Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Atmospheric Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/atmosres

A database of the raindrop scattering properties at millimeter and

sub-millimeter wavelengths
Jiaqi Zhao a, b, Shuai Hu a, b, *, Xichuan Liu a, b, Ruijun Dang a, b, Yao Xiao a, b
a
College of Meteorology and Oceanography, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, China
b
High Impact Weather Key Laboratory of CMA, Changsha, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Currently, the majority of publicly raindrop scattering database are calculated with spherical particles. However,
Database as the raindrop grows, the bottom of the raindrop gradually flattens out. The differences of raindrop shape will
Nonspherical particles lead to a difference of the calculated scattering parameters from reality, and further influencing the accuracy of
Scattering parameters
calculations in the fields of radar detection, microwave transmission and satellite remote sensing. In this regard,
Millimeter and sub-millimeter wavelengths
Invariant imbedding T-matrix
we developed a non-spherical raindrop scattering parameter database (RP database) with frequencies from 3GHz
Atmospheric radiative transfer to 1000GHz. It has been published in an open-access repository. We compared the RP database with the database
of Ekelund et al., and found that their difference is basically under 5%; Further the comparisons were also made
between the scattering parameters of ellipsoids, spherical raindrops and the non-spherical raindrops, both
spherical and ellipsoidal particles have clear difference from non-spherical particles. Finally, we analyzed the
group particle attenuation at different frequencies.

1. Introduction
The scattering parameters of the atmospheric particles such as rain
droplets and ice crystals are the basic parameters in the atmospheric
radiative transfer simulation and remote sensing application. Since they
describe how individual particles scatter, emit, and absorb the radiation
that is measured by the sensor, the scattering parameters of atmospheric
particles play an important role in inversion of the microphysical
characteristics of precipitation and cloud no matter for the active and
passive. Especially for polarization remote sensing, e.g., millimeter
radar, and sub-millimeter radar, because the polarization states of the
scattering wave is much sensitive to particles’ shape (Evans and Ste­
phens, 1991; Dubovik et al., 2006), their retrieval accuracy are much
more sensitive to scattering parameters compared with traditional
method that depends only on the intensity of electromagnetic waves
(Teng et al., 2018; Cheng et al., 2010). Because of the importance of the
scattering parameters of the particles, how to obtain the scattering
properties accurately has become a hotpot in the remote sensing field.
The calculation efficiency of scattering simulation depends on par­
ticles’ shape and size, and it is generally time consuming for the particles
with irregular geometry. Owning to this reason, it is difficult work to
calculate the scattering parameters of the atmospheric particle in a real-
time. For this problem, the scattering databases which contains the
extinction coefficients, single scattering albedo and phase functions are
generally established in advance (Hess and Wiegner, 1994). At present,
many scholars have tried to establish the database of ice crystal particle
scattering parameters. In 2005, in order to study the optical properties of
cirrus clouds, Yang et al., 2014 developed a database of ice crystal
scattering parameters with 49 bands between 3um and 100um. In 2016,
for the GCOM-C/SGLI satellite mission, Hu et al., 2020 optimized the
complex refractive index grid of the database, and built a database of ice
crystal particle scattering parameters between 0.38um and 12.0um. In
2018, aiming at microwave remote sensing, Eriksson et al., 2018
developed a database of scattering parameters with frequencies from 1
to 886 GHz. It contains 4 major categories and 34 subcategories of
particles and calculated separately for different temperatures, greatly
contributing to the development of microwave remote sensing (Fox,
2020a, 2020b; Ekelund et al., 2020a).
For rainfall particles, most of the public scattering database are
calculated with spherical particles, for example, the early efforts by
Ryde (1946). In 1977, the ellipsoidal model has been gradually used for
scattering calculations to quantify the effect of the equivalent oblate
approximation (Oguchi, 1977). Afterwards, many scholars conducted
calculations on the scattering data of ellipsoidal rainfall particles

