the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 16 Nov 2023
The characteristics of cloud macro parameters caused by seeder-feeder inside clouds measured by millimeter-wave cloud radar in Xi'an
Abstract. The seeding effect of upper clouds on lower clouds affects the evolution of clouds, especially the seeding from upper ice clouds on lower stratiform clouds or convective clouds, which can stimulate the precipitation of lower clouds and even produce extreme precipitation. Because when seeders of seeding cloud enter the feeding cloud, the interaction between cloud particles results in the change of macro and micro parameters of the feeding cloud. Based on the observation data of the ground-based Ka-band millimeter-wave cloud radar (MMCR) and microwave radiometer (MWR) in spring and autumn from 2020 to 2022, the seeder-feeder phenomenon among double-layer clouds in China Xi'an was studied. The study on 11cases of seeder-feeder processes shows that the processes can be divided into three categories by defining the height difference (HD) between the seeding cloud base and the feeding cloud top, and the effective seeding depth (ESD). Through the analysis on the reflectivity factor and the radial velocity of cloud particles detected by MMCR and on the retrieved cloud dynamics parameters (vertical velocity of airflow and falling velocity of cloud particles), it is shown that the reflectivity factor in the cloud are significantly enhanced during the seeder-feeder period for the three types of processes. But there are different enhancements among the reflectivity factor profiles for the three seeder-feeder processes. The results also showed the limited depth as seeders entering the top of the feeding cloud. The lower and thinner the HD height was, the lower and thicker the ESD height was. On the contrary, the higher the HD height, the higher and thinner the ESD height.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(2843 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(2843 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Nov 2023
Based on the observed results of microwave radar, this paper analyzed the seeding process of the upper layer in stable stratus cloud to the lower layer cloud. Specifically, by defining the relevant parameters of the seeding process, the characteristics of these parameters in the seeding process were obtained, such as the seeding depth and the seeding action time. The significance of this paper is to reveal the cloud interaction in vertical direction from the observed results of microwave radar.
The process from cloud to rain is very complex, the upper cloud affected the lower, and produced precipitation, have been widely attention, such as cold cloud precipitation process that involves the upper ice particles falling action on the lower cloud. To this end, the following recommendations are made:
- Is the method described in the article appropriate for unstable cloud systems?
- In the article, only one microwave radar was used. If the two radars placed along the direction of cloud movement, is it better for your result?
- It is very nice for this article that obtained the useful characteristics of seeding process, such as the differences of seeding depth and the seeding action time for the three different seeding processes. My suggestion is that in the follow-up studies by large sample statistics, possibly more specific differences between different seeding types will be obtained.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yun Yuan, 01 Dec 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2183/egusphere-2023-2183-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Dec 2023
The author's answer is very good and I am very satisfied. It also shows that the author is very familiar with microwave radar detection and has a good understanding of the physical mechanism of the cloud seeding-feeding process.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-RC2
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Dec 2023
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Aoqi Zhang, 14 Jan 2024
This paper investigated the ‘seeder-feeder’ process of bilayer stratiform clouds. Using ground-based MMCR and MWR) in spring and autumn from 2020 to 2022 in Xi’an, the authors defined several key parameters of ‘seeder-feeder’ process, including Height Difference (HD) of two clouds and effective seeding depth (ESD), and studied the relationship of the key parameters. The idea of this paper is innovative, and presents well references for investigating ‘seed-feeder’ processes and effects in other regions. The studies are well organized with clear results.
Specifically, I’m very curious about one question: how does the ‘seeder-feeder’ process initiate (end time of t1 and start time of t2)? It would be nice if the authors discuss more clearly about this issue.
Line 388：delete ‘f’ after ‘The’
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-CC1 -
CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Huige Di, 16 Jan 2024
Thank you very much for your comment of our paper, and your question and suggestion are very helpful for us to improve the quality of the paper.
