Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “TRACER campaign”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Size-resolved Eddy-Covariance Particle Flux Measurement during the TRACER Campaign (Final Report)

The main goal of the TRacking Aerosol Convection interactions ExpeRiment (TRACER) campaign was to study aerosol–cloud interactions during deep convection over the Houston area. This project deployed a suite of instrumentation with the aim to (1) quantify turbulent vertical particle fluxes during at DOE-ARM sites, including TRACER, (2) assess hygroscopic growth factors and hygroscopicity parameters of the material driving modal aerosol growth during new particle formation and growth events, (3) derive turbulent aerosol mass fluxes using co-located Doppler LIDAR measurements, and (4) create quality-controlled PI data products to support future research utilizing data collected during the TRACER campaign. This report summarized the main findings from the deployments at two DOE-ARM sites. Briefly, we found that new particle formation may occur aloft, in a residual layer, near the top of the boundary layer. Small grown particles appear later due to downward mixing with daytime turbulence. The species that are responsible for aerosol modal growth had hygroscopicity parameters varying between 0.05 and 0.34. These values systematically depended on the wind sector, suggesting that the chemical composition of the precursors differed. This work demonstrated that lidar retrievals of the elastic backscatter and Doppler velocity can be used to obtain surface number emissions of particles with a diameter greater than 0.53 µm. During TRACER, emission particle number fluxes peaked near ∼ 100 cm−2 s−1. Multiple quality-controlled PI data products that will support future TRACER related science were generated and made publically available.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Chemical properties and single-particle mixing state of soot aerosol in Houston during the TRACER campaign

Abstract. A high-resolution soot particle aerosol mass spectrometer (SP-AMS) was used to selectively measure refractory black carbon (rBC) and its associated coating material using both the ensemble size-resolved mass spectral mode and the event trigger single particle (ETSP) mode in Houston, Texas, in summer 2022. This study was conducted as part of the Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) program's TRacking Aerosol Convection interactions ExpeRiment (TRACER) field campaign. The study revealed an average (±1σ) rBC concentration of 103 ± 176 ng m−3. Additionally, the coatings on the BC particles were primarily composed of organics (59 %; 219 ± 260 ng m−3) and sulfate (26 %; 94 ± 55 ng m−3). Positive matrix factorization (PMF) analysis of the ensemble mass spectra of BC-containing particles resolved four distinct types of soot aerosol, including an oxidized organic aerosol (OOABC,PMF) factor associated with processed primary organic aerosol, an inorganic sulfate factor (SO4,BC,PMF), an oxidized rBC factor (O-BCPMF), and a mixed mineral dust–biomass burning aerosol factor with significant contribution from potassium (K-BBBC,PMF). Additionally, K-means clustering analysis of the single-particle mass spectra identified eight different clusters, including soot particles enriched in hydrocarbon-like organic aerosol (HOABC,ETSP), sulfate (SO4,BC,ETSP), two types of rBC, OOA (OOABC,ETSP), chloride (ClBC,ETSP), and nitrate (NO3,BC,ETSP). The single-particle measurements demonstrate substantial variation in BC coating thickness with coating-to-rBC mass ratios ranging from 0.1 to 100. The mixing state index (χ), which denotes the degree of homogeneity of the soot aerosol, varied from 4 % to 94 % with a median of 40 %, indicating that the aerosol population lies in between internal and external mixing but has large temporal and source type variability. In addition, a significant fraction of BC-containing particles, a majority enriched with oxidized organics and sulfate, exhibit sufficiently high κ values and diameters conducive to activation as cloud nuclei under atmospherically relevant supersaturation conditions. This finding bears significance in comprehending the aging processes of rBC-containing particles and their activation into cloud droplets. Our analysis highlights the complex nature of soot aerosol and underscores the need to comprehend its variability across different environments for accurate assessment of climate change.

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↗
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

Mini-Micropulse Lidar 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 (mini-MPL)), 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”. The mini-MPL deployed with ROAM-V is a 532 nm elastic and polarization lidar. The mini-MPL outputs normalized relative backscatter (NRB) derived from raw signal after after-pulse, overlap, and dead-time correction calibration. The depolarization ratio is calculated from the co-polarized and cross-polarized NRB (Flynna et al., 2007). The NRB and depolarization ratio data are resampled from the original data at 1-minute intervals. The vertical resolution of the mini-MPL data is 15 meters. The mini-MPL data can be used to determine the boundary layer, cloud top, and cloud bottom height and can be used to retrieve aerosol type and concentration profile. 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 . Flynna, C. J., Mendozaa, A., Zhengb, Y., & Mathurb, S. (2007). Novel polarization-sensitive micropulse lidar measurement technique. Optics express, 15(6), 2785-2790.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
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 OSTI2026

