Articles | Volume 16, issue 14
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 8899–8914, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8899-2016
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 8899–8914, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-8899-2016

Research article 19 Jul 2016

Research article | 19 Jul 2016

Comparing contact and immersion freezing from continuous flow diffusion chambers

Baban Nagare et al.

Download

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Claudia Marcolli on behalf of the Authors (24 May 2016)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (25 May 2016) by Hinrich Grothe
RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (25 May 2016)
RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (07 Jun 2016)
ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (08 Jun 2016) by Hinrich Grothe
Short summary
The relative importance of contact freezing and immersion freezing at mixed-phase cloud temperatures is the subject of debate. We performed experiments using continuous-flow diffusion chambers to compare the freezing efficiency of ice-nucleating particles for both these nucleation modes. Silver iodide, kaolinite and Arizona Test Dust were used as ice-nucleating particles. We could not confirm the dominance of contact freezing over immersion freezing for our experimental conditions.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint