You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We currently don't use hardcoded growth factors but rather compute the coefficients using the code highlighted here provided by Aaron van Donkelaar. We need guidance from the Aerosol WG on how to translate the new recommendations into the code.
I ran a 1-hour test simulation with 13.1.0 with debug print out turned on to check the growth factor values computed in aerosol_mod.F90 using the code updates suggested by Aaron and we get:
Growth factors at 35% RH:
0.62 for SO4, NIT, and NH4
1.05 for OCPI and SOA
1.86 for SALA
That doesn't match up with the 1.10 value recommended on the PM2.5 wiki page.
Randall Marting wrote:
For SIA Growth, it appears that two different definitions were being used (the value above 1, and the total value). I think the safest option is to replace the code with the following, which is another approach that Aaron recommended.
!Set SIA growth above unity to half of its original value of 1.2 to treat as partially crystalline
SIA_GROWTH = 1.1
…tially crystalline
The previous update in commit ea23363 did not properly set SIA_Growth to
1.10 as recommended. We now force SIA_GROWTH to that value. For more details
see #685.
Signed-off-by: Melissa Sulprizio <mpayer@seas.harvard.edu>
The GEOS-Chem Aerosols Working Group have approved a new formulation for PM2.5, as described on the GEOS-Chem wiki: http://wiki.geos-chem.org/Particulate_matter_in_GEOS-Chem.
This will be added into a GEOS-Chem 13.Y.0 version (TBD)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: