the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
How to Extract Lagrangian Information from Cloud Radar Doppler Spectra for Process Studies?
Abstract. Ground-based remote sensing instruments are often operated in a vertically pointing mode, producing time-height cross-section images (THIs) of the atmosphere. However, THIs are not Lagrangian observations: they cannot track the evolution of a single particle directly. Instead, several assumptions are required to derive the particle evolution from THI. We discuss these assumptions and show how their validity can be assessed using elevation scans. For demonstration, we analyze two intense riming cases. Since rimed particles exhibit enhanced sedimentation velocities, we first present a method to derive the vertical target velocity from scanning cloud radar observations. This method allows to study the spatial distribution of riming. The first case is comprised of several horizontally homogeneous, descending layers of rimed particles. Under these conditions, one can safely study the particle evolution in a "traditional" way by evaluating subsequent vertical profiles. The second case is more heterogeneous. For the analysis, we introduce the new spectral column vertical profile (SCVP) technique. SCVPs allow to trace the evolution of a single particle population's Doppler spectrum in space and time, thereby representing true Lagrangian observations. Our results demonstrate the value of scanning observations and show that downsides, for example regarding the use of Doppler velocity, can be overcome. Our results also raise the question whether the typically very high time resolution of THI is actually required for the common type of analyses performed on THI, and whether a combination of scanning and vertical observations could be the better observational strategy for ground-based remote sensing instruments.
Competing interests: In addition to her affiliation with the Munich Institute of Meteorology at LMU Munich, IP is employed by the German Meteorological Service (DWD).
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 paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.- Preprint
(8572 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(4367 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 18 Oct 2026)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-3446', Mariko Oue, 20 Aug 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Paul Ockenfuss, 08 Sep 2026
reply
Thank you very much for the review. Please see the attached answers to your questions. A version of the manuscript with highlighted changes is attached after the review comments in the same pdf.
-
AC2: 'Reply on AC1', Paul Ockenfuss, 08 Sep 2026
reply
Please excuse us, the diff pdf was missing. You find it attached here.
-
AC2: 'Reply on AC1', Paul Ockenfuss, 08 Sep 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Paul Ockenfuss, 08 Sep 2026
reply
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-3446', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Oct 2026
reply
In their manuscript Ockenfuß et al describe how specialized scan patterns of cloud radars can be used to track lagrangian particle evolution. They propose to extend column vertical profiles by the use of spectral data and present two case studies of riming in wintertime (frontal) cloud systems. The manuscript is well written and fits the journal, thus it should be considered for publication after minor revisions.
L4: ‘using elevation scans’ maybe it would be clearer to already here mention RHI scans.
L12: ’use of Doppler velocity’ please consider including slant Doppler velocity, to make that sentence clearer.
L61: It is not perfectly clear from the text how these striped regions manifest. I recon, periodic vertical elongated features are meant?
L92: Please indicate more clearly, that you are referring to the online supplement
Fig. 1: To be honest, I struggled very much in understanding that figure and the respective description. The videos helped a lot, but the static figure could also be made more accessible. Two concrete suggestions:
1) On top of panels a, d, and g indicate where the particles were generated. This could be as simple as two downward facing triangles indicating start and stop of particle generation/location where the particles ‘entered the domain)’.
2) Again, panels a, d, and g consider showing an additional point of time (i.e. one before the particles were advected above the radar) or show the trajectories of selected particles as thin lines.
Is there a specific reason, why different sedimentation velocities were used? A single one would make the scenarios more comparable.L294/Fig6: The wind barbs in Fig 6b are a bit confusing, as they seem to indicate 3 different horizontal wind directions in the lowermost range gate. Are these subsampling the raw vertical resolution? For the second range gate (southerly wind, 10kt), the horizontal wind seems to be perpendicular to the RHI scan. Can you comment how that affects your retrieval?
L307: Are there objective criteria available to assess the quality of the reconstruction?
L320: Most likely also various broadening effects affect the quality of the spectra (see e.g. Nastorm 1997 doi.org/10.1007/s00585-997-0786-7).
L420: The attribution of seeding is a bit speculative solely having Fig 6a at hand. Do the RHI scans give more indication above 2.5km height?
L449: Maybe ‘underdetermined by two factors’ would be more precise wording.
L456: See above on the objective criteria for the quality of the reconstruction.
L474: ‘horizontal homogeneity in the particle properties’ would be less ambigious.
L483: Again on the horizontal homogeneity. It would be of advantage to have a rule of thumb for which horizontal scale of particle features and horizontal wind, the THIs are sufficient. But maybe, that’s beyond of the scope of the current manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3446-RC2
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 149 | 89 | 28 | 266 | 29 | 17 | 19 |
- HTML: 149
- PDF: 89
- XML: 28
- Total: 266
- Supplement: 29
- BibTeX: 17
- EndNote: 19
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
General Comments
This study proposed a new scan strategy to better track features of generating cells and riming signatures of falling particles in snow precipitation systems. The strategy is unique and captured riming signatures of falling particles in better ways, and the obtained results are reasonable. The analysis has been done well by considering uncertainties and limitations. The paper is well organized. I have only a few minor comments.
Specific comments