Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “drop size distribution”

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

Evaluating Entrainment–Mixing Characteristics through Direct Comparisons of Drop Size Distributions Using In Situ Observations from ACE-ENA

Abstract Constraining the impacts of entrainment and associated mixing (i.e., entrainment–mixing) on cloud properties continues to be difficult, partly due to observational uncertainties as well as a lacking consensus of which methodologies for diagnosing entrainment–mixing are most appropriate. This study introduces a novel method to evaluate the presence and degree of inhomogeneous and homogeneous mixing using ∼100 h of in situ observations from a research aircraft over the northeastern Atlantic. Specifically, drop size distributions are compared between regions containing negligible and significant entrainment for select flight legs, making a direct characterization of the degree of homogeneous and inhomogeneous mixing possible. A measure of drop concentration variance is used as a proxy variable to diagnose entrainment–mixing. Results correspond well with entrainment–mixing metrics, showing lower Damköhler numbers where drop size distributions shift toward smaller drop sizes (i.e., inhomogeneous mixing) and greater transition length scales where drop size distributions do not (i.e., homogeneous mixing). Inhomogeneous mixing occurs in most samples from Aerosol and Cloud Experiment in the Eastern North Atlantic (ACE-ENA) (regardless of homogeneous mixing frequencies increasing with increasing spatial resolution from ∼100 to ∼10 m) and is associated with decreased drop size relative dispersion and both greater aerosol and drop concentrations compared with homogeneous mixing. Precipitating clouds have a greater frequency of homogeneous mixing compared with nonprecipitating clouds. The proposed methodology is similarly applied to in situ observations of southeast Pacific stratocumulus, shallow convective clouds over central Oklahoma and low-level clouds over the Southern Ocean. All four locations are primarily dominated by inhomogeneous mixing with minimal variability among each region.

Clouds↗
DOE OSTI2025

Warm-phase microphysical evolution in large-eddy simulations of tropical cumulus congestus: evaluating drop size distribution evolution using polarimetry retrievals, in situ measurements, and a thermal-based framework

Owing to uncertainties in convective microphysics processes, improving parameterizations in Earth system models (ESMs) can benefit from observationally constrained cases suitable for scaling between cloud-resolving models and ESMs. We propose a benchmark large-eddy simulation (LES) cumulus congestus case study from the NASA Cloud, Aerosol, and Monsoon Processes Philippines Experiment (CAMP 2 Ex) for evaluating and improving ESMs in single-column model (SCM) mode. We seek observational constraints using novel polarimetric retrievals and in situ cloud microphysics measurements. Simulations using bulk and bin microphysics initialized with observed aerosol profiles are compared to cloud-top retrievals of cloud droplet effective radius (R eff ), effective variance (ν eff ), and number concentration (N d ) from the airborne Research Scanning Polarimeter (RSP). Both schemes reproduce characteristics of cloud-top N d and R eff that increase and decrease with altitude, respectively. Cloud-top N d is low-biased relative to RSP retrievals in both schemes, potentially due to limitations in both simulations and retrieval assumptions. Cloud-top R eff is low-biased in the bulk scheme but reasonably reproduced by the bin scheme. Profiles of N d and R eff are sensitive to the collision–coalescence process and the vertical variation in aerosol size distribution. Comparison of simulated and in situ droplet size distributions (DSDs) shows that, to first order, integrated moments are always sensitive to sizes < ~ 30 µm and can also be sensitive to larger sizes if the DSDs are sufficiently broad, with implications for the assumed maximum observed size retrieved by the RSP. The bin scheme captures the observed extended tail of the DSD, while the bulk scheme is unable to due to parametric constraints. Differences in expected relationships between in situ measurements of cloud cores and cloud-top retrievals by RSP demonstrate difficulty in constraining well the case presented herein. Finally, a thermal-tracking framework demonstrates that the dilution of N d throughout a thermal's lifetime is heavily determined by collision–coalescence and the height-varying aerosol distribution and that, in the absence of these, the impact of entrainment on diluting N d is largely offset by secondary activation. Implications for evaluating warm-phase convective microphysics schemes in ESMs and translating results for use on global, space-based polarimetry platforms are discussed.

Stanford, McKenna Wallace [Columbia Univ., New Yor↗
DOE OSTI2026

Drop clustering and drop size correlations from holographic imagery suggest cloud droplet spectral broadening via entrainment-mixing

The question of how droplets rapidly grow large enough to initiate collision-coalescence has persisted for decades. Many theories explaining the production of sufficiently large drops (i.e., those in the “bottleneck” size range; ∼ 25–50 µm diameters) involve drop clustering on millimeter scales. A novel method is introduced to evaluate drop clustering trends particle-by-particle (i.e., the number/proximity of neighboring drops for given droplets; defined as drop clustering fields) which are diagnosed relative to drops within their shared drop environments – in contrast to previous studies which diagnose drop clustering of defined sample volumes, or in terms of absolute length scales. Specifically, this study evaluates the statistical likelihood that drops of a given size are associated with either a significant number of neighboring drops, or are significantly isolated from neighboring drops. Observations are acquired from the HOLODEC during the Cloud System Evolution in the Trades campaign, which sampled subtropical marine clouds. The HOLODEC measures drop size distributions and the 3D spatial coordinates of droplets. Results show drops within the bottleneck size range (diameters of ∼ 25–50 µm) are most likely to be significantly isolated from neighboring drops. This “isolated large drop trend” is primarily observed at subsaturated conditions, suggesting entrainment is the contributing factor. Holograms associated with this trend are more likely to have broader drop size distributions, larger maximum drop sizes and overly regions where precipitation reaches the lowest altitudes from the sampled cloud, suggesting entrainment-mixing drop size distribution broadening is a relevant precipitation-initiation mechanism.

D'Alessandro, John J. [Univ. of Washington, Seattl↗
DOE OSTI2024

THz Radar Observations of Hydrometeors in a Spray Chamber

Abstract A THz radar, with its wide bandwidth, is capable of high‐resolution imaging down to the centimeter scale. In this study, a THz radar is applied to detect hydrometeors generated in a spray chamber. The observed backscattering signals show fluctuations at centimeter scales, indicating various hydrometeor distribution patterns along the radar beam. A co‐located High‐Speed Imaging (HSI) sensor is used to measure the Drop Size Distributions (DSD) in the spray chamber. The radar sampling beam is well aligned with the HSI probes, allowing an objective comparison between the remote sensing and in situ observations. In this study, the observed radar power is compared with the power estimated from the HSI measurements. Results show great consistency, with power difference smaller than 0.5 dB. This study demonstrates the feasibility and great potential of using a THz radar for ultra‐high‐resolution observations of clouds in a laboratory facility, and in the real atmosphere.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Impacts of Bulk Microphysics Scheme Structural Choices on Simulations of Rain Initiation Through Drop Coalescence

This study examines how different structural choices in bulk microphysics schemes impact the simulation of warm rain initiation. A single liquid category (SLC) approach prognosing up to four moments of a single drop size distribution (DSD) is compared to the traditional two-category, two-moment approach with separate DSDs for cloud and rain (four total prognostic variables). Different methods for calculating tendencies of the prognostic variables from drop collision-coalescence are also tested: a discretized numerical-integration approach, machine learning via neural networks, lookup tables, and traditional power law fits. Relative to simulations using a bin microphysics model, SLC gives smaller error overall than the two-category approach when numerical integration is used to calculate the collision-coalescence tendencies for both. Replacing the numerical integration with a pre-computed lookup table reduces computational cost with little loss of accuracy. However, using fitted power laws with SLC to represent the collision-coalescence tendencies substantially reduces accuracy and leads to an order of magnitude increase in error. It is also demonstrated that with SLC, reasonably accurate solutions are obtained using only three prognostic moments, while a two-moment SLC scheme leads to substantial error. Overall, both the choice of prognostic moments (e.g., SLC vs. two-category) and method to calculate the collision-coalescence tendencies are important to consider for minimizing errors in bulk schemes. SLC with a sufficiently detailed calculation of the collision-coalescence tendencies provides accurate solutions for a reasonable computational cost, providing a viable alternative to the traditional two-category, two-moment approach for bulk microphysics.

320 (cloud physics and chemistry)↗
DOE OSTI2025

Uncertainty quantification and optimization of precipitating hydrometeor parameters for winter precipitation in a cloud microphysics scheme

The precipitating hydrometeor parameters used in cloud microphysics schemes carry inherent uncertainties. The quantification of these uncertainties, together with parameter optimization, can significantly improve precipitation forecasts. This study investigates the effects of 13 parameters in the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Double-Moment 6-class (WDM6) microphysics scheme, which define the hydrometeor characteristics such as fall velocity–diameter and mass–diameter relationships, as well as the shape parameter of the drop size distribution for precipitating particles such as rain, snow, and graupel on simulated winter precipitation. A comparison between the model's pre-defined parameters and observations from the International Collaborative Experiments for the PyeongChang 2018 Olympic and Paralympic winter games (ICE-POP 2018) field campaign reveals that the fall velocity–diameter relationship for rain, the mass–diameter relationships for snow and graupel, and the shape parameters for all precipitating particles in the WDM6 scheme deviate from the median values observed by the two-dimensional video disdrometer (2DVD). To quantify parameter sensitivities, a perturbed parameter ensemble (PPE) of 256 simulations was conducted within parameter ranges constrained by 2DVD observations for three winter precipitation cases. Bayesian optimization was then applied to identify parameter sets that minimized the root mean square error (RMSE) for each case, achieving reductions of up to 30.2 %. These results demonstrate that ensemble-based uncertainty quantification and parameter optimization can help identify key parameters and provide a pathway to improving precipitation simulation performance. In addition, measurement sites can be strategically selected based on regions that show high sensitivity to variations in hydrometeor characteristic parameters.

Bayesian optimization↗
DOE OSTI2026

Understanding the causes of satellite–model discrepancies in aerosol–cloud interactions using near-LES simulations of marine boundary layer clouds

Aerosol–cloud interactions (ACI) remain the largest source of uncertainty in model estimates of anthropogenic radiative forcing, primarily because of deficiencies in representing aerosol–cloud microphysical processes that lead to inconsistent cloud liquid water path (LWP) responses to aerosol perturbations between observations and models. To investigate this discrepancy, we conducted a series of large-eddy-scale simulations driven by realistic meteorology over the eastern North Atlantic, and evaluated LWP susceptibility, precipitation processes, and boundary layer thermodynamics using satellite and ground-based observations. Simulated LWP responses show a strong dependence on cloud state. Non-precipitating thin clouds exhibit a modest LWP decrease with increasing cloud droplet number concentration (N d ), consistent in sign but weaker in magnitude than satellite estimates, reflecting enhanced turbulent mixing and evaporation. The largest model-observation discrepancy occurs in non-precipitating thick clouds, where simulated LWP susceptibilities are strongly positive (+0.32) while observations indicate large negative values (−0.69). This discrepancy stems from excessive precipitation driven by underestimated entrainment, overly active accretion, and overly broad drop-size distributions in polluted conditions. While our high-resolution setup mitigates the excessive drizzling common in coarser models and captures key regime transitions, these biases persist – highlighting that improved parameterizations of cloud-top processes, precipitation, and aerosol effects are needed beyond simply increasing model resolution. Additionally, misrepresented moisture inversions in reanalysis introduce a moist bias in cloud-top relative humidity, further amplifying positive LWP susceptibility. Our results also suggest that large negative N d –LWP relationships in observations may reflect internal cloud processes rather than true ACI effects.

Aerosol-cloud interaction↗
DOE OSTI2024

ACE-ENA: Fast Liquid Water Content

These data were collected during the Aerosol and Cloud Experiments in the Eastern North Atlantic field campaign as part of ARM Aerial Facility deployment (ACE-ENA, https://www.arm.gov/research/campaigns/aaf2017ace-ena). The ARM Aerial Facility Gulfstream-1 was deployed at Lajes Air Base (IATA: TER, ICAO: LPLA), on Terceira Island in the Azores, Portugal, for the two Intensive Observation Periods from June 20 through July 22, 2017 (IOP#1) and from January 11 through February 22, 2018 (IOP#2). The G-1 aircraft performed 20+19 research flights over the ARM Eastern North Atlantic (ENA) site and Atlantic Ocean to measure atmospheric turbulence, cloud water content and drop size distributions, aerosol precursor gases, aerosol chemical composition and size distributions. The current data set presents re-processed Particle Volume Monitor PVM-100A (aka Gerber probe) data: Liquid Water Content (LWC), Particle Surface Area (PSA), and the effective droplet radius (re) averaged to 50 Hz, 10 Hz, and 1 Hz.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

