Comparison of planetary boundary layer height from ceilometer with ARM radiosonde data

Abstract

Ceilometer measurements of aerosol backscatter profiles have been widely used to provide continuous planetary boundary layer height (PBLHT) estimations. To investigate the robustness of ceilometer-estimated PBLHT under different atmospheric conditions, we compared ceilometer- and radiosonde-estimated PBLHTs using multiple years of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) ceilometer and balloon-borne sounding data at ARM fixed-location atmospheric observatories and from ARM mobile facilities deployed around the world for various field campaigns. These observatories cover from the tropics to the polar regions and over both ocean and land surfaces. Statistical comparisons of ceilometer-estimated PBLHTs from the Vaisala CL31 ceilometer data with radiosonde-estimated PBLHTs from the ARM PBLHT-SONDE Value-added Product (VAP) are performed under different atmospheric conditions including stable and unstable atmospheric boundary layer, low-level cloud-free conditions, and cloudy conditions at these ARM observatories. Under unstable conditions, good comparisons are found between ceilometer- and radiosonde-estimated PBLHTs at ARM low- and mid-latitude land observatories. However, it is still challenging to obtain reliable PBLHT estimations over ocean surfaces even using radiosonde data. Under stable conditions, ceilometer- and radiosonde-estimated PBLHTs have weak correlations. We compare different PBLHT estimations utilizing the Heffter, the Liu–Liang, and the bulk Richardson number methods applied to radiosonde data with ceilometer-estimated PBLHT. We find that ceilometer-estimated PBLHT compares better with the Liu–Liang method under unstable conditions and compares better with the bulk Richardson number method under stable conditions.