Results for “Mobile LiDAR” | Engineering Papers

DOE OSTI2020

Fully Automated Profile-based Calibration Strategy for Airborne and Terrestrial Mobile LiDAR Systems with Spinning Multi-beam Laser Units

LiDAR-based mobile mapping systems (MMS) are rapidly gaining popularity for a multitude of applications due to their ability to provide complete and accurate 3D point clouds for any and every scene of interest. However, an accurate calibration technique for such systems is needed in order to unleash their full potential. In this paper, we propose a fully automated profile-based strategy for the calibration of LiDAR-based MMS. The proposed technique is validated by comparing its accuracy against the expected point positioning accuracy for the point cloud based on the used sensors’ specifications. The proposed strategy was seen to reduce the misalignment between different tracks from approximately 2 to 3 m before calibration down to less than 2 cm after calibration for airborne as well as terrestrial mobile LiDAR mapping systems. In other words, the proposed calibration strategy can converge to correct estimates of mounting parameters, even in cases where the initial estimates are significantly different from the true values. Furthermore, the results from the proposed strategy are also verified by comparing them to those from an existing manually-assisted feature-based calibration strategy. The major contribution of the proposed strategy is its ability to conduct the calibration of airborne and wheel-based mobile systems without any requirement for specially designed targets or features in the surrounding environment. The above claims are validated using experimental results conducted for three different MMS – two airborne and one terrestrial – with one or more LiDAR unit.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗

DOE OSTI2026

Emerging mobile lidar technology to study boundary layer winds influenced by operating turbines

The development of a microjoule-class pulsed Doppler lidar and deployment of this compact system on mobile platforms such as aircraft, ships, or trucks have opened a new opportunity to characterize the dynamics of complex mesoscale wind flows. The PickUp-based Mobile Atmospheric Sounder (PUMAS) truck-based lidar system was recently used during the American Wake Experiment (AWAKEN) to assess the general structure of boundary layer (BL) wind and turbulence around wind turbines in central Oklahoma. Wind speed profiles averaged over PUMAS transects influenced by the operating turbines (waked flow) show a 1–2 m s −1 reduction compared to mean undisturbed (free flow) wind speed profiles. Spatial variability in wind speed was observed in time–height cross-sections at different distances from turbines. The wind speeds were about 9–12 m s −1 at 6 km distance compared to 5–7 m s −1 at the transects near the turbines. The PUMAS dataset from AWAKEN demonstrated the capability of the mobile Doppler lidar system to document spatial variability in wind flows at different distances from wind turbines and obtain quantitative estimates of wind speed reduction in the waked flow. The high-frequency, simultaneous measurements of the horizontal and vertical winds provide a new approach for characterizing dynamic processes critical for wind farm wake analyses.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Aboveground woody biomass estimation of young bioenergy plantations of Populus and its hybrids using mobile (backpack) LiDAR remote sensing

Woody aboveground biomass (AGB) including short-rotation Populus is used as a feedstock for renewable and carbon-neutral bioenergy. While woody AGB can be estimated with allometric equations requiring labor-intensive field data, remote sensing technologies like mobile terrestrial light detection and ranging (LiDAR) can estimate woody AGB quickly and accurately. Therefore, the goals of this study were to develop a model to predict woody AGB of 2-year-old Populus spp. from three taxa (P. deltoides, P. deltoides × P. maximowiczii and P. deltoides × P. trichocarpa) using allometric (height and diameter at breast height (DBH)) or LiDAR-derived metrics from a mobile terrestrial (backpack) system. Likewise, we sought to compare LiDAR-estimated tree height and DBH with field-measured values. We found that a taxa-specific model containing LiDAR-measured tree height, crown volume, and taxa interactions with the height of the 10 th percentile, and the density of the lowest interval (density metric 0) explained 84 % of the variation in woody AGB with a root mean square error (RMSE) of 28.7 % and performed slightly better than the allometric model. The best model excluding taxa had a slightly higher RMSE but lower bias than the allometric model. LiDAR-derived tree heights were highly correlated with field-measured heights, but DBH could not be estimated accurately. Therefore, terrestrial mobile LiDAR systems can accurately estimate woody AGB and tree height of Populus in short rotation systems to aid in the fast and efficient quantification of woody bioenergy production and renewable energy resources.

AGB↗

DOE OSTI2026

Allometric and Mobile Terrestrial LiDAR Modeling of Aboveground Woody Biomass of Populus in Coppice Production

Poplars ( Populus spp.) and their hybrids are increasingly being grown in coppice production to generate bioenergy feedstocks at frequent intervals. Allometric equations are re-quired to predict aboveground biomass (AGB) of coppiced individuals with minimal field measurements. Likewise, remote sensing tools like LiDAR (light detection and ranging) can be used if models are available to predict AGB from point cloud data. Therefore, this study sought to develop equations to predict dry woody AGB from field measurements and LiDAR data from coppiced poplar field trials containing eastern cottonwood ( P. del-toides ) and hybrid poplar taxa. We found that taxa-specific allometric models containing the summed basal area of the three largest stems in the coppice provided the best predictive model, with stem height and stem count failing to provide additional explanatory power. The best predictive LiDAR-based model was independent of taxa but had slightly lower adjusted R 2 and higher RMSE than the allometric model. It contained four parameters including crown volume, leaf area index, variance of height returns, and the top point density (i.e., density metric 9 or the proportion of points in the highest point interval when the point cloud is evenly divided into ten vertical intervals). In total, these models can be used to quickly and efficiently estimate dry woody AGB of Populus coppice systems for bioenergy feedstock production.

AGB↗

DOE OSTI2023

LiDAR Measurements to Investigate Farm-to-Farm Interactions at the AWAKEN Experiment

The exponential growth of wind energy and the need to exploit wind resources over areas with higher energy potential have led to the construction of neighboring wind turbines and farms with relatively small separation distances. As a result, for specific wind and atmospheric conditions, the wakes generated by an upstream wind farm may affect wind resources available for a downstream wind farm resulting in detrimental impacts on energy harvesting and structural loads for the downwind wind turbines. Distances between neighboring wind farms are typically larger than those associated with intra-wind-farm wake interactions, generating cumulative wakes whose characteristics might differ from those predicted through classical engineering wake models. These phenomena are referred to as farm-to-farm interactions. A better understanding and characterization of farm-to-farm interactions is one of the science goals tackled by the ongoing American WAKE experimeNt (AWAKEN). The site under investigation for this field campaign comprises two large wind farms in northern Oklahoma, USA, which are spaced roughly 5km apart along the prevailing South-North wind direction. To investigate possible interactions between these two wind farms, the WindFluX mobile LiDAR station has been deployed mainly to perform volumetric scans over their gap region. In this paper, preliminary results from these LiDAR volumetric scans will be discussed, specifically for a case with multiple wind turbine wakes evolving during the occurrence of a low-level jet.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Turbulent properties from Doppler lidar

Permanent and mobile facilities deployed by the ARM program cover a wide range of climatic regions, with a suite of active remote-sensing of cloud and aerosol profiles complemented by comprehensive in-situ measurements of the chemical, physical and optical properties of aerosol measured at the surface. To be able to fully exploit these datasets requires an understanding of the transport from the surface and within the atmosphere, especially within the planetary boundary layer. This requires a method of identifying when the surface and atmosphere are dynamically-linked. Determining the state of the boundary layer, and defining a well-mixed boundary-layer, is therefore suitably described in terms of mixing; here, we will assume that mixing essentially means turbulent mixing. This necessitates accurate measurements of the winds and turbulent mixing in the atmosphere. Doppler lidar is an excellent tool for observing turbulent properties, and ARM has deployed commercially available Doppler lidars at many of the fixed and mobile facilities. Doppler lidars have been shown to provide accurate retrievals of wind and turbulent properties within the boundary layer , however, robust characterization and calculation of the Doppler lidar measurement uncertainties is required before deriving higher level data products.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Experiment of Sea Breeze Convection, Aerosols, Precipitation, and Environment (ESCAPE)

