From: Paul Demott <pdemott@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 15:28:31 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Draft topic F1 - Evaporation IN (fwd)


Dear IN-WG members,

   Here is a (belated) contribution regarding the posed Fundamental
Question F1 regarding evaporation ice nuclei. I welcome your comments.

Paul

**************************************************************************
Paul J. DeMott
Research Scientist
Department of Atmospheric Science
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1371
(t) 970-491-8257
(f) 970-491-8449
(e) pdemott@lamar.colostate.edu
**************************************************************************

F1. How compelling is the evidence that evaporation enhances the number or 
activity of IN? What are the details known so far? How to become more 
secure on this issue? 

1. The evidence that evaporation enhances IN activity is mostly
indirect or inferential. This evidence, at the moment, is perhaps more
intriguing than it is compelling. Some field studies have related
unusually high ice nuclei numbers or unusual increases in ice crystal
numbers to circumstances in which clouds were evaporating. Langer et al.
(1969) found IN enhanced in thunderstorm outflow regions compared to 
surrounding regions of the atmosphere. Cooper (1995) observed the onset of 
up to a 100 factor increase in ice crystal concentrations in the 
evaporation region of orographic wave clouds. The largest ice enhancements 
in the Cooper study were observed in clouds with temperatures approaching 
the onset temperature for homogeneous freezing. Smaller enhancements were 
found in warmer clouds and no enhancements were found warmer than about -20 
degC. Cooper also noted that ice crystal concentrations do not progressively 
increase in wave cloud trains, as might be expected if IN were being 
created by the cloud cycling. Some of the observations of ice crystal number
enhancement versus expected IN number in the comprehensive cloud studies of 
Hobbs and Rangno (1985; 1990; 1994) were also observed to originate in 
close proximity to regions of cloud evaporation. Nevertheless, these authors 
have focused attention on the stronger relation between cloud droplet 
diameter and high ice crystal concentration. 
   Additional evidence for ice nuclei formed in association with 
evaporation come from studies in which natural air that had been through a 
condensation process was purposely warmed and evaporated before measuring 
ice nucleus activity. In three cases, Kassander et al. (1957) found high IN 
concentrations (~100/L at temperatures between -1 and -14 degC) in cloudy 
air samples that had been evaporated and warmed to 13 degC prior to cooling 
in a mixing cloud chamber. Ice formation at such warm temperatures was not 
noted in sampling any cloud that consisted only of liquid droplets, but 
only in clouds that also contained ice crystals. These unusual observations 
have never been reproduced in other airborne IN sampling programs. For 
example, Rogers et al. (1998) brought air into a warm aircraft cabin from 
ice clouds on many occasions and did not note enhanced ice nuclei compared 
to clear air sampling in their continuous flow diffusion chamber. In a 
filter-processing study of natural IN, Rosinski and Morgan (1991) observed 
a transient population of sorption ice nuclei created during the 
evaporation of droplets formed initially on aerosol particles above water 
saturation. These new ice nuclei remained viable only as long as the air 
remained supersaturated with respect to ice during evaporation. The IN 
enhancements of sorption nuclei were up to several  per liter, stated to 
represent 0.00001 to 0.0001 fractions of the droplet population, with 
little temperature dependence between -4 and -20 degC. The enhancement 
factor approached a very high level, of the degree needed to explain the 
pervasive amounts of ice often found in mixed regions of cumuli, in only 
one of eleven samples. The same study found that the population of 
condensation-freezing nuclei is actually degraded in successive 
condensation/evaporation cycles and that the deactivation is greater the 
more the air volume is warmed during evaporation. These observations are in 
sharp contrast to the findings of Kassander et al. and appear unable to 
explain an abundance of IN in thunderstorm outflows. The measurements of 
Rosinski and Morgan (1991) also suggest that most IN measurement techniques 
will probably have difficulty detecting populations of transient IN that 
disappear when sample humidity falls below ice saturation. 

2. Some field and laboratory work has been done on this topic in the last 
several years, but results have not been published in the reviewed 
literature. This probably speaks for the difficulty of reproducing the 
conditions under which evaporation ice nuclei are thought to form. At least 
three laboratories have attempted experimentation on the effects of 
evaporation on IN as part of broader research projects. During the time 
period of NCAR's Winter Icing in Storms Project (1991-1994), Colorado State 
University conducted evaporation/recondensation experiments in a controlled 
expansion chamber. Aerosol particles from surface-level air and air 
collected by aircraft in the free troposphere were used in the experiments. 
Ice enhancements during forced cloud evaporation and in subsequent 
reformation of clouds ranged from 0 to several times in the temperature 
range -15 to -33 degC, but concentration changes only rarely exceeded 10/L 
(Paul DeMott, personal communication). The University of Missouri-Rolla has 
conducted similar measurements during the last few years. The University of 
Illinois has also initiated related studies in the laboratory and in field 
programs. Cooper (1995) performed a more comprehensive analysis of
enhancements noted in the downstream regions of wave clouds than appeared 
in his conference paper, but these results are also not yet published. 
 
