Abstract. This study evaluates the potential of using aerosol optical depth (τ a ) measurements to characterise the microphysical and optical properties of atmospheric aerosols. With this aim, we used the recently developed GRASP (Generalized Retrieval of Aerosol and Surface Properties) code for numerical testing of six different aerosol models with different aerosol loads. The direct numerical simulations (selfconsistency tests) indicate that the GRASP-AOD retrieval provides modal aerosol optical depths (fine and coarse) to within 0.01 of the input values. The retrieval of the finemode radius, width and volume concentration are stable and precise if the real part of the refractive index is known. The coarse-mode properties are less accurate, but they are significantly improved when additional a priori information is available. The tests with random simulated errors show that the uncertainty in the bimodal log-normal size distribution parameters increases as the aerosol load decreases. Similarly, the reduction in the spectral range diminishes the stability of the retrieved parameters. In addition to these numerical studies, we used optical depth observations at eight AERONET locations to validate our results with the standard AERONET inversion products. We found that bimodal log-normal size distributions serve as useful input assumptions, especially when the measurements have inadequate spectral coverage and/or limited accuracy, such as moon photometry. Comparisons of the mode median radii between GRASP-AOD and AERONET indicate average differences of 0.013 µm for the fine mode and typical values of 0.2-0.3 µm for the coarse mode. The dominant mode (i.e. fine or coarse) indicates a 10 % difference in mode radii between the GRASP-AOD and AERONET inversions, and the average of the difference in volume concentration is around 17 % for both modes. The retrieved values of the fine-mode τ a (500) using GRASP-AOD are generally between those values obtained by the standard AERONET inversion and the values obtained by the AERONET spectral deconvolution algorithm (SDA), with differences typically lower than 0.02 between GRASP-AOD and both algorithms. Finally, we present some examples of application of GRASP-AOD inversion using moon photometry and the airborne PLASMA sun photometer during the ChArMEx summer 2013 campaign in the western Mediterranean.

Abstract. This paper presents the new photometer CE318-T, able to perform daytime and night-time photometric measurements using the sun and the moon as light source. Therefore, this new device permits a complete cycle of diurnal aerosol and water vapour measurements valuable to enhance atmospheric monitoring to be extracted. In this study we have found significantly higher precision of triplets when comparing the CE318-T master instrument and the Cimel AErosol RObotic NETwork (AERONET) master (CE318-AERONET) triplets as a result of the new CE318-T tracking system. Regarding the instrument calibration, two new methodologies to transfer the calibration from a reference instrument using only daytime measurements (Sun Ratio and Sun-Moon gain factor techniques) are presented and discussed. These methods allow the reduction of the previous complexities inherent to nocturnal calibration. A quantitative estimation of CE318-T AOD uncertainty by means of error propagation theory during daytime revealed AOD uncertainties (u D AOD ) for Langley-calibrated instruments similar to the expected values for other reference instruments (0.002-0.009). We have also found u D AOD values similar to the values reported in sun photometry for field instruments (∼ 0.015). In the case of the night-time period, the CE318-T-estimated standard combined uncertainty (u N AOD ) is dependent not only on the calibration technique but also on illumination conditions and the instrumental noise. These values range from 0.011-0.018 for Lunar Langley-calibrated instruments to 0.012-0.021 for instruments calibrated using the Sun Ratio technique. In the case of moon-calibrated instruments using the Sun-Moon gain factor method and suncalibrated using the Langley technique, we found u N AOD ranging from 0.016 to 0.017 (up to 0.019 in 440 nm channel), not dependent on any lunar irradiance model.A subsequent performance evaluation including CE318-T and collocated measurements from independent reference instruments has served to assess the CE318-T performance as well as to confirm its estimated uncertainty. Daytime AOD evaluation, performed at Izaña station from March to June 2014, encompassed measurements from a reference CE318-T, a CE318-AERONET master instrument, a Precision Filter Radiometer (PFR) and a Precision Spectroradiometer (PSR) prototype, reporting low AOD discrepancies between the four instruments (up to 0.006). The nocturnal AOD evaluation was performed using CE318-T-and starphotometer-collocated measurements and also by means of a day/night coherence transition test using the CE318-T masPublished by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. Á. Barreto et al.: The new sun-sky-lunar Cimel CE318-T multiband photometerter instrument and the CE318 daytime data from the CE318-AERONET master instrument. Results showed low discrepancies with the star photometer at 870 and 500 nm channels (≤ 0.013) and differences with AERONET daytime data (1 h after and before sunset and sunrise) in agreement with the estimated u N AOD value...

