Results for “LONGITUDE” — Page 8

DOE OSTI2020

A Census of Star Formation in the Outer Galaxy. II. The GLIMPSE360 Field

We have conducted a study of star formation in the outer Galaxy from 65°< l < 265° in the region observed by the GLIMPSE360 program. This Spitzer warm mission program mapped the plane of the outer Milky Way with IRAC at 3.6 and 4.5 μm. We combine the IRAC, Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE), and Two Micron All Sky Survey catalogs and our previous results from another outer Galaxy survey and identify a total of 47,338 young stellar objects (YSOs) across the field spanning >180° in Galactic longitude. Using the DBSCAN method on the combined catalog, we identify 618 clusters or aggregations of YSOs having five or more members. We identify 10,476 class I, 29,604 class II, and 7325 anemic class II/class III YSOs. The ratio of YSOs identified as members of clusters was 25,528/47,338, or 54%. We found that 100 of the clusters identified have previously measured distances in the WISE H ii survey. We used these distances in our spectral energy distribution (SED) fitting of the YSOs in these clusters, of which 96 had YSOs with <3σ fits. We used the derived masses from the SED model fits to estimate the initial mass function (IMF) in the inner and outer Galaxy clusters; dividing the clusters by galactocentric distances, the slopes were Γ = 1.87 ± 0.31 above 3 M {sub ⊙} for R {sub Gal} < 11.5 kpc and Γ = 1.15 ± 0.24 above 3 M {sub ⊙} for R {sub Gal} > 11.5 kpc. The slope of the combined IMF was found to be Γ = 1.92 ± 0.42 above 3 M {sub ⊙}. These values are consistent with each other within the uncertainties and with literature values in the inner Galaxy high-mass star formation regions. The slopes are likely also consistent with a universal Salpeter IMF.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2020

An Investigation of Poorly Studied Open Cluster NGC 4337 Using Multicolor Photometric and Gaia DR2 Astrometric Data

We present a comprehensive analysis (photometric and kinematical) of the poorly studied open cluster NGC 4337 using 2MASS, WISE, APASS, and Gaia DR2 databases. By determining the membership probabilities of stars, we identified the 624 most probable members with membership probability higher than 50% by using proper motion and parallax data taken from Gaia DR2. The mean proper motion of the cluster is obtained as μ{sub x}=−8.83±0.01 and μ {sub y} = 1.49 ± 0.006 mas yr{sup −1}. We find the normal interstellar extinction toward the cluster region. The radial distribution of members provides a cluster radius of 7.′75 (5.63 pc). The estimated age of 1600 ± 180 Myr indicates that NGC 4337 is an old open cluster with a bunch of red giant stars. The overall mass function slope for main-sequence stars is found as 1.46±0.18 within the mass range 0.75−2.0 M{sub ⊙}, which is in fair agreement with Salpeter’s value (x = 1.35) within uncertainty. The present study demonstrates that NGC 4337 is a dynamically relaxed open cluster. Using the Galactic potential model, Galactic orbits are obtained for NGC 4337. We found that this object follows a circular path around the Galactic center. Under the kinematical analysis, we compute the apex coordinates (A, D) by using two methods: (i) the classical convergent point method and (ii) the AD-diagram method. The obtained coordinates are (A {sub conv}, D {sub conv}) = (96.°27 ± 0.°10, 13.°14 ± 0.°27) and (A {sub ◦}, D {sub ◦}) = (100.°282 ± 0.°10, 9.°577 ± 0.°323) respectively. We also computed the Velocity Ellipsoid Parameters, matrix elements (μ {sub ij}), direction cosines (l {sub j}, m {sub j}, n {sub j}), and the Galactic longitude of the vertex (l {sub 2}).

