气候变化领域集成服务门户(CCPortal): Comment on "review of experimental studies of secondary ice production" by Korolev and Leisner (2020)

CCPortal

DOI	10.5194/acp-21-11941-2021
	Comment on "review of experimental studies of secondary ice production" by Korolev and Leisner (2020)
	Phillips V.T.J.; Yano J.-I.; Deshmukh A.; Waman D.
发表日期	2021
ISSN	1680-7316
起始页码	11941
结束页码	11953
卷号	21 期号:15
英文摘要	This is a comment on the review by Korolev and Leisner (2020, hereafter KL2020). The only two laboratory/field studies ever to measure the breakup in ice-ice collisions for in-cloud conditions were negatively criticised by KL2020, as were our subsequent theoretical and modelling studies informed by both studies. First, hypothetically, even without any further laboratory experiments, such theoretical and modelling studies would continue to be possible, based on classical mechanics and statistical physics. They are not sensitive to the accuracy of lab data for typical situations, partly because the nonlinear explosive growth of ice concentrations continues until some maximum concentration is reached. To a degree, the same final concentration is expected regardless of the fragment number per collision. Second, there is no evidence that both lab/field observational studies characterising fragmentation in ice-ice collisions are either mutually conflicting or erroneous such that they cannot be used to represent this breakup in numerical models, contrary to the review. The fact that the ice spheres of one experiment were hail sized (2ĝ€¯cm) is not a problem if a universal theoretical formulation, such as ours, with fundamental dependencies, is informed by it. Although both lab/field studies involved head-on collisions, rotational kinetic energy for all collisions generally is only a small fraction of the initial collision kinetic energy (CKE) anyway. Although both lab/field experiments involved fixed targets, that is not a problem since the fixing of the target is represented via CKE in any energy-based formulation such as ours. Finally, scaling analysis suggests that the breakup of ice during sublimation can make a significant contribution to ice enhancement in clouds, again contrary to the impression given by the review. © Copyright:
语种	英语
scopus关键词	cloud; experimental study; ice breakup; ice crystal; kinetic energy
来源期刊	ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS
文献类型	期刊论文
条目标识符	http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/246665
作者单位	Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystem Science, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden; CNRM, UMR 3589 (CNRS) Meteo-France, Toulouse CEDEX, 31057, France
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Phillips V.T.J.,Yano J.-I.,Deshmukh A.,et al. Comment on "review of experimental studies of secondary ice production" by Korolev and Leisner (2020)[J],2021,21(15).
APA	Phillips V.T.J.,Yano J.-I.,Deshmukh A.,&Waman D..(2021).Comment on "review of experimental studies of secondary ice production" by Korolev and Leisner (2020).ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS,21(15).
MLA	Phillips V.T.J.,et al."Comment on "review of experimental studies of secondary ice production" by Korolev and Leisner (2020)".ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS 21.15(2021).