Convective clouds play an important role in Earth’s climate system and are a known source of extreme weather. Gaps in our understanding of convective vertical motions, microphysics, and precipitation across a full range of aerosol and meteorological regimes continue to limit our ability to predict the occurrence and intensity of these cloud systems. To improve predictability, the National Science Foundation (NSF) sponsored a large field experiment entitled “Experiment of Sea Breeze Convection, Aerosols, Precipitation, and Environment (ESCAPE).” ESCAPE took place between 30 May and 30 September 2022 in the vicinity of Houston, Texas, because this area frequently experiences isolated deep convection that interacts with the region’s mesoscale circulations and its range of aerosol conditions. ESCAPE focused on collecting observations of isolated deep convection through innovative sampling and developing novel analysis techniques. This included the deployment of two research aircraft, the National Research Council of Canada Convair-580 and the Stratton Park Engineering Company Learjet, which combined conducted 24 research flights from 30 May to 17 June. On the ground, three mobile X-band radars and one mobile Doppler lidar truck equipped with soundings were deployed from 30 May to 28 June. From 1 August to 30 September 2022, a dual-polarization C-band radar was deployed and operated using a novel, multisensor agile adaptive sampling strategy to track the entire life cycle of isolated convective clouds. Analysis of the ESCAPE observations has already yielded preliminary findings on how aerosols and environmental conditions impact the convective life cycle.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Doppler Lidar Motion-Correction (DLMC) Value-Added Product Report

The U.S. Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) second ARM Mobile Facility (AMF2) Doppler lidar (S/N 0319-160) was deployed on the German ice breaker Polarstern during the Multidisciplinary Drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) campaign during 2019-2020 (see Figure 1). This was the first deployment of the new AMF2 Doppler lidar, as well as the first ship-based deployment of a Doppler lidar (DL) by ARM. In contrast to land-based deployments, the lidar’s heading (a.k.a. home point) and tilt are constantly changing, and lidar’s radial velocity measurements are impacted by the ship’s motion. Since the beam directions are reported relative to the instrument’s frame of reference, derivation of higher-order data products such as wind speed and direction require that the lidar’s attitude and translational velocity be properly accounted for. The Doppler Lidar Motion-Correction (DLMC) Value-Added-Product (VAP) was developed specifically for ship-based deployments of the Doppler lidar. This VAP combines raw uncorrected data from the DL and simultaneous measurements from the ARM Navigation system (NAV) (Walton 2019) to transform the beam angles from the lidar coordinate system to an Earth-fixed coordinate system. The VAP also removes the contribution of the lidar’s platform velocity from the radial velocity measurements. This report documents the methods used by the DLMC to perform these corrections.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Infrastructure-Based Cooperative Perception at a Traffic Intersection: Overview and Challenges: Preprint

Recent advancement in autonomous driving vehicles and V2X communication has attracted increasing attention towards Intelligent Transportation Systems to build a safe and reliable traffic intersection. However, most of the systems are still at the initial stages and require significant progress to become a reality. This paper presents an overview of NREL Infrastructure Perception and Control (IPC) framework which is an open-source track-data fusion engine which takes input from infrastructure-based perception sensors and cooperatively shared messages from Connected Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs) and Connected Vehicle (CVs) and the challenges associated with deploying such cooperative perception framework at a four-way traffic intersection in the city of Colorado Springs, CO, USA. The sensor data is collected by deploying two radars and two LiDAR sensors on the IPC mobile lab and two radars on diagonally opposite traffic poles at the proposed intersection. The sensor output results imply the need for rapid sensor calibration to bring the collective perception to a common coordinate frame, the importance of time synchronization between the sensors in order to capture accurate spatial and temporal alignment of the objects, and the need for a health monitoring system with fail safe closed-loop detection model for real-time deployment.

camera↗

DOE OSTI2021

Remote-sensing and radiosonde datasets collected in the San Luis Valley during the LAPSE-RATE campaign

