2016
DOI: 10.5194/acp-16-6563-2016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Long-resident droplets at the stratocumulus top

Abstract: Abstract. Turbulence models predict low droplet-collision rates in stratocumulus clouds, which should imply a narrow droplet size distribution and little rain. Contrary to this expectation, rain is often observed in stratocumuli. In this paper, we explore the hypothesis that some droplets can grow well above the average because small-scale turbulence allows them to reside at cloud top for a time longer than the convective-eddy time t * . Long-resident droplets can grow larger because condensation due to longwa… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…But in this paper we focus on mechanisms involving the condensation process. For example, results from Lagrangian tracking studies suggest that large droplets from condensation growth within parcels having favored trajectories can trigger collisions and drizzle formation in warm clouds (Lasher-Trapp et al, 2005;Cooper et al, 2013;Magaritz-Ronen et al, 2014Naumann and Seifert, 2015;de Lozar and Muessle, 2016). Korolev et al (2013) proposed that the droplet size distribution can be broadened through diffusion growth due to cloud base mixing and vertical fluctuation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But in this paper we focus on mechanisms involving the condensation process. For example, results from Lagrangian tracking studies suggest that large droplets from condensation growth within parcels having favored trajectories can trigger collisions and drizzle formation in warm clouds (Lasher-Trapp et al, 2005;Cooper et al, 2013;Magaritz-Ronen et al, 2014Naumann and Seifert, 2015;de Lozar and Muessle, 2016). Korolev et al (2013) proposed that the droplet size distribution can be broadened through diffusion growth due to cloud base mixing and vertical fluctuation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An interesting question is to explain why the CDSD is wider than predicted and the presence of the large droplet sizes in the tail of the distribution (e.g., Siebert and Shaw, 2017), which might be related to the fast-rain process in the atmosphere (e.g., Göke et al, 2007). Several pos- 15 sible mechanisms have been proposed, including the existence of giant cloud condensational nuclei (GCCN, usually defined as aerosols with dry diameter larger than few ”m) (e.g., Feingold et al, 1999;Yin et al, 2000;Jensen and Lee, 2008;Cheng et al, 2009;Jensen and Nugent, 2017), lucky cloud droplets (e.g., Kostinski and Shaw, 2005;Naumann and Seifert, 2015;Lozar and Muessle, 2016), mixing with environmental air (e.g., Lasher-Trapp et al, 2005;Cooper et al, 2013;Korolev et al, 2013;Yang et al, 2016), supersaturation fluctuations (e.g., Chandrakar et al, 2016;Siebert and Shaw, 2017), and enhancement of collision 20 efficiency due to turbulence or charge (e.g., Paluch, 1970;Grabowski and Wang, 2013;Falkovich and Pumir, 2015;Lu and Shaw, 2015). Recently, Jensen and Nugent (2017) investigated the effect of GCCN on droplet growth and rain formation using a cloud parcel model.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Turbulence can also modulate the condensational growth of cloud droplets through mixing and entrainment (e.g., Lasher-Trapp et al, 2005;Cooper et al, 2013;Korolev et al, 2013;Yang et al, 2016). In addition, turbulence can enhance the collision efficiency between droplets and produce "lucky" cloud droplets through stochastic collisions, which has been confirmed by direct numerical simulations and Lagrangian drop models (e.g., Paluch, 1970;Kostinski and Shaw, 2005;Falkovich and Pumir, 2007;Grabowski and Wang, 2013;Naumann and Seifert, 2015;de Lozar and Muessle, 2016).…”
mentioning
confidence: 69%