The following is our replies to your question. The starting time, t2, is determined based on the distribution of the echo reflectivity factor, which is the time when the reflectivity factor of the upper and lower clouds begins firstly to connect (see Figure 2 in the text). At this time, particles in the upper cloud fall into the lower cloud. In this study, we marked the start time, t2, by using our eye observation method. In the future, if more statistical and business research is conducted, we will develop algorithms to automatically recognize the start time t2.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-CC2
-
CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Huige Di, 16 Jan 2024
- CC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Huige Di, 19 Jan 2024
-
CC4: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Yan Yin, 17 Feb 2024
General comments:
The manuscript presents analysis of cloud and precipitation development related to the seeder-feeder mechanism, based on ground-based Ka-band millimeter-wave cloud radar (MMCR) and microwave radiometer (MWR) in Xi’an, China. Through analysis of the reflectivity factor and the radial velocity of cloud particles detected by MMCR, and the retrieved cloud dynamics parameters (vertical velocity of airflow and falling velocity of cloud particles), the authors showed that the reflectivity factor in the cloud are significantly enhanced during the seeder-feeder period, and the magnitude of the enhancements are different for clouds with different HD (the height difference between the seeding cloud base and the feeding cloud top) and ESD (the effective seeding depth). While the manuscript is understandable as a whole, many phrases and explanations are not clear or even incorrect. I think the quality of the manuscript needs a significant improvement.
Specific Comments:
1. When explaining the seeder-feeder mechanism (Lines 31-33), the authors said: When these seeders meet lower cloud droplets with ice phase or in supercool water state, the droplets will grow larger by riming or vapor deposition via the Wegener-Bergeron-Findeisen effect (Bergeron 1935; He et al., 2022). This is conceptually incorrect. It should be the ice particles that grow in the WBF process, not the droplets.
2. Probably the most significant contribution of this article is by defining the height difference between the seeding cloud base and the feeding cloud top (HD) and the effective seeding depth (ESD), the authors found that the seeding effect are different for cloud with different HD. However, the similar expressions “The lower and thinner the HD height was, the lower and thicker the ESD height was. On the contrary, the higher the HD height, the higher and thinner the ESD height” appeared in the Abstract (Lines 20-21) and in the Conclusions (Lines 529-530) are hard to understand. The heights of HD and EST cannot be described as thinner or thicker.
More detailed comments:
1. The title may be changed as “The characteristics of cloud macro parameters caused by seeder-feeder process inside clouds measured by millimeter-wave cloud radar in Xi'an, China”;
2. Line 13: Change “China Xi’an” to “Xi’an, China”;
3. Lines 18-19: “But there are different enhancements among the reflectivity factor profiles for the three seeder-feeder processes” may be modified to “But the magnitudes of the enhancements among the three seeder-feeder processes are different” to avoid duplication with the previous sentence;
4. Line 26: “lead” may be modified to "promote";
5. Lines 29-30 are not clear;
6. Lines 34-35: There are syntax errors in this expression;
7. Lines 36-38: The sentence is incomplete or not clear;
8. Lines 42-44: There is logical problem in this sentence;
9. Lines51-54: The expression is not clear to me. What scientific questions are still existing related to the seeder-feeder process?
10. Line 57: Why several cloud layers are needed?
11. Line 64: “the seeder-feeder processes” or “the seeder-feeder process”?
12. The sentence in Lines 66-67: “The parameters of microphysics, dynamics and thermodynamics during the seeder-feeder process were focused on analysis” is not clear to me.
13. Line 83: “observations data” may be changed to “observational data”.
14. Line 109: “which reduces the trouble of eliminating terrain clutter in observation data quality control”, needs to be rewritten.
15. What does “air haze” in Line 110 mean?
16. Lines 109-113 are not clear.
17. Lines 120-121: the expression ”Because the descending the cloud particles velocity in different phase states is different, the influence on the vertical velocity of the airflow in the cloud is different” needs to be written.
18. Line 128: What does mean by “In the identified l supercooled water region”?
19. Line 129: “When there was a drizzle, the SP of MMCR usually shows a bimodal distribution”: a drizzle?
20. Line 138: change “this season” to “these seasons”;
21. Line 141: “cloud bottom” should be changed as “cloud base” , similar changes should also be made in other places;
22. Lines 139-141: How the heights of cloud top and cloud base are defined?
23. Lines 152-153: “…… seeding time t2 at 98.2min, and feeding cloud development duration at more than 2hr 30min” needs rewritten.
24. Line 166 and several other places: “the final falling velocity” is “the terminal fall velocity”?
25. Lines 170-171: why the unit of width of the velocity spectrum is m/s?
26. Lines 184-186: “But in some altitudes, there are the airflow sinking movements, which can be explained the needs of airflow sinking movement short-term to achieve mass balance”: What does this mean?
27. Line 187: “the sinking velocity of the cloud particles is in the range of –1~ –4 ms-1 during seeding process”: What size cloud particles can get such falling velocity? The sinking velocity is the terminal fall velocity?