An initial effort to study the influence of pitting in SAVY containers

As part of a broader effort to investigate a critical pit depth, below which SAVY containers fail a leak test after a drop test, surrogate testing using pristine SAVY container material was investigated. The original study involved producing pits in a SAVY wall to depths 35% to 55% of the wall thickness and subjecting the pitted container to a drop test under prototypic conditions. Subsequent leak testing after drop testing showed the container passed and that the pit size distribution and drop conditions were not sufficient to cause a leak test failure in this specific container.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Are turbulence effects on droplet collision–coalescence a key to understanding observed rain formation in clouds?

Rain formation is a critical factor governing the lifecycle and radiative forcing of clouds and therefore it is a key element of weather and climate. Cloud microphysics–turbulence interactions occur across a wide range of scales and are challenging to represent in atmospheric models with limited resolution. Based on past experiments and idealized numerical simulations, it has been postulated that cloud turbulence accelerates rain formation by enhancing drop collision–coalescence. We provide substantial evidence for significant impacts of turbulence on the evolution of cloud droplet size distributions and rain formation by comparing high-resolution observations of cumulus congestus clouds with state-of-the-art large-eddy simulations coupled with a Lagrangian particle-based microphysics scheme. Turbulent coalescence must be included in the model to accurately represent the observed drop size distributions, especially for drizzle drop sizes at lower heights in the cloud. Turbulence causes earlier rain formation and greater rain accumulation compared to simulations with gravitational coalescence only. The observed rain size distribution tail just above cloud base follows a power law scaling that deviates from theoretical scalings considering either a purely gravitation collision kernel or a turbulent kernel neglecting droplet inertial effects, providing additional evidence for turbulent coalescence in clouds. In contrast, large aerosols acting as cloud condensation nuclei (“giant CCN”) do not significantly impact rain formation owing to their long timescale to reach equilibrium wet size relative to the lifetime of rising cumulus thermals. Overall, turbulent drop coalescence exerts a dominant influence on rain initiation in warm cumulus clouds, with limited impacts of giant CCN.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

CROCUS Forward Scatter Disdrometer Data at Argonne National Laboratory Prairie Site

The Vaisala FD70 is a multi-parameter present weather and visibility sensor designed to measure precipitation type, intensity, and visibility with high accuracy in diverse environmental conditions. It uses a combination of forward-scatter measurement and optical disdrometer technologies to detect drop size, fall speeds, and optical properties, enabling the classification of various precipitation types such as rain, snow, sleet, and freezing rain along is visibility estimates. The FD70 provides quantitative estimates of liquid-equivalent precipitation rate and meteorological optical range (MOR), supporting applications in meteorological research, aviation, and road weather monitoring. These measurements are collected at the Argonne Testbed for Multiscale Observational Science (ATMOS), a 20 acre prairie site at Argonne National Lab, located in Lemont, IL. Data is available in netcdf format. Each file contains one second interval data, for approximately 24 hrs each day. File naming convention includes the project (CROCUS), location (ATMOS), instrument name, data level (raw, a1), and date (year, month, day).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Giant Cloud Condensation Nuclei Facilitate Drizzle Formation in Stratocumulus—Insights From a Combined Observation‐Modeling Framework

The mechanism for initiating drizzle drop remains a gap in the current understanding of warm rain formation. One prevalent hypothesis suggests that the presence of Giant Cloud Condensation Nuclei (GCCN) generates drizzle‐sized drops necessary to trigger the Collision‐Coalescence (C‐C) process. Here, in this study, this hypothesis is investigated using a novel framework that integrates in situ observations, remote sensing measurements, and idealized models. Results show that GCCN can efficiently generate drizzle drops through condensation, producing a broad Droplet Size Distribution (DSD) comparable to in situ observations. The large drizzle drop and broad DSD strongly facilitate C‐C, further accelerating drizzle initiation. To compare with observation, the model‐generated DSDs are used to generate radar Doppler spectra where radar reflectivity and Doppler skewness is estimated. The simulated radar quantities correspond well with radar observations, providing critical evidence for the GCCN‐induced drizzle initiation mechanism.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Investigation of Anchor Link Magnetohydrodynamic Effects in the Toroidally Symmetric Lead-Lithium (TSLL) Blanket Concept

