WMO-CAS TECHNICAL CONFERENCE,
INCHEON, R. KOREA 16-17 NOVEMBER, 2009
IMPACTS ON PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL
PROPERTIES OF A STORM FROM THE TROPICALVS-MID-LATITUDE CONTRAST IN INSTABILITY
AND HUMIDITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT
V.Spiridonov1 and M.Curic2
1 Hydrometeorological Institute Skopje, Macedonia,
2Department of Meteorology, Faculty of Physics, Belgrade Serbia
MODEL FRAMEWORK






The convective cloud model is a three-dimensional, nonhydrostatic, time-dependant, compressible system using the
dynamic scheme from Klemp and Wilhelmson (1978).
The thermodynamic energy equation is based on Orville and
Kopp (1977) with effects of the snow field added.
Bulk water parameterizations are used for simulation of
microphysical processes with detailed scheme from Lin et al.
(1983) with a significant improvement proposed by Curic and
Janc (1995, 1997).
It takes into account 6 water variables (water vapor, cloud
droplets, ice crystals, rain, snow, and graupel).
The graupel hydrometeor class is represented as hail with a
density of 0.9 g cm-3.
The equivalent radar reflectivity factors for hail, rain are
computed by using equations from Smith et al., (1975) and
empirical equation for snow by Sekhon and Srivistava (1970).
MODEL CHEMISTRY




The chemistry module includes 4 species (SO2, SO42-, NH4+, H2O2) and
3 aqueous-phase reactions describing in-cloud sulfate chemistry (Taylor,
1989).
While the mass of aerosol sulfate is predicted, the aerosols do not affect the
cloud drop activation. The absorption of chemical species from the gas
phase into cloud water and rainwater is determined by either Henry’s law
equilibrium (Taylor, 1989), or by diffusion-limited mass transfer between
gas and liquid phases to include possible non-equilibrium states, (Barth et
al., 2001).
All equilibrium constants and oxidation reactions are temperature
dependent according to the van’t-Hoff relation (Seinfeld, 1986). Cloud
water and rainwater pH is calculated using the charge balance equation
from Taylor (1989).
The model includes a freezing transport mechanism of chemical species
based on Rutledge et al. (1986). Thus, when water from one hydrometeor
class is transferred to another, the dissolved scalar is transferred to the
destination hydrometeor in proportion to the water mass that was
transferred. More detailed information’s regarding the hydrodynamic
equations, microphysics equations, turbulent closure, chemistry
parameterizations and numerical methods could be found in Telenta and
Aleksic (1988) and (Spiridonov and Curic, 2003; 2005).
MODEL CONCEPT
1.
A THREE-DIMENSIONAL
2.
NON-HYDROSTATIC
3.
CLOUD RESOLVING
4.
COMMPRESIBLE
5.
TIME-DEPENDANT
MODEL FRAMEWORK
1.
DYNAMICS AND THERMODYNAMICS
2.
TURBULENCE
3.
MICROPHYSICS
4.
CHEMISTRY
5.
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS, NUMERICAL
TECHNIQUES AND INITIALIZATION
DYNAMICS
1.
KLEMP AND WILHELMSON (1978)
The momentum equations are derived from
2.
Navier-Stokes equations with the aid
of moist equation of state
3.
4.
p  ρR T(1  0,608qυ)
d
Non-dimensional pressure (Exner function)
R
R /c
R /c
Π  ( p ) d p  ( d ρθυ ) d υ
p
p
0
0

5.
(1)
(2)
d  c   ' (  '  0.608q 'q  q )  f (kx)  F (3)
p 0
v c v
u
dt

0
THE PRESSURE EQUATION
1.
2.
DERIVED BY TAKING SUBSTANTIAL
DERIVATIVE OF EQ. (2) USING
COMPRESSIBLE CONTINUITY EQUATION
ρ    ρu   ρ''u ''
j x
j
t
x
j
j
(4)
To eliminate d/dt, and thermodynamic
equation to eliminate d/dt.
3.
4.
The final equationhas the following form:
u
π  c2  (ρ θ u )  u π  Rdπ j  c2 dθυ  D (5)
π
υ j
cυ x c θ 2 dt
j x
t c ρ θ 2 x
j
j
j
p υ
p υ
THERMODYNAMIC EQUATION
1.
The potential temperature is used as a
Conservative variable for adiabatic processes
2.
3.
The flux-conserving form of the equation is:

 ' 
Lf
cW
cW
    'K h '
(Pg ' Ps ' )  (T  T0 )(PGMLT  PSMLT )  [qCW
t
cPT00
T00
T00
 

 
 
cI
 qR (  kUR )  T] 
δ[q CI  T  qG (  kUG )  T  qS (  kUS )  T]
cPT00
’ is specific entropy of moist air;
4.
Kh heat eddy coefficient
(6)
THE SUBGRID SCALE PROCESSES
1.
2.
3.
4.
SUB-GRID SCALE PARAMETERIZATION BASED ON
THE SOLUTION OF THE TURBULENT KINETIC
ENERGY (TKE ), DERIVED FROM:
MOMENTUM EQUATION (3), FOR INCOMPRESSIBLE FLUID
(=const), PERFORMING REYNOLDS AVERAGING ON
EACH PROGNOSTIC VARIABLES AND APPLYING FIRSTORDER CLOSURE TO NEARLY CONSERVATIVE
VARIABLES
3
dE  δ g '( θ''  0,608q ''q ' )  u 'u ' i   ( K E )  (C / l )E 2 (7)
m x
V
D
C
i j x  x
dt
θ
0
j
j
j
Subgrid-scale kinetic energy per unit mass
E  1 (u ')2
2 i
(8)
TKE TERMS R.H.S. EQ. (7)
1.
BUOYANCY
SHEAR
2.
DIFFUSSION
3.
DISSIPATION
4.
5.
δ g '( θ''  0,608q ''q ' )
V
C
θ
0