* Corresponding author at: College of Meteorology and Oceanography, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, China.
E-mail address: hushuai2012@nudt.edu.cn (S. Hu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2023.107206
Received 1 August 2023; Received in revised form 1 December 2023; Accepted 22 December 2023
Available online 27 December 2023
0169-8095/© 2023 Published by Elsevier B.V.
J. Zhao et al.
(Morgan, 1980; Eriksson et al., 2018). And in a long time, the ellipsoidal
scattering model of raindrop have played an important role in the
retrieval of rain droplets. However, as the raindrop grows, the bottom of
the raindrop gradually flattens out. (Chuang and Beard, 1990). The
differences in the raindrop shape will cause the calculated scattering
characteristics deviate from reality. Many researchers have found that
the incomplete description of the shape of the rain droplets will affect
the calculation accuracy in areas such as radar detection (Manić et al.,
2018; Thurai et al., 2014), microwave propagation, and satellite remote
sensing (Battaglia et al., 2009). Because the polarization characteristics
appear to be more sensitive to particle shape, the effect of raindrop
shape becomes magnified. To this point, numerous scholars have studied
the effect of scattering properties on polarimetric radar detection and
found that the use of a more realistic particle model can improve the
inversion accuracy of polarimetric radar (Thurai et al., 2007; Teng et al.,
2018). During microwave transmission, the electromagnetic signal
along its propagation path gets attenuated by rainfall. As the intensity of
rainfall varies in time and space, the microwave attenuation intensity
also changes, which provides support for the inversion of rainfall in­
formation by microwave link (Uijlenhoet et al., 2018). The calculation
of microwave attenuation will also be affected by the raindrop shape.
From the study of the effect of raindrop shape on microwave inversion, it
was found that using realistic shaped raindrops for model will improve
the inversion accuracy of liquid water paths (Czekala et al., 2001). They
also showed that more rigorous rainfall processing would improve the
algorithm’s ability of discriminate between rainfall and clouds (Batta­
glia et al., 2009). With the remote sensing moving to the high frequency,
the sub-millimeter band that fills in the gap between infrared and mi­
crowave have gradually drawn more and more attention. In recent
years, the remote sensing atmospheric parameters gradually by the sub-
millimeter become a hotspot. Several research have shown that there is
potentially hydro-meteorological information in the atmospheric radi­
ation with frequencies ranging 100 to 1000 GHz (Camille et al., 2017a,b;
Fox et al., 2019). An irregularly-shaped non-spherical ice particles in
terahertz wave that recently applied into remote sensing technology by
Li et al. (2023). Some researchers also pointed out that the sub-
millimeter band will be the key spectral range that we can use to
obtain an overview of the relation between cloud-ice and precipitation
processes (Gong et al., 2021).
As the radiative transfer simulation is gradually moving to a higher
frequency band, the development of scattering parameter databases of
the rain droplets is also gradually moving towards to the high fre­
quencies. However, most of the open-source non-spherical particle
scattering models focus on small and medium-sized parameter particles
(e.g., Finite-DifferenceTime-Domain FDTD, Discrete Dipole Approxi­
mation DDA, extended boundary condition method EBCM), for example,
the FDTD is only good at calculating the particles with size parameters
smaller than 40. In 2020, Ekelund et al., 2020a, 2020b established the
non-spherical raindrop scattering parameter database (ART database)
with the EBCM T-matrix method. In this non-spherical raindrop scat­
tering parameter database, the scattering characteristics of 34 fre­
quencies is contained. However, due to the inability of the EBCM model
to calculate the particles of large size parameters, the database contains
a maximum rainfall particle diameter of 5.75 mm, also Ekelund et al.,
2020a, 2020b have pointed that it was difficult to reach convergence for
all sizes and frequencies, specifically when the imaginary refractive
index is exceptionally high (e.g. the imaginary part of the refractive
index reaches as high as 2.77 at 40 GHz). In response to this issue, we