This paper presents a comprehensive study on the magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) flow in a slotted channel with a cylindrical anchor link, which is an imperative component of the toroidally symmetric lead-lithium (TSLL) blanket concept. Following the validation of the MHD solver implemented in COMSOL and a proposed subtraction approach to compute the anchor link pressure drop, the effects of computational domain size on the pressure drop and velocity distribution are examined. The results show that the pressure drop associated with the anchor link and the maximum flow velocity follow an asymptotic trend as the domain width increases, with wall-induced pressure drop being more dominant than that of the anchor link. The velocity distribution analysis revealed the formation of an internal boundary layer extending along the magnetic field direction, which is a unique feature of the investigated MHD flow. An estimation of the total MHD pressure drop associated with the array of anchor links under the TSLL blanket conditions suggests ~0.3 MPa, which is significantly lower than the recommended maximum allowable blanket pressure drop of 2 MPa. In conclusion, this work offers valuable insights into the anchor link–associated MHD phenomena and serves as a foundation for further development of the TSLL blanket concept for future fusion reactors.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Experimental and Computational Characterization of a Modified Sioutas Cascade Impactor for Respirable Radioactive Aerosols

Oak Ridge National Laboratory is collecting and characterizing aerosols released when spent nuclear fuel (SNF) rods are fractured in bending. An aerosol collection system was designed and tested to collect respirable sized (<10 μm aerodynamic diameter [AED]) particulates inside a hot cell facility. The setup is a modified version of the commercially available Sioutas cascade impactor, to which additional stages were added to expand the aerosol collection range from 2.5 to ~15 μm AED. To accommodate the additional stages and specific test conditions, the operating flow rate for aerosol collection was reduced, and testing was conducted by using pressure drop measurements, surrogate dust collection, and particle size characterization. The fluid flow distribution within the cascade and its stages was simulated in STAR-CCM+, and the stage-wise pressure drops obtained using the computational fluid dynamics model were then compared to experimental data. Lagrangian particle simulations were also performed, and stage-wise collection statistics were obtained from the simulation for comparison with the experimental data obtained using SNF-surrogate dust particles. The results provide valuable insights into the stage-wise particle collection characteristics of the modified cascade impactor and can also be used to improve the prediction accuracy of the manufacturer-determined analytical correlations.

aerosol modeling↗
DOE OSTI2024

Coastal Cloud Chemistry during EPCAPE Field Campaign Report

For this campaign, Principal Investigator Markus Petters deployed a suite of instruments inside Lynn Russell’s container that was sited at Mt. Soledad during the Eastern Pacific Cloud Aerosol Precipitation Experiment (EPCAPE) campaign. Funding for this activity was provided by National Science Foundation Award 2410536. The instrument rack (Figure 1) included a differential mobility analyzer, a condensation particle counter, a portable optical particle spectrometer, and a continuous flow diffusion cloud condensation nuclei counter (CCN). The instruments sampled from a counterflow virtual impactor (CVI) inlet and an isokinetic inlet. The measurements provided aerosol size distribution, size-resolved CCN activity, and denuded versus undenuded CCN activity of aerosols and cloud drop residuals.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Full-torus impurity transport simulation in boron powder injection experiments in the Large Helical Device

The toroidal distribution of boron deposition on plasma-facing components (PFCs) in boron powder injection using an impurity power dropper (IPD) was investigated by full-torus simulation and observations in a systematic plasma density-scan experiment. The images of the ablation of dropped boron powders observed with a visible CCD camera were consistently explained by the simulations of the ablation positions of the boron powders considering the size distribution. Simulations assuming full-torus boron deposition on the PFCs did not reproduce the observed intensity profile of boron emission lines for higher plasma densities. It indicated that the density of boron deposited on PFCs installed toroidally far from the IPD was low for higher plasma densities due to the change in the ablation positions of the boron powders toward the outboard side. The experimental results verified the previous full-torus simulation of the toroidal distribution of the boron deposition in both lower and higher plasma densities.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