u 'u ' i
i j x
j
 ( K E )
m x
x
j
j
3
(C / l )E 2
D
’ deviation of vertical velocity ,CD=0.2 empirical
value; l=(xyz)1/3 is the appropriate length
CLOUD MICROPHYSICS
1.
Bulk cloud microphysics scheme from Lin et
al. (1983)
2.
6 water variables (water vapor, cloud droplets,
ice crystals, rain, snow and graupel)
3.
Cloud water and cloud ice are assumed to be
monodisperse, with zero terminal velocities
4.
Cloud droplets mass: Mw=4.19x10-9
Cloud crystal mass: Mi=4.19x10-10
5.
Rain, hail and snow have Marshall-Palmer
type size distributions with fixed intercept
parameters
n  8 x 10-2 cm-4; n
 4 x 10-4 cm-4 and n  3 x 10-2cm4
0R
0H
0S
MICROPHYSICS PARAMETERIZATIONS
Density of rain, hail and snow are:
1.
(1g cm-3; 0.9 g cm-3; 0.1 g cm-3)
The density of air is separately calculated
2.
3.
These six forms of water substances
interact mutually
4.
5.
Four continuity equations for the water
substances
The equivalent radar reflectivity factors for hail and
rain are computed on the equations given by Smith
et al., (1975) and empirical equation for snow by
Sekhon and Srivistava (1970)
MICROPHYSICS (CONTINUE)
1.
q    q    K q  P  P  P
h
R S G
t
2.

q
R    q    K q  P  1  (U q ρ)
m R R ρ z R R
R
t
(9)
3.

q
G    q    K q  P  1  (U q ρ)
m G G ρ z G G
G
t
4.

q
S    q    K q  P  1  (U q ρ)
m S S ρ z S S
S
t
5.
where
q  rq
q
CW
CI
(10)
(11)
(12)
q
, q ,q , q , q and r
CW CI R G S
Are the mixing ratios for cloud water, cloud ice,
rain, hail and snow and water vapor, respectively
MICROPHYSICS (CONTINUE)
Kh is the eddy heat diffusion coefficient
1.
Km is the eddy momentum diffusion coefficient
2.
UR, UG and US are terminal velocities for rain,
graupel and snow;
PR, PG and PS are production terms
3.
4.
Allow coexistence of cloud water and cloud ice
in the temperature region of - 40C to 0C Hsie
et al. (1980)
Condensation and deposition of water vapor
produce, cloud water and cloud ice, respectively
5.
Conversly, evaporation and sublimation of cloud
water and cloud ice maintain saturation
MICROPHYSICS (CONTINUE)
1.
2.
Natural cloud ice is initiated by using a Fletcher-type
equation for the ice nuclei number concentration
Bergeron-Findeisen process transforms some of
cloud water into cloud ice, and both into snow
3.
Rain is produced by the autoconversion of cloud
water, melting of snow and hail, and shedding
during wet growth of hail
4.
Hail is produced by the auto-conversion of snow,
interaction of cloud ice and snow with rain, and by
immersion freezing of rain
5.
Snow may by produced by the auto-conversion,
Bergeron-Findeisen growth of cloud ice, and
interaction of cloud ice and rain
All types of precipitation elements grow by different
forms of accretion
MODEL CHEMISTRY
1.
Model chemistry is formulated in terms of
continuity equations
concentration of the i-th pollutant expressed
through mixing ratio in the air, cloud water
and cloud ice by ( qi,a ) rain( qi,r ), graupel
or hail ( qi,g_h) and snow ( qi,s )
2.
3.
q
i,a    q  E  SM  Sq ,
i ,a
i,a
i,a
i,a
t
q
i,r    q  SF  E  SM  Sq
i ,r
i,r
i,r
i,r
i,r
t
4.
q
5.
6.
i  1, 2, 3
(13)
(14)
i,g_h    q
 SF
E
 SM
 Sq
(15)
i, g _ h
i,g_h
i,g_h
i,g_h
i,g_h
t
q
i,s    q  SF  E  SM  Sq
(16)
i,s
i,s
i,s
i,s
i,s
t
MODEL CHEMISTRY
1.
2.
3.
SUBGRID CONTRIBUTION
E ,E ,E ,E
and E
i,a i,c i,r i,g_h
i,s
REDISTRIBUTION TERMS INDUCED BY
MICROPHYSICS CONVERSION PROCESSES
SM , SM , SM
and SM
i,r
i,g_h
i,s
i,a
SM
 q qm (w  i)/q w (17)
GIVEN BY
i, w
i, w
WHERE qm(w  i) IS THE RATE OF MICROPHYSICS
TRANSFORMATION DERIVED FROM MIC.SCHEME
4.
CHEMICAL TRANSFORMATIONS TERMS
Sq , Sq , Sq
and Sq
i,r
i,g_h
i,s
i,a
5.
FALLOUT TERMS
SF
 1  ( ρU
q
)
i,r,g_h, s ρ ρ x
r,g_h, s i,r,g_h, s (18)
3
During transformation water “w” is considered
to lose mass while “i” to gain mass
MASS TRANSFER BETWEEN
GAS AND LIQUID PHASES
Absorption of gas phase is determined:
1.
a) Equilibrium according to Henry’s law;
b) Mass transfer limitation calculation
2.
3.
4.
Gases, (with an effective Henrys law constant
K *  103 mol dm-3 atm-1
H
in cloud water and rain are assumed to be in
equilibrium with the local gas-phase concentrations
These liquid-phase concentrations of each chemical component
(i) are calculated according to Henry’s law; i.e.
[i]  K p
(19)
H i
Where [i] is in mol i/L H2O (M); KH Henry’s law
coefficient (M atm-1); pi partial pressure of the
Species “i” given in units atm.
MASS TRANSFER BETWEEN
GAS AND LIQUID PHASES
1.
All equilibrium constants and oxidation
reactions are temperature dependent
according to van’t-Hoff’s relation
K  K exp(ΔH/R(1/T  1/T )
T
T0
0
2.
3.
4.
5.
(20)
where H increase of enthalpy induced
by chemical reactions, KT0 is the equilibrium constant at
standard temperature and R
However, a chemical species not attain equilibrium on the time scale of
cloud model due to the slow mass transfer between phases. In that case a
fully kinetic calculation of gas dissolution in cloud drops and raindrops is
applied in the model
12η2 N
dq
q
g,i Sh,(V
i
d,i,a 
d,i,α ) (21)
N
P

