Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1992 <br /> <br />JOURNAL OF CLIMATE AND APPLIED METEOROLOGY <br /> <br />VOLUME 22 <br /> <br />upward motion approaching the barrier. Crystal con- <br />centrations of 5-20 L -1 were found upwind of the <br />barrier with almost no temperature dependence. <br />Rauber and Grant (1981 b), also present model results <br />in good agreement with their observations. More recent <br />observations from several more storms gave further <br />evidence that most of the liquid water was located over <br />the crest and upper slopes of the Park Range (Rauber <br />et aI., 1982). <br />Hill (1980a), in discussing winter orographic storms <br />in northern Utah, noted that, "our data indicate that <br />the production of supercooled water is closely asso- <br />ciated with vertical air motion which in turn is found <br />primarily at or near mountain-top levels". Thus, it <br />appears that liquid water concentrations may generally <br />be quite low in stable orographic clouds. The only <br />region of significant liquid water may be within ~.1 <br />kIn of the ground above the upwind slope of the barrier, <br />over the ridge and perhaps for a short distance beyond. <br />This likely corresponds to the region of most pro- <br />nounced upward motion. In this situation, ice crystal <br />growth may be very limited outside the zone of su- <br />percooled liquid water. Simple calculations of diffu- <br />sional growth and. subsequent ice crystal trajectories <br />suggest that crystals formed at elevations well above <br />the liquid water zone (e.g. near cloud top) are generally <br />carried beyond a barrier the width of the Bridger Range <br />without settling to the surface. The crystals most im- <br />portant to the snowfall processes may be those formed <br />well below cloud top that are carried quasi-horizontally <br />into the liquid water zone where rapid growth can <br />occur. <br />While understanding of both natural and seeded <br />snowfall process is still incomplete, the following gen- <br />eral statements about artificial seeding can be made. <br />In order for cloud seeding to increase snowfall from <br />winter clouds over mountainous terrain, several links <br />in a physical chain of events must exist. First, seeding <br />material must be successfully and reliably produced. <br />Second, this material must be transported into a region <br />of cloud that has supercooled water or ice supersat- <br />uration in excess of that which can be converted to <br />ice by naturally produced ice crystals. Third, the seeding <br />material must have dispersed sufficiently upon reaching <br />this region so that a significant volume is affected by <br />the desired concentration range of ice nuclei or the <br />resulting ice crystals. In the case of AgI seeding this <br />requires, fourth, that the temperature be low enough <br />for substantial nucleation to occur. Once ice crystals <br />form, they must remain in an environment suitable <br />for growth long enough to enable fallout to occur, <br />generally prior to their being carried beyond the <br />mountain barrier where downslope motion, cloud <br />evaporation and ice crystal sublimation typically exist. <br />The BRE was not able to acquire direct physical <br />evidence that each of these steps in the physical process <br />occurred in a significant fraction of the orographic <br />storms. Only AgI generator operation, precipitation <br /> <br />measured by the gage network, certain other surface <br />observations and upper air parameters were routinely <br />monitored. However, the BRE did obtain evidence <br />that the first four steps frequently occurred. Consid- <br />erable uncertainties still remain concerning the entire <br />physical process, particularly with regard to the growth <br />and trajectories of ice particles. This post hoc statistical <br />analysis is an attempt to reduce these uncertainties. <br /> <br />3. Experimental equipment <br /> <br />a. Precipitation gage network <br /> <br />A network of 31 precipitation monitoring sites was <br />maintained during the 1970-71 and 1971-72 winters <br />and is shown in Fig. 1. Twenty-eight of these sites were <br />east of the Main Ridge, one was 28 km south of the <br />,southern seeding site and the other two were at the <br />seeding sites. These latter three were used as control <br />gages in the statistical analysis herein. <br />The mechanisms of standard Belfort weighing gages <br />were used throughout the network. However, special <br />gage shells were constructed with a 28.7 cm diameter <br />orifice. This provided twice the sampling area of the <br />standard 8 inch gage, which prevented "capping" by <br />snow buildup, and dm.ibled resolution on the gage <br />chart. Each gage was equipped with an Alter-II type <br />windshield (Warnick, 1956). <br />All gages were positioned in relation to local terrain <br />features or forest cover so as to minimize wind effects. <br />The higher elevation sites, including the control gages <br />and gages on the Bangtail Ridge, were located in natural <br />clearings in the forest. These would be classified as <br />"overprotected" by Brown and Peck (1962). It is not <br />known how well measurements in such sites represent <br />the absolute snowfall amount over the larger, mostly <br />forested area. However, as shown in Part I, comparisons <br />between gages and snowboards showed excellent <br />agreement within such sites (r = 0.99) and correlation <br />coefficients of approximately 0.95 were common for <br />24 h totals between sheltered gage sites located ~4 <br />km apart. Thus, at.least in a relative sense, the gages <br />appeared to provide reliable estimates of precipitation. <br />All precipitation charts were manually reduced to <br />the nearest 0.01 inch by two independent teams of <br />data clerks. Any differences were then reconciled by <br />a third examination. Approximately 96% of all possible <br />precipitation data was retrieved from the gage charts. <br />About three-fourths of the remaining 4% had total <br />pr~cipitation known but time distribution unknown, <br />usually due to clock stoppages. All missing data.were <br />estimated with the aid of a series of maps, similar to <br />Fig. 1, which were prepared for all consecutive 6 h <br />periods with missing data. All available precipitation <br />totals were noted by each gage site, and information <br />on "amounts known but time distribution unknown" <br />was also noted. However, each map was coded and <br />nothing on it indicated the date in question, whether <br />the day was seeded, or even if the period was from an <br />