Abstract. In July 2018, the International Society for Atmospheric Research using Remotely piloted Aircraft (ISARRA) hosted a flight week to showcase the role remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPASs) can have in filling the atmospheric data gap. This campaign was called Lower Atmospheric Process Studies at Elevation – a Remotely-piloted Aircraft Team Experiment (LAPSE-RATE). In support of this campaign, ground-based remote and in situ systems were also deployed for the campaign. The University of Oklahoma deployed the Collaborative Lower Atmospheric Mobile Profiling System (CLAMPS), the University of Colorado deployed two Doppler wind lidars, and the National Severe Storms Laboratory deployed a mobile mesonet with the ability to launch radiosondes. This paper focuses on the data products from these instruments that result in profiles of the atmospheric state. The data are publicly available in the Zenodo LAPSE-RATE community portal (https://zenodo.org/communities/lapse-rate/, 19 January 2021). The profile data discussed are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3780623 (Bell and Klein, 2020), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3780593 (Bell et al., 2020b), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3727224 (Bell et al., 2020a), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3738175 (Waugh, 2020b), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3720444 (Waugh, 2020a), and https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3698228 (Lundquist et al., 2020).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

A primer on forest structure measurement with lidar for ecologists

Light detection and ranging (lidar) technology has fundamentally advanced the way we measure forest structure, facilitating new insights into ecological processes. Lidar for forest ecology applications is deployed on multiple types of platforms that operate from the ground, air, or space, and each has associated strengths and limitations. Ideally, the choice of what kind of lidar to use in a particular study should be guided by the ecological question of interest; however, practical considerations of cost, data availability, and processing tools can be equally important. This synthesis is a practical introduction to how different lidar platforms characterize forest structure (e.g., tree size/location, wood volume, branching structure, aboveground biomass, leaf properties), designed for a general audience of ecologists (not remote sensing scientists) seeking an accessible introduction to the use of lidar. We also provide examples of novel ecological insights from recent lidar research and describe current limitations and areas of expected improvement. Last, we include an appendix of data collected from terrestrial, mobile, unoccupied aerial system, airplane, and satellite lidar platforms within a common temperate forest area, with associated code to allow new lidar users to visualize and manipulate data in R.

Cushman, KC [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000234641151)↗

DOE OSTI2023

Mini-Micropulse Lidar data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V) was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (mini-MPL)), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. The mini-MPL deployed with ROAM-V is a 532 nm elastic and polarization lidar. The mini-MPL outputs normalized relative backscatter (NRB) derived from raw signal after after-pulse, overlap, and dead-time correction calibration. The depolarization ratio is calculated from the co-polarized and cross-polarized NRB (Flynna et al., 2007). The NRB and depolarization ratio data are resampled from the original data at 1-minute intervals. The vertical resolution of the mini-MPL data is 15 meters. The mini-MPL data can be used to determine the boundary layer, cloud top, and cloud bottom height and can be used to retrieve aerosol type and concentration profile. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07055 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu . Flynna, C. J., Mendozaa, A., Zhengb, Y., & Mathurb, S. (2007). Novel polarization-sensitive micropulse lidar measurement technique. Optics express, 15(6), 2785-2790.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Texas A&M University Mobile Facility Measurements during TRACER (Field Campaign Report)

One of the main goals of the U.S Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment (TRACER) near Houston, Texas is to improve understanding of how meteorology and aerosols impact storm dynamical and microphysical processes in deep convection to better constrain and improve their model representation. The Houston area is strongly influenced by sea- and bay-breeze circulations that generate convergence and help to initiate and organize deep convection. To properly isolate and understand the roles of varied meteorological conditions and cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) and ice nucleation particles (INP) distributions in different air masses, co-located thermodynamic, kinematic, and aerosol vertical profile observations are needed. The focus of this campaign was to provide key measurements in air masses both in front of and behind sea/bay breeze fronts moving through the greater Houston area to sample the airmass heterogeneity. The overarching scientific goal of this campaign is to understand how the vertical distributions of both CCN and INP correspond to the inflow layer of deep convection in maritime, background continental, and polluted continental air masses, and how these variations influence deep convection. To fully sample the heterogeneity in both meteorological conditions and aerosols across the sea-breeze front (SBF), Texas A&M University (TAMU) deployed a InterMet 3050A 403 MHz mobile unit launching iMet-4 radiosondes and the new Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurement Van (ROAM-V) for aerosol sampling during the TRACER intensive operational period (IOP) from June to September 2022. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a condensation particle counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A differential mobility analyzer), cloud condensation nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN counter), micropulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies micropulse lidar [miniMPL]), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the Global Positioning System (GPS) on the phone application “My Altitude”. The DRUM data were collected as part of a closely related ARM field campaign and also supported by DOE Atmospheric System Research grant DE-SC0021047. The TAMU team sampled these airmass heterogeneities by strategically choosing deployment sites in a different airmass than the ARM fixed sites in La Porte and Guy, Texas. On days when the sea/bay breeze boundary was pushing inland, the TAMU team would usually sample the airmass on the maritime side of the SBF at a coastal site in Galveston, Texas in the early afternoon (1730-1900 UTC) and then move inland ahead of the SBF to sample the airmass on the continental side during late afternoon (2030-2230). Figure 1 shows the Galveston maritime site and the array of sites for the late afternoon continental measurements.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

