Hi Frank, Hi all, first, I agree with Patrick, it's easier to provide suitable support when you provide information which (major) version you use. A lot has happened in development (ie 2.3) since the release of the last stable version (ie 2.2).
Then, however, I have to slightly correct Patrick - internal calculation of pnd_field IS possible in 2.2 already. It's a limited number of parametrizations available for that, but it includes the MH97 that Patrick mentioned (see workspace method pnd_fieldSetup in v2.2 online doc). Since you mentioned absorption - there is a bunch of different ways with different complexity and level of simplification to handle/consider hydrometeors: - when absorption/emission is sufficient, then hydrometeors can be handled as an absorption species using one of the hydrometeor continuum models (see continua.arts in controlfiles/general/ for available ones). these hydrometeor continua are refractive index/permittivity-based, ie assume Rayleigh particles. the hydrometeor field then goes as one field entry into vmr_field (just as any other absorption species set in abs_species) and should contain, I think, the mass concentration (kg/m3) Pro: no scat_data and pnd_field needed. - then there is an option to still only consider absorption/emission and the hydrometeor species as an absorption species, but take the optical properties from actual scattering property calculations, eg Mie or Tmatrix calculations or even scattering databases; whatever you put into scat_data (see Section "Absorbing particles" in the ARTS User Guide(s) and propmat_clearskyAddParticles in the online documentation and for an example controlfiles/artscomponents/absorption/TestAbsParticle.arts in v2.3 code base - this should, with some adaptions for name changes between v2.2 and v2.3 also work in 2.2; i just hadn't prepared an example yet back in the v2.2 times...). Pro: Fast. Actual optical properties used. - Finally, you can do actual scattering calculations using a range of different scattering solvers. These all need scat_data and pnd_field - Here pnd_field can either be prepared externally and just read-in (example for this in controlfiles/artscomponents/doit/TestDOIT.arts*). - Or you can calculate the pnd_field from hydrometeor mass (sometimes also number) concentration or precip rates (which parameter field(s) required depends on the bulk parametrisation used). This approach also requires some meta data on the hydrometeor optical property (scat_data) data (named scat_meta or similar, depending on the version...). For examples see controlfiles/artscomponents/disort/TestDisort.arts* or controlfiles/artscomponents/wfuns/TestWfunsHybCloudy.arts* in v2.3 (v2.3 currently has two different systems for internal pnd_field preparation. the one in TestWfunsis the one that is newer, probably the nicer, but definitely the one preferred and supported in the future) Ragrding the input for pnd_field calculations,there's no "standard" hydrometeor profile data (like the Fascode/AFGL standard atmospheres). There's the different instances of ECMWF statistically-selected datasets in arts-xml-data/planets/Earth/ECMWF/IFS/ that contain hydrometeor profiles. But you probaly rather like to use your own ones, I assume. For scat_data and scat_meta; there's examples in v2.3 controlfiles/testdata/scatData/. Also check user guide and online doc for more formating info. Atmlab (and typhon?) has functions to create scat_data (and scat_meta?) from Mie and Tmatrix calculations. The ARTS scattering database comes with an interface to prepare these from it's DDA-based contents. So far. Best regards, Jana PS. * note these examples control cases/files are named after the use of different scattering solvers. How to prepare pnd_field is independent of the applied solver, ie you can combine solver and pnd_field preparation approaches freely (almost: Hybrid solver only works with the approach used in that controlfile). On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 1:05 PM Patrick Eriksson < patrick.eriks...@chalmers.se> wrote: > Dear Frank Werner, > > It makes me happy to hear that your are integrating ARTS into your code > base. When we started ARTS, limb sounding was one of the main > applications so it is very nice if ARTS gets used on limb sounders > beside Odin/SMR. > > Let me start by asking if you are using v2.2 or a relatively recent v2.3? > > If v2.2: Then you have to create the "pnd_field" yourself and import > data with e.g. ParticleTypeAdd. > > If v2.3: In this version you can work with particle size distributions > (PSDs). Be aware that there was a first system, that now is replaced. > The later version operates with particle_bulkprop_field. With this > system you can give ARTS IWC-values and select some PSDs, such as the > MH97 one that both Dong Wu and I have used for limb retrievals. > > In both cases, scattering data you either generate inside ARTS with > T-matrix or take it from our "scattering database". > > Some brief comments. If you tell me what version you actually are using, > I can provide more detailed help. > > Bye, > > Patrick > > > On 2019-11-04 22:07, Claudia Emde wrote: > > Dear Arts-Developers, > > > > here is a question about how to include clouds in ARTS. Since I am not > > up-to-date, I forward this message to you. > > > > Best regards, > > Claudia > > > > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > > Subject: Clouds in ARTS > > Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 17:40:47 +0000 > > From: Werner, Frank (329D) <frank.wer...@jpl.nasa.gov> > > To: claudia.e...@lmu.de <claudia.e...@lmu.de> > > > > > > > > Hi Claudia, > > > > The MLS satellite team here at JPL has recently started using ARTS, in > > addition to the in house radiative transfer algorithms. Michael Schwartz > > and I have been the two people playing around with ARTS, trying to > > incorporate it as another RT option in our code base. We are almost at > > the point where we have ARTS as another plug-and-play option for our > > retrievals. > > > > One of the last remaining issues is handling of clouds. As far as I can > > tell, all I have to do is turn the ‘cloudbox’ on and add hydro meteors > > via ‘ParticleTypeAdd’. Is there a simple example for some cloud > > absorption you can send me? It doesn’t need to be super realistic or > > anything. As far as I can tell, the workspace method needs scattering > > properties and number densities. All I could find in the standard ARTS > > data sets is the Chevallier_91L stuff in > > ‘/controlfiles/planets/Earth/Chevallier_91L/’. > > > > Again, a simple example of some cloud absorption would be appreciated. > > Thanks for your help! > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Frank > > > > -- > > > > Frank Werner > > Mail Stop 183-701, Jet Propulsion Laboratory > > 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, California 91109, United States > > Phone: +1 818 354-1918 > > > > Fax: +1 818 393 5065 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > arts_dev.mi mailing list > > email@example.com > > https://mailman.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/mailman/listinfo/arts_dev.mi > > > _______________________________________________ > arts_dev.mi mailing list > firstname.lastname@example.org > https://mailman.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/mailman/listinfo/arts_dev.mi > -- ================================================================= Jana Mendrok, Ph.D. Deutscher Wetterdienst Frankfurter Str. 135 63067 Offenbach am Main, Germany Email: jana.mend...@dwd.de Phone : +49 (0)69 8062 3139 =================================================================
_______________________________________________ arts_dev.mi mailing list email@example.com https://mailman.rrz.uni-hamburg.de/mailman/listinfo/arts_dev.mi