have established a raindrop particle scattering parameter database (RP
database) with the invariant imbedding T-matrix model (IIM T-M)
developed by our team. The main feature of the invariant imbedding T-
matrix program is that it can calculate the scattering parameters of
nonspherical particles based on the volume integral solution of Max­
well’s equations. Compared with the traditional T-matrix method, it can
calculate the scattering properties of the particles with arbitrary shapes,
and can also achieve high accuracy for the particles with large complex
2
Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206
refractive index. In this regard, it is more suitable for the establishment
of a database of scattering parameters of the non-spherical precipitation
particles, especially at high frequencies. Since the maximum rain par­
ticle size observed so far is 9 mm (Thurai et al., 2007), the range of the
diameter of the rain droplets in this scattering database is 0.1 to 9.0 mm
(446 sizes in total), and the modeling frequencies cover the millimeter
wave and sub-millimeter wave from 3GHZ to 1000 GHZ, with a total of
40 frequencies. From this aspect, the database established in this paper
can not only cover all sizes of known raindrop particles but also contain
the scattering parameters in the high-frequency band (e.g., the THz
wave band), which can make up for the lack of the scattering parameters
of the rain of large sizes in the high-frequencies. The database is pub­
lished in an open-access repository in order to promote the usage of
realistic microphysical assumptions in the microwave remote sensing
community. Furthermore, the database was employed in radiative
transfer simulations of passive and active microwave rain observations,
in order to investigate the impact of raindrop shape upon observations
and to provide general guidelines on usage of the published database.
We compared the RP database with the database of Ekelund et al.,
2020a, 2020b and found that their difference is basically under 5%,
which verifies the accuracy of the data. Further, the comparisons were
also made between the scattering parameters of ellipsoids, spherical
raindrops, and the non-spherical raindrops, both spherical and ellip­
soidal particles have clear differences from non-spherical particles,
which proves the necessity of establishing a non-spherical rainfall par­
ticle scattering database.
This paper is divided into six sections. In Section 2, the rain shape
model (i.e., the BC model) and the invariant imbedding T-matrix method
were described. In Section 3, the scattering database were introduced
briefly. In Section 4, the differences in scattering properties between
non-spherical raindrop particles, ellipsoidal particles and spherical
particles were systematically analyzed. In Section 5, we developed an
interface to the program for calculating the scattering properties of
group particles and gave examples of calculations. Lastly, a summary of
this paper was provided in Section 6.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Construction of particle shape
The shape of raindrops is an important parameter for calculating
scattering characteristics. At present, the model developed by Prup­
pacher(PP mode) (Pruppacher and Beard, 1970), the model developed
by Beard and Chuang(BC model) (Beard & Chuang, 1990), and
approximate ellipsoidal model (Ross and Bradley, 2002) are commonly
used. The BC model considers surface tension, hydrostatic pressure,
dynamic pressure, and electric stresses to iteratively calculate the shape
of the raindrop particle, which is more similar to the real shape of
raindrops (Eriksson et al., 2018). The formulated model of BC model as
follows
[ ]
∑10
r(θ) = r0 1 + cn cos(nθ) (1)
n=0
Where, r is the distance from the sphere to the original point, r0 is the
radius of the equal volume sphere. cn is the deformation factor given in
Chuang and Beard (1990). Since the BC model is a better model, it is
used to calculate the raindrop particle scattering parameters in this
paper. In order to compare the differences of scattering properties
among the real particles, and the equal volume ellipsoidal, spherical
particles, we calculate the scattering parameters of the partcles with the
three shapes at once. The shape of the approximate ellipsoidal model
particle is formulated as
J. Zhao et al. Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206

