Retrieval of Normalized Gamma Size Distribution Parameters Using Precipitation Imaging Package (PIP) Snowfall Observations during ICE-POP 2018

Author/Creator ORCID

Date

2023-05-29

Department

Program

Citation of Original Publication

Tokay, Ali, Liang Liao, Robert Meneghini, Charles N. Helms, S. Joseph Munchak, David B. Wolff, and Patrick N. Gatlin. "Retrieval of Normalized Gamma Size Distribution Parameters Using Precipitation Imaging Package (PIP) Snowfall Observations during ICE-POP 2018." Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 62, no. 5 (May 29, 2023): 611–24. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-21-0266.1.

Rights

This work was written as part of one of the author's official duties as an Employee of the United States Government and is therefore a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 U.S.C. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under U.S. Law.
Public Domain

Subjects

Abstract

Parameters of the normalized gamma particle size distribution (PSD) have been retrieved from the Precipitation Image Package (PIP) snowfall observations collected during the International Collaborative Experiment–PyeongChang Olympic and Paralympic winter games (ICE-POP 2018). Two of the gamma PSD parameters, the mass-weighted particle diameter Dmass and the normalized intercept parameter NW, have median values of 1.15–1.31 mm and 2.84–3.04 log(mm−1 m−3), respectively. This range arises from the choice of the relationship between the maximum versus equivalent diameter, Dmx–Deq, and the relationship between the Reynolds and Best numbers, Re–X. Normalization of snow water equivalent rate (SWER) and ice water content W by NW reduces the range in NW, resulting in well-fitted power-law relationships between SWER/NW and Dmass and between W/NW and Dmass. The bulk descriptors of snowfall are calculated from PIP observations and from the gamma PSD with values of the shape parameter μ ranging from −2 to 10. NASA's Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission, which adopted the normalized gamma PSD, assumes μ = 2 and 3 in its two separate algorithms. The mean fractional bias (MFB) of the snowfall parameters changes with μ, where the functional dependence on μ depends on the specific snowfall parameter of interest. The MFB of the total concentration was underestimated by 0.23–0.34 when μ = 2 and by 0.29–0.40 when μ = 3, whereas the MFB of SWER had a much narrower range (from −0.03 to 0.04) for the same μ values.