Aircraft-Produced Ice Particles (APIPs): Additional Results and Further Insights

William L. Woodley Woodley Weather Consultants, Littleton, Colorado

Search for other papers by William L. Woodley in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Glenn Gordon Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming

Search for other papers by Glenn Gordon in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Thomas J. Henderson Atmospheres, Inc., Fresno, California

Search for other papers by Thomas J. Henderson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Bernard Vonnegut University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, New York

Search for other papers by Bernard Vonnegut in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Daniel Rosenfeld Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel

Search for other papers by Daniel Rosenfeld in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Andrew Detwiler Institute of Atmospheric Sciences, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, Rapid City, South Dakota

Search for other papers by Andrew Detwiler in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

This paper presents new results from studies of aircraft-produced ice particles (APIPs) in supercooled fog and clouds. Nine aircraft, including a Beech King Air 200T cloud physics aircraft, a Piper Aztec, a Cessna 421-C, two North American T-28s, an Aero Commander, a Piper Navajo, a Beech Turbo Baron, and a second four-bladed King Air were involved in the tests. The instrumented King Air served as the monitoring aircraft for trails of ice particles created, or not created, when the other aircraft were flown through clouds at various temperatures and served as both the test and monitoring aircraft when it itself was tested. In some cases sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) gas was released by the test aircraft during its test run and was detected by the King Air during its monitoring passes to confirm the location of the test aircraft wake. Ambient temperatures for the tests ranged between −5° and −12°C. The results confirm earlier published results and provide further insights into the APIPs phenomenon. The King Air at ambient temperatures less than −8°C can produce APIPs readily. The Piper Aztec and the Aero Commander also produced APIPs under the test conditions in which they were flown. The Cessna 421, Piper Navajo, and Beech Turbo Baron did not. The APIPs production potential of a T-28 is still indeterminate because a limited range of conditions was tested. Homogeneous nucleation in the adiabatically cooled regions where air is expanding around the rapidly rotating propeller tips is the cause of APIPs. An equation involving the propeller efficiency, engine thrust, and true airspeed of the aircraft is used along with the published thrust characteristics of the propellers to predict when the aircraft will produce APIPs. In most cases the predictions agree well with the field tests. Of all of the aircraft tested, the Piper Aztec, despite its small size and low horsepower, was predicted to be the most prolific producer of APIPs, and this was confirmed in field tests. The APIPs, when they are created, appear in aircraft wakes in concentrations up to several hundred per liter, which are initially very small and almost uniform in size but grow to larger nearly uniform sizes with time. APIPs production is most likely at low ambient temperatures when an aircraft is flown at maximum power with the gear and flaps extended, resulting in a relatively low airspeed under high-drag conditions. It is predicted that APIPs production of an aircraft can be decreased or eliminated altogether by using a propeller with a larger number of propeller blades, such that the engine thrust is distributed over more blades, thereby decreasing the cooling on each blade. Plans to test this hypothesis using three- and four-bladed King Airs as the test aircraft never came to fruition because of unsatisfactory weather conditions. It is likely that APIPs have confounded the results of some past cloud microphysical investigations, especially those in which repeat passes were made through individual clouds under heavy icing conditions by aircraft known now to be APIPs producers. Aircraft flying under such conditions are forced to use high power settings to overcome the drag of a heavy ice load. These are the conditions that field tests demonstrate are most conducive to the production of APIPs. In these situations, APIPs may have led investigators to conclude that there was more rapid development of ice, and higher concentrations of ice particles in clouds, than actually was the case.

Deceased

Corresponding author address: Dr. William L. Woodley, Woodley Weather Consultants, 11 White Fir Ct., Littleton, CO 80127. williamlwoodley@cs.com

Abstract

This paper presents new results from studies of aircraft-produced ice particles (APIPs) in supercooled fog and clouds. Nine aircraft, including a Beech King Air 200T cloud physics aircraft, a Piper Aztec, a Cessna 421-C, two North American T-28s, an Aero Commander, a Piper Navajo, a Beech Turbo Baron, and a second four-bladed King Air were involved in the tests. The instrumented King Air served as the monitoring aircraft for trails of ice particles created, or not created, when the other aircraft were flown through clouds at various temperatures and served as both the test and monitoring aircraft when it itself was tested. In some cases sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) gas was released by the test aircraft during its test run and was detected by the King Air during its monitoring passes to confirm the location of the test aircraft wake. Ambient temperatures for the tests ranged between −5° and −12°C. The results confirm earlier published results and provide further insights into the APIPs phenomenon. The King Air at ambient temperatures less than −8°C can produce APIPs readily. The Piper Aztec and the Aero Commander also produced APIPs under the test conditions in which they were flown. The Cessna 421, Piper Navajo, and Beech Turbo Baron did not. The APIPs production potential of a T-28 is still indeterminate because a limited range of conditions was tested. Homogeneous nucleation in the adiabatically cooled regions where air is expanding around the rapidly rotating propeller tips is the cause of APIPs. An equation involving the propeller efficiency, engine thrust, and true airspeed of the aircraft is used along with the published thrust characteristics of the propellers to predict when the aircraft will produce APIPs. In most cases the predictions agree well with the field tests. Of all of the aircraft tested, the Piper Aztec, despite its small size and low horsepower, was predicted to be the most prolific producer of APIPs, and this was confirmed in field tests. The APIPs, when they are created, appear in aircraft wakes in concentrations up to several hundred per liter, which are initially very small and almost uniform in size but grow to larger nearly uniform sizes with time. APIPs production is most likely at low ambient temperatures when an aircraft is flown at maximum power with the gear and flaps extended, resulting in a relatively low airspeed under high-drag conditions. It is predicted that APIPs production of an aircraft can be decreased or eliminated altogether by using a propeller with a larger number of propeller blades, such that the engine thrust is distributed over more blades, thereby decreasing the cooling on each blade. Plans to test this hypothesis using three- and four-bladed King Airs as the test aircraft never came to fruition because of unsatisfactory weather conditions. It is likely that APIPs have confounded the results of some past cloud microphysical investigations, especially those in which repeat passes were made through individual clouds under heavy icing conditions by aircraft known now to be APIPs producers. Aircraft flying under such conditions are forced to use high power settings to overcome the drag of a heavy ice load. These are the conditions that field tests demonstrate are most conducive to the production of APIPs. In these situations, APIPs may have led investigators to conclude that there was more rapid development of ice, and higher concentrations of ice particles in clouds, than actually was the case.