28. Lines 207-210: “During being seeded, ice particles were the main component in the cloud. After being seeded, the ice particles in the lower part of the feeding cloud lasted for a long time (maintaining the whole t3 period), while the supercooled water layer at the top was obvious”: This needs more explanation.
29. Lines 211-212: “The instantaneous water vapor flux structure (Fig. 4b) indicates that the seeding cloud is smaller than the feeding cloud”: smaller in size or water vapor flux?
30. “seeing-feeding” in Lines 213-214 should be “seeding-feeding";
31. Lines 229-233: not clear;
32. Line 236: Change “Following to this principle” to “Following this principle”;
33. Lines 240-241: “……the corresponding average profile of cloud particle parameter profile for the three intensity echoes is also gained” needs rewritten;
34. Lines 287-288: “…… after the seeding, the cloud particle size distribution and particle velocity of the bilayer cloud reach a relatively balanced and stable state through complex thermodynamic and dynamic interactions”: needs more physical explanation.
35. Lines 310-312: “Therefore, the Effective Seeding Depth (ESD) is defined as the height difference between the top height of the feeding cloud and from the height down to the height of the maximum correlation coefficient, which represents the influence of seeders on the seeding cloud”: I do not understand.
36. What does it mean by “sowing effect” in Line 315?
37. There are more expression problems in the remaining part of the text. I suggest the quality of the whole text to be carefully checked and revised.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-CC4 -
CC5: 'Reply on CC4', Huige Di, 01 Mar 2024
Thank you very much for your nice comments. Your question and suggestion are very helpful for us to improve the quality of our paper. We appreciate the reviewer’s thoughtful review and constructive comments. The attachment provides our point-to-point replies.
- CC6: 'Reply on CC4', Huige Di, 01 Mar 2024
-
CC5: 'Reply on CC4', Huige Di, 01 Mar 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Anonymous Referee #3, 09 Mar 2024
General comments:
The manuscript shows the microphysical characteristics of cloud caused by seeder-feeder process, based on ground-based Ka-band millimeter-wave cloud radar (MMCR) and microwave radiometer (MWR) in Xi’an, China. With the definition of the height difference (HD) and the effective seeding depth (ESD), this study shows detailed features of the reflectivity and radial velocity for seeder-feeder phenomena, which would deepen our understanding of the physical process.however，many phrases and explanations are not clear . I think the quality of the manuscript needs more improvement.
Specific Comments:
1.Since the definitions of HD and ESD are key parts in this paper, the authors are suggested to make them more clearly with physical concept, especially for ESD. The ESD defined in Line 310-313 is still confused and the role of autocorrelation between reflectivity factor and falling velocity is not clear.
2.It is found that the updraft flow is very important for seeder-feeder in this study. It is suggested to distinguish the properties of cloud, such as if it is convective or stratiform cloud. It may make the clusters’ features more vivid.
3.How to determine the time of t1? The description in this paper is very subjective and needs to be given more objective indicators
4.How to use cloud radar power spectrum to separate air velocity and particle falling velocity? More detailed explanation should be given.
5.There is a strong correlation between the seeder-feeder mechanism and the cloud particles phase. The determination of particle phase states and the process of change are not given
6.As shown in Figure 4, the cloud is dominated by ice crystals and snow during t2, this situation does not trigger the seeder-feeder mechanism.
7.There are some grammar and expression mistakes in this paper, which need to be modified.
More detailed comments:
1.Line 1: macro or micro??
2.The past and present tense is mixed in some paragraphs, which needs to be uniformed. For example, Line 13 “shows”, Line 19 “showed”;
3.Line 9: “Because” is unwanted;
4.Line 13: “China Xi’an” is wrong expressed;
5.Line 67: “were focused on analysis” ?
6.Line 92 shows that “but Fig. 3c still shows that after this time, cloud particles still sink (at 02:45 BJT, sinking velocity –0.5 ms-1) on the feeding cloud top”. Figure 6 gives the autocorrelation coefficient profile in t2 period and shows positive correlations. It’s better to add some figures and discussions to explore the relationships between reflectivity factor and particle descent velocity in t3 period.
7.Line 189:should be “table 3”.
8.Line 518: “seeing-feeding”??
9.Based on the observation data of the ground-based Ka-band millimeter-wave cloud radar (MMCR) and microwave radiometer (MWR) in spring and autumn from 2020 to 2022(line 12), Table 4 show the observation results by MMCR from winter to the next spring from 2021 to 2022, which one is correct?
