Microphysical Representations and Their Consistency with In Situ and Remote-Sensing Observations
The different microphysical schemes developed to date represent hydrometeors using parameters whose statistics—mean values, variances, correlations, and joint probability distribution—have not received much scrutiny, let alone validation against actual observations. This leads to some very problematic inconsistencies, which are described in this chapter, along with guidance on approaches to resolve them objectively.
KeywordsHydrometeors Cloud microphysics Precipitation
This work was performed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Copyright 2018. All rights reserved.
- Atlas, D. 1990. In Radar in Meteorology—Battan memorial and 40th Anniversary Radar Meteorology Conference, ed. D. Atlas, 86–97.Google Scholar
- Kuo, K.-S., W.S. Olson, B.T. Johnson, M. Grecu, L. Tian, T.L. Clune, B.H. van Aartsen, A.J. Heymsfield, L. Liao, and R. Meneghini. 2016. The microwave radiative properties of falling snow derived from nonspherical ice particle models. Part I: An extensive database of simulated pristine crystals and aggregate particles, and their scattering properties. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 55: 691–708. https://doi.org/10.1175/jamc-d-15-0130.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Williams, C.W., V.N. Bringi, L.D. Carey, V. Chandrasekar, P.N. Gitlin, Z.S. Haddad, R. Meneghini, S.J. Munchak, S.W. Nesbitt, W.A. Petersen, S. Tanelli, A. Tokay, A. Wilson, and D.B. Wolff. 2014. Describing the shape of raindrop size distributions using uncorrelated raindrop mass spectrum parameters. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 53: 1282–1296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar