HR: 09:15h
AN: A51G-06 [Abstracts]
TI: The Daytime Mixed Layer Observed by Radiosonde, Profiler, and Lidar during MILAGRO
AU: * Shaw, W J
EM: will.shaw@pnl.gov
AF: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PO Box 999, MS K9-30, Richland, WA 99352, United
States
AU: Pekour, M S
EM: mikhail.pekour@pnl.gov
AF: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PO Box 999, MS K9-30, Richland, WA 99352, United
States
AU: Coulter, R L
EM: rl_coulter@anl.gov
AF: Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Ave., Argonne, IL 60439, United States
AU: Martin, T J
EM: tjmartin@anl.gov
AF: Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Ave., Argonne, IL 60439, United States
AU: Walters, J
EM: jwalters@southernco.com
AF: University of Alabama in Huntsville, Atmospheric Science Department
University of Alabama in Huntsville
320 Sparkman Drive, NSSTC, Huntsville, AL 35806, United States
AB:
During the 2006 MILAGRO field campaign centered in the Mexico City area, scientists from Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory (PNNL), Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), and the University of Alabama in Huntsville
(UAH) operated a variety of atmospheric profiling systems. The systems were located at the Mexican Petroleum
Institute (IMP) in central Mexico City, at Tecámac University on the northeastern edge of the Mexico City urban
area, and at Rancho la Bisnaga, a privately owned ranch. These sites are referred to as T0, T1, and T2 to reflect
the idea of sequential arrival times of air parcels at each site under common transport conditions. T2 was
approximately 50 km north of T1. Similar 915 MHz wind profiling radars were operated at all three sites. ANL
additionally operated a sodar, a 523-nm micropulse lidar, and a radiosonde system at T1. At T2, PNNL
additionally operated a radiosonde system. On aircraft sampling days, five radiosondes were launched at T1
during the daytime, and three were launched at T2.
The collocation of profiling systems afforded an opportunity to compare the three primary methods of measuring
the depth of deep mixing layers in the Mexico City environment. In this paper we will describe the methods of
extracting mixing layer depth from each system as well as the results of the comparison. The results highlight the
general agreement among the various methods, but also the ambiguity that results from multiple inversions for
radiosondes and from elevated layers with significant particulate matter for lidars. We conclude that the wind
profiler is the system of choice for identifying mixing layer depth from the MILAGRO campaign.
In addition to the instrument comparison, we also have completed a description of the temporal variability of the
mixing layer during the campaign as well as spatial variations among the three sites. We have interpreted our
results in the contexts of the widely reported Norte events, of the days with and without occurrences of deep
convection, and of wind profiler measurements of mixing layer depth from the IMADA-AVER campaign in 1997.
Our findings include the results that turbulent mixing began at the surface 67.5 ± 15 min following sunrise,
that daily mixed layer growth was nearly identical in the mean and in its variability between the IMADA-AVER and
the MILAGRO campaigns, that conditions that produced deep convection did not systematically change morning
boundary layer growth, and that Norte events did not seem to strongly perturb mixed layer behavior on the Central
Mexican Plateau. Because of its relevance for aerosol particle size distributions, we will also describe the vertical
structure of humidity relative to mixing layer depth.
DE: 0305 Aerosols and particles (0345, 4801, 4906)
DE: 0394 Instruments and techniques
DE: 3307 Boundary layer processes
SC: Atmospheric Sciences [A]
MN: 2007 Fall Meeting