Laserfiche WebLink
<br />APRIL 1990 <br /> <br />DESHLER, REYNOLDS AND HUGGINS <br /> <br />323 <br /> <br />TABLE 5. Comparison of initial conditions in cases <br />with seeding effects vscases..with no efIeCts. <br /> <br /> Cases with Cases with no <br />A verages of seeding effects seeding effects <br />Liquid water content (g m-3): <br />Range 0.0 to 0.12 0.02 to 0.09 <br />Mean 0.05 0.05 <br />Number of cases 15 11 <br />2D-C concentration (L-1): <br />Range 4 to 78 2 to 130 <br />Mean 23 81 <br />Number of cases 14 11 <br />2D-P concentration (L -I): <br />Range I to 10 2 to 15 <br />Mean 3 7 <br />Number of cases 14 11 <br />dBZ max: <br />Range <MDS to 17 5 to 22 <br />Mean 8 14 <br />Number of cases 9 11 <br /> <br />then evolved to include more careful monitoring of <br />delivery of CO2 and results improved in 1984/1985. <br />A chopper was installed on the aircraft for 1985/1986 <br />to allow an even more direct delivery of CO2, It is not <br />known if this was partly responsible for the poor success <br />rate for that year. <br /> <br />2) AGI FLARES <br /> <br />Prior to the winter of 1986/1987 seeding with AgI <br />was in the form of 20 gm TB I type pyrotechnic flares <br />dropped at a rate of one every 10 s (I km) to produce <br />a I km deep curtain of seeding material. These flares <br />were used for 15 seedlines on four days and the aircraft <br />penetrated all of them. Seeding signatures were found <br />in 4 (27 percent) of these 15 curtains. Two of the cur- <br />tains with seeding signatures were tracked during two <br />experiments in 1980 (Stewart and Marwitz 1982). <br />During one experiment the effects of seeding were fol- <br />lowed for 57 min in a nonprecipitating altostratus cloud <br />with no natural ice. Ice nuclei counts above background <br />were noted during these two experiments, but the signal <br />was not nearly as strong as observed in the 1986 ex- <br />periments. This was probably due to more careful op- <br />eration of the counter during 1986. No ice nucleus <br />counts were observed for the case on 26 February 1982, <br />while the ice nucleus counter was not used for the 4 <br />March 1985 case. Increases in ICC were not observed <br />on 4 March 1985, even though there were relatively <br />high amounts of SL W at the seedline. Although this is <br />a limited sample for an assessment of the effectivity of <br />the flares, there are problems associated with them. <br />They are expensive. For the ten seedlines released on <br />4 March 1985 nearly $10 000 worth of flares was con- <br />sumed. The ice nucleating activity of the flares is two <br />to three orders of magnitude lower than AgI in an ace- <br /> <br />tone solution, especially when the tracer cesium is <br />added to the flares. The flares deteriorate with age, and <br />the quality control is poor. In one test of the flares <50 <br />percent of them burned for the 30 s required. <br /> <br />3) AGI IN ACETONE <br /> <br />In 1986/87 AgI was released as a line source using <br />a 3 percent solution of AgI NH41 NH4Cl04 burned in <br />acetone. Interception of seedlines were noted by in- <br />creased ice nucleus counts and increased ICC. There <br />were seven seedlines initiated on three days using this <br />mixture. The research aircraft penetrated all seven <br />seedlines and detected seeding signatures in six (86 <br />percent) of them. On 2 February 1980 one seedline <br />was created by burning Agl in an acetone solution, but <br />not using the AgI NH41 NH4C104 mixture. No seeding <br />effects were noted from this line, although clear seeding <br />signatures were noted when Agl flares were used earlier <br />on this day (Stewart and Marwitz 1982). In 1986/87 <br />the AgI produced seeding effects that could be tracked <br />for over 45 min, while one seedline on 22 December <br />1986 was tracked for 90 min. <br />The increased success with the AgI-acetone solution <br />compared to the AgI flares was probably due to: 1) <br />more dependable operation of the NCAR ice nucleus <br />counter during 1986 and, therefore, better documen- <br />tation of plume location; 2) a continuous source of ice <br />nuclei rather than a curtain with gaps as may have <br />occurred with AgI flares; and 3) higher activity of the <br />AgI acetone solution compared to the AgI flares. <br />Continued production of small ice crystals as nuclei <br />are lifted to colder temperatures, and thus a continuous <br />source of high ICC explains the increased longevity of <br />the AgI-acetone seedlines compared to the CO2 cur- <br />tains which nucleate a large number of crystals only at <br />the seedline. The maximum age observed for a CO2 <br />curtain was 36 min, but more commonly the longest <br />times were 25-30 min. <br /> <br />4) ICE CR YST AL GROWTH <br /> <br />The results noted in columns 7-10 in Table 6 will <br />be discussed together. The ice crystal habits produced <br />by seeding were consistent within the narrow temper- <br />ature range over which these experiments were con- <br />ducted. Plates and columnar habits dominated the ob- <br />servations, but needles were rarely observed. Most early <br />curtain interceptions ( < 10 min) showed pristine crys- <br />tals while the later ones (> 20 min) had rimed particles. <br />One case (26 January 1985) with very low liquid water <br />and weak winds had unrimed crystals 33 min after <br />seeding. There was a distinct lack of aggregation within <br />the seeded curtains. This is in contrast to the obser- <br />vations of Huggins and Rodi (1985), who found large <br />aggregates after 10 min in convective clouds seeded <br />with CO2, and the observations of Deshler et al. (1987), <br />who found aggregates in snowfall from low-level stratus <br />seeded with CO2. <br />