Aerosol-deep convection interaction based on joint cell-thermal tracking in Large Eddy Simulations during the TRACER campaign

In cumulus clouds, aerosol concentrations control cloud droplet concentrations, modifying cloud radiative properties, precipitation processes, and cloud electrification. However, mechanisms of aerosol-deep convection interactions are not well understood due to complex cloud dynamics and microphysics. We investigate the interaction of aerosols with isolated deep convection using Large Eddy Simulations of two cases during the TRacking Aerosol Convection interactions ExpeRiment (TRACER) near Houston, Texas, using a joint cell-thermal tracking algorithm. Cumulus thermals are droplet generators, since supersaturation and droplet nucleation coincide with thermal centers, where the strongest updrafts occur. Primary ice crystal formation does not take place inside thermals, but at layers where previous thermals detrained moisture. As subsequent thermals containing supercooled droplets penetrate these layers, hail and graupel form at or near these thermals. Higher aerosol concentrations result in higher droplet concentrations that suppress drizzle, delay warm rain processes, and transport more moisture aloft. This increases snow and ice amount, as well as graupel and hail, leading to more lightning. Polluted thermals initiate at slightly higher altitudes, and are slightly larger and faster, suggesting a weak invigoration. We also find more thermals per cell, but fewer isolated cells, since convection is more aggregated and intense, especially near the end of the 24 h simulation. Non-linear mesoscale feedback likely triggered by temperature and moisture responses to aerosol-thermal interactions causes the aggregation. Time-lagged aerosol-reinitialization experiments show that the mesoscale response is the predominant forcing for the invigoration. These changes happen within one day, on a smaller scale than previously suggested.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Impact of Urbanization on Convection, Lightning, and Precipitation Over the Houston Metropolitan Area: Case Study Simulation From the TRACER Campaign

This study investigates the effects of urbanization, specifically land use change and anthropogenic emissions (AE), on convection, lightning, and surface precipitation for a case of summertime sea‐breeze convection observed over the Houston metropolitan area. The unique capabilities of the NASA‐Unified Weather Research and Forecasting model allows us to conduct a series of sensitivity experiments with complex configurations, in particular including multi‐year land model spin‐up simulations, treatment of aerosols and their precursors, and explicit cloud charging and lightning. The simulation results show that urban land use primarily alters the temporal evolution of convection, lightning, and surface precipitation, leading to late afternoon thunderstorm development. The decrease in latent heat flux from the land surface caused by urbanization weakens convection in the early afternoon, while a condition suitable for convection development is maintained in the late afternoon due to less stabilization of the lower troposphere by the weaker convection development and high sensible heat flux from the surface. On the other hand, anthropogenic aerosols directly enhance convection, lightning, and surface precipitation by increasing convective updrafts due to the aerosol‐induced convective invigoration. The combined effects of urban land use and AE lead to even stronger thunderstorms in the late afternoon, mostly consistent with observations. These results indicate that urbanization increases the probability of late afternoon thunderstorms over the Houston area during the summer season. Advanced weather forecasting models that incorporate these urbanization effects might support sustainable urban planning to better mitigate the impacts of urbanization on local weather and public safety.

Iguchi, T. [Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD (U↗
DOE OSTI2020

TR acking A erosol C onvection Interations E xpe R iment ( TRACER ): Site Selection for the ARM TRACER Campaign

Three AMF Sites are needed: Main Site for the AMF1 Observatory, an 'ancillary site' to the SW of the city for measurement of air before crossing Houston. A radar site for the CSAPR between the main and ancillary sites, ideally no more than 50km from either site. We are making preliminary evaluations of sites for tethered balloon system (TBS) activities.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Observation of O3 events with LMOL during the TRACER-AQ campaign

The TRACER-AQ campaign in Houston TX, happened in August-September 2021 in Houston, Texas. The Langley Mobile Ozone Lidar (LMOL) was located on the Houston campus and performed observations of ozone alongside basic estimation of aerosol backscatter. In presentation, we highlight the latest results from LMOL during that campaign. We show how the latest improvements of the lidar along with secondary measurements, such as from ozonesondes, and modeling enable better observations and understanding of ozone events in coastal environments.

