Plotting HOM J #145
Plotting HOM J #145
Conversation
Codecov ReportPatch and project coverage have no change.
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #145 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 96.04% 96.04%
=======================================
Files 16 16
Lines 911 911
=======================================
Hits 875 875
Misses 36 36 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
Trying to replicate blue curve (at aqueous saturation): What I have with x_sulph = 0.027 (anything higher results in Delta_a_w being out of valid range, anything lower results in shorter curve; 0.027 seems like already much lower than atmospheric conditions) Spichtinger et al 2023 states "formulations should match in the temperature range 235 K ≤ T ≤ 240 K, since this range is relevant for the freezing of pure water cloud droplets with reasonable sizes. This temperature range at water saturation is equivalent to the range of water activity difference 0.27 < Delta_a_w < 0.31". But at those temperature bounds, I get 0.29 < Delta_a_w < 0.31. This is probably why the warmer end of my curve has log10(J) values so much higher than the paper's. |
|
Calculating Delta_a_w the way Koop 2000 did at x = 0.032 and constant P = 0.01 GPa gives me But the max valid P decreases each iteration and goes into the negatives. Still can't increase x_sulph to a more reasonable mass fraction like 0.8. |
|
bors try |
tryBuild succeeded! The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon. If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here. If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page. |
|
For all plots, blue curve is our parameterization and yellow curve are literature values. All literature values are implementations of Koop 2000. x_sulph = 0.031 (minimum value that doesn't give NaN error) x_sulph = 0.04 x_sulph = 0.065 The right-most plot is off by a factor of 8. When I force it to match Baumgartner by dividing J by 8, the other plots to the left of it don't get any better. In fact, for x = 0.065, I can see that the leftmost plot gets farther than the literature values. |
trontrytel
force-pushed
the
al/hom_plots
branch
2 times, most recently
from
059e2b2
to
e3884e8
Compare
amylu00
force-pushed
the
al/hom_plots
branch
from
6ae0005
to
6392642
Compare
comparing plots testing stuff out Adding homogeneous J example plot add new velocity types to exports fix apparent nucleation Add predicting properties from the p3 scheme Move ice nucleation J params to CLIMAParams Fix package deps for a release adding area docs Update to julia 1.9.2 Simplify Microphysics0M Fix nucleation parameter flow, const statements Add project to test path Update to new thermodynamics bump version down Add KA13 J vs T plots Restructure CloudMicrophysics 0M code bump down julia compat req. fix broadcasting issue for ClimaAtmos Update P3 scheme to new parameters, cleanup code and docs plots Add additional constructors for CloudMicrophysicsParameters0M and CloudMicrophysicsParametersP3 introduce water water_activity typo? documentation + moving plot file to folder duplicate in bibliography Add aqua tests, small fixes for tests untangling water activity from abifm docs fix plot
amylu00
force-pushed
the
al/hom_plots
branch
from
6392642
to
0350cf3
Compare
|
bors r+ |
|
Build succeeded! The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon. If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here. If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page. |
Purpose
Including plots for homogeneous nucleation rate coefficient to verify values.
To-do
Content