Fig. 2. Cross section diagram of non-spherical particles. In the figure, R1 is the

Fig. 1. Cross sections of particles with different diameters in the approximate maximum inscribed sphere radius and R2 is the minimum circumscribed
ellipsoidal model and BC model. The solid line is the calculation result of BC sphere radius.
model, and the dotted line is the calculation result of approximate ellip­
soidal model. ⎡ ⎤
⎡ ⎤
11 12 11 12
[ ] p1 ⎢ T T11 ⋯ ⋯ T1,lmax T1,lmax ⎥⎡ ⎤
∑
10 2 ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 11 ⎥ a1
r0 1 + 2c0 + c20 + cn ⎢ q ⎥ ⎢ T 21 22
T11 ⋯ ⋯ 21
T1,lmax 22
T1,lmax ⎥
2 ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ 11 ⎥ ⎢ b1 ⎥
a= n=1
(2) ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⋯ ⎥ ⎢ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⎥⎢ ⋯ ⎥
1 + c0 + c2 + c4 + c6 + c8 + c10 ⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎢ ⋯ ⎥=⎢ ⋯
⎥⋅⎢ ⎥ (4)
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⎥⎢ ⋯ ⎥⎥ ⎢
⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ 11 ⎥ ⎣ almax ⎦
b = r0 (1 + c0 + c2 + c4 + c6 + c8 + c10 ) (3) ⎢ plmax ⎥ ⎢ Tlmax,1 12
Tlmax,1 ⋯ ⋯ 11
Tlamx,lmax 12
Tlamx,lmax ⎥
⎣ ⎦ ⎢ ⎥ blmax
⎣ 21 ⎦
In this case, a is the length of the horizontal semi-axis, b is the length
22 21 22
qlamx Tlmax,1 Tlmax,1 ⋯ ⋯ Tlmax,lmax Tlmax,lmax
of the vertical one. A comparison of the shape cross sections between the
approximate ellipsoidal model and the BC model is shown in Fig. 1. As it The invariant imbedding T-matrix model is to solve the Helmholtz
can be seen, when the raindrop particle diameter is <3 mm, the shapes volume integral equation derived from Maxwell’s equations by the
calculated by both models are close to spherical. With increasing par­ volume integral method.
ticle diameter, the particle calculated by the approximate ellipsoidal ∫∫∫
model gradually comes close to a flat ellipsoid, while the particle E(r) = Einc (r) + G0 (r, r′)u(r′)Z(r)E(r′)d3 r′ (5)
calculated by the BC model gradually becomes flat at the bottom, which V
is closer to the shape of natural precipitation.
In the calculation process of the IIM T-M method, the non-spherical
2.2. The invariant imbedded T-matrix program particles are regarded as an inhomogeneous sphere and discretized into
a certain number of inhomogeneous spherical shells from R1 to RN in the
We used IIM T-M program by Hu et al. (2020, 2021) to calculate the spherical coordinate system.(See Fig. 2.)
scattering parameters of raindrop particles. The IIM T-matrix method is To improve modeling efficiency, the T-matrix of the inscribed sphere
one of the important methods to calculate the atmospheric non-spherical is firstly calculated by the Lorenz-Mie theory, and then, the T-matrix is
particles’ light scattering properties. This method is based on physical updated layer by layer by using the invariant imbedding technique,
mechanisms, which calculates particle scattering parameters by where the iterative equation can be written as
numerically solving Maxwell’s equations. Its calculation accuracy has
T(rn ) = Q11 (rn ) + (I + Q12 (rn ) )[I − T(rn− 1 )Q22 (rn ) ]− 1 T(rn− 1 )[I + Q21 (rn ) ]
been widely recognized internationally and is widely used in the field of
(6)
atmospheric radiation and remote sensing (Baum et al., 2005; Bi et al.,
2013; Panetta et al., 2016). Once the T matrix is obtained in a one-time
where, T(rn ) and T(rn-1 ) are the T-matrix of the spheres of n layers and n-
calculation, the scattering properties of the randomly oriented particles
can be analytically calculated, which greatly increasing its efficiency. 1 layers, Q11 (rn ), Q12 (rn ), Q21 (rn ) and Q22 (rn ) are the optical matrix of
The essential of IIM T-M is to obtain the T-matrix through numerically the nth spherical shell, they can be calculated by matrix, written as
solving the Green’s function solution of Helmholtz equation. Compared
with the EBCM method, the major advantage of this method is that the Q11 (rn ) = JT (rn )Q(rn )J(rn ) (7)
limitation of boundary conditions is avoided, which can be applied to
the light scattering problem of arbitrary shape and non-homogeneous Q12 (rn ) = JT (rn )Q(rn )H(rn ) (8)
particles. And the calculation range of IIM T-M is larger than that of
EBCM, therefore it is more suitable for the development of raindrop Q21 (rn ) = HT (rn )Q(rn )J(rn ) (9)
particle scattering parameter database.
The T matrix is a linear transformation matrix of the incident and Q22 (rn ) = HT (rn )Q(rn )H(rn ) (10)
scattering field. By using the T-matrix, the particle’s scattering field can
be calculated once the incident light is known, written as where, J(rn ) and H(rn ) are the radical matrices constructed by Bessel
function and Hankel function. The calculation formula of Q(rn ) matrix
is:

3
J. Zhao et al. Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206

Q(rn ) = ωn [I − ωn U(rn )g(rn , rn ) ]− 1 U(rn ) (11) field expansion coefficients. pmn and qmn are the expansion coefficients of
the scattering field expansion coefficients, which can be obtained by
in which, the U-matrix contains particle properties, and its calculation is linear transformation of the incident field expansion coefficients:

⎛ ⎡ ⎡
2n′+1
∫2π ∫π
2n+1
2 2 ⎝−
Umnm′n′ (r) = k r ⎣ 4π n(n+1) ⎣4πn′(n′+1) dφ dθsinθexp[ − i(m − m′)φ ][εr (r, θ, φ) − 1 ]
0 0
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
π mn (θ)π ′
mn ′ (θ) + τ mn (θ) τ ′
mn ′ (θ) − i[π mn (θ) τ m n′ (θ) + τmn (θ)π m′n′ (θ) ]
′ 0 ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ (12)
⎨ i[πmn (θ)τ ′ ′ (θ) + τmn (θ)π ′ ′ (θ) ] πmn (θ)πm′n′ (θ) + τmn (θ)τm′n′ (θ) 0 ⎬
×
mn mn √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
n′
⎪
⎪ n(n + 1)n′(n′ + 1) d0m n
d0m ′ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 0 0 ⎪
⎪
⎩ εr (r, θ, φ) ⎭

The detailed introduction of the model has been presented in pre­

vious papers published by the author (Hu et al., 2020, 2021). If readers ∑
∞ n′
∑ [ 11 ]
wish to gain a deeper understanding, you can refer to and read it. pmn = 12
Tmnm′n′ am′n′ + Tmnm′n′ bm′n′ (19)
n′=1 m′=− n′