Guillaume Gronoff↗
DOE OSTI2023

Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment (TRACER) Field Campaign Report

Convective clouds serve a critical role in the Earth’s energy and water cycles through their transport of heat, moisture, momentum, and chemical species through the troposphere driving the global circulation (e.g., Hartmann et al. 1984, Del Genio et al. 2012, Su et al. 2014). On more local scales, convective clouds impact the atmospheric heating profile through diabatic heating effects, removal of water from the atmospheric column through precipitation, and conditioning of the local environment impacting further development of clouds (e.g., Sullivan and Voigt 2021). These critical roles underscore the importance of realistic representation of convective processes across scales of models from large-eddy simulation (LES), to convection-permitting models (CPM; e.g., Kendon et al. 2020, Marinescu et al. 2021), to numerical weather prediction (NWP) models used for operational weather forecasting, to Earth system models used to predict climate sensitivity (Sanderson et al. 2011, Sherwood et al. 2014, Tomassini et al. 2014, Zhao et al. 2016, Cronin et al. 2017). A key component of improving model representation of convective clouds is better quantification and parameterization of updraft microphysics and dynamics, including their interactions with the surrounding environment and storm organization (Bony et al. 2015, Hagos and Houze 2016, Donner et al. 2016, Morrison et al. 2020). Aerosol is an important environmental factor that could affect convective clouds and precipitation since cloud droplet and ice formation processes are initiated by it. Andrae et al. (2004) hypothesized that aerosols associated with increased biomass burning particles acting as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) result in smaller and more monodisperse cloud droplets leading to suppression of warm rain formation, ultimately leading to more cloud water being lofted above the freezing level based on observations in the Amazon region. The subsequent increase in latent heat release increases the buoyancy of rising convective parcels invigorating the deep convection. This work was followed by a description of the theoretical basis for this “cold-phase invigoration” by Rosenfeld et al. (2008), who argued that it could have a significant effect for deep convective clouds with warm cloud-bases. Several modeling studies (e.g., Khain et al. 2005, 2009, van den Heever et al. 2006, Fan et al. 2007, 2009, 2012, Lee et al. 2008, Storer et al. 2010, Lebo et al. 2012, Storer and van den Heever 2013, Chen et al. 2020, Dagan et al. 2022) have investigated these aerosol-convection interactions and the environmental factors that influence their relative importance and magnitude. More recently, several studies have indicated that “warm-phase invigoration”, the enhancement of convection through condensational heating, also appears to play a role in enhancing both shallow cumuli (Seiki and Nakajima 2014, Saleeby et al 2015) and deeper tropical convection (Lebo and Seinfeld 2011, Khain et al. 2012, Sheffield et al 2015, Fan et al. 2018, Igel and van den Heever 2021), as well as Houston thunderstorms (Fan et al. 2007, 2020). However, still other studies have provided additional evidence of systematic biases in simulated convective outflow ice size distribution properties, which are consistent with a lack of poorly understood secondary ice production within convective updrafts (e.g., Fridlind et al. 2017). To help address these critical gaps in our understanding of cloud processes, aerosol processes and aerosol-cloud interactions, the Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment was designed building upon efforts by the Aerosol, Cloud, Precipitation and Climate (ACPC) Initiative (http://acpcintiative.org/), a joint effort of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP) and the World Climate Research Program (WCRP) that focused on resolving uncertainties in the interactions between aerosol and clouds towards better understanding the role that these interactions play in the climate system. The TRACER campaign was motivated by recommendations from a number of pilot studies undertaken by ACPC (van den Heever et al. 2017, Fridlind et al. 2019, Hu et al. 2019, Fan et al. 2020, Marinescu et al. 2021, Hernandez-Deckers et al. 2022) that pointed towards the southeastern Texas region as a locale where aerosol-convection interactions could be studied owing to the copious occurrence of isolated convection during the summer months accompanied by diverse and significant sources of aerosols from both anthropogenic and natural sources. The TRACER campaign began on 01 October 2021 and extended through 30 September 2022 with an intensive operational period (IOP) during June-September 2022. Three main sites (Table 1) were managed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Stereo Camera Deployment in Support of TRACER (Field Campaign Report)