3. Mechanisms have been proposed to explain ice enhancements of the type 
observed by Rosinski and Morgan (1991). These mechanisms involve the 
effects of organic films or surface charges on droplet freezing (Beard, 
1991) and surface kinetic effects on droplet cooling during evaporation 
(Cooper, 1995). These hypotheses have not been rigorously pursued 
experimentally. These mechanisms are attractive because only small 
fractions of cloud drops would need to freeze to greatly enhance ice 
concentrations. 

4. How to become more secure on the relation between evaporation and IN 
number? 
a.  New measurements in wave clouds, including IN measurements 
upstream and downstream of clouds, would help address the effects of the 
cloud processing and evaporation on IN. Use of a counterflow virtual 
impactor upstream of an IN processing device is one means of providing only 
cloud particle residues. Keeping air at least ice saturated in the process 
may not be an easy task. In such an experiment, one must assure that ice in 
downstream leg of cloud could not have initiated aloft of flight path. 
Cloud profiling with a millimeter radar in combination with aircraft data 
would provide useful guidance. Measurements of cloud particle populations 
should be made down to small particle sizes (e.g., using the CPI device) in 
order to more accurately determine the evolution of ice particle 
concentrations in evaporation regions. Similar measurements, including 
greater detail on particle size spectra, in cloud top and edge regions of 
cumuli may also be useful, albeit harder to interpret. 

b. There are some laboratory experiments that should give clear answers to 
the question of the effects of evaporation on ice nuclei concentration. 
These experiments must be designed to consider the likely transient nature 
of resulting IN populations. One example is an expansion chamber experiment 
in which the condensation level is repeatedly crossed at various 
supercooled temperatures. Experiments can also be envisioned using a 
continuous flow diffusion chamber (CFD). For example, it is possible to 
expose air to a condensation/evaporation cycle at a low temperature just 
upstream of processing through a CFD. Some optical and electrodynamic 
levitation devices now exist to isolate and observe the freezing behavior 
of single droplets at low temperatures and controlled humidity. Finally, 
analysis of the contact freezing ability of evaporated cloud residues 
should be pursued using a cold-stage precipitator (Vali, 1976). Any of 
these experimental methods could also explore the effects of droplet 
composition, organic contaminants and particle charge on ice formation. 

References:

Cooper, W.A., 1995: Ice formation in wave clouds: Observed enhancement 
during evaporation. Conf. on Cloud Physics, Amer. Meteor. Soc. (Boston), 
147-152. 

Hobbs, P.V. and A.L. Rangno, 1990: Ice particle concentrations in clouds. J 
Atmos. Sci., 42, 2523-2549. 

Hobbs, P.V. and A.L. Rangno, 1990: Rapid development of high ice particle 
concentrations in small polar maritime cumuliform clouds. J Atmos. Sci., 
47, 2710-2722. 

Kassander, A.R., L.L. Sims and J.E. McDonald, 1957: Observations of 
freezing nuclei over the southwestern U.S., In: Artificial Stimulation of 
Rain. Pergamon, New York, 392-403. 

Langer, G., G. Morgan, C.T. Nagamoto, M. Solak and J. Rosinski, 1979: 
Generation of ice nuclei in the surface outflow of thunderstorms in 
northeast Colorado. J. Atmos. Sci., 36, 2484-2494. 

Rangno, A.L. and P.V. Hobbs, 1994: Ice particle concentrations and 
precipitation development in small continental cumuliform clouds. Q.J.R. 
Meteorol. Soc., 120, 573-601. 

Rogers, D.C., P.J. DeMott, S.M. Kreidenweis, and Y. Chen, 1998: 
Measurements of ice nucleating aerosols during SUCCESS. Geophys. Res. 
Lett., 25, 1383-1386. 

Rosinski, J. and G. Morgan, 1991: Cloud condensation nuclei as a source of 
ice-forming nuclei in clouds. J. Aerosol Sci., 2, 123-133. 

Vali, G., 1976: Contact-freezing nucleation measured by the DFC instrument. 
In: Intnl. Workshop on Ice Nucl. Meas. (G. Vali, Ed.), Univ. of Wyoming 
Report, Laramie, 159-178. 




