Articles | Volume 9, issue 2
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 899–914, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-899-2016
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 899–914, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-899-2016

Model description paper 01 Mar 2016

Model description paper | 01 Mar 2016

UManSysProp v1.0: an online and open-source facility for molecular property prediction and atmospheric aerosol calculations

David Topping et al.

Related authors

JlBox v1.1: a Julia-based multi-phase atmospheric chemistry box model
Langwen Huang and David Topping
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 2187–2203, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2187-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-2187-2021, 2021
Short summary
PyCHAM (v2.1.1): a Python box model for simulating aerosol chambers
Simon Patrick O'Meara, Shuxuan Xu, David Topping, M. Rami Alfarra, Gerard Capes, Douglas Lowe, Yunqi Shao, and Gordon McFiggans
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 675–702, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-675-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-675-2021, 2021
Short summary
Quantifying bioaerosol concentrations in dust clouds through online UV-LIF and mass spectrometry measurements at the Cape Verde Atmospheric Observatory
Douglas Morrison, Ian Crawford, Nicholas Marsden, Michael Flynn, Katie Read, Luis Neves, Virginia Foot, Paul Kaye, Warren Stanley, Hugh Coe, David Topping, and Martin Gallagher
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 14473–14490, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14473-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-14473-2020, 2020
Short summary
Evaluating the use of Facebook's Prophet model v0.6 in forecasting concentrations of NO2 at single sites across the UK and in response to the COVID-19 lockdown in Manchester, England
David Topping, David Watts, Hugh Coe, James Evans, Thomas J. Bannan, Douglas Lowe, Caroline Jay, and Jonathan W. Taylor
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2020-270,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2020-270, 2020
Revised manuscript has not been submitted
Short summary
Measured solid state and subcooled liquid vapour pressures of nitroaromatics using Knudsen effusion mass spectrometry
Petroc D. Shelley, Thomas J. Bannan, Stephen D. Worrall, M. Rami Alfarra, Ulrich K. Krieger, Carl J. Percival, Arthur Garforth, and David Topping
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8293–8314, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8293-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8293-2020, 2020
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
OpenIFS@home version 1: a citizen science project for ensemble weather and climate forecasting
Sarah Sparrow, Andrew Bowery, Glenn D. Carver, Marcus O. Köhler, Pirkka Ollinaho, Florian Pappenberger, David Wallom, and Antje Weisheimer
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3473–3486, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3473-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3473-2021, 2021
Short summary
Regional CO2 inversions with LUMIA, the Lund University Modular Inversion Algorithm, v1.0
Guillaume Monteil and Marko Scholze
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3383–3406, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3383-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3383-2021, 2021
Short summary
The Detailed Emissions Scaling, Isolation, and Diagnostic (DESID) module in the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system version 5.3.2
Benjamin N. Murphy, Christopher G. Nolte, Fahim Sidi, Jesse O. Bash, K. Wyat Appel, Carey Jang, Daiwen Kang, James Kelly, Rohit Mathur, Sergey Napelenok, George Pouliot, and Havala O. T. Pye
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3407–3420, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3407-2021, 2021
Short summary
Evaluation of the dynamic core of the PALM model system 6.0 in a neutrally stratified urban environment: comparison between LES and wind-tunnel experiments
Tobias Gronemeier, Kerstin Surm, Frank Harms, Bernd Leitl, Björn Maronga, and Siegfried Raasch
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3317–3333, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3317-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3317-2021, 2021
Short summary
Implementing a sectional scheme for early aerosol growth from new particle formation in the Norwegian Earth System Model v2: comparison to observations and climate impacts
Sara M. Blichner, Moa K. Sporre, Risto Makkonen, and Terje K. Berntsen
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 3335–3359, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3335-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3335-2021, 2021
Short summary

Cited articles

Aumont, B., Szopa, S., and Madronich, S.: Modelling the evolution of organic carbon during its gas-phase tropospheric oxidation: development of an explicit model based on a self generating approach, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 2497–2517, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2497-2005, 2005.
Barley, M., Topping, D. O., Jenkin, M. E., and McFiggans, G.: Sensitivities of the absorptive partitioning model of secondary organic aerosol formation to the inclusion of water, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 2919–2932, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-2919-2009, 2009.
Barley, M. H., Topping, D., Lowe, D., Utembe, S., and McFiggans, G.: The sensitivity of secondary organic aerosol (SOA) component partitioning to the predictions of component properties – Part 3: Investigation of condensed compounds generated by a near-explicit model of VOC oxidation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 11, 13145–13159, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-11-13145-2011, 2011.
Barley, M. H., Topping, D. O., and McFiggans, G.: Critical Assessment of Liquid Density Estimation Methods for Multifunctional Organic Compounds and Their Use in Atmospheric Science, J. Phys. Chem. A, 117, 3428–3441, 2013.
Bas, G. L.: The Molecular Volume of Liquid Chemical Compounds, Longmans, New York, NY, USA, 1915.
Download
Short summary
In this paper we describe the development and application of a new web-based and open-source facility, UManSysProp (http://umansysprop .seaes.manchester.ac.uk), for automating predictions of molecular and atmospheric aerosol properties. Current facilities include pure component vapour pressures, critical properties, and sub-cooled densities of organic molecules; activity coefficient predictions for mixed inorganic-organic liquid systems; hygroscopic growth factors and CCN activation potential.