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2020

BVR{sub C}I{sub C} Observations and Analysis of the UV LEO-type Binary, the Pre-WUMa, V1023 Persei

V1023 Per is a polar spotted, but well-detached dwarf binary, very likely a Pre-WUMa eclipsing binary. It was observed on 11 nights in 2015 October, November, and December at Dark Sky Observatory in North Carolina with the 0.81 m reflector of Appalachian State University. The period behavior is complex and may be increasing with a cubic or quadratic ephemeris. Its odd light curves are of high amplitude but have no totality and reach maximum light just before and following the secondary eclipse, indicating that it has polar spots similar to UV Leo. The 28 yr orbital period study calls the attention of observers to further monitor this binary to understand the complex nature of the period evolution. Its presently fixed polar spot does indicate that it must have a strong magnetic field and that it is synchronously rotating. The BVR{sub c}I{sub c} simultaneous 2016 Wilson–Devinney program (W-D) solution gives fillouts of 68% and 75% for the primary and secondary components, respectively. The polar position of the spot, its radius (24°), and T-fact (0.75) indicate that a strong magnetic field is present. The small ΔT in the components (∼289 K) show that the stars are similar in spectral type despite them being well detached. The inclination is high, ∼85.°19 ± 0.°04, but there is not a total eclipse due to the high mass ratio (∼0.739 ± 0.001). Due to the low galactic position (longitude = 150.°390, latitude = −1.°023), its reddening is addressed. The primary components temperature is estimated to be 5250 ± 250 K.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Signatures of a Tidally Induced Spiral Arm at the Anticenter of the Milky Way and a Kinematically Extended Anticenter Stream Using DESI Data Release 2

Using the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) Milky Way Survey, we examine the six-dimensional space of the anticenter region of the Milky Way stellar disk (150° < Galactic longitude < 220°) using 61,883 main-sequence turnoff stars. We focus on two well-known stellar overdensities in the anticenter: the Monoceros Ring (MRi) and Anticenter Stream (ACS). We find that the MRi overdensity has kinematic signatures consistent with a tidally induced spiral arm, a type of dynamic spiral arm created by an interaction with a satellite galaxy, most likely the Sagittarius dwarf spheroidal galaxy (Sgr). We use the kinematics of the MRi to calculate the two most recent passage times of Sgr, finding 0.25 ± 0.09 Gyr and 1.10 ± 0.23 Gyr from the present day. We validate that the ACS is kinematically decoupled from the MRi because they are moving in opposite radial and vertical directions. We find that the kinematics associated with the ACS extends beyond our defined overdensity. The features we see in the ACS region are likely part of a broader distribution of stars with the same kinematic signature as detected in other places, like the vertical wave in the outer disk and phase spiral.

Lambert, Mika [University of California, Santa Cru↗

DOE OSTI2023

Fermi-LAT Detection of the Supernova Remnant G312.4-0.4 in the Vicinity of 4FGL J1409.1-6121e

Abstract Gamma-ray emission provides constraints on the nonthermal radiation processes at play in astrophysical particle accelerators. This allows both the nature of accelerated particles and the maximum energy that they can reach to be determined. Notably, it remains an open question to what extent supernova remnants contribute to the sea of Galactic cosmic rays. In the Galactic plane, at around 312° of Galactic longitude, Fermi-LAT observations show an extended source (4FGL J1409.1−6121e) around five powerful pulsars. This source is described by one large disk of 0.°7 radius with a high significance of 45σin the 4FGL-DR3 catalog. Using 14 yr of Fermi-LAT observations, we revisited this region with a detailed spectro-morphological analysis in order to disentangle its underlying structure. Three sources have been distinguished, including the supernova remnant G312.4−0.4 whose gamma-ray emission correlates well with the shell observed at radio energies. The hard spectrum detected by the LAT, extending up to 100 GeV without any sign of a cutoff, is well reproduced by a purely hadronic model.

Astronomy & Astrophysics↗

DOE OSTI2023

A Data-driven, Physics-based Transport Model of Solar Energetic Particles Accelerated by Coronal Mass Ejection Shocks Propagating through the Solar Coronal and Heliospheric Magnetic Fields