α α i
dt
RTα2
K *
H
Where qd,i,a is the rate of molar mixing ratio of gas species
inside dropswith diameter  to that in the air; KH* effective
Henrys’s law coefficient; Dg,I diffusivity of gases “i”, P partial
pressure; Nsh,i mass ventilation index;  factor as function of
MASS TRANSFER BETWEEN
CLOUD HYDROMETEORS
1.
2.
After dissolution into cloud water and rain
follows: transfer of a soluble compound
through microphysical processes
The present model includes: frezing transport
mechanism of chemical species
3.
It is assumed that dissolved compounds are
retained during conversion of liquid drops to
frozen hydrometeors
4.
Melting of ice, snow or hail transfer the
dissolved matter to cloud water and rain
5.
During sublimation of hail and snow, dissolved
scalar is retain in the hail or snow unless all
hydrometeor mass is converted to gas phase
SULFATE CHEMISTRY
PARAMETERIZATION
1.
The chemistry module includes sulfate
chemistry from (Taylor, 1989) both inside
and outside clouds
The absorbtion of chemical species from the gas
phase into cloud water and rain is determined:
2.
Hentry’s law equilibrium (Taylor, 1989), or
Diffusion limited mass transfer (Barth et al., 2001)
3.
4.
5.
Equilibrium constants and oxidation reactions are
temperature dependent, van’t-Hoff relation (Seifeld,
1986)
The model includes a freezing transport mechanizm
of chemical species (Rutledge et al. 1986); i.e. water
from one hydrometeor class is transferred another,
The dissolved chemical scalar is tranaferred to the
destination hydrometeor in proportion to the water
mass that was transferred
SCHEMATIC OF MICROPHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY-RELATED
CONVERSIONS FOR SO4 -2 IN AIR AND IN DIFFERENT
WATER CATEGORIES
PS26
SO2
SO4 ¯²
SO4 ¯²
EXPLICIT FIELD
SNOW
PS 20
PS 11
PS 5 (SUL15)
OXIDATION
S(IV)
SO4 ¯²
RAIN
RAIN
PS 9
SO4 ¯²
PS 13
PS 19
SO4 ¯²
CLOUD WATER
PS 23
PS 2
PS 16
OXIDATION
PRECIPITATION ON THE GROUND
Fig. 1.
PS 7
PS 6
PS 8
PS 21
S(IV)
PS 22
PS 24
PS14
CLOUD WATER
EXPLICIT FIELD
CLOUD ICE
PS5
PS 4
PS 3
PS 15
PS 1 (SUL1)
PS 10
AEROSOL
PS 25
GAS
PS 12
PS 17
SO4 ¯²
PS 18
GRAUPEL or
HAIL
SCHEMATIC OF MICROPHYSICS- AND CHEMISTRYRELATED CONVERSIONS FOR H2O2, SO2 AND O3 IN
AIR AND IN DIFFERENT WATER CARRIERS
Fig.2
PH17, OHP17, SUL 17
G GASES
PH11, OHP11, SUL11
PH 9, OHP 9, SUL 9
PH21, OHP21, SUL21
PH3, OHP3,SUL3
S(IV)
H2O2
O3
RAIN
PH10, OHP10, SUL10
PH4, OHP4, SUL 4
SO2
H2O2
O3
PH8, OHP8, SUL8
PH 18, OHP18, SUL 18
PH14, OHP14, SUL14
SNOW
GRAUPEL or HAIL
PH7, OHP7, SUL7
RAIN
PH15, OHP15, SUL15
SO2
H2O2
O3
PH12 , OHP12, SUL12
SO2
H2O2
O3
PH 16 (PH16K), OHP 16, SUL16
SO2
H2O2
O3
CLOUD ICE
PH5, OHP5, SUL5
PH 1 (PH1K), OHP1, SUL1
PH2, OHP2, SUL2
PH20, OHP20, SUL20
CLOUD WATER
PH19, OHP19, SUL19
PH13, OHP13,SUL13
S(IV)
H2O2
O3
PH6, OHP6, SUL 6
SULFATE CHEMISTRY PARAMETERIZATION
Cloud water and rainwater pH is calculated using
the charge balance equation from (Taylor, 1989)
[H ]  0.5{2[SO 2 ] [NH ]  ((2[SO 2 ] [NH ])2  4K *p
 4K )0.5}
H SO
W
4
4
4
4
2
Table 1. Contents of Chemical Species Groups in the Model Group
______________________________________________________________
Group
Gaseous Phase
Aqueous or Solid Phase
S(IV)
SO2
SO2, HSO3-,SO3=
S(VI)
H2SO4, HSO4-,SO4=
C(IV)
CO2
CO2,HCO3-,CO3=
NH3
NH3
NH4OH, NH4+
H2O2
H2O2
H2O2
O3
O3
O3
N(V)
HNO3
HNO3, NO3_____________________________________________________________________
Table 3. S(IV) Oxidations and the Corresponding Coefficients
___________________________________________________________________________________
No.
9
Reaction
S(IV) + O3  S(VI) + O2
K 298 ( M n s 1 ) H 298 / R (K)
3.7 x105
7.5x107
-5530
References
Hoffman and Calvert (1985)
10
S(IV) + H2O2  S(VI) + H2O
-4751
Hoffman and Calvert (1985)
___________________________________________________________________________________
Table 2. Equilibrium Reactions and rate coefficients
K 298 (MorMatm 1 )
No. Reactions
1
SO2 (g)  SO2 (aq)
2
SO2 (aq)  HSO3  H 1.3x102
3
HSO3  SO3
1.2
H 298 / R (K)
-3135
Hoffman & Calvert (1985)
-2000
Hoffman & Calvert (1985)
-1495
Hoffman & Calvert (1985)


2
 H
6.3x10 8
6
H2O2 (g)  H2O2 (aq) 7.1x10 4
3.4 x10 2
CO2 ( g )  CO2 (aq)
HNO3 ( g )  HNO3 (aq) 2.1x105
7
O3 ( g )  O3 (aq)
4
5
1.13 x10 2
8.
NH3 ( g )  NH 4OH (aq) 2.0 x10 2
9
OH
References
-6800
Martin & Damschen (1981)
-2440
Pandis & Seinfeld (1989)
-6710
Pandis & Seinfeld (1989)
-2300
Pandis & Seinfeld (1989)
-3402
Graedel & Weschler (1981)
K w  1.0 x1014
_____________________________________________________________________
Table 4. Initial concentrations for chemical species at the lowest model level; H is
the scale height; o(k) is the air density at each vertical level.
Chemical species
q(0)
H (km)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------CSO2
21.0 [gkg 1 (air )]
3.0
16.0
3.5
C 2
SO 4