SMPS data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V) was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Onboard the ROAM-V, aerosol samples are drawn through a shared isokinetic inlet at a flow rate ranging from 3.5 to 7.0 LPM. A portion of this flow, 1.0 LPM, is directed through TSI's 0.071 cm impactor attached to the classifier of the SMPS setup. The SMPS’s DMA and CPC are connected through a 20.3 cm length of 0.48 cm diameter tubing. Measured SMPS size distributions were used to calculate size-dependent particle losses for each SMPS scan. Particle losses from diffusion (based on Kesten, 1991 and Gormley, 1949) and inertial impaction in 90-degree bends (based on Aerosol Measurement, 2011 and Crane, 1977) were included in the loss calculation. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07055 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Kesten et. al. Calibration of a TSI Model 3025 Ultrafine Condensation Particle Counter. Aerosol Science and Technology, 15:2, 107-111, 1991. Gormley et. al. Diffusion from a Stream Flowing through a Cylindrical Tube. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol 52, 163-169, 1948. Aerosol Measurement: Principles, Techniques, and Applications, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2011. Crane et. al. Inertial Deposition of Particles in a Bent Pipe. Journal of Aerosol Science, Vol 8, 161-170, 1977.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

CPC data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston, TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V) was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Onboard the ROAM-V, aerosol samples are drawn through a shared isokinetic inlet at a flow rate ranging from 3.5 to 7.0 LPM. A portion of this flow is directed through a cyclone impactor (Brechtel, Inc. Model SCC 0.732) and 0.3 LPM is directed to the CPC. To correct the data for particle losses, we used a two-step method. First, the measured SMPS size distributions were used to calculate total particle loss through the inlet for every SMPS scan at a single deployment location. Second, the CPC data was corrected for particle losses using the average of the total losses per scan. This calculation was done separately for each deployment location due to changes in the measured size distributions between locations. Particle loss from diffusion (based on Kesten, 1991 and Gormley, 1949), inertial impaction in 90-degree bends (based on Aerosol Measurement, 2011 and Crane, 1977), and cyclone impactor efficiency (based on Dirgo, 1985) were included in the loss calculation. When the SMPS was not sampling at a location (in the case of an instrument malfunction or operator error), the reported CPC data was corrected with an average of the total losses for the entire campaign at the specified deployment location (e.g., if we needed to correct Galveston data, then the average of all calculated losses at Galveston was taken). These flatline corrections were used for all data on 22/07/13, 22/07/20, 22/07/22, and the data from Galveston on 22/08/09. An additional flatline correction of 14% was applied to all CPC data based on laboratory calibration prior to and after the campaign. In laboratory calibrations, we identified that for the same sample of air the field CPC (GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC) undercounted the total concentration of particles by 14% compared to the ground truth laboratory CPC (TSI Model 3750). This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07055 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Kesten et. al. Calibration of a TSI Model 3025 Ultrafine Condensation Particle Counter. Aerosol Science and Technology, 15:2, 107-111, 1991. Gormley et. al. Diffusion from a Stream Flowing through a Cylindrical Tube. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol 52, 163-169, 1948. Aerosol Measurement: Principles, Techniques, and Applications, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2011. Crane et. al. Inertial Deposition of Particles in a Bent Pipe. Journal of Aerosol Science, Vol 8, 161-170, 1977. Dirgo et. al. Cyclone Collection Efficiency: Comparison of Experimental Results with Theoretical Predictions. Aerosol Science and Technology, 4:4, 401-415, 1985.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