Abstract In an effort to develop computational tools for predicting radiation hazards from solar energetic particles (SEPs), we have created a data-driven physics-based particle transport model to calculate the injection, acceleration, and propagation of SEPs from coronal mass ejection (CME) shocks traversing through the solar corona and interplanetary magnetic fields. The model runs on an input of corona and heliospheric plasma and magnetic field configuration from a magnetohydrodynamic model driven by solar photospheric magnetic field measurements superposed with observed CME shocks determined from coronagraph images. SEP source particles are injected at the shock using the result of diffusive shock acceleration formulation from a characteristic obliquity-dependent injection from a heated solar wind thermal tail population. With several advanced computation techniques involving stochastic simulation and integration, the model obtains the particle intensity at any location in interplanetary space through the rigorous solution to the time-dependent 5D focus transport equation in the phase space that includes perpendicular diffusion. We apply the model to the 2011 November 3 CME event. The calculation results reproduce multispacecraft SEP observations at Earth and STEREO-B reasonably well without normalization of particle flux. The observations at STEREO-A can be reproduced by rescaling particle energy or modified energy dependence of particle diffusion coefficients. This circumsolar SEP event seen by spacecraft at Earth, STEREO-A, and STEREO-B at widely separated longitudes can be explained by diffusive shock acceleration by a single CME shock with a moderate speed.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Global ocean dimethyl sulfide climatology estimated from observations and an artificial neural network

Marine dimethyl sulfide (DMS) is important to climate due to the ability of DMS to alter Earth's radiation budget. Knowledge of the global-scale distribution, seasonal variability, and sea-to-air flux of DMS is needed in order to improve understanding of atmospheric sulfur, aerosol/cloud dynamics, and albedo. Here we examine the use of an artificial neural network (ANN) to extrapolate available DMS measurements to the global ocean and produce a global climatology with monthly temporal resolution. A global database of 82 996 ship-based DMS measurements in surface waters was used along with a suite of environmental parameters consisting of latitude–longitude coordinates, time of day, time of year, solar radiation, mixed layer depth, sea surface temperature, salinity, nitrate, phosphate, and silicate. Linear regressions of DMS against the environmental parameters show that on a global-scale mixed layer depth and solar radiation are the strongest predictors of DMS. These parameters capture ~9 % and ~7 % of the raw DMS data variance, respectively. Multilinear regression can capture more of the raw data variance (~39 %) but strongly underestimates DMS in high-concentration regions. In contrast, the artificial neural network captures ~66 % of the raw data variance in our database. Like prior climatologies our results show a strong seasonal cycle in surface ocean DMS with the highest concentrations and sea-to-air fluxes in the high-latitude summertime oceans. We estimate a lower global sea-to-air DMS flux (20.12±0.43 Tg S yr –1 ) than the prior estimate based on a map interpolation method when the same gas transfer velocity parameterization is used. Our sensitivity test results show that DMS concentration does not change unidirectionally with each of the environmental parameters, which emphasizes the interactions among these parameters. The ANN model suggests that the flux of DMS from the ocean to the atmosphere will increase with global warming. Given that larger DMS fluxes induce greater cloud albedo, this corresponds to a negative climate feedback.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Organic matter transformations are disconnected between surface water and the hyporheic zone

Abstract. Biochemical transformations of organic matter (OM) are a primary driver of river corridor biogeochemistry, thereby modulating ecosystem processes at local to global scales. OM transformations are driven by diverse biotic and abiotic processes, but we lack knowledge of how the diversity of those processes varies across river corridors and across surface and subsurface components of river corridors. To fill this gap we quantified the number of putative biotic and abiotic transformations of organic molecules across diverse river corridors using ultra-high-resolution mass spectrometry. The number of unique transformations is used here as a proxy for the diversity of biochemical processes underlying observed profiles of organic molecules. For this, we use public data spanning the contiguous United States (ConUS) from the Worldwide Hydrobiogeochemical Observation Network for Dynamic River Systems (WHONDRS) consortium. Our results show that surface water OM had more biotic and abiotic transformations than OM from shallow hyporheic zone sediments (1–3 cm depth). We observed substantially more biotic than abiotic transformations, and the numbers of biotic and abiotic transformations were highly correlated with each other. We found no relationship between the number of transformations in surface water and sediments and no meaningful relationships with latitude, longitude, or climate. We also found that the composition of transformations in sediments was not linked with transformation composition in adjacent surface waters. We infer that OM transformations represented in surface water are an integrated signal of diverse processes occurring throughout the upstream catchment. In contrast, OM transformations in sediments likely reflect a narrower range of processes within the sampled volume. This indicates decoupling between the processes influencing surface water and sediment OM, despite the potential for hydrologic exchange to homogenize OM. We infer that the processes influencing OM transformations and the scales at which they operate diverge between surface water and sediments.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Global anthropogenic emissions (CAMS-GLOB-ANT) for the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service simulations of air quality forecasts and reanalyses