Deceased

Corresponding author address: Dr. William L. Woodley, Woodley Weather Consultants, 11 White Fir Ct., Littleton, CO 80127. williamlwoodley@cs.com

Save
  • Czys, R. R., S. A. Changnon, M. S. Petersen, R. W. Scott, and N. E. Westcott. 1992. Initial results from the 1989 cloud seeding experiment in Illinois. J. Wea. Modification 24:1318.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Czys, R. R., S. A. Changnon, N. E. Westcott, M. S. Petersen, and R. W. Scott. 1993. Evaluation of echo core responses in the 1989 Illinois exploratory cloud seeding experiment using a seedability index. J. Wea. Modification 25:1225.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • English, M. and J. D. Marwitz. 1981. A comparison of AgI and CO2 seeding effects in Alberta cumulus clouds. J. Appl. Meteor. 20:483495.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Foster, T. C. and J. Hallett. 1993. Ice crystals produced by expansion: Experiments and applications to aircraft-produced ice. J. Appl. Meteor 32:716728.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gordon, G. L. and J. D. Marwitz. 1986. Hydrometeor evolution in rainbands over the California valley. J. Atmos. Sci. 43:10871100.

  • Kelly, R. D. and G. Vali. 1991. An experimental study of the production of ice crystals by a twin-turboprop aircraft. J. Appl. Meteor. 30:217226.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krauss, T. W., R. T. Bruintjes, J. Verlinde, and A. Kahn. 1987. Microphysical and radar observations of seeded and nonseeded continental cumulus clouds. J. Climate Appl. Meteor. 26:585606.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lan, C. T. and J. Roskam. 1980. Airplane Aerodynamics and Performance. Roskam Aviation and Engineering Corporation, 547 pp.

  • Marwitz, J. D. and R. E. Stewart. 1981. Some seeding signatures in sierra storms. J. Appl. Meteor. 20:11291144.

  • Rangno, A. L. and P. V. Hobbs. 1983. Production of ice particles in clouds due to aircraft penetrations. J. Climate Appl. Meteor. 22:214232.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rangno, A. L. and P. V. Hobbs. 1984. Further observations of the production of ice particles in clouds by aircraft. J. Climate Appl. Meteor. 23:985987.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rodi, A. R. 1982. Case studies of ice and supercooled water evolution in SCPP-1 convective clouds. Preprints, Conf. on Cloud Physics, Chicago, IL, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 465–468.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rosenfeld, D. and W. L. Woodley. 1997. Cloud microphysical observations of relevance to the Texas cold-cloud conceptual seeding model. J. Wea. Modification 29:5669.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rosenfeld, D. and W. L. Woodley. 2000. Convective clouds with sustained highly supercooled liquid water down to −37.5°C. Nature 405:440442.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rosenfeld, D., W. L. Woodley, P. Sudhikoses, N. Tantipubthong, and W. Sukarnjanaset. 1999. The Thailand cold cloud seeding experiment: 3. Physical support for the experimental results. Proc. Seventh WMO Conf. on Weather Modification, Chiang Mai, Thailand, WMO, 29–32.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Roskam, J. and C. T. Lan. 1997. Airplane Aerodynamics and Performance. DAR Corporation, 711 pp.

  • Sassen, K. 1991. Aircraft-produced ice particles in a highly supercooled altocumulus cloud. J. Appl. Meteor. 30:765775.

  • Smith, P. L. Coauthors,. 1984. HIPLEX-1: Experimental design and response variables. J. Climate Appl. Meteor. 23:497512.

  • Stewart, R. E. and J. D. Marwitz. 1982. Microphysical effects of seeding wintertime stratiform clouds near the Sierra Nevada mountains. J. Appl. Meteor. 21:874880.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vonnegut, B. 1986. Nucleation of ice crystals in supercooled clouds caused by passage of an airplane. J. Climate Appl. Meteor. 25:98.

  • Weinstein, A. L. and J. R. Hicks. 1976. Use of compressed air for supercooled fog dispersal. J. Appl. Meteor. 15:12261231.

  • Woodley, W. L. and D. Rosenfeld. 2000. Evidence for changes in microphysical structure and cloud drafts following AgI seeding. J. Wea. Modification 32:5368.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Woodley, W. L., J. Jordan, J. Simpson, R. Biondini, J. A. Flueck, and A. Barnston. 1982. Rainfall results of the Florida Area Cumulus Experiment, 1970–76. J. Appl. Meteor. 21:139164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Woodley, W. L., A. Barnston, J. A. Flueck, and R. Biondini. 1983. The Florida Area Cumulus Experiment's second phase (FACE-2). Part II: Replicated and confirmatory analyses. J. Climate Appl. Meteor. 22:15291541.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Woodley, W. L., T. J. Henderson, B. Vonnegut, G. Gordon, R. Breidenthal, and S. M. Holle. 1991. Aircraft-produced ice particles (APIPs) in supercooled clouds and the probable mechanism for their production. J. Appl. Meteor. 30:14691489.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 252 88 27
PDF Downloads 78 43 8