Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.414 IF 5.414
  • IF 5-year value: 5.958 IF 5-year
    5.958
  • CiteScore value: 9.7 CiteScore
    9.7
  • SNIP value: 1.517 SNIP 1.517
  • IPP value: 5.61 IPP 5.61
  • SJR value: 2.601 SJR 2.601
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 191 Scimago H
    index 191
  • h5-index value: 89 h5-index 89
Volume 16, issue 2
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 933–952, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-933-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 16, 933–952, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-933-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 26 Jan 2016

Research article | 26 Jan 2016

Investigation of the adiabatic assumption for estimating cloud micro- and macrophysical properties from satellite and ground observations

D. Merk 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 Daniel Merk on behalf of the Authors (29 May 2015)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (07 Jun 2015) by Graham Feingold
RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (11 Jun 2015)
ED: Reconsider after major revisions (22 Jun 2015) by Graham Feingold
AR by Daniel Merk on behalf of the Authors (21 Dec 2015)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (24 Dec 2015) by Graham Feingold
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
A 2-year data set is analyzed to evaluate the consistency and limitations of current ground-based and satellite-retrieved cloud property data sets. We demonstrate that neither the assumption of a completely adiabatic cloud nor the assumption of a constant sub-adiabatic factor is fulfilled. As cloud adiabaticity is required to estimate the cloud droplet number concentration, but is not available from passive satellite observations, we need an independent method to estimate the adiabatic factor.
A 2-year data set is analyzed to evaluate the consistency and limitations of current...
Citation