3.0
3.5
C NH 4
CH2O2
0.59 
CHNO3
1.0
ppb
3.0
CNH3
1.0
ppb
3.0
CO3
50.0 ppb

CCO2
330
ppm

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
1.
Boundary conditions are specified along all sides of
the integration domain since the computations take
place within a finite model domain
2.
Along the bottom of the model domain the normal
velocity w is set to zero
3.
The open top boundary condition is applied in the
model in order to eliminate strong internal gravity
waves (Klemp and Durran, 1983)
4.
The lateral boundaries are open and timedependant, so that disturbances can pass through
with minimal reflection
5.
Two different cases with regard to the wind velocity
are considered, after Durran [1981]
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
1.
2.
3.
When the velocity component normal to the
boundary is directed inside the domain (inflow
boundary), normal derivatives are set to zero
At outflow boundaries, the normal velocity
component is advected out through the boundary
with an estimated propagation speed which is
averaged in the vertical, and weighted at each level
by the approximate local amplitude of the wave
Boundary conditions for the pressure are calculated
from other boundary values to maintain consistency
NUMERICAL TECHNIQUES
1.
Model equations are solved on a standard spatially
staggered grid
All velocity components are defined at one-half grid
interval , while scalar variables are defined at the
mid point of each grid
2.
3.
4.
5.
The horizontal and vertical advection terms are
calculated by centered fourth- and second-order
differences, respectively
Since the model equations are compressible, a time
splitting procedure is applied to achieve numerical
efficiency
With this procedure the sound wave terms are solved
separately using a smaller time step, while all other
processes are treated with a larger time step , which
is appropriate to the time scales of physical interest.
NUMERICAL TECHNIQUES
1.
The scalar prognostic equations, except the pressure equation,
are solved from t-t to t+t by a single leap-frog step
The terms which are not responsible for sound wave generation
in the equations of motion and the pressure equation, are
evaluated at the central time level t
2.
3.
4.
5.
Wind and pressure prognostic variables are stepped forward
from t-t to t+t with forward time differencing with the small
time step
In grid points adjacent to lateral boundaries, the normal
horizontal advection terms are approximated using secondorder differences instead of the fourth-order ones used
elsewhere
At lateral boundaries the normal derivatives for all prognostic
variables are calculated with first-order accuracy, through onesided differences lagged at time to provide stability
NUMERICAL TECHNIQUES-CHEMISTRY
1.
The model chemistry also included the time splitting
procedure, using ratios of the time step n1, n2, n3, n4 and n5 of
a given process (e.g., advection, subgrid scale, microphysical,
the dissociation, oxidation or other aqueous phase reaction
term) to the base time step Dt, Wang and Chang (1993a)
2.
The advection scheme for chemicals is mainly based on Bott
(1989), using nonoscillatory method by Smolarkiewicz and
Grabowski (1990)
3.
More detailed information about the cloud model and the
chemistry submodels could be found in studies by Telenta and
Aleksic (1988) and Spiridonov and Curic (2003,2005,2006)
MODEL INITIALIZATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Initial impulse for convection is an ellipsoidal warm bubble of
the form
ΔT  ΔT cos2 π β
0
2
where
for
β 1
x  x c 2 y  y c 2 z  z c 2 12
β  [(
) (
) (
) ]
x
y
z
Here, the subscript c refers to the location of the center of the
perturbation
While x*, y*, z* are radial dimensions of the bubble
THE MAIN MOTIVATION OF THE STUDY

CONVECTIVE PROCESSING OF TRACE GAS SPECIES AND
AEROSOLS IS AN IMPORTANT MEANS OF MOVING CHEMICAL
CONSTITUENTS RAPIDLY BETWEEN THE BOUNDARY LAYER AND
FREE TROPOSPHERE, AND IS ALSO AN EFFECTIVE WAY OF
CLEANSING THE ATMOSPHERE THROUGH WET DEPOSITION.

BECAUSE OF THESE TWO PROCESSES, THE EFFECT OF
CONVECTION ON CHEMICAL SPECIES AND AEROSOLS IS CRITICAL
TO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF CHEMISTRY-CLIMATE STUDIES, AIR
QUALITY STUDIES, AND THE EFFECTS OF ACIDIC PRECIPITATION
ON THE EARTH'S SURFACE.

IT IS INTERESTING TO STUDY THE IMPACTS ON PHYSICAL AND
CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF CONVECTIVE CLOUDS FROM THE
TROPICAL-VS-MID-LATITUDE CONTRAST IN INSTABILITY AND
HUMIDITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT.

IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO ANALYSE THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE
OF SCAVENGING, OXIDATION AND ICE PHASE PROCESSES IN
SULFATE PRODUCTION AND WET REMOVAL IN SUCH TYPE OF
CLOUDS.
MODEL INITIALIZATION
Continental environemnt
Tropical environment
THERMODYNAMIC PARAMETERS
STATION INFORMATION / THERMODYNAMIC PARAMETER
Observation time
Station latitude
Station longitude
Station elevation
Showalter index
Lifted index
LIFT computed using virtual temperature
SWEAT index
K index
Cross totals index
Vertical totals index
Totals totals index
Convective Available Potential Energy
CAPE using virtual temperature
Convective Inhibition
CINS using virtual temperature
Equilibrum Level
Equilibrum Level using virtual temperature
Level of Free Convection
LFCT using virtual temperature
Bulk Richardson Number
Bulk Richardson Number using CAPV
Temp [K] of the Lifted Condensation Level
Pres [hPa] of the Lifted Condensation Level
Mean mixed layer potential temperature
Mean mixed layer mixing ratio
1000 hPa to 500 hPa thickness
Precipitable water [mm] for entire sounding
CONTINENTAL
CASE
Station
number:
Wyoming-72672
070725/0000
13.73
100.57
4.0
1.10
-2.26
-2.76
177.60
28.30
18.50
24.50
43.00
749.13
878.78
-142.75
-86.44
216.33
215.67
669.79
726.35
303.12
355.58
293.72
913.15
301.47
17.04
5794.00
51.88
TROPICAL CASE
Station
number:
Bangkok-48455
960710/0000
43.06
-108.48
1703.0
-0.50
-0.72
49.80
-54.09
437.46
592.39
598.21
2.03
2.84
274.90
638.44
312.51
6.86
5768.00
17.95
INITIALIZATION OF CHEMICAL SPECIES
INCLUDED IN SULFATE PRODUCTION
20
15
15
10
Height (km)
Height (km)
15
10
0
0
0
0
2
4
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0,00
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2
4
6
8
0,50
1,00
1,50
H2O2 (ppbv)
10
12
14
0,0
16
0,5
1,0
1,5
20
Height (km, m.s.l.)
0
10
5
5
5
Height (km, m.s.l.)
Height (km)
20
20
2,00
2,50
3,00
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
100
200
300
O3 (ppbv)
400
500
600
2,0
2,5
3,0
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF CLOUDS
Maximum updrafts as a function of the simulation time in a
mid-latitude and tropical run
25
15
wmax (mid-lat)
wmax (trop)
10
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100 110 120
simulation time (min.)
Turbulent diffusion coefficient
1500
1000
Mid.-lat
Trop.
500
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
9
100
110
120
0
0
(m**2/s)
wmax (m/s)
20
Simulation time (min)
MICROPHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF CLOUDS
Maximum hydrometeor mixing ratios as a function of the simulation time (midlatitude run)
mixing ratio (g/kg)
12
10
cloud w ater
8
cloud ice
6
rainw ater
4
graupel or hail
2
snow
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
sim ulation tim e (m in.)
Maximum hydrometeor mixing ratios as a function of the simulation
time (tropical run)
mixing ratio (g/kg)
10
8
cloud w ater
cloud ice
6
rainw ater
4
graupel or hail
2
snow
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
sim ulation tim e (m in.)
90
100
110
120
RAINFALL AND RADAR REFLECTIVITY
Maximum reflectivity and accumulated rainfall as a function
of the simulation time
80
Reflectivity (dBz)
rainfall (mm)
70
60
ref. (mid-lat)
50
ref. (trop)
40
Rainfall (mid-lat)
30
Rainfall (trop)
20
10
0
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
simulation time (min.)
DISTRIBUTION OF CHEMICALS
(g / m3 )
Time distribution of hydrogen peroxide mixing ratios
in condensate phase
(g / m3 )
2,5
Time distribution of ozone mixing ratios
in condensate phase
200
2
150
1,5
1
H2O2(trop)
0,5
H2O2(midat)
100
O3 (trop)
50
O3(midlat)
0
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
simulation time (min.)
(g / m3 )
simulation time (min.)
Time distribution of sulfur dioxide mixing ratios
in condensate phase
(g / m3 )
3,5
3
2,5
2
1,5
SO2(trop)
1
SO2(mid-lat)
0,5
0
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
simulation time (min.)
Time distribution of sulfate aerosol mixing ratios in condensate
phase
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Mid-lat.
Tropical
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
simulation time (min.)
pH-FACTOR
Cloud water ph (polluted background)
6
5
5
4
4
Trop.
3
Cont.
ph
ph
Cloud water ph (non-polluted background)
2
3
Trop.
2
Cont.
1
1
0
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
simulation time (min.)
simulation time (min.)
Rain water ph (non-polluted background)
Rain water ph (polluted background)
6
3
2,5
Trop_non
3
2
Cont_non
1
0
ph
ph
5
4
Trop_pol
2
Cont_pol
1,5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
1
0
simulation time (min.)
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
simulation time (min.)
THE MEAN TRANSFER RATES OF THE
MICROPHYSICAL PROCESSES AVERAGED OVER 2
H SIMULATION PERIOD
___________________________________________________________________________
Term QRR (kg kg-1s-1 )
Term CLCW (kg kg-1s-1 )
Term CLCI (kg kg-1s-1 )
Continental Tropical
Continental Tropical
Continental Tropical
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
3.0  10 -07 1.1 10 -07
PSAUT
9.7  10 -06
9.5  10 -06
PSACI
4.7  10 -17 7.2  10 -18
PRACI
6.9  10 -06
7.7  10 -06
PSFI
2.5  10 -07
2.4  10 -07
PGACI
2.4  10 -06
PGACIP 2.5  10 -06
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Term RA1 (kg kg-1s-1 )
Term SN1 (kg kg-1s-1 )
Term HA1 (kg kg-1s-1 )
Continental Tropical
Continental Tropical
Continental Tropical
PSDEP
8.6  10 -06 1.2  10 -05
PRAUT
PRACW
PSACW
PGACW
PSFW
3.4  10 -06 3.0  10 -06
1.1  10 -13
4.8  10 -13