CCN data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V) was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Onboard the ROAM-V, aerosol samples are drawn through a shared isokinetic inlet at a flow rate ranging from 3.5 to 7.0 LPM. A portion of this flow is directed through a cyclone impactor (Brechtel, Inc. Model SCC 0.732) and 0.5 LPM is directed to the CCN. To calculate particle losses, we used a two-step method. First, the measured SMPS size distributions were used to calculate particle loss through the inlet during sampling. Second, the corrected SMPS data was used to calculate the average of the total losses per scan down the CCN line. Then, the correction was applied to the CCN data. This calculation was done separately for each deployment location due to changes in the measured size distributions between locations. Particle loss from diffusion (based on Kesten, 1991 and Gormley, 1949), inertial impaction in 90-degree bends (based on Aerosol Measurement, 2011 and Crane, 1977), and cyclone impactor efficiency (based on Dirgo, 1985) were included in the loss calculation. When the SMPS was not sampling at a location (in the case of an instrument malfunction or operator error), the reported CPC data was corrected with an average of the total losses for the entire campaign at the specified deployment location (e.g., if we needed to correct Galveston data, then the average of all calculated losses at Galveston was taken). These flatline corrections were used for all data on 22/07/13, 22/07/20, 22/07/22, and the data from Galveston on 22/08/09. The supersaturation uncertainty is estimated conservatively at +/- 0.03%, where variation in the inlet temperature, pressure, and calibration technique prevents a more accurate measurement. Confidence in the reported supersaturation measurements is based on a pre-campaign calibration (following the methods from our previous work and Deng, 2014 based on Rose, 2008) in addition to inter-comparisons with the DOE for two days (22/08/18 and 22/09/01) where TAMU was co-located with AMF1. The inter-comparisons show good agreement between our instrument and the DOEs instrument on both days at all supersaturations. After the last inter-comparison on 22/09/01, there was no indication of a malfunction by our instrument through the rest of the campaign. Unfortunately, the instrument was dropped during demobilization. A post-campaign calibration was conducted, which showed a substantial departure from the pre-campaign calibration. The drop may have damaged the instrument’s ability to produce the desired supersaturations. Therefore, we do consider the data after 22/09/01 to be correct, but it should be used with caution. The CCN counter sampled for 3 minutes at each supersaturation setpoint (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2%). At the end of a cycle, the instrument was set to 0.01% supersaturation for 5 minutes. The data is comprised of the last 60 seconds of each supersaturation set point (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2%) to ensure the instrument stabilized and was able to reach thermal equilibrium. We removed the data during the periods where there were operational difficulties, setup, or maintenance. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07055 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Rose et. al. Calibration and Measurement Uncertainties of a Continuous-Flow Cloud Condensation Nuclei Counter (DMT-CCNC): CCN Activation of Ammonium Sulfate and Sodium Chloride Aerosol Particles in Theory and Experiment. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1153-1179, 2008. Deng et. al. Using Raman Microspectroscopy to Determine Chemical Composition and Mixing State of Airborne Marine Aerosols over the Pacific Ocean. Aerosol Science and Technology, Vol 48, Issue 2, 2014. Kesten et. al. Calibration of a TSI Model 3025 Ultrafine Condensation Particle Counter. Aerosol Science and Technology, 15:2, 107-111, 1991. Gormley et. al. Diffusion from a Stream Flowing through a Cylindrical Tube. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol 52, 163-169, 1948. Aerosol Measurement: Principles, Techniques, and Applications, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2011. Crane et. al. Inertial Deposition of Particles in a Bent Pipe. Journal of Aerosol Science, Vol 8, 161-170, 1977. Dirgo et. al. Cyclone Collection Efficiency: Comparison of Experimental Results with Theoretical Predictions. Aerosol Science and Technology, 4:4, 401-415, 1985.