2010, Duplissy, J., Enghoff, M.B., Aplin, K.L., Arnold, F., Aufmhoff, H., Avngaard, M., Baltensperger, U., Bondo, T., Bingham, R., Carslaw, K., Curtius, J., David, A., Fastrup, B., Gagné, S., Hahn, F., Harrison, R.G., Kellett, B., Kirkby, J., Kulmala, M., Laakso, L., Laaksonen, A., Lillestol, E., Lockwood, M., Mäkelä, J., Makhmutov, V., Marsh, N.D., Nieminen, T., Onnela, A., Pedersen, E., Pedersen, J.O.P., Polny, J., Reichl, U., Seinfeld, J.H., Sipilä, M., Stozhkov, Y., Stratmann, F., Svensmark, H., Svensmark, J., Veenhof, R., Verheggen, B., Viisanen, Y., Wagner, P.E., Wehrle, G., Weingartner, E., Wex, H., Wilhelmsson, M., Winkler, P.M.

During a 4-week run in October–November 2006, a pilot experiment was performed at the CERN Proton Synchrotron in preparation for the Cosmics Leaving OUtdoor Droplets (CLOUD) experiment, whose aim is to study the possible influence of cosmic rays on clouds. The purpose of the pilot experiment was firstly to carry out exploratory measurements of the effect of ionising particle radiation on aerosol formation from trace H2SO4 vapour and secondly to provide technical input for the CLOUD design. A total of 44 nucleation bursts were produced and recorded, with formation rates of particles above the 3 nm detection threshold of between 0.1 and 100 cm−3s−1, and growth rates between 2 and 37 nm h−1. The corresponding H2O concentrations were typically around 106 cm−3 or less. The experimentally-measured formation rates and \htwosofour concentrations are comparable to those found in the atmosphere, supporting the idea that sulphuric acid is involved in the nucleation of atmospheric aerosols. However, sulphuric acid alone is not able to explain the observed rapid growth rates, which suggests the presence of additional trace vapours in the aerosol chamber, whose identity is unknown. By analysing the charged fraction, a few of the aerosol bursts appear to have a contribution from ion-induced nucleation and ion-ion recombination to form neutral clusters. Some indications were also found for the accelerator beam timing and intensity to influence the aerosol particle formation rate at the highest experimental SO2 concentrations of 6 ppb, although none was found at lower concentrations. Overall, the exploratory measurements provide suggestive evidence for ion-induced nucleation or ion-ion recombination as sources of aerosol particles. However in order to quantify the conditions under which ion processes become significant, improvements are needed in controlling the experimental variables and in the reproducibility of the experiments. Finally, concerning technical aspects, the most important lessons for the CLOUD design include the stringent requirement of internal cleanliness of the aerosol chamber, as well as maintenance of extremely stable temperatures (variations below 0.1 °C

2016, van Pinxteren, Dominik, Fomba, Khanneh Wadinga, Mertes, Stephan, Müller, Konrad, Spindler, Gerald, Schneider, Johannes, Lee, Taehyoung, Collett, Jeffrey L., Herrmann, Hartmut

Cloud water samples were taken in September/October 2010 at Mt. Schmücke in a rural, forested area in Germany during the Lagrange-type Hill Cap Cloud Thuringia 2010 (HCCT-2010) cloud experiment. Besides bulk collectors, a three-stage and a five-stage collector were applied and samples were analysed for inorganic ions (SO42−,NO3−, NH4+, Cl−, Na+, Mg2+, Ca2+, K+), H2O2 (aq), S(IV), and dissolved organic carbon (DOC). Campaign volume-weighted mean concentrations were 191, 142, and 39 µmol L−1 for ammonium, nitrate, and sulfate respectively, between 4 and 27 µmol L−1 for minor ions, 5.4 µmol L−1 for H2O2 (aq), 1.9 µmol L−1 for S(IV), and 3.9 mgC L−1 for DOC. The concentrations compare well to more recent European cloud water data from similar sites. On a mass basis, organic material (as DOC × 1.8) contributed 20–40 % (event means) to total solute concentrations and was found to have non-negligible impact on cloud water acidity. Relative standard deviations of major ions were 60–66 % for solute concentrations and 52–80 % for cloud water loadings (CWLs). The similar variability of solute concentrations and CWLs together with the results of back-trajectory analysis and principal component analysis, suggests that concentrations in incoming air masses (i.e. air mass history), rather than cloud liquid water content (LWC), were the main factor controlling bulk solute concentrations for the cloud studied. Droplet effective radius was found to be a somewhat better predictor for cloud water total ionic content (TIC) than LWC, even though no single explanatory variable can fully describe TIC (or solute concentration) variations in a simple functional relation due to the complex processes involved. Bulk concentrations typically agreed within a factor of 2 with co-located measurements of residual particle concentrations sampled by a counterflow virtual impactor (CVI) and analysed by an aerosol mass spectrometer (AMS), with the deviations being mainly caused by systematic differences and limitations of the approaches (such as outgassing of dissolved gases during residual particle sampling). Scavenging efficiencies (SEs) of aerosol constituents were 0.56–0.94, 0.79–0.99, 0.71–98, and 0.67–0.92 for SO42−, NO3−, NH4+, and DOC respectively when calculated as event means with in-cloud data only. SEs estimated using data from an upwind site were substantially different in many cases, revealing the impact of gas-phase uptake (for volatile constituents) and mass losses across Mt. Schmücke likely due to physical processes such as droplet scavenging by trees and/or entrainment. Drop size-resolved cloud water concentrations of major ions SO42−, NO3−, and NH4+ revealed two main profiles: decreasing concentrations with increasing droplet size and “U” shapes. In contrast, profiles of typical coarse particle mode minor ions were often increasing with increasing drop size, highlighting the importance of a species' particle concentration size distribution for the development of size-resolved solute concentration patterns. Concentration differences between droplet size classes were typically < 2 for major ions from the three-stage collector and somewhat more pronounced from the five-stage collector, while they were much larger for minor ions. Due to a better separation of droplet populations, the five-stage collector was capable of resolving some features of solute size dependencies not seen in the three-stage data, especially sharp concentration increases (up to a factor of 5–10) in the smallest droplets for many solutes.