Abstract. This paper presents the preliminary results of nocturnal Aerosol Optical Depth (τa) and Angström Exponent (α) obtained from a new lunar photometer prototype, trade name Cimel CE-318U. Due to the variation of the moon's illumination inherent to the lunar cycle, the typical Langley-plot Method used in solar photometry to calibrate these instruments cannot be applied. In this paper, we propose three different methods to carry out the lunar-photometer calibration. In order to validate the results, we have selected three events which encompass seven nights and ten days under different atmospheric conditions, including several saharan dust intrusions episodes. Method#1 is introduced in this work as a modification of the usual Langley Method. This technique, called Lunar-Langley Method, requires the extraterrestrial irradiances from a lunar irradiance model, providing similar accuracies on τa to those of AERONET (±0.01–0.02). It makes comparable daytime and nighttime measurements. Method#2 consists of transferring the current calibration from a master used by sunphotometers. Its results are again within the limit of accuracy expected for the instrument. Method#3 uses an integrating sphere and the methodology proposed by Li et al. (2008) to determine sky calibration coefficients (Cj) and the instrument's solid angle field-of-view (Ω), respectively. We observe significant τa differences between Method#1 and #3 (up to 0.07), which might be attributed to the errors propagation in Method#3. The good results obtained from the comparison against a second CE-318U prototype, and against daytime data from a Precision Filter Radiometer (PFR), constitute a valuable assessment of CE-318U performance. Results of α and its spectral variation (δ α) show good agreement between daytime and nighttime, being able to identify the aerosol properties associated with each event.

30The use of sky cameras for nocturnal aerosol characterization is discussed in this study. 31Two sky cameras are configured to take High Dynamic Range (HDR) images at and thermal radiation (direct effect), and acting as cloud droplet nuclei that leads to 60 changes in the cloud properties and lifetime (indirect effect). 61At night there is no solar radiation, but aerosol radiative forcing in the longwave 62 range can be significant for large particles like desert dust and sea salt [Stier et al., 2007; 63 Sicard et al., 2014]. In addition, at night the aerosol indirect effect still works and could 64 provide changes on nocturnal cloud properties [Ramanathan et al., 2001; Kaufman et al. 65 2005; Rosenfeld et al. 2006]. These changes could contribute to global warming since 66 clouds at night absorb part of the longwave radiation emitted by Earth, and then, they 67 re-emit radiation back to the Earth surface [Ramanathan et al., 1989; NASA Facts, 68 1999; Wild, 2012]. Moreover, the knowledge of aerosol properties at night is important 69 for the aerosol characterization in polar areas and in winter seasons, which present low 70 sunshine duration values [Stone et al., 2010; Tomasi et al., 2015]. 71Some instruments and techniques are used for the characterization of aerosol 72 properties at night: lidar systems provide backscatter and extinction profiles using Fernald-Sasano retrievals [Klett, 1981[Klett, , 1985 Fernald, 1984;Sasano, 1984] [Ansmann et al., 2001;Pérez-Ramírez et al., 2008Berkoff et al., 2011; Barreto et 79 al., 2013 Barreto et 79 al., , 2016 Barreto et 79 al., , 2017. The AOD measurements at night provide information to 80 discriminate between the extinction of fine and coarse mode [O'Neill et al., 2003] brighter. This information could be combined with the spectral AOD, also obtained 91 from the Moon (lunar photometry) to retrieve aerosol characteristics. 92A sky camera can be used to obtain relative sky radiance near the Moon since it 93 records the full hemispherical sky radiance measuring different wavelength intervals 94 and it can operate at night with an appropriate exposure time (ET). It should be noted 95 also that sky cameras usually present a low signal to noise ratio. Cloud detection is the 96 most spread use of sky cameras [Long et al., 2006; Calbó and Sabburg, 2008; Cazorla et 97 al., 2008a; Ghonima et al., 2012;Kazantzidis et al., 2012; Mandat et al., 2014, Alonso 98 et al., 2014 though they have been used with other purposes [Horváth et al., 2002; 99 Cazorla et al., 2008b;Kreuter et al., 2009; Sigernes et al., 2014], including the 100 retrieval of sky radiances in daytime [Voss and Zibordi, 1989; López-Alvarez et al., 101 2008; Román et al., 2012; Toshing et al., 2013; Chauvin et al., 2015]. The CCD spectral response, given by the manufacturer, is shown in Fig. 1a. This 183 response is only available up to 700 nm, but red channel seems to have certain 184 sensitivity to longer wavelengths. As mentioned above, the camera also co...