2.3. Output of the invariant imbedded T-matrix

∑
∞ n′
∑ [ 21 ]
qmn = 22
Tmnm′n′ am′n′ + Tmnm′n′ bm′n′ (20)
As implied by the name, the IIM T-M revolves around the calculation n′=1 m′=− n′
of the T-matrix. Using this model, the scattering parameters of particles
can be obtained. One of the outputs from the IIM T-M code is the 2 × 2 Based on the output of the IIM T-M method, the database we
amplitude scattering matrix S, which relates the incident to scattered developed contains a total of five covariates: particle scattering phase
electric fields: function, polarization characteristics, scattering cross-section, extinc­
[ ] [ ] tion cross-section, and absorption cross-section, which can be used for
Esca eikr Einc future study.
v
= S(nsca , ninc ) v
(13)
Esca
h
r Einc
h
3. Data records
where r(m) is the distance from the particle centre, k(m− 1) is the
wavenumber, n is the propagation direction, and E(V•m-1) are the In order to simulate the scattering properties of raindrops, we used
electric fields. The amplitude scattering matrix S can be used to derive Smith’s pure water complex refractive index model to calculate the
any particle scattering parameter. In this case, the scattering phase complex refractive index of liquid water. In the numerical simulation,
matrix Z is calculated as: the temperature is set as 295 K, which is the average temperature of the
⎡ ⎤ planned temperature range. In the future, we will also add multiple
2 *
S11 S12 *
S12 S11 |S12 |2 scattering parameters between 280 K to 295 K to the database. The
⎢ |S11 | ⎥
⎢ * * * * ⎥ particle size is uniformly distributed in the range of 0.1 to 9 mm (equal
( sca inc ) ⎢ S11 S21 S11 S22 S12 S21 S12 S22 ⎥ −
n ,̂
Z ̂ n = D⎢
⎢ S S* * * *
⎥D
⎥
1
(14) volume ball diameter) with 0.02 mm intervals. The modeling fre­
⎢ 21 11 S21 S12 S22 S11 S22 S12 ⎥ quencies covers the range of 3–1000 GHz with 40 frequencies, which
⎣ * *
⎦
|S21 |2 S21 S22 S22 S21 |S22 |2 contains the common frequencies of current weather radar, cloud radar,
and terahertz radar (S-band 3GHz, X-band 10GHz, etc. for weather
In the formula, radar, 100GHz, 35.6GHz, etc. for cloud radar, 183.3, 380.2, 487.25GHz,
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ etc. for Sub-millimeter wave radar), and the details are shown in
1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0
⎢1 0 0 − 1⎥ 1⎢0 0 − 1 i ⎥ Table 1.
D=⎢ ⎥ −
⎣ 0 − 1 − 1 0 ⎦, D
1
= ⎢ ⎥ (15)
2⎣0 0 − 1 − i⎦
0 − i i 0 1 − 1 0 0

From the electrical vector expansion coefficients of the incident and

scattered fields, the IIM T-M code can also directly calculate the scat­ Table 1
tering cross-section, extinction cross-section and absorption-cross sec­ Grid and details of the calculations.
tion of the particles: Shapes BC model，AE model ，spherical
Refractive index ERIC A. SMITH
1 ∑
∞ ∑
n
model
Csca = ⃒ ⃒2 |pmn |2 + |qmn |2 (16)
k2 ⃒Einc ⃒ Temperatures [K] 295 K
n=1 m=− n
Frequencies [GHz] 3.0，5.6，10.0，12.0，12.5，13.0，18.6，28.0，29.0，
0

30.0，35.6，50.0，94.1，100.0，122.2，150.0，183.3，
1 ∑
∞ ∑
n
190.31，200.0，220.0，250.0，300.0，350.0，380.2，
Cext = ⃒ ⃒ amn (pmn )* + bmn (qmn )* (17)
k2 ⃒Einc ⃒2 n=1 m=− n 400.0，450.0，487.25，500.0，550.0，600.0，640.0，
0
650.0，700.0，750.0，800.0，850.0，883.0，900.0，
950.0，1000.0
Cabs = Cext − Csca (18) Particle diameter 0.1– 9
[mm]
In which, amn and bmn are the expansion coefficients of the incident

4
J. Zhao et al. Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206

Fig. 3. Comparison of the scattering phase matrices in the ARTS database and the RP database. The abscissa is the scattering angle. The incident light frequency is
35.6 GHz and the equal volume diameter is 3.5 mm. The blue line is the data in ARTS database, and the red line is the data in RP database. (For interpretation of the
references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Fig. 4. Comparison of the scattering phase matrices in the ARTS database and the RP database. The abscissa is the scattering angle. The incident light frequency is
122.2 GHz and the equal volume diameter is 3.5 mm. The blue line is the data in ARTS database, and the red line is the data in RP database. (For interpretation of the
references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

