the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
High-resolution modelling of early contrail evolution from hydrogen-powered aircraft
Abstract. In this study, we investigate the properties of young contrails formed behind hydrogen-powered aircraft, particularly compared to contrails from conventional kerosene combustion. High-resolution simulations of individual contrails are performed using the EULAG-LCM model, a large-eddy simulation model with fully coupled particle-based ice microphysics.
Previous studies on early contrail evolution during the vortex phase explored a range of meteorological and aircraft-related parameters but focused on contrails with ice crystal numbers and water vapor emissions typical of kerosene combustion.
This study examines the early H2-contrail evolution, starting tenths of a second after exhaust emission when ice crystal formation is complete. Two key parameters are adjusted: the amount of emitted water vapor and the number of ice crystals formed during the initial stage. The emitted water vapor varies between 3.7 and 38.6 g per flight meter, depending on the fuel and aircraft type. The initial ice crystal number spans four orders of magnitude, from approximately 1010 to 1014 ice crystals per flight meter. Additionally, we extend our atmospheric scenarios to ambient temperatures up to 235 K as H2 contrails can form in warmer conditions where kerosene plumes typically cannot.
Our results show that vortex phase processes reduce the four-order magnitude difference in ice crystal number to two orders of magnitude. Moreover, relative ice crystal loss increases with increasing ambient temperatures and decreasing relative humidity levels.
Finally, we extend the parametrization of ice crystal loss from a previous study to include scenarios of contrails from hydrogen propulsion systems.
- Preprint
(6648 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(3343 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3859', Anonymous Referee #1, 24 Jan 2025
Overall i think this paper present great qualities . The survival ice crystals fraction parametrization seems is really impoved. However i have some concerned about the CFD presented that may affect this parametrization. Therfore i do not recommand the publication at this stage since the paper will clearly benefit from a sensitivity analysis to there computationnal domain, mesh and initial condition. More details are given in the supplement.
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3859', Anonymous Referee #2, 31 Mar 2025
General comments
This manuscript presents a numerical study of ice crystal formation behind hydrogen-powered aircraft using a 3D large-eddy simulation (LES) framework coupled with a Lagrangian microphysical model. The focus lies on the vortex phase of contrail evolution, with a comparative analysis between hydrogen- and kerosene-fueled aircraft. The study explores the sensitivity of contrail properties to ambient humidity, temperature, initial ice crystal properties, and aircraft type. A new parameterization for the survival fraction of ice crystals under hydrogen combustion scenarios is proposed and tested against the LES results.
This is a timely and relevant contribution, particularly given the increasing interest in low-emission aviation technologies. The manuscript is well written and the results are clearly presented. I believe this study is of high quality and should be published after addressing a few key issues. In particular, the mesh resolution near the vortex core appears coarse when compared to prior studies (e.g., http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4807063, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4934350), which used at least 10 grid points across the vortex core radius. I would encourage the authors to comment on this, and ideally to provide a resolution sensitivity test (e.g., for both A350 and A320 cases), particularly regarding contrail properties such as vertical profiles of ice mass and ice crystal survival fractions.
Specific comments
- Section 2.1 (second paragraph): The Lagrangian particle framework is introduced, but it is not stated whether drag forces acting on the particles are considered. Given that the ice crystals exceed 1 μm in radius, could the authors clarify whether drag is included in the particle dynamics?
- Line 124: You mention the simulation starts “several seconds” after emission. Can you specify the exact time corresponding to the plume age? This is important for comparison with prior studies (e.g., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-15-7369-2015).
- Line 121: Please clarify what is meant by "rigid boundary conditions". Do you refer to the vertical boundaries being reflective, fixed-value, or another type?
- Line 170: About the initial crystal distribution, I understand the lack of direct measurements of crystal properties (e.g., radius and density), but more explanation on how the initial mean radius and density were selected would be appreciated. Was this based on previous simulations (e.g., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24-2319-2024), theoretical estimates, or adjusted to match a specific ice number emission index?
Technical corrections
- In lines 309, should be “A320 aircraft” not “A320aircraft”.
- In lines 309, should be “with a wing span” not “with wing span”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3859-RC2
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
260 | 71 | 8 | 339 | 76 | 12 | 10 |
- HTML: 260
- PDF: 71
- XML: 8
- Total: 339
- Supplement: 76
- BibTeX: 12
- EndNote: 10
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|---|---|---|
United States of America | 1 | 100 | 30 |
Germany | 2 | 70 | 21 |
United Kingdom | 3 | 31 | 9 |
Canada | 4 | 16 | 4 |
France | 5 | 12 | 3 |
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
- 100