Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Lecture 2:
Marine aerosol source function:
approaching the consensus
Andreas “A review of sea spray generation function for the open ocean”
Motivation: How far we are from consensus on aerosol fluxes...
Andreas “A review of sea spray generation function for the open ocean”, Skipton, 2004
A proposition of getting closer to consensus:
let's delete the outliers and all function that are not U3 dependant
Andreas “A review of sea spray generation function for the open ocean”
dF
=f U 10 f r W U 10 f r
dr
Monahan '71
Wilheit '79
M&O'M '80 RBF
Various whitecap coverage parametrizations M&O'M '80 OLS
100 Bondur&Sharkov'82 A
Bondur&Sharkov'82 B
Pandey&Kakar 82
Monahan et al. '83
10 Spillane et al'86 cold
Whitecap coverage,W (%)
ln z / L 10 z / L 0 z /L
f ( z / L) ln z / L 0.07 z / L 0
0.25 1.2( z / L) 1/3 z / L 0.07
N)
(z N*l
n )
(z C
3
3
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.7
all sizes
N*log(z)+C
2.6 2.6 0.5-1.0
log(z)
log(z)
2.5
1.0-1.5 all sizes
2.4 1.5-2.0 N*log(z)+C
0.5-1.0
2.4 2.0-2.5
1.0-1.5
1.5-2.0
2.3 2.0-2.5
2.2
2.1 2.2
2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
N[1/m3] x 10
6
2
0 5 10 15
3 6
N[1/m ] x 10
3
all sizes
N*log(z)+C
2.8
0.5-1.0
1.0-1.5
2.6 1.5-2.0
2.0-2.5
log(z)
2.5-3.0
2.4 3.0-3.5
3.5-4.0
4.0-4.5
2.2 4.5-5.0
5.0-5.5
5.5-6.0
2 2 6.0-6.5
4 6 8
10 10 10 106.5-7.0
3 7.0-7.5
N [1/m ]
7.5-8.0
FE = A < dE > + B
MV E 0
V
M u
0uu 2
* 0
< dE > M U 3
3
FE =A< U > +B
Correlation between U3 and FE
0.88
0.86
0.84
0.82
r
0.8
r (0.65)
max
= 0.873447
0.78
r(2/3) = 0.873444
0.76
0.74
0.72
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
exponent
N d a3 h 2
3
N d a5 dE 2/ 3
dE a4 h
1/ 4
w
1/3
aH 1/ 2
U
2 2 /3
g
s 1`0
Summary
-Aerosol emission from open sea areas my be parameterised
with a linear function of dissipation energy in power 2/3
1 / 3 aH s1 / 2U12`0 B
2/ 3
FE A
-7
were: A=1.52 ; B=1.6 10 g
Problems to solve:
-Finding a parameterisation of emission
flux for different wave ages
-Verifying the parameterisation using
experimental wave data
Measurement stations of r/v "Oceania" in the Norwegian and
Greenland Seas in recent summers
SGF for different win speed: comparison of our North Atlantic
data (stars) and calculated functions to literature functions
7
10 6
10
10
6 U = 7 m/s
U = 6 m/s 5
10 dry dep.
Andreas
5
10 dry dep. Smith
Andreas Monahan method
4
Smith 10 gradient aprox.
Flux[m-2s-1µm-1]
Flux[m s µm ]
4
-1
3 gradient data 3
10 10
2
10 2
10
1
10
1
10
0
10
0
10
-1 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Particle radius r [µm]
Particle radius r [µm]
6
10 6
10
dry dep.
U = 8 m/s Andreas U = 10 m/s dry dep.
5 Smith Andreas
10 Monahan method 5 Smith
10
gradient aprox. Monahan method
gradient data gradient aprox.
Flux[m-2s-1µm-1]
gradient data
10
4
Flux[m-2s-1µm-1] 4
10
3
10 10
3
2 2
10 10
1 1
10 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Particle radius r [µm] Particle radius r [µm]
Comparison different SGF for 10 m/s wind speed.
60
30
-30
-60
-90
-180 -120 -60 0 60 120 180
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
Range of conditions
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
Temperature effect?
23oC
15oC
5oC
-2oC
Monahan E. C. (Univ. of Connecticut) “Assessing Global Sea Spray Aerosol Production from
Estimates of Global Oceanic Whitecap Coverage”
Subjective analysis
Intensity threshold;
A and B stages in oblique view
High uncertainty: Stramska and Petelski, 2003
Up to 30%;
Higher
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
Alternative method: remote sensing of sea surface
emissivity.
90
60
Same magnitude;
30 Different spatial
Lat itude
0 features:
-30
-60
March 1998
-90
-180 -120 -60 0 60 120 180 W U103
Lon gitud e 90
60
-30
-60
-90
-180 -120 -60 0 60 120 180
Lon gitud e
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via Wh iteca p cov erage , W
Whitecap Coverage”
Alternative method: remote sensing of sea surface
emissivity. Validation with previous data
Magnitude;
Trend:
Suppressio
n at high
winds;
Enhanceme
nt at
moderate
winds.
Variability!
Anguelova et al. (NRL) “Effects of Environmental Variables in Sea Spray Generation Function via
Whitecap Coverage”
Turbulent fluxes: correlation eddy method (sonic anemometer)
O'Dowd C.E. et al. (Galway) “Primary Marine Aerosol Turbulent Flux Measurements at
Mace Head”
Plume bubbles: image and
distribution
0 101 -1
10
3
M
Fit
1 0
10
M(µMol µm-1)
-2
10
9
~r -0.
10-1 ~
2
(# µm-1)
r-2.4
z (cm)
3
10-2
~
-3
10
r-
2.8
4
10-3
5
10-4 10-4
100 200300 500 1000 200030005000
0 1 2 3 4 5 r(µ
m )
x(cm)
Ira Leifer (Marine Science Institute, Goleta, CA) “Bubble Plumes from Breaking
Waves during LUMINY”
The next iteration: Whitecaps and
Bubble Plumes – “the gateleg table”
Rather like the blind-
folded person sizing
up the elephant: The
acoustician grasps
the large, old,
“microbubble”
plumes, while the
camera sees the new
“alpha” plumes