Anthropogenic emissions are the result of many different economic sectors, including transportation, power generation, industrial, residential and commercial activities, waste treatment and agricultural practices. Air quality models are used to forecast the atmospheric composition, analyze observations and reconstruct the chemical composition of the atmosphere during the previous decades. In order to drive these models, gridded emissions of all compounds need to be provided. This paper describes a new global inventory of emissions called CAMS-GLOB-ANT, developed as part of the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS; https://doi.org/10.24380/eets-qd81, Soulie et al., 2023). The inventory provides monthly averages of the global emissions of 36 compounds, including the main air pollutants and greenhouse gases, at a spatial resolution of 0.1° × 0.1° in latitude and longitude, for 17 emission sectors. The methodology to generate the emissions for the 2000–2023 period is explained, and the datasets are analyzed and compared with publicly available global and regional inventories for selected world regions. Depending on the species and regions, good agreements as well as significant differences are highlighted, which can be further explained through an analysis of different sectors as shown in the figures in the Supplement.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

The E3SM Diagnostics Package (E3SM Diags v2.7): a Python-based diagnostics package for Earth system model evaluation

Abstract. The E3SM Diagnostics Package (E3SM Diags) is a modern, Python-based Earth system model (ESM) evaluation tool (with Python module name e3sm_diags), developed to support the Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM). E3SM Diags provides a wide suite of tools for evaluating native E3SM output, as well as ESM data on regular latitude–longitude grids, including output from Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) class models. E3SM Diags is modeled after the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Atmosphere Model Working Group (AMWG, 2022) diagnostics package. In its version 1 release, E3SM Diags included a set of core essential diagnostics to evaluate the mean physical climate from model simulations. As of version 2.7, more process-oriented and phenomenon-based evaluation diagnostics have been implemented, such as analysis of the quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO), the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO), streamflow, the diurnal cycle of precipitation, tropical cyclones, ozone and aerosol properties. An in situ dataset from DOE's Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) program has been integrated into the package for evaluating the representation of simulated cloud and precipitation processes. This tool is designed with enough flexibility to allow for the addition of new observational datasets and new diagnostic algorithms. Additional features include customizable figures; streamlined installation, configuration and execution; and multiprocessing for fast computation. The package uses an up-to-date observational data repository maintained by its developers, where recent datasets are added to the repository as they become available. Finally, several applications for the E3SM Diags module were introduced to fit a diverse set of use cases from the scientific community.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Evaluation of native Earth system model output with ESMValTool v2.6.0

Earth system models (ESMs) are state-of-the-art climate models that allow numerical simulations of the past, present-day, and future climate. To extend our understanding of the Earth system and improve climate change projections, the complexity of ESMs heavily increased over the last decades. As a consequence, the amount and volume of data provided by ESMs has increased considerably. Innovative tools for a comprehensive model evaluation and analysis are required to assess the performance of these increasingly complex ESMs against observations or reanalyses. One of these tools is the Earth System Model Evaluation Tool (ESMValTool), a community diagnostic and performance metrics tool for the evaluation of ESMs. Input data for ESMValTool needs to be formatted according to the CMOR (Climate Model Output Rewriter) standard, a process that is usually referred to as “CMORization”. While this is a quasi-standard for large model intercomparison projects like the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), this complicates the application of ESMValTool to non-CMOR-compliant climate model output. In this paper, we describe an extension of ESMValTool introduced in v2.6.0 that allows seamless reading and processing of “native” climate model output, i.e., operational output produced by running the climate model through the standard workflow of the corresponding modeling institute. This is achieved by an extension of ESMValTool's preprocessing pipeline that performs a CMOR-like reformatting of the native model output during runtime. Thus, the rich collection of diagnostics provided by ESMValTool is now fully available for these models. For models that use unstructured grids, a further preprocessing step required to apply many common diagnostics is regridding to a regular latitude–longitude grid. Extensions to ESMValTool's regridding functions described here allow for more flexible interpolation schemes that can be used on unstructured grids. Currently, ESMValTool supports nearest-neighbor, bilinear, and first-order conservative regridding from unstructured grids to regular grids. Example applications of this new native model support are the evaluation of new model setups against predecessor versions, assessing of the performance of different simulations against observations, CMORization of native model data for contributions to model intercomparison projects, and monitoring of running climate model simulations. For the latter, new general-purpose diagnostics have been added to ESMValTool that are able to plot a wide range of variable types. Currently, five climate models are supported: CESM2 (experimental; at the moment, only surface variables are available), EC-Earth3, EMAC, ICON, and IPSL-CM6. As the framework for the CMOR-like reformatting of native model output described here is implemented in a general way, support for other climate models can be easily added.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Metrics tool for for evaluating atmospheric rivers in climate data