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Ice nucleation measurements from DRUM impactors during TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, three Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM) were used to collect aerosols for ice nucleation measurements in the Brooks laboratory at Texas A&M University. The three instruments were located at AMF1 in La Porte, Ancillary site in Guy (ANC), and onboard the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V). ROAM-V was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and one of the Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Each DRUM sampler was operated at a flow rate of 23 LPM. Each DRUM has four stages where the aerodynamic diameter size cuts are as follows: stage 1 larger than 3 μm, stage 2 from 3 to 1.2 μm, stage 3 from 1.2 to 0.34 μm, and stage 4 from 0.34 to 0.15 μm. Pretreated aluminum foil was used as a substrate on all stages. At AMF1 and ANC sites, the DRUMs were operated on the shared aerosol inlet, with generous support of the DOE ARM site staff. These instruments rotated 24 mm per day and only contained aluminum foil substrates. Substrates were changed weekly and transported to Texas A&M for storage in -80C freezer until analysis. The DRUM onboard ROAM-V was operated at a faster rotation rate of 150 mm per day to clearly separate the multiple deployment locations for ROAM-V. For the ROAM-V DRUM, substrates were changed every deployment and transported to Texas A&M for storage in -80C freezer until analysis. At Texas A&M, ice nucleation experiments were conducted to measure the ice nucleation temperature of the ambient aerosol samples collected from the three DRUMs using our previously established procedures (Alsante et al., 2023; Fornea et al., 2009; Matthews et al., 2023). For ice nucleation, only samples collected on stage 3 were analyzed, given that these are the most relevant size (1.2 to 0.34 μm diameter) for potential ice nucleating particles. For the AMF1 and ANC sites, we cut and analyzed 2 mm (2-hour) samples. We analyzed the time periods of the AMF1 site instrument when the ROAM-V was deployed. A 72-hour period from July 11th at 23:49 through July 15th at 1:49 was analyzed from the ANC site instrument. For the ROAM-V instrument, we separated the daily samples by site location. Between 1- and 6-hour independent samples were analyzed at each location. We also cut the ROAM-V samples in half to allow for compositional analysis of the aerosol on the other half of the substrate. All viable samples from the ROAM-V were analyzed. Analysis was done using a custom-built ice nucleation apparatus, recently updated to include an array of 16 individual samples (Matthews et al., 2023). On our experimental setup, we used 100 μL of Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UHPLC) water (Sigma Aldrich, >99.9% purity) to wash off the aerosol from the DRUM substrate. Then, we micropipetted 2 μL droplet samples into each of the 16 wells of the array, using hydrophobically coated microscope slides. Experiments would cycle 28 times from 10 C to -40C over a 20-hour period. During analysis of the TRACER samples, nine experiments were conducted with UHPLC water process blanks that followed an identical preparation procedure. The average freezing temperature and standard deviation for these process blanks is -27.7±2.4 C. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07023 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Alsante, A. N., Thornton, D. C., & Brooks, S. D. (2023). Ice nucleation catalyzed by the photosynthesis enzyme RuBisCO and other abundant biomolecules. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1), 51. Fornea, A. P., Brooks, S. D., Dooley, J. B., & Saha, A. (2009). Heterogeneous freezing of ice on atmospheric aerosols containing ash, soot, and soil. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 114(D13). DOI:10.1029/2009JD011958 Matthews, B. H., Alsante, A. N., & Brooks, S. D. (2023). Pollen Emissions of Subpollen Particles and Ice Nucleating Particles. ACS Earth and Space Chemistry.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Doppler Lidar (DL) Instrument Handbook

The Doppler lidar (DL) is an active remote sensing instrument that provides range- and time-resolved measurements of radial velocity and attenuated backscatter. The principle of operation is similar to radar in that pulses of energy are transmitted into the atmosphere; the energy scattered back to the transceiver is collected and measured as a time-resolved signal. From the time delay between each outgoing transmitted pulse and the backscattered signal, the distance to the scatterer is inferred. The radial or line-of-sight velocity of the scatterers is determined from the Doppler frequency shift of the backscattered radiation. The DL uses a heterodyne detection technique in which the return signal is mixed with a reference laser beam (i.e., local oscillator) of known frequency. An onboard signal processing computer then determines the Doppler frequency shift from the spectra of the heterodyne signal. The energy content of the Doppler spectra can also be used to determine attenuated backscatter.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