4. Results differences <1%, especially for P12/P11, within 0.5%.

4.1. Comparison scattering phase matrix (ART database and RP
database)
To demonstrate the practicality of the RP database and the reliability
of the database, we compared the scattering phase matrix with the data
in the Ekelund et al.’s database (ARTS database) in low frequency band,
in which, the equal volume diameter of the rain particle was 3.5 mm,
and the frequency of incident light was 35.6GHz, the refractive index
was taken as 5.2673 + 2.8008i, the results are shown in Fig. 3.
As shown in the figure, for the scattering phase function, the calcu­
lation results of our model differ slightly from the data in the ARTS
database, and their deviation is not significant. For the forward scat­
tering angles (0◦ ~ 40◦ ), their deviation is generally between 2% to 5%.
At the rest of the scattering angles, the deviation of the scattering phase
function is all <2%. For the polarization components, our calculations
are in agreement with the data in the ARTS database well, with their
To further validate the accuracy of our database, another comparison
in higher frequency is also conducted, in which the equal volume
diameter of selected particle was 3.5 mm, and the frequency of incident
light was 122.2GHz, the refractive index was taken as 3.1001 + 1.7038i,
the comparison results are shown in Fig. 4.
As can be seen, when the frequency increases to 122.2 GHz, both the
curves of the scattering phase function and the polarization component
become unsmooth, but a good agreement is also achieved between the
two databases. For the scattering phase function, when the scattering
angle is <150◦ , their difference is within 1%. After the scattering angle is
>150◦ , their difference gradually increases to over 5%, which may be
due to the different complex rerfractive index between models. For the
polarization components, their agreement is higher than the phase
function, and the differences is generally about 2%.
Another rain particle with larger size is selected for the validation. In
this test, the equal volume diameter of particle was 5.5 mm, and the
frequency of incident light was set as 35.6GHz, the refractive index was

5
J. Zhao et al. Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206

Fig. 5. Comparison of the scattering phase matrices in the ARTS database and the RP database. The abscissa is the scattering angle. The incident light frequency is
35.6 GHz and the equal volume diameter is 5.5 mm. The blue line is the data in ARTS database, and the red line is the data in RP database. (For interpretation of the
references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Fig. 6. Comparison of the scattering phase matrices in the BC, AE and SP. The abscissa is the scattering angle. The incident light frequency is 18.6 GHz and the equal
volume radius is 2.25 mm. In the three subgraphs above, the blue line is the BC particle, the red line is the AE particle and the yellow line is the SP particle. In the
three subgraphs below, the orange line is the percentage deviation between BC particle and AE particle(|AE-BC|/BC), and the green line is the percentage deviation
between BC particle and SP particle(|AE-BC|/BC). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of
this article.)

taken as 5.2673 + 2.8008i, the comparison results are shown in Fig. 5. From the above analysis, the RP database and the ARTS database
When the particle equal volume diameter increases to 5.5 mm, for show a strong coherence in the overlapping parts, which proves the
the scattering phase function, the agreement at the forward scattering practicality of the RP database and the reliability of the database
angle improves with a difference of about 1%, but the agreement at the calculated by the IIM T-M method.
backward scattering angle is not as good as that of the 3.5 mm particles,
but the deviation is still about 5% overall. The consistency of the po­
larization components does not decrease with the increasing of the
particle equal volume diameter, and their differences are still <2%.