The metric tool code is designed for evaluating atmospheric rivers (AR) in climate models and reanalysis. It is python based, with built in metrics of AR frequency, AR precipitation, AR peak day, AR characteristics (width, length, area, latitude and longitude), and output of diagnostic plots. Is there

Dong, Bo↗

DOE OSTI2021

The I-24 Trajectory Dataset

This dataset was created by recording CAN and GPS data from a single vehicle driving on I-24. The dataset includes values for Time, Velocity, Acceleration, Space Gap, Lateral Distance, Relative Velocity, Longitude GPS, Latitude GPS and more. This empirical dataset is useful for understanding/simulating real vehicle trajectories and vehicle controller performance.

controller area network↗

DOE OSTI2020

PVAnalytics [SWR-20-33]

PVAnalytics inputs long term (multiple years) photovoltaic (PV) outdoor sensor data and completes autonomous quality assurance (QA) analysis on the data. Time series data from individual sensors such as electric meters, inverter outputs, irradiance, and temperature sensors are compared to physically expected outputs of these sensors under clear sky conditions based on the latitude, longitude, and orientation of the PV system. PVAnalytics outputs as QA pass or fail for each sensor, reasons determined for failure, time series flags identifying QA thresholds have been exceeded, flags for sunny days, the time zone found for the given sensor, sensor drift, time periods for passing data, and results of orientation checks.

Muller, Matthew↗

DOE OSTI2023

CPC data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston, TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V) was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Onboard the ROAM-V, aerosol samples are drawn through a shared isokinetic inlet at a flow rate ranging from 3.5 to 7.0 LPM. A portion of this flow is directed through a cyclone impactor (Brechtel, Inc. Model SCC 0.732) and 0.3 LPM is directed to the CPC. To correct the data for particle losses, we used a two-step method. First, the measured SMPS size distributions were used to calculate total particle loss through the inlet for every SMPS scan at a single deployment location. Second, the CPC data was corrected for particle losses using the average of the total losses per scan. This calculation was done separately for each deployment location due to changes in the measured size distributions between locations. Particle loss from diffusion (based on Kesten, 1991 and Gormley, 1949), inertial impaction in 90-degree bends (based on Aerosol Measurement, 2011 and Crane, 1977), and cyclone impactor efficiency (based on Dirgo, 1985) were included in the loss calculation. When the SMPS was not sampling at a location (in the case of an instrument malfunction or operator error), the reported CPC data was corrected with an average of the total losses for the entire campaign at the specified deployment location (e.g., if we needed to correct Galveston data, then the average of all calculated losses at Galveston was taken). These flatline corrections were used for all data on 22/07/13, 22/07/20, 22/07/22, and the data from Galveston on 22/08/09. An additional flatline correction of 14% was applied to all CPC data based on laboratory calibration prior to and after the campaign. In laboratory calibrations, we identified that for the same sample of air the field CPC (GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC) undercounted the total concentration of particles by 14% compared to the ground truth laboratory CPC (TSI Model 3750). This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07055 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Kesten et. al. Calibration of a TSI Model 3025 Ultrafine Condensation Particle Counter. Aerosol Science and Technology, 15:2, 107-111, 1991. Gormley et. al. Diffusion from a Stream Flowing through a Cylindrical Tube. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol 52, 163-169, 1948. Aerosol Measurement: Principles, Techniques, and Applications, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2011. Crane et. al. Inertial Deposition of Particles in a Bent Pipe. Journal of Aerosol Science, Vol 8, 161-170, 1977. Dirgo et. al. Cyclone Collection Efficiency: Comparison of Experimental Results with Theoretical Predictions. Aerosol Science and Technology, 4:4, 401-415, 1985.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