10.The author should give all the spelling about CFAD in Fig. 7 to Fig.11。
11. It should illustrate the exact numbers to describe how these parameters changed in different height or regions (et al., THSC-BHSC, HD, THSC), rather than “varies significantly during seedings”, “all increased correspondingly”, “decreased significantly”.
12. Line 482 is very confusing.
13. Line 388, “the f type I” may be “the type I”
14. Numbers of horizontal axis in Fig. 7, Fig.9 and Fig. 11 are italic, which are different to other figures. There are some more blanks to fit all figures.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-RC3
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Nov 2023
Based on the observed results of microwave radar, this paper analyzed the seeding process of the upper layer in stable stratus cloud to the lower layer cloud. Specifically, by defining the relevant parameters of the seeding process, the characteristics of these parameters in the seeding process were obtained, such as the seeding depth and the seeding action time. The significance of this paper is to reveal the cloud interaction in vertical direction from the observed results of microwave radar.
The process from cloud to rain is very complex, the upper cloud affected the lower, and produced precipitation, have been widely attention, such as cold cloud precipitation process that involves the upper ice particles falling action on the lower cloud. To this end, the following recommendations are made:
- Is the method described in the article appropriate for unstable cloud systems?
- In the article, only one microwave radar was used. If the two radars placed along the direction of cloud movement, is it better for your result?
- It is very nice for this article that obtained the useful characteristics of seeding process, such as the differences of seeding depth and the seeding action time for the three different seeding processes. My suggestion is that in the follow-up studies by large sample statistics, possibly more specific differences between different seeding types will be obtained.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yun Yuan, 01 Dec 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2183/egusphere-2023-2183-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Dec 2023
The author's answer is very good and I am very satisfied. It also shows that the author is very familiar with microwave radar detection and has a good understanding of the physical mechanism of the cloud seeding-feeding process.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-RC2
-
RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Dec 2023
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Aoqi Zhang, 14 Jan 2024
This paper investigated the ‘seeder-feeder’ process of bilayer stratiform clouds. Using ground-based MMCR and MWR) in spring and autumn from 2020 to 2022 in Xi’an, the authors defined several key parameters of ‘seeder-feeder’ process, including Height Difference (HD) of two clouds and effective seeding depth (ESD), and studied the relationship of the key parameters. The idea of this paper is innovative, and presents well references for investigating ‘seed-feeder’ processes and effects in other regions. The studies are well organized with clear results.
Specifically, I’m very curious about one question: how does the ‘seeder-feeder’ process initiate (end time of t1 and start time of t2)? It would be nice if the authors discuss more clearly about this issue.
Line 388：delete ‘f’ after ‘The’
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-CC1 -
CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Huige Di, 16 Jan 2024
Thank you very much for your comment of our paper, and your question and suggestion are very helpful for us to improve the quality of the paper.
The following is our replies to your question. The starting time, t2, is determined based on the distribution of the echo reflectivity factor, which is the time when the reflectivity factor of the upper and lower clouds begins firstly to connect (see Figure 2 in the text). At this time, particles in the upper cloud fall into the lower cloud. In this study, we marked the start time, t2, by using our eye observation method. In the future, if more statistical and business research is conducted, we will develop algorithms to automatically recognize the start time t2.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-CC2
-
CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Huige Di, 16 Jan 2024
- CC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Huige Di, 19 Jan 2024
-
CC4: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Yan Yin, 17 Feb 2024
General comments:
The manuscript presents analysis of cloud and precipitation development related to the seeder-feeder mechanism, based on ground-based Ka-band millimeter-wave cloud radar (MMCR) and microwave radiometer (MWR) in Xi’an, China. Through analysis of the reflectivity factor and the radial velocity of cloud particles detected by MMCR, and the retrieved cloud dynamics parameters (vertical velocity of airflow and falling velocity of cloud particles), the authors showed that the reflectivity factor in the cloud are significantly enhanced during the seeder-feeder period, and the magnitude of the enhancements are different for clouds with different HD (the height difference between the seeding cloud base and the feeding cloud top) and ESD (the effective seeding depth). While the manuscript is understandable as a whole, many phrases and explanations are not clear or even incorrect. I think the quality of the manuscript needs a significant improvement.
Specific Comments:
1. When explaining the seeder-feeder mechanism (Lines 31-33), the authors said: When these seeders meet lower cloud droplets with ice phase or in supercool water state, the droplets will grow larger by riming or vapor deposition via the Wegener-Bergeron-Findeisen effect (Bergeron 1935; He et al., 2022). This is conceptually incorrect. It should be the ice particles that grow in the WBF process, not the droplets.
