Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1950
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1950
12 Jun 2025
 | 12 Jun 2025
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).

Constraining microphysics assumptions on the modeling of Atmospheric Rivers using GNSS Polarimetric Radio Occultations

Antía Paz, Ramon Padullés, and Estel Cardellach

Abstract. The Polarimetric Radio Occultation (PRO) technique enhances the standard Radio Occultation (RO) method by offering vertical profiles of precipitation structure and thermodynamic atmospheric profiles. PRO achieves this by utilizing two orthogonal polarizations—horizontal (H) and vertical (V)—to measure the differential phase shift (ΔΦ), which represents the difference in phase delay between the two of them. This study focuses on assessing the sensitivity of the PRO technique to the vertical structure of hydrometeors under different microphysical assumptions. To explore this sensitivity, simulations were conducted using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, with particular attention to the effects of different microphysics schemes on the simulated ΔΦ. The study also incorporated the Atmospheric Radiative Transfer Simulator (ARTS) particle database to characterize hydrometeors based on their scattering properties. Atmospheric Rivers (ARs) were used as a case study. The simulated ΔΦ values were compared to GNSS-PRO observational data from PAZ and Spire satellites, providing a means to evaluate the performance of the WRF microphysics parameterizations. Combining water content information derived from WRF simulations with ARTS-based scattering parameters, the specific differential phase (Kdp) was computed for various hydrometeor types. This allowed for a detailed assessment of their contributions to the observable ΔΦ. Results indicate that the Goddard and WSM6 schemes are the ones that reproduce better the observations for most of the studied cases. Similarly, snow particle habits that yield a factor of ~0.1 between water content and Kdp are the ones that lead to a better match between the observations and simulations.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Share
Antía Paz, Ramon Padullés, and Estel Cardellach

Status: open (until 31 Jul 2025)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Antía Paz, Ramon Padullés, and Estel Cardellach
Antía Paz, Ramon Padullés, and Estel Cardellach

Viewed

Total article views: 120 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
91 19 10 120 7 10
  • HTML: 91
  • PDF: 19
  • XML: 10
  • Total: 120
  • BibTeX: 7
  • EndNote: 10
Views and downloads (calculated since 12 Jun 2025)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 12 Jun 2025)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 118 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 118 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 07 Jul 2025
Download
Short summary
This study explores how different assumptions in cloud microphysics affect the vertical distribution of hydrometeors during extreme precipitation events, such as atmospheric rivers. Using a combination of high-resolution weather simulations and radiative transfer modeling, we identify snow as the dominant contributor to the observed vertical signal. The analysis highlights the sensitivity of precipitation structure to particle properties, that could help refine atmospheric modeling approaches.
Share