1.5  10 -04 1.3  10 -04
1.2  10 -04 1.4  10 -04
9.2  10 -10 5.4  10 -9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREVP - 6.7  10 -05 - 8.4  10 -05 PSMLT  4.2  10 -07  2.2  10 -06 PGMLT  1.7  10 -04  1.9  10 -04
6.8  10 -06 PGAUT 1.3  10 -06
1.0  10 -06 PGSUB  5.6  10 -06  1.1  10 -06
PIACR 1.6  10 -06
5.0  10 -05 PRACS 8.7  10 -05
6.4  10 -05 PGWET
2.1  10 -03
1.3  10 -03
PSACR 1.9  10 -05
1.0  10 -06 4.8  10 -07 PSSUB  1.5  10 -05  4.7  10 -06 PGDRY
2.6  10 -04
3.1  10 -04
PGFR
5.5  10 -05
PGACR 9.0  10 -05 1.1  10 -04
PGACS 5.2  10 -05
PGACRP 5.1  10 -5 - 1.4  10 -05 PGACSP 3.6  10 -04 2.7  10 -04
___________________________________________________________________________
THE MEAN CHEMICAL CONVERSION RATES OF
SULFATE (KG KG-1 S-1) AVERAGED OVER 2H
SIMULATION PERIOD (POLLUTED BACKGROUND)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Term Continental Tropical Term Continental Tropical Term Continental Tropical
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PS1 4.1  10 -15 1.8  10 -15 PS10 7.7  10 -19 1.6  10 -16 PS19  1.1  10 -13  4.7  10 -14
PS2 3.9  10 -08 1.1  10 -08 PS11 4.1  10 -25 2.7  10 -24 PS20 2.3  10 -22 2.4  10 -22
PS3 1.1  10 -08 1.4  10 -08 PS12  1.2  10 -14 1.4  10 -13 PS21  6.7  10 -15  1.7  10 -15
PS4 8.3  10 -11 8.6  10 -11 PS13 1.7  10 -14 4.3  10 -12 PS22 2.8  10 -26 1.8  10 -25
PS5 1.8  10 -11 1.6  10 -11 PS14 2.1  10 -15 9.3  10 -16 PS23 1.2  10 -25 3.0  10 -24
PS6 2.8  10 -11 0.4  10 -13 PS15 4.8  10 -14 4.0  10 -14 PS24 2.1  10 -27 2.9  10 -27
PS7 6.7  10 -12 0.4  10 -11 PS16  3.7  10 -16  1.4  10 -15 PS25 3.5  10 -15 6.9  10 -15
PS8 6.7  10 -12 0.9  10 -12 PS17 3.1  10 -14 1.7  10 -14 PS26  1.0  10 -18  7.4  10 -20
PS9 1.3  10 -08 2.0  10 -09 PS18  2.7  10 -17  1.5 10--17
________________________________________________________________________
THE MEAN CHEMICAL CONVERSION RATES OF
SULFATE (KG KG-1 S-1) AVERAGED OVER 2 H
SIM. PERIOD (NON-POLLUTED BACKGROUND)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Term Continental Tropical Term Continental Tropical Term Continental Tropical
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PS1 3.9  10 -16 3.6  10 -16 PS10 9.4  10 -18 8.6  10 -20 PS19  2.1  10 -14  9.1  10 -15
PS2 8.3  10 -09 2.4  10 -09 PS11 2.0  10 -26 5.3  10 -25 PS20 4.4  10 -23 4.6  10 -23
PS3 2.0  10 -09 3.0  10 -09 PS12  6.5  10 -15  2.8  10 -12 PS21  1.2  10 -15  9.1  10 -15
PS4 1.6  10 -11 1.7  10 -11 PS13 1.2  10 -12 2.3  10 -15 PS22 5.4  10 -27 3.6  10 -25
PS5 3.4  10 -12 3.1  10 -12 PS14 4.0  10 -16 1.8  10 -16 PS23 2.4  10 -26 5.9  10 -25
PS6 1.1  10 -11 4.8  10 -12 PS15 9.3  10 -15 7.5  10 -15 PS24 4.1  10 -28 5.6  10 -28
PS7 2.2  10 -12 2.9  10 -15 PS16  7.2  10 -17  2.6  10 -16 PS25 6.7  10 -16 1.3  10 -15
PS8 2.1  10 -12 2.9  10 -15 PS17 5.9  10 -15 3.4  10 -15 PS26  1.4  10 -19  1.4  10 -23
PS9 1.2  10 -09 4.9  10 -09 PS18  5.3  10 -18  2.9  10--18
________________________________________________________________________
SULFUR INTEGRATED CLOUD BASE FLUX
AND PRECIPITATION MASS
Non-polluted background
Polluted background
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------Sulfur (kg)
Continental
Tropical
Continental
Tropical
Base run
Cloudbase (CB)
201.12
213.99
760.16
960.48
Precipitation (P)
12.35
13.74
36.25
49.83
P/CB
0.061
0.064
0.048
0.052
(%)
Absorbtion-Kinetic method off
Cloudbase (CB)
214.40
238.54
921.88
1082.85
Precipitation (P)
13.86
15.12
54.80
65.39
P/CB
0.064
0.063
0.059
0.064
Cloudbase (CB)
Precipitation (P)
P/CB
In-cloud scavenging off
200.13
172.07
9.51
9.38
0.048
0.054
701.86
24.51
0.035
Cloudbase (CB)
Precipitation (P)
P/CB
Subcloud scavenging off
197.78
172.16
10.56
12 .02
0.053
0.069
698.75
29.23
0.042
884.27
40.16
0.045
704.96
19.58
0.029
902.55
28.48
0.033
Cloudbase (CB)
Precipitation (P)
P/CB
Cloudbase (CB)
Precipitation (P)
P/CB
Cloudbase (CB)
Precipitation (P)
P/CB
In-cloud oxidation off
180.32
172.22
7.24
11.28
0.040
0.065
Subcloud oxidation off
161.24
178.35
9.77
9.32
0.060
0.052
Aqueous simulation of ice phase off
179.30
172.40
7.71
7.57
0.043
0.044
705.11
23.75
0.034
695.85
21.89
0.031
886.74
32.59
0.047
889.80
37.97
0.043
881.55
30.81
0.035
THE REL. CONTRIBUTION IN (%) OF THE TOTAL SULFUR MASS
REMOVED BY WET DEPOSITION FOR MID-LATITUDE COTINENTAL
AND TROPICAL NON-POLLUTED AND POLLUTED BACKGROUND
Absorption
-------------------Run
Kinetic /Henry’s
Law
I
II
Nucleation
and impact
scavenging
-------------------in-cloud/subcloud
III
Liquid- phase
oxidation of SO2
by H2O2 and O3
--------------------
Aqueous
simulation
of ice
phase
Non-polluted / Polluted
------------------------------------Cont. / Trop. Cont. / Trop.
in-cloud/ subcloud
IV
V
VI
VII
Base run
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
Mid-latitude convective clouds
-------------------------------------
yes
no*
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no*
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
yes
no*
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no*
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no*
yes
no*
yes
yes
yes
yes
no*
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no*
Sulfur (kg)
12.35 13.74 36.25 49.83
------------------------------------(%) contribution to sulfur
wet deposition
112.4
23.0
16.1
41.4
20.9
37.4
110.0
31.7
12.4
17.9
32.2
45.0
151.2
32.4
19.0
54.0
34.5
39.6
137.2
34.6
20.0
42.8
23.8
39.8
RELATIVE CONTRIBUTION (CONTINUE)
160
(%) contribution
140
overestimate
120
100
Mid-latitude
80
underestimate
60
Tropical
case
40
20
0
In-cloud
scav.
Subcloud
scav.
In-cloud
oxid.
Subcloud
oxid.
Ice
Henry's
neglect. Law
SULFATE AEROSOL AND CLOUD -TROPICAL CASE
TROPICAL CASE
z (km)
20
10 min.
15
10
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
z (km)
20
30 min.
15
10
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
z (km)
20
40 min.
15
10
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
z (km)
20
15
50 min.
10
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
z (km)
20
70 min.
15
10
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
z (km)
20
90 min.
15
10
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
x (km)
60
70
80
90
100
6.6
6.1
5.6
5.1
4.6
4.1
3.6
3.1
2.6
2.1
1.6
1.1
0.6
0.1
CLOUD +SULFATE AEROSOLS (CONT. CASE)
MID-LATITUDE CASE
z (km)
20
15
10
5
0
z (km)
20
15
z (km)
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
30 min.
5
20
15
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
4.6
4.1
5
20
15
3.6
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
50 min.
3.1
2.6
10
2.1
5
1.6
0
20
15
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
20
15
90 min.
10
5
0
10
1.1
0.6
0.1
70 min.
10
0
z (km)
5.6
5.1
40 min.
10
0
z (km)
10
10
0
z (km)
10 min.
x (km)
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
RADAR REFLECTIVITY-CONTINENTAL CASE
Z (KM)
REF (dBz)
12
6
0
65
55
45
35
25
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
15
X (KM)
120
continental storm (60 min)
110
Z (dBz)
100
90
55
80
Y (KM)
45
70
35
60
50
25
40
15
30
5
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
X (KM)
70
80
90
100
110
120
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
RADAR REF. AND RAINFALL-TROPICAL CASE
60
55
Z (dBz)
50
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
45
40
Y (KM)
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
X (KM)
ÊÓ¹ Ñ¡¾Ñ² ¹ ÒÍ ØµØ¹ÂÔÁÇÔ·ÂÒ
¡ ÃÁÍ ØµØ¹ÔÂÁÇÔ·ÂÒ
60
´ Í ¹ àÁ×ͧ
500
Í ÓàÀÍ » Ò¡ à¡ Åḉ
ÊÒÂäËÁ
ËÅÑ¡ÊÕè
Í ÓàÀÍ º Ò§ãË- è
400
º ҧࢹ
¤ÅÍ §ÊÒÁÇÒ
300
Í ÓàÀÍ àÁ×ͧ¹ ¹ · º ØÃÕ
˹ Í §¨ Í ¡
¤Ñ¹¹ ÒÂÒÇ
º Ö§¡ ØèÁ
º Ò§¾ÅÑ́
· ÇÕÇѲ ¹ Ò
º Ò§¡ Í ¡ ¹ éÍ Â
µÅÔ觪 ѹ
Í ÓàÀÍ ÊÒÁ¾ÃÒ¹
º Ò§á¤
˹ Í §á¢Á
ÀÒÉÕਠÃÔ-
¾- Òä·
´ Թᴠ§
º Ò§¡ Í ¡ ãË- è
¨ Í Á· Í §
Í ÓàÀÍ ¡ Ãз ØèÁẠ¹
´ ØÊÔµ
¾Ãй ¤Ã
» éÍ Á» ÃÒº
¸ ¹ º ØÃÕ
» · ØÁÇѹ
º Ò§ÃÑ¡
ÊÒ· Ã
Çѧ· Í §ËÅÒ§
ËéÇ¢ÇÒ§
150
Êоҹ ÊÙ§
ÇѲ ¹ Ò
Í ÓàÀÍ àÁ×ͧ©Ðઠԧ෠ÃÒ
Êǹ ËÅǧ
ÃÒÉ®Ãìº Ùó Ð
¾ÃÐ⢹ §
» ÃÐàÇÈ
º Ò§¹ Ò
Í ÓàÀÍ ¾Ãл ÃÐá´ §
90
40
35
70
50
40
· Ø觤ÃØ
30
25
30
º Ò§¢Ø¹à· Õ¹
20
Í ÓàÀÍ àÁ×ͧÊÁØ·ÃÊÒ¤Ã
72
68
64
60
56
52
48
44
40
36
32
28
24
20
16
12
8
4
0
45
120
ÅÒ́ ¡ Ãк ѧ
¤ÅÍ §àµÂ
º Ò§¤Í áËÅÁ
ÂÒ¹ ¹ ÒÇÒ
º Ò§º Í ¹
200
ÁÕ¹º ØÃÕ
º Ò§¡ л Ô
50
250
ÅÒ́ ¾ÃéÒÇ
¨ µØ̈Ñ¡Ã
º Ò§« ×èÍ
55
20
Í ÓàÀÍ ¾ÃÐÊÁØ·Ãਠ´ ÕÂì
10
15
5
0.1
10
5
Accumulate Rainfall (00 Z 25 – 00 Z 26 Jul 2007) Max 66.5 mm. At Bangkok area
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
X-Z CROSS SECTIONS ON CO, O3 AND NOX
(CONTINENTAL CASE)
Z (KM)
CO (ppbv)
16
12
8
4
0
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
X (KM)
Z (KM)
60
50
O3 (ppbv)
16
12
8
4
0
520
480
440
400
360
320
280
240
200
160
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
120
80
40
X (KM)
Z (KM)
NOx (ppt)
16
12
8
4
0
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
20
40
60
80
X (KM)
100
120
140
100
50
X-Z CROSS SECTIONS ON CO, O3 AND NOX
(TROPICAL CASE)
z (km)
CO (ppbv)
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
z (km)
x (km)
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
540
490
440
390
340
290
240
190
140
90
5
z (km)
50
O3 (ppbv)
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60 NOx
(ppbv)
40
x (km)
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
x (km)
40
45
50
55
60
50
X-Y cross sections on the gas-phase mixing ratios on CO, O3 and NOx
at z = 10.7 km (cont. case- upper panel, trop. case-bottom panel).
CO (ppbv) CONTINENTAL CASE X-Y CROSS SECTION AT Z = 10.5 KM
140
140
CO (ppbv)
O3 (ppbv)
120
100
80
60
40
20
135
220
125
115
105
60
80
60
80
100
120
140
100
85
40
75
40
60
65
55
20
20
20
0
0
40
180
60
95
0
20
260
100
145
80
0
0
NOx (ppt)
120
155
100
Y (KM)
120
115
110
105
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
Y (KM)
120
Y (KM)
NOx (ppt) CONTINENTAL CASE X-Y CROSS SECTION AT Z = 10.5 KM
O3 (ppbv) CONTINENTAL CASE X-Y CROSS SECTION AT Z = 10.5 KM
140
20
40
60
140
80
100
120
0
140
20
40
60
CO (ppbv) TROPICAL CASE X-Y CROSS SECTION AT Z = 10.5 KM
100
120
140
X (KM)
X (KM)
NOx (ppt) TROPICAL CASE X - Y CROSS SECTION AT Z = 10.5 KM
O3 (ppbv) TROPICAL CASE X-Y CROSS SECTION AT Z = 10.5 KM
X (KM)
80
60
60
55
55
O3 (ppbv)
50
60
55
CO (ppbv)
50
50
175
45
45
45
170
155 40
40
40
150
145
95
85
135
30
25
25
75
20
20
65
15
55
130
125 30
115
105 25
110
95
90
20
85
75
15
65
10
35
Y (KM)
30
35
Y (KM)
35
Y (KM)
165
105
NOx (ppt)
10
55
15
70
10
50
5
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
X (KM)
40
45
50
55
60
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
60
X (KM)
X (KM)
40
45
50
55
60
CLOUD TOGETHER CHEMISTRY
CONTINENTAL AND TROPICAL STORM
0
20
40
60
15
10
5
0
0
SO4 (ppb) SO2 (ppb) H2O2 (ppb) O3 (ppb)
20
40
60
20.00
10.00
20.00
10.00
10.00
20.00
6.6
6.1
0
5.6
20
40
5.1
20.00
6020.00
4.6
15
4.1
10
5
10.00
10.00
3.6
0
0
3.1
20
40
2.6
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
10.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
30.00 20.00
40.00 10.00
50.00 20.00
60.00
10.00
70.00
20.00
80.00
30.00
90.00
40.00
100.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
60
2.1
1.6
0
1.1
20
0.6
40
60
0.1
15
10
5
0
0
20
40
60
4.1
2.3
2.1
3.6
1.9
3.1
1.7
2.6
1.5
1.3
2.1
1.6 90.00
100.00
80.00
1.1
1.1
0.9
100.00
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.1
0.3
0.1
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
THE GENERAL REMARKS AND CONCLUSIONS