An improved understanding of the salient environmental controls on cloud formation, evolution, and eventual dissipation is critical to address ongoing challenges with cloud process and parameterization representations in global climate and Earth system models. One goal for the recent U.S. Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility’s Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment (TRACER) campaign was to collect a comprehensive data set that enabled such convective cloud process studies and key demonstrations for those controls that influenced cloud life cycle (i.e., aerosols, thermodynamics) in the Houston, Texas region. To help accomplish this, ARM instrumentation during TRACER was tasked with tracking a large number of individual, isolated convective cells – and to follow the evolution of these cells at high spatiotemporal resolution to characterize changes in cloud dynamic and microphysical properties. Since Houston experiences a range of convective clouds, it was known that the standard ARM Mobile Facility (AMF) instruments may not be sufficient to completely document initiating, transient, or dissipating low- or shallow-cloud behaviors that were also expected during this campaign (in terms of sensitivity, resolution, and/or operational availability). As one partial solution, a supplemental stereo camera deployment (this sub-campaign) was requested to augment the ARM AMF instrumentation to better address shallow and shallow-to-deep transitional types of cloud process drivers during TRACER (ARM stereo cameras for clouds [STEREOCAM]; Romps and Öktem 2018). The primary scientific focus was the relationships between cloud properties and the ambient conditions, which points to several key TRACER science questions including: ‘What is the relationship between cloud size or updraft intensity to the environmental wind shear and/or humidity?’ Overall, the ARM TRACER stereo camera deployment demonstrated unique effectiveness in observing a wide range of critical shallow, congestus, and transitioning or time-evolving cloud characteristics. The data sets from these cameras include information on the clouds' horizontal dimensions, elevations, and depths, while also enabling potential products for cloud initiation and dissipation rates, and vertical velocities. Stereo cameras simultaneously inform on cloud life cycle stage and spatial properties such as cloud fractional coverage, which should provide complementary information for ARM users when combined with TRACER cloud radars, lidar, and/or other profiling sensors. Moreover, camera products offer large-eddy simulation (LES),-scale-appropriate cloud coverage, depth, and spatial variability estimates, while opening additional avenues to challenge difficult process questions on cloud updrafts/entrainment and their covariability with environmental controls such as wind shear and humidity.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
NASA NTRS2024

Lightning and Radar Measures of Mixed Phase Updraft Variability in Tracked Storms During the TRACER Field Campaign in Houston, Texas

Properties of 7488 thunderstorms are summarized for June-September 2022 during the TRACER field campaign Houston, Texas using polarimetric weather radar and VHF 3D lightning mapping array data. Automated tracking of storms linked each instrument’s measurements to a data-defined, time-evolving storm footprint. Within each storm, the depth and magnitude of episodic columns of radar differential reflectivity and specific differential phase quantified the prevalence of updrafts that activated mixed-phase precipitation pathways. Lightning measurements further distinguished the degree of rimed precipitation formation: the fraction of tracks with lightning varied from day to day, and cells with lightning had stronger polarimetric columns. Track-level correlation of lightning flash rate with radar polarimetric measures had substantial spread, showing that lightning provides an additional signal of mixed-phase precipitation processes that can complement future studies of thermodynamic and aerosol controls on cloud microphysics in the Houston region.

TRACER field campaign↗
DOE OSTI2023

Ice Nucleation Measurements during TRACER (Field Campaign Report)

This campaign, Ice Nucleation Measurements during TRACER, was conducted during the TRacking Aerosol Convection Interactions ExpeRiment (TRACER) in Houston, Texas during June-September, 2022. Specifically, our ice nucleation campaign was designed to improve understanding of ice nucleating particles (INPs) and their role in deep convective clouds across the Houston region. Summertime deep convection in southeast Texas is regularly tied to the sea-breeze front (SBF) that pushes inland from the Gulf of Mexico across the region. During TRACER, three Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM) were used to collect aerosols for offline ice nucleation measurements in the Brooks laboratory at Texas A&M University. The three instruments were located at the U.S. Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) first Mobile Facility (AMF1) in La Porte, at the ancillary site in Guy (ANC), and onboard the newly developed Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V). Aerosol at the main ARM TRACER site, ARM1, is expected to arise from local urban, industrial, and ship channel sources. In contrast, the ANC is isolated and rural, and can therefore provide a continental background aerosol population. On select days when convective development was forecast to be probable, ROAM-V commuted from College Station, Texas to Galveston, sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast, and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. Sampling from the ROAM-V allowed us to capture aerosol and meteorological differences between maritime and continental airmasses by strategically positioning the ROAM-V near the coast in the morning in the opposite airmass from the AMF1 site.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Lightning and Radar Measures of Mixed-Phase Updraft Variability in Tracked Storms during the TRACER Field Campaign in Houston, Texas

Properties of 7488 thunderstorms are summarized for June–September 2022 during the Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment (TRACER) field campaign Houston, Texas, using polarimetric weather radar and VHF 3D Lightning Mapping Array data. Automated tracking of storms linked each instrument’s measurements to a data-defined, time-evolving storm footprint. Within each storm, the depth and magnitude of episodic columns of radar differential reflectivity and specific differential phase quantified the prevalence of updrafts that activated mixed-phase precipitation pathways. Lightning measurements further distinguished the degree of rimed precipitation formation: the fraction of tracks with lightning varied from day to day and cells with lightning had stronger polarimetric columns. Track-level correlation of the lightning flash rate with radar polarimetric measures had substantial spread, showing that lightning provides an additional signal of mixed-phase precipitation processes that can complement future studies of thermodynamic and aerosol controls on cloud microphysics in the Houston region.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