2. Probably the most significant contribution of this article is by defining the height difference between the seeding cloud base and the feeding cloud top (HD) and the effective seeding depth (ESD), the authors found that the seeding effect are different for cloud with different HD. However, the similar expressions “The lower and thinner the HD height was, the lower and thicker the ESD height was. On the contrary, the higher the HD height, the higher and thinner the ESD height” appeared in the Abstract (Lines 20-21) and in the Conclusions (Lines 529-530) are hard to understand. The heights of HD and EST cannot be described as thinner or thicker.
More detailed comments:
1. The title may be changed as “The characteristics of cloud macro parameters caused by seeder-feeder process inside clouds measured by millimeter-wave cloud radar in Xi'an, China”;
2. Line 13: Change “China Xi’an” to “Xi’an, China”;
3. Lines 18-19: “But there are different enhancements among the reflectivity factor profiles for the three seeder-feeder processes” may be modified to “But the magnitudes of the enhancements among the three seeder-feeder processes are different” to avoid duplication with the previous sentence;
4. Line 26: “lead” may be modified to "promote";
5. Lines 29-30 are not clear;
6. Lines 34-35: There are syntax errors in this expression;
7. Lines 36-38: The sentence is incomplete or not clear;
8. Lines 42-44: There is logical problem in this sentence;
9. Lines51-54: The expression is not clear to me. What scientific questions are still existing related to the seeder-feeder process?
10. Line 57: Why several cloud layers are needed?
11. Line 64: “the seeder-feeder processes” or “the seeder-feeder process”?
12. The sentence in Lines 66-67: “The parameters of microphysics, dynamics and thermodynamics during the seeder-feeder process were focused on analysis” is not clear to me.
13. Line 83: “observations data” may be changed to “observational data”.
14. Line 109: “which reduces the trouble of eliminating terrain clutter in observation data quality control”, needs to be rewritten.
15. What does “air haze” in Line 110 mean?
16. Lines 109-113 are not clear.
17. Lines 120-121: the expression ”Because the descending the cloud particles velocity in different phase states is different, the influence on the vertical velocity of the airflow in the cloud is different” needs to be written.
18. Line 128: What does mean by “In the identified l supercooled water region”?
19. Line 129: “When there was a drizzle, the SP of MMCR usually shows a bimodal distribution”: a drizzle?
20. Line 138: change “this season” to “these seasons”;
21. Line 141: “cloud bottom” should be changed as “cloud base” , similar changes should also be made in other places;
22. Lines 139-141: How the heights of cloud top and cloud base are defined?
23. Lines 152-153: “…… seeding time t2 at 98.2min, and feeding cloud development duration at more than 2hr 30min” needs rewritten.
24. Line 166 and several other places: “the final falling velocity” is “the terminal fall velocity”?
25. Lines 170-171: why the unit of width of the velocity spectrum is m/s?
26. Lines 184-186: “But in some altitudes, there are the airflow sinking movements, which can be explained the needs of airflow sinking movement short-term to achieve mass balance”: What does this mean?
27. Line 187: “the sinking velocity of the cloud particles is in the range of –1~ –4 ms-1 during seeding process”: What size cloud particles can get such falling velocity? The sinking velocity is the terminal fall velocity?
28. Lines 207-210: “During being seeded, ice particles were the main component in the cloud. After being seeded, the ice particles in the lower part of the feeding cloud lasted for a long time (maintaining the whole t3 period), while the supercooled water layer at the top was obvious”: This needs more explanation.
29. Lines 211-212: “The instantaneous water vapor flux structure (Fig. 4b) indicates that the seeding cloud is smaller than the feeding cloud”: smaller in size or water vapor flux?
30. “seeing-feeding” in Lines 213-214 should be “seeding-feeding";
31. Lines 229-233: not clear;
32. Line 236: Change “Following to this principle” to “Following this principle”;
33. Lines 240-241: “……the corresponding average profile of cloud particle parameter profile for the three intensity echoes is also gained” needs rewritten;
34. Lines 287-288: “…… after the seeding, the cloud particle size distribution and particle velocity of the bilayer cloud reach a relatively balanced and stable state through complex thermodynamic and dynamic interactions”: needs more physical explanation.