Tropical storm has shown a more intensive initial convection, associate
with strong updrafts, turbulent diffusion coefficient and low level moisture
relative to continental storm
The differences in cloud dynamics belongs to difference in potential
instability, wind shear and turbulence
Continental storm exhibits continuous and uniform evolution in the storm
mature stage with relatively higher values for turbulence that maintains
convection
Predicted maximum mixing ratios of hydrometeors show differences
among cases, as result of different initial moisture content as well as
difference in vertical transport of moisture and microphysics production
terms
The intercomparison described here also shows higher rainfall efficiency in
tropical case attributed to differences in the interaction of cloud dynamics
and microphysics and precipitation flux processes
The intercomparison described here also shows differences in rainfall
efficiency attributed to interaction of cloud dynamics and microphysics and
precipitation flux processes
MICROPHYSICS PRODUCTION TERMS





Dominant microphysics production terms
terms in tropical srtorms and higher value
relative to continental case:
PSDEP-depositional growth of snow (1.4)
PSFW-Bergeron process transfer of cloud
water to form snow (6 times)
PGACR-accretion of rain by graupel (1.2)
PSML-snow melting to from rain (5 times)
MICROPHYSICS PRODUCTION TERMS

Dominant microphysics production terms
terms in continental case and higher value
relative to tropical case:

PGFR-probablistic freezing of rain to form graupel (2 times)
PGAUT-autoconversion of snow to form graupel (1.3=
PRACI-accretion of cloud ice by rain (6 times)
PSSUB- sublimation of snow (6 times)



MICROPHYSICS PRODUCTION TERMS





Dominant microphysics production terms
terms in tropical srtorms and higher value
relative to continental case:
PSDEP-depositional growth of snow (1.4)
PSFW-Bergeron process transfer of cloud
water to form snow (6 times)
PGACR-accretion of rain by graupel (1.2)
PSML-snow melting to from rain (5 times)
CLOUD WATER AND RAINWATER pH-FACTOR





similar values of cloud water pH in continental and tropical
case using non-polluted background shows a
a more uniform distribution of cloud water pH with a lower
values compared to tropical case during simulation time using
polluted background
Rainwater pH in continental case using non-polluted
background has a more uniform distribution and lower values
relative to tropical one.
Similar values between rainwater pH betwen continental and
tropical case until moderate stage of storm evolution and
higher values in tropical case relative to cont, case in
dissipative stage
DOMINANT SULFATE PRODUCTION TERMS
Liquid phase oxidation of SO2 by H2O2 and
O3 in cloud droplets and rainwater
Highest production values are found in
continental polluted clouds
Maximum production rate of in-cloud nucleation
and impact scavenging is simulated in tropical
polluted clouds

RELATIVE CONTRIBUTION TO SULFUR WET
DEPOSITION




Hanry Law assumption leads to higher overestimation
of sulfur wet deposition of 151 % in cont. polluted
clouds
Cont. polluted clouds have shown a higher percentage
values relative to tropical case for incloud and subcloud oxidation
Ice phase proceses and in-cloud scavenging have a
similar percentage contribution values in both cases
Sub-cloud scavenging in tropical polluted clouds has
a higher relative contribution to sulfur wet deposition
in (kg) compared to continental one
THANK YOU
VLADO SPIRIDONOV
HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL
INSTITUTE SKUPI BB 1000 SKOPJE,
R.MACEDONIA
E-mail: vspiridonov@meteo.gov.mk