English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

. The second phase of the Fifth International Ice Nucleation Workshop (FIN-02)involved the gathering of a large number of researchers at the KarlsruheInstitute of Technology's Aerosol Interactions and Dynamics of the Atmosphere(AIDA) facility to promote characterization and understanding of icenucleation measurements made by a variety of methods used worldwide.Compared to the previous workshop in 2007, participation was doubled,reflecting a vibrant research area. Experimental methods involved sampling ofaerosol particles by direct processing ice nucleation measuring systems fromthe same volume of air in separate experiments using different ice nucleatingparticle (INP) types, and collections of aerosol particle samples ontofilters or into liquid for sharing amongst measurement techniques thatpost-process these samples. In this manner, any errors introduced bydifferences in generation methods when samples are shared across laboratorieswere mitigated. Furthermore, as much as possible, aerosol particle sizedistribution was controlled so that the size limitations of different methodswere minimized. The results presented here use data from the workshop toassess the comparability of immersion freezing measurement methods activatingINPs in bulk suspensions, methods that activate INPs in condensation and/orimmersion freezing modes as single particles on a substrate, continuous flowdiffusion chambers (CFDCs) directly sampling and processing particles wellabove water saturation to maximize immersion and subsequent freezing ofaerosol particles, and expansion cloud chamber simulations in which liquidcloud droplets were first activated on aerosol particles prior to freezing.The AIDA expansion chamber measurements are expected to be the closestrepresentation to INP activation in atmospheric cloud parcels in thesecomparisons, due to exposing particles freely to adiabatic cooling. The different particle types used as INPs included the minerals illite NX andpotassium feldspar (K-feldspar), two natural soil dusts representative of arable sandy loam(Argentina) and highly erodible sandy dryland (Tunisia) soils, respectively,and a bacterial INP (Snomax®). Consideredtogether, the agreement among post-processed immersion freezing measurementsof the numbers and fractions of particles active at different temperaturesfollowing bulk collection of particles into liquid was excellent, withpossible temperature uncertainties inferred to be a key factor in determiningINP uncertainties. Collection onto filters for rinsing versus directly intoliquid in impingers made little difference. For methods that activatedcollected single particles on a substrate at a controlled humidity at orabove water saturation, agreement with immersion freezing methods was good inmost cases, but was biased low in a few others for reasons that have not beenresolved, but could relate to water vapor competition effects. AmongstCFDC-style instruments, various factors requiring (variable) highersupersaturations to achieve equivalent immersion freezing activation dominatethe uncertainty between these measurements, and for comparison with bulkimmersion freezing methods. When operated above water saturation to includeassessment of immersion freezing, CFDC measurements often measured at orabove the upper bound of immersion freezing device measurements, but oftenunderestimated INP concentration in comparison to an immersion freezingmethod that first activates all particles into liquid droplets prior tocooling (the PIMCA-PINC device, or Portable Immersion Mode Cooling chAmber–Portable Ice Nucleation Chamber), and typically slightly underestimated INPnumber concentrations in comparison to cloud parcel expansions in the AIDAchamber; this can be largely mitigated when it is possible to raise therelative humidity to sufficiently high values in the CFDCs, although this isnot always possible operationally. Correspondence of measurements of INPs among direct sampling andpost-processing systems varied depending on the INP type. Agreement was bestfor Snomax® particles in the temperature regimecolder than −10 ∘ C, where their ice nucleation activity is nearlymaximized and changes very little with temperature. At temperatures warmer than −10 ∘ C, Snomax® INP measurements (allvia freezing of suspensions) demonstrated discrepancies consistent withprevious reports of the instability of its protein aggregates that appear tomake it less suitable as a calibration INP at these temperatures. ForArgentinian soil dust particles, there was excellent agreement across allmeasurement methods; measures ranged within 1 order of magnitude for INPnumber concentrations, active fractions and calculated active site densitiesover a 25 to 30  ∘ C range and 5 to 8 orders of correspondingmagnitude change in number concentrations. This was also the case for alltemperatures warmer than −25 ∘ C in Tunisian dust experiments. Incontrast, discrepancies in measurements of INP concentrations or active sitedensities that exceeded 2 orders of magnitude across a broad range of temperaturemeasurements found at temperatures warmer than −25 ∘ C in a previous study werereplicated for illite NX. Discrepancies also exceeded 2 orders of magnitude attemperatures of −20 to −25 ∘ C for potassium feldspar (K-feldspar), but these coincidedwith the range of temperatures at which INP concentrations increase rapidly atapproximately an order of magnitude per 2  ∘ C cooling forK-feldspar. These few discrepancies did not outweigh the overall positive outcomes of theworkshop activity, nor the future utility of this data set or future similarefforts for resolving remaining measurement issues. Measurements of the samematerials were repeatable over the time of the workshop and demonstratedstrong consistency with prior studies, as reflected by agreement of databroadly with parameterizations of different specific or general (e.g., soildust) aerosol types. The divergent measurements of the INP activity of illiteNX by direct versus post-processing methods were not repeated for otherparticle types, and the Snomax® datademonstrated that, at least for a biological INP type, there is no expectedmeasurement bias between bulk collection and direct immediately processedfreezing methods to as warm as −10 ∘ C. Since particle size rangeswere limited for this workshop, it can be expected that for atmosphericpopulations of INPs, measurement discrepancies will appear due to thedifferent capabilities of methods for sampling the full aerosol sizedistribution, or due to limitations on achieving sufficient watersupersaturations to fully capture immersion freezing in direct processinginstruments. Overall, this workshop presents an improved picture of presentcapabilities for measuring INPs than in past workshops, and providesdirection toward addressing remaining measurement issues.

The Fifth International Workshop on Ice Nucleation phase 2 (FIN-02): laboratory intercomparison of ice nucleation measurements