origin. Both visibility and LWC depend on the position within the cloud, with the highest LWC values found when the station was between 100 and 400 m above the cloud base, independently of the actual value.
Fulltext:  PDF
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION TO PRAGUE AEROSOL CALIBRATION CENTER
Ondráček, Jakub ; Roztočil, Petr
In general, the PACC offers a range of services, from calibration and consulting to methodology and technical development. Furthermore, the PACC has the capacity to organize and perform training for microphysical (including optical in the near future) aerosol in-situ instrumentation. The equipment at the PACC is fully in-line with the state of-the-art aerosol instrumentation (starting from various aerosol generators for welldefined nanoparticles, reference instruments, and newly designed calibration lines) and the laboratory space is flexible for various types of instrument calibration/verification/intercomparison or testing of newly developed, cutting-edge equipment.
Plný tet: PDF
|
|
|
Intercomparison of boundary layer and mixing layer height from models and ground-based measurements
Julaha, Kajal
In this study, we found that the boundary layer height tends to belower in ERA5 and timing for the daily peak also appears to differ\nas compared to ceilometer boundary layer data. In contrast, the ERA5 boundary layer observation was found to agree well with the mixing layer height obtained from the ceilometer. Whereas in comparison to HYSPLIT, GFS and GDAS, observations were found to agree well with ceilometer data while Reanalysis underestimated mixing layer height throughout the year. The seasonal changes in the boundary/mixing layer height were well captured by both models and the ceilometer.
Plný tet: PDF
|
guest ::
