Filters

2011 - 20172

More filters

20192
Reset filters

Settings

search.filters.applied.f.access: openAccess × Author: Kandler, Konrad × Author: Müller, Detlef × End date: 2020 × Start date: 2010 × DDC: 550 × Has files: Yes × Subject: biomass burning × WGL Institute: TROPOS ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Saharan Mineral Dust Experiments SAMUM-1 and SAMUM-2: What have we learned?
    (Milton Park : Taylor & Francis, 2011) Ansmann, Albert; Petzold, Andreas; Kandler, Konrad; Tegen, Ina; Wendisch, Manfred; Müller, Detlef; Weinzierl, Bernadett; Müller, Thomas; Heintzenberg, Jost
    Two comprehensive field campaigns were conducted in 2006 and 2008 in the framework of the Saharan Mineral Dust Experiment (SAMUM) project. The relationship between chemical composition, shape morphology, size distribution and optical effects of the dust particles was investigated. The impact of Saharan dust on radiative transfer and the feedback of radiative effects upon dust emission and aerosol transport were studied. Field observations (ground-based, airborne and remote sensing) and modelling results were compared within a variety of dust closure experiments with a strong focus on vertical profiling. For the first time, multiwavelength Raman/polarization lidars and an airborne high spectral resolution lidar were involved in major dust field campaigns and provided profiles of the volume extinction coefficient of the particles at ambient conditions (for the full dust size distribution), of particle-shape-sensitive optical properties at several wavelengths, and a clear separation of dust and smoke profiles allowing for an estimation of the single-scattering albedo of the biomass-burning aerosol. SAMUM–1 took place in southern Morocco close to the Saharan desert in the summer of 2006, whereas SAMUM–2 was conducted in Cape Verde in the outflow region of desert dust and biomass-burning smoke from western Africa in the winter of 2008. This paper gives an overview of the SAMUM concept, strategy and goals, provides snapshots (highlights) of SAMUM–2 observations and modelling efforts, summarizes main findings of SAMUM–1 and SAMUM–2 and finally presents a list of remaining problems and unsolved questions.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Regional modelling of Saharan dust and biomass-burning smoke, Part I: Model description and evaluation
    (Milton Park : Taylor & Francis, 2017) Heinold, Bernd; Tegen, Ina; Schepanski, Kerstin; Tesche, Matthias; Esselborn, Michael; Freudenthaler, Volker; Gross, Silke; Kandler, Konrad; Knippertz, Peter; Müller, Detlef; Schladitz, Alexander; Toledano, Carlos; Weinzierl, Bernadett; Ansmann, Albert; Althausen, Dietrich; Müller, Thomas; Petzold, Andreas; Wiedensohler, Alfred
    The spatio-temporal evolution of the Saharan dust and biomass-burning plume during the SAMUM-2 field campaign in January and February 2008 is simulated at 28 km horizontal resolution with the regional model-system COSMOMUSCAT. The model performance is thoroughly tested using routine ground-based and space-borne remote sensing and local field measurements. Good agreement with the observations is found in many cases regarding transport patterns, aerosol optical thicknesses and the ratio of dust to smoke aerosol. The model also captures major features of the complex aerosol layering. Nevertheless, discrepancies in the modelled aerosol distribution occur, which are analysed in detail. The dry synoptic dynamics controlling dust uplift and transport during the dry season are well described by the model, but surface wind peaks associated with the breakdown of nocturnal low-level jets are not always reproduced. Thus, a strong dust outbreak is underestimated. While dust emission modelling is a priori more challenging, since strength and placement of dust sources depend on on-line computed winds, considerable inaccuracies also arise in observation-based estimates of biomass-burning emissions. They are caused by cloud and spatial errors of satellite fire products and uncertainties in fire emission parameters, and can lead to unrealistic model results of smoke transport.