Abstract. The aim of this paper is to analyze the suitability of the high-mountain stations Mauna Loa and Izaña for Langley plot calibration of Sun photometers. Thus the aerosol optical depth (AOD) characteristics and seasonality, as well as the cloudiness, have been investigated in order to provide a robust estimation of the calibration uncertainty as well as the number of days that are suitable for Langley calibrations. The data used for the investigations belong to the AERONET and GAW-PFR networks, which maintain reference Sun photometers at these stations with long measurement records: 22 years at Mauna Loa and 15 years at Izaña. In terms of clear-sky and stable aerosol conditions, Mauna Loa (3397 m a.s.l.) exhibits on average 377 Langley plots (243 morning and 134 afternoon) per year suitable for Langley plot calibration, whereas Izaña (2373 m a.s.l.) shows 343 Langley plots (187 morning and 155 afternoon) per year. The background AOD (500 nm) values, on days that are favorable for Langley calibrations, are in the range 0.01–0.02 throughout the year, with well-defined seasonality that exhibits a spring maximum at both stations plus a slight summer increase at Izaña. The statistical analysis of the long-term determination of extraterrestrial signals yields to a calibration uncertainty of ∼ 0.25–0.5 %, this uncertainty being smaller in the visible and near-infrared wavelengths and larger in the ultraviolet wavelengths. This is due to atmospheric variability produced by changes in several factors, mainly the AOD. The uncertainty cannot be reduced based only on quality criteria of individual Langley plots and averaging over several days is shown to reduce the uncertainty to the needed levels for reference Sun photometers.

Abstract. This study presents the results of the Fourth Filter Radiometer Comparison that was held in Davos, Switzerland, between 28 September and 16 October 2015. Thirty filter radiometers and spectroradiometers from 12 countries participated including reference instruments from global aerosol networks. The absolute differences of all instruments compared to the reference have been based on the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) criterion defined as follows: 95% of the measured data has to be within 0.005 ± 0.001∕m (where m is the air mass). At least 24 out of 29 instruments achieved this goal at both 500 and 865 nm, while 12 out of 17 and 13 out of 21 achieved this at 368 and 412 nm, respectively. While searching for sources of differences among different instruments, it was found that all individual differences linked to Rayleigh, NO2, ozone, water vapor calculations and related optical depths and air mass calculations were smaller than 0.01 in aerosol optical depth (AOD) at 500 and 865 nm. Different cloud-detecting algorithms used have been compared. Ångström exponent calculations showed relatively large differences among different instruments, partly because of the high calculation uncertainty of this parameter in low AOD conditions. The overall low deviations of these AOD results and the high accuracy of reference aerosol network instruments demonstrated a promising framework to achieve homogeneity, compatibility and harmonization among the different spectral AOD networks in the near future.

Abstract. A comprehensive comparison of more than 70 000 synchronous 1 min aerosol optical depth (AOD) data from three Global Atmosphere Watch precision-filter radiometers (GAW-PFR), traceable to the World AOD reference, and 15 Aerosol Robotic Network Cimel radiometers (AERONET-Cimel), calibrated individually with the Langley plot technique, was performed for four common or “near” wavelengths, 380, 440, 500 and 870 nm, in the period 2005–2015. The goal of this study is to assess whether, despite the marked technical differences between both networks (AERONET, GAW-PFR) and the number of instruments used, their long-term AOD data are comparable and consistent. The percentage of data meeting the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) traceability requirements (95 % of the AOD differences of an instrument compared to the WMO standards lie within specific limits) is >92 % at 380 nm, >95 % at 440 nm and 500 nm, and 98 % at 870 nm, with the results being quite similar for both AERONET version 2 (V2) and version 3 (V3). For the data outside these limits, the contribution of calibration and differences in the calculation of the optical depth contribution due to Rayleigh scattering and O3 and NO2 absorption have a negligible impact. For AOD >0.1, a small but non-negligible percentage (∼1.9 %) of the AOD data outside the WMO limits at 380 nm can be partly assigned to the impact of dust aerosol forward scattering on the AOD calculation due to the different field of view of the instruments. Due to this effect the GAW-PFR provides AOD values, which are ∼3 % lower at 380 nm and ∼2 % lower at 500 nm compared with AERONET-Cimel. The comparison of the Ångström exponent (AE) shows that under non-pristine conditions (AOD >0.03 and AE <1) the AE differences remain <0.1. This long-term comparison shows an excellent traceability of AERONET-Cimel AOD with the World AOD reference at 440, 500 and 870 nm channels and a fairly good agreement at 380 nm, although AOD should be improved in the UV range.

No abstract