35. Lines 310-312: “Therefore, the Effective Seeding Depth (ESD) is defined as the height difference between the top height of the feeding cloud and from the height down to the height of the maximum correlation coefficient, which represents the influence of seeders on the seeding cloud”: I do not understand.
36. What does it mean by “sowing effect” in Line 315?
37. There are more expression problems in the remaining part of the text. I suggest the quality of the whole text to be carefully checked and revised.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-CC4 -
CC5: 'Reply on CC4', Huige Di, 01 Mar 2024
Thank you very much for your nice comments. Your question and suggestion are very helpful for us to improve the quality of our paper. We appreciate the reviewer’s thoughtful review and constructive comments. The attachment provides our point-to-point replies.
- CC6: 'Reply on CC4', Huige Di, 01 Mar 2024
-
CC5: 'Reply on CC4', Huige Di, 01 Mar 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2183', Anonymous Referee #3, 09 Mar 2024
General comments:
The manuscript shows the microphysical characteristics of cloud caused by seeder-feeder process, based on ground-based Ka-band millimeter-wave cloud radar (MMCR) and microwave radiometer (MWR) in Xi’an, China. With the definition of the height difference (HD) and the effective seeding depth (ESD), this study shows detailed features of the reflectivity and radial velocity for seeder-feeder phenomena, which would deepen our understanding of the physical process.however，many phrases and explanations are not clear . I think the quality of the manuscript needs more improvement.
Specific Comments:
1.Since the definitions of HD and ESD are key parts in this paper, the authors are suggested to make them more clearly with physical concept, especially for ESD. The ESD defined in Line 310-313 is still confused and the role of autocorrelation between reflectivity factor and falling velocity is not clear.
2.It is found that the updraft flow is very important for seeder-feeder in this study. It is suggested to distinguish the properties of cloud, such as if it is convective or stratiform cloud. It may make the clusters’ features more vivid.
3.How to determine the time of t1? The description in this paper is very subjective and needs to be given more objective indicators
4.How to use cloud radar power spectrum to separate air velocity and particle falling velocity? More detailed explanation should be given.
5.There is a strong correlation between the seeder-feeder mechanism and the cloud particles phase. The determination of particle phase states and the process of change are not given
6.As shown in Figure 4, the cloud is dominated by ice crystals and snow during t2, this situation does not trigger the seeder-feeder mechanism.
7.There are some grammar and expression mistakes in this paper, which need to be modified.
More detailed comments:
1.Line 1: macro or micro??
2.The past and present tense is mixed in some paragraphs, which needs to be uniformed. For example, Line 13 “shows”, Line 19 “showed”;
3.Line 9: “Because” is unwanted;
4.Line 13: “China Xi’an” is wrong expressed;
5.Line 67: “were focused on analysis” ?
6.Line 92 shows that “but Fig. 3c still shows that after this time, cloud particles still sink (at 02:45 BJT, sinking velocity –0.5 ms-1) on the feeding cloud top”. Figure 6 gives the autocorrelation coefficient profile in t2 period and shows positive correlations. It’s better to add some figures and discussions to explore the relationships between reflectivity factor and particle descent velocity in t3 period.
7.Line 189:should be “table 3”.
8.Line 518: “seeing-feeding”??
9.Based on the observation data of the ground-based Ka-band millimeter-wave cloud radar (MMCR) and microwave radiometer (MWR) in spring and autumn from 2020 to 2022(line 12), Table 4 show the observation results by MMCR from winter to the next spring from 2021 to 2022, which one is correct?
10.The author should give all the spelling about CFAD in Fig. 7 to Fig.11。
11. It should illustrate the exact numbers to describe how these parameters changed in different height or regions (et al., THSC-BHSC, HD, THSC), rather than “varies significantly during seedings”, “all increased correspondingly”, “decreased significantly”.
12. Line 482 is very confusing.
13. Line 388, “the f type I” may be “the type I”
14. Numbers of horizontal axis in Fig. 7, Fig.9 and Fig. 11 are italic, which are different to other figures. There are some more blanks to fit all figures.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2183-RC3
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 240 | 79 | 31 | 350 | 14 | 14 |
- HTML: 240
- PDF: 79
- XML: 31
- Total: 350
- BibTeX: 14
- EndNote: 14
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States of America | 1 | 114 | 32 |
| China | 2 | 94 | 27 |
| Germany | 3 | 20 | 5 |
| France | 4 | 16 | 4 |
| undefined | 5 | 8 | 2 |
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
- 114
Huige Di
Yun Yuan
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(2843 KB) - Metadata XML