CCN data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V) was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Onboard the ROAM-V, aerosol samples are drawn through a shared isokinetic inlet at a flow rate ranging from 3.5 to 7.0 LPM. A portion of this flow is directed through a cyclone impactor (Brechtel, Inc. Model SCC 0.732) and 0.5 LPM is directed to the CCN. To calculate particle losses, we used a two-step method. First, the measured SMPS size distributions were used to calculate particle loss through the inlet during sampling. Second, the corrected SMPS data was used to calculate the average of the total losses per scan down the CCN line. Then, the correction was applied to the CCN data. This calculation was done separately for each deployment location due to changes in the measured size distributions between locations. Particle loss from diffusion (based on Kesten, 1991 and Gormley, 1949), inertial impaction in 90-degree bends (based on Aerosol Measurement, 2011 and Crane, 1977), and cyclone impactor efficiency (based on Dirgo, 1985) were included in the loss calculation. When the SMPS was not sampling at a location (in the case of an instrument malfunction or operator error), the reported CPC data was corrected with an average of the total losses for the entire campaign at the specified deployment location (e.g., if we needed to correct Galveston data, then the average of all calculated losses at Galveston was taken). These flatline corrections were used for all data on 22/07/13, 22/07/20, 22/07/22, and the data from Galveston on 22/08/09. The supersaturation uncertainty is estimated conservatively at +/- 0.03%, where variation in the inlet temperature, pressure, and calibration technique prevents a more accurate measurement. Confidence in the reported supersaturation measurements is based on a pre-campaign calibration (following the methods from our previous work and Deng, 2014 based on Rose, 2008) in addition to inter-comparisons with the DOE for two days (22/08/18 and 22/09/01) where TAMU was co-located with AMF1. The inter-comparisons show good agreement between our instrument and the DOEs instrument on both days at all supersaturations. After the last inter-comparison on 22/09/01, there was no indication of a malfunction by our instrument through the rest of the campaign. Unfortunately, the instrument was dropped during demobilization. A post-campaign calibration was conducted, which showed a substantial departure from the pre-campaign calibration. The drop may have damaged the instrument’s ability to produce the desired supersaturations. Therefore, we do consider the data after 22/09/01 to be correct, but it should be used with caution. The CCN counter sampled for 3 minutes at each supersaturation setpoint (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2%). At the end of a cycle, the instrument was set to 0.01% supersaturation for 5 minutes. The data is comprised of the last 60 seconds of each supersaturation set point (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2%) to ensure the instrument stabilized and was able to reach thermal equilibrium. We removed the data during the periods where there were operational difficulties, setup, or maintenance. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07055 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Rose et. al. Calibration and Measurement Uncertainties of a Continuous-Flow Cloud Condensation Nuclei Counter (DMT-CCNC): CCN Activation of Ammonium Sulfate and Sodium Chloride Aerosol Particles in Theory and Experiment. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1153-1179, 2008. Deng et. al. Using Raman Microspectroscopy to Determine Chemical Composition and Mixing State of Airborne Marine Aerosols over the Pacific Ocean. Aerosol Science and Technology, Vol 48, Issue 2, 2014. Kesten et. al. Calibration of a TSI Model 3025 Ultrafine Condensation Particle Counter. Aerosol Science and Technology, 15:2, 107-111, 1991. Gormley et. al. Diffusion from a Stream Flowing through a Cylindrical Tube. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol 52, 163-169, 1948. Aerosol Measurement: Principles, Techniques, and Applications, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2011. Crane et. al. Inertial Deposition of Particles in a Bent Pipe. Journal of Aerosol Science, Vol 8, 161-170, 1977. Dirgo et. al. Cyclone Collection Efficiency: Comparison of Experimental Results with Theoretical Predictions. Aerosol Science and Technology, 4:4, 401-415, 1985.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

SMPS data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V) was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Onboard the ROAM-V, aerosol samples are drawn through a shared isokinetic inlet at a flow rate ranging from 3.5 to 7.0 LPM. A portion of this flow, 1.0 LPM, is directed through TSI's 0.071 cm impactor attached to the classifier of the SMPS setup. The SMPS’s DMA and CPC are connected through a 20.3 cm length of 0.48 cm diameter tubing. Measured SMPS size distributions were used to calculate size-dependent particle losses for each SMPS scan. Particle losses from diffusion (based on Kesten, 1991 and Gormley, 1949) and inertial impaction in 90-degree bends (based on Aerosol Measurement, 2011 and Crane, 1977) were included in the loss calculation. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07055 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Kesten et. al. Calibration of a TSI Model 3025 Ultrafine Condensation Particle Counter. Aerosol Science and Technology, 15:2, 107-111, 1991. Gormley et. al. Diffusion from a Stream Flowing through a Cylindrical Tube. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol 52, 163-169, 1948. Aerosol Measurement: Principles, Techniques, and Applications, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2011. Crane et. al. Inertial Deposition of Particles in a Bent Pipe. Journal of Aerosol Science, Vol 8, 161-170, 1977.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Ice nucleation measurements from DRUM impactors during TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, three Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM) were used to collect aerosols for ice nucleation measurements in the Brooks laboratory at Texas A&M University. The three instruments were located at AMF1 in La Porte, Ancillary site in Guy (ANC), and onboard the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V). ROAM-V was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and one of the Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Each DRUM sampler was operated at a flow rate of 23 LPM. Each DRUM has four stages where the aerodynamic diameter size cuts are as follows: stage 1 larger than 3 μm, stage 2 from 3 to 1.2 μm, stage 3 from 1.2 to 0.34 μm, and stage 4 from 0.34 to 0.15 μm. Pretreated aluminum foil was used as a substrate on all stages. At AMF1 and ANC sites, the DRUMs were operated on the shared aerosol inlet, with generous support of the DOE ARM site staff. These instruments rotated 24 mm per day and only contained aluminum foil substrates. Substrates were changed weekly and transported to Texas A&M for storage in -80C freezer until analysis. The DRUM onboard ROAM-V was operated at a faster rotation rate of 150 mm per day to clearly separate the multiple deployment locations for ROAM-V. For the ROAM-V DRUM, substrates were changed every deployment and transported to Texas A&M for storage in -80C freezer until analysis. At Texas A&M, ice nucleation experiments were conducted to measure the ice nucleation temperature of the ambient aerosol samples collected from the three DRUMs using our previously established procedures (Alsante et al., 2023; Fornea et al., 2009; Matthews et al., 2023). For ice nucleation, only samples collected on stage 3 were analyzed, given that these are the most relevant size (1.2 to 0.34 μm diameter) for potential ice nucleating particles. For the AMF1 and ANC sites, we cut and analyzed 2 mm (2-hour) samples. We analyzed the time periods of the AMF1 site instrument when the ROAM-V was deployed. A 72-hour period from July 11th at 23:49 through July 15th at 1:49 was analyzed from the ANC site instrument. For the ROAM-V instrument, we separated the daily samples by site location. Between 1- and 6-hour independent samples were analyzed at each location. We also cut the ROAM-V samples in half to allow for compositional analysis of the aerosol on the other half of the substrate. All viable samples from the ROAM-V were analyzed. Analysis was done using a custom-built ice nucleation apparatus, recently updated to include an array of 16 individual samples (Matthews et al., 2023). On our experimental setup, we used 100 μL of Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UHPLC) water (Sigma Aldrich, >99.9% purity) to wash off the aerosol from the DRUM substrate. Then, we micropipetted 2 μL droplet samples into each of the 16 wells of the array, using hydrophobically coated microscope slides. Experiments would cycle 28 times from 10 C to -40C over a 20-hour period. During analysis of the TRACER samples, nine experiments were conducted with UHPLC water process blanks that followed an identical preparation procedure. The average freezing temperature and standard deviation for these process blanks is -27.7±2.4 C. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07023 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Alsante, A. N., Thornton, D. C., & Brooks, S. D. (2023). Ice nucleation catalyzed by the photosynthesis enzyme RuBisCO and other abundant biomolecules. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1), 51. Fornea, A. P., Brooks, S. D., Dooley, J. B., & Saha, A. (2009). Heterogeneous freezing of ice on atmospheric aerosols containing ash, soot, and soil. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 114(D13). DOI:10.1029/2009JD011958 Matthews, B. H., Alsante, A. N., & Brooks, S. D. (2023). Pollen Emissions of Subpollen Particles and Ice Nucleating Particles. ACS Earth and Space Chemistry.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