![Page 1: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation
measurementsDavid Painemal
MPO531
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 2: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline
• Theory
• Applications
• Results
• Conclusions
![Page 3: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Theory
S= 0: conservative scattering
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
€
s =1−ω0( )1−ω0g( )
τ =16
•S=0 for 1m.
•1.65m 2.16m, S sensitive to re.
re
S as a function of wavelength for selected values of the effective radius
• The asymptotic theory: The reflection (and transmission) properties of thick layer depend essentially on three parameters of the atmosphere, the scaled optical thickness (’), the similarity parameter (s) and reflectivity of the underlying surface.
![Page 4: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Theory
• We chose the wavelengths: 0.75m and 2.5m– Outside of water vapor and oxygen absorption.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Theoretical relationships between the reflection function at 0.75m and 2.16 m for various values of and r
•Reflection at 2.16m: sensitive to re
• Reflection at 0.75m: sensitive to
We can estimate re and separately
![Page 5: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Theory
• Optical thickness at 0.75m does not depend strongly on re.
• Reflection function at 2.16m is independent of the optical thickness.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Reflection function as a function of r for different values of , and azimuth angle.
![Page 6: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Determination of and re
• We assume that measurements have a relative precision
€
χ 2 = lnRmeasi (μ,μ0,φ) − lnRcalc
i (τ ,reμ,μ0,φ)[ ]2
i
∑
• Minimizing χ, we obtain and r.
![Page 7: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
€
Rmeas0.75 (μ,μ0,φ)
Rmeas2.16 (μ,μ0,φ)
€
Rcalc0.75(τ ,r,μ,μ0,φ)
Rcalc2.16(τ ,r,μ,μ0,φ)
Determination of and re
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Measurements of reflectance
Minimum , re
albedo,
![Page 8: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Determination of and re
χ at 0.75 and 2.16m
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
χ at 0.75, 1.65 and 2.16m
χ at 0.75, 1.65 2.16 and 3.7m
χ at 0.75 and 3.7 m
![Page 9: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Determination of and re
• Two minima regardless of the number of channels.
• The introduction of a third channel at 1.65m does not improve the retrieval for liquid water clouds.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 10: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Stratocumulus observations:
• Why?– Uniform layer– Dark ocean surface, reducing problems
associated with surface reflection.– Liquid water droplets: Mie scattering by
spherical particles is applicable
![Page 11: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Marine Sc observations
• Comprehensive measurements off the coast of California 29 June-18 July
• The intent of this work is to provide comparisons of remote sensing and in situ estimates of cloud properties.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 12: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Instrumentation
• Aircraft measurements (7, 10, 13 and 16 July)– ER-2 aircraft: 18 km of altitude.Spectral scanning
radiometer, seven channel narrowband solar flux radiometer, spectral scanning radiometer.
– C-131A aircraft: within the clouds. Measurements of cloud microphysics.
• Satellite measurements on 2 days (7 and 16 July.
![Page 13: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Effective radius
• Good spatial correlation
• Overestimation
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.•Remote sensing based on reflectivity is insensitive to drizzle.
![Page 14: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Optical thickness
• Geometric thickness assumed constant
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
€
in situ =3
2ρ
LWPin siturin situ
LWPin situ = wJW ⋅Δz
wJW : LWC - Johnson - Williams probe
![Page 15: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Including additional absorption
• Overestimation of effective radius It is necessary to introduce additional absorption for water vapor.
• We can adopt a gaseous volume extinction=0.6km-1.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
€
β 'ext =β ext
1− 0.33τ ce−0.26τ c
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture. €
βg (2.16μm) = 0.6km−1
![Page 16: Determination of the optical thickness and effective radius from reflected solar radiation measurements David Painemal MPO531](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022062304/56649e875503460f94b8a9f1/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Conclusions• A statistical technique has been described for inferring optimum
values of r and .• Reflection function at:
– 2.16 m is primarily sensitive to re.– 0.75 m is primarily sensitive to .
• Comparisons between in situ and remote sensing estimates of:– Effective radius
• Correlated variables• Remote sensing overestimates the radius of cloud droplets.
– Optical thickness:• Close agreement.• Problems with Johnson-Williams hot wire probe?
• The discrepancy between in-situ and remote sensing estimates of re can be explained by additional absorption by water vapor at 2.16m.