2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.104949
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simulation of aerosol deposition flux over the Arabian Peninsula with CHIMERE-2017: Sensitivity to different dry deposition schemes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 79 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The underestimation of the coarse fraction of PM can stem from either too low emissions of coarse particles in the HTAP anthropogenic emissions inventory, or excess dry deposition as (PM 10 -PM 2.5 ) are substantially more deposited than PM 2.5 due to their greater mass. The latter point is sensitive to the choice of the deposition scheme, sometimes resulting in significantly different fluxes, e.g., [49]. However, emissions of aerosols by fires are usually mostly found in fine mode as is consistently shown both by the simulations and measurements: when the fire event starts, the PM 2.5 /PM 10 ratio increases in both the model and observations, to around 0.8 and 0.6, respectively, (not shown here).…”
Section: In Santiagomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The underestimation of the coarse fraction of PM can stem from either too low emissions of coarse particles in the HTAP anthropogenic emissions inventory, or excess dry deposition as (PM 10 -PM 2.5 ) are substantially more deposited than PM 2.5 due to their greater mass. The latter point is sensitive to the choice of the deposition scheme, sometimes resulting in significantly different fluxes, e.g., [49]. However, emissions of aerosols by fires are usually mostly found in fine mode as is consistently shown both by the simulations and measurements: when the fire event starts, the PM 2.5 /PM 10 ratio increases in both the model and observations, to around 0.8 and 0.6, respectively, (not shown here).…”
Section: In Santiagomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conducting multiple simulations, using different deposition parameterizations, could help estimate the variability of our results related to this choice. However, Beegum et al (2020) for example showed that the compared performance of both deposition schemes available in CHIMERE depends on the season and location considered. Thus, including a second set of simulations with the other deposition scheme would not result in more confident results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another dry deposition scheme is available in CHIMERE based on Wesely (1989). The compared performance of Zhang et al (2001) and Wesely (1989) deposition schemes in CHIMERE was assessed over the Arabian Peninsula in Beegum et al (2020), revealing that Zhang et al (2001) matched observations better for this region, despite a seasonal variability in performance. The choice to use only one scheme rather than performing a sensitivity analysis with both schemes is discussed in Section 4.…”
Section: Modeling Setupmentioning
confidence: 99%