6
J. Zhao et al.
Fig. 7. Comparison of the scattering phase matrices in the BC、AE and SP. The
abscissa is the scattering angle. The incident light frequency is 18.6 GHz and the
equal volume radius is 4.5 mm. In the three subgraphs above, the blue line is
the BC particle, the red line is the AE particle and the yellow line is the SP
particle. In the three subgraphs below, the orange line is the percentage devi­
ation between BC particle and AE particle(|AE-BC|/BC), and the green line is
the percentage deviation between BC particle and SP particle(|SP-BC|/BC). (For
interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is
referred to the web version of this article.)
4.2. Comparison among spherical particles, ellipsoid particles and BC
particles
In this section, we compare the scattering phase matrices computed
by different models. Since the application of the scattering phase matrix
(including radar horizontal reflectivity, vertical reflectivity and differ­
ential reflectivity) in polarimetric remote sensing is mainly focused on
four elements P11, P12, P21, P22, and for the random orientation particles,
P12––P21, therefore only P11, P12 and P22 are selected for the comparison
in this section.
The equal volume diameter of selected particle was 2.25 mm, and the
frequency of incident light was 18.6GHz, the refractive index was taken
as 6.8927 + 2.6844i. Their calculated P11, P12, P22 and differences
Fig. 8. Comparison of the scattering phase matrices in the BC、AE and SP. The abscissa is the scattering angle. The incident light frequency is 3 GHz and the equal
volume radius is 4.5 mm. In the three subgraphs above, the blue line is the BC particle, the red line is the AE particle and the yellow line is the SP particle. In the three
subgraphs below, the orange line is the percentage deviation between BC particle and AE particle(|AE-BC|/BC), and the green line is the percentage deviation
between BC particle and SP particle(|SP-BC|/BC). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of
this article.)
7
Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206
among equal volume ellipsoid (AE), spherical particle (SP) and BC
model particle (BC) are shown in Fig. 6.
For raindrop particles with an equal volume radius of 2.25 mm, the
calculated results of the SP model and the BC model are notably different
from each other, with a relative difference of the scattering phase
function up to 20% in the forward scattering angle (0◦ ~ 90◦ ) and 5%
~10% at the backward scattering angles. For the polarization compo­
nents, the SP model deviates from the BC model by about 10%, and at
part of the forward scattering angles, the deviation of P22 is up to 15%.
For the calculated results of the AE model and BC model, their difference
is <1% for both the scattering phase function and the polarization
components. This is due to the fact that for the rain particle with a size of
2.25 mm, the BC model and the AE model have a similar shape.
The rain particle with larger size is also used for the comparison. In
this simulation, the equal volume diameter of the selected particle was
4.5 mm, and the frequency of incident light was 18.6GHz, the refractive
index was taken as 6.8927 + 2.6844i. Their calculated P11, P12, P22 and
differences between equal volume ellipsoid (AE), spherical particle (SP)
and BC model particle (BC) are shown in Fig. 7.
At the same frequency, when the particle equal volume radius in­
creases to 4.5 mm, the difference of the scattering matrix parameters of
the SP model and the BC model are also increased, in which the differ­
ence of about 50% overall. For the AE model and the BC model, the
results also show significant differences, with their differences reaching
8% in scattering phase functions and P22 in partial forward scattering
angles. For P12, their differences are around 10% overall, and their
differences increase abruptly at scattering angles of 70◦ and 135◦ .
For the large precipitation particles, the effect of particle shape in
longwave radiation is also significant. In this simulation, the equal
volume diameter of the selected particle was 4.5 mm, and the frequency
of incident light was 3GHz, the refractive index was taken as 8.83 +
0.707i. Their calculated P11, P12, P22 and differences between equal
volume ellipsoid (AE), spherical particle (SP) and BC model particle (BC)
are shown in Fig. 8.
When the frequency of incident light decreases to 3GHz, the
J. Zhao et al. Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206

Fig. 9. Comparison of the scattering cross section in the BC、AE and SP. In the three subgraphs above, the blue line is the BC particle, the red line is the AE particle
and the yellow line is the SP particle. In the three subgraphs below, the orange line is the percentage difference between BC particle and AE particle(|AE-BC|/BC), and
the green line is the percentage difference between BC particle and SP particle(|SP-BC|/BC). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

difference of the scattering matrix parameters of the SP model and the
BC model are also significantly. The main reason is that as the frequency
decreases, the complex refractive index of raindrop particles signifi­
cantly increases. For the AE model and the BC model, their differences
reaching 10% in scattering phase functions.
For the AE model, when the particle size parameter is small, the
difference of the calculated scattering phase matrix is smaller due to the
higher similarity of the shapes obtained by the AE model and the BC
model, but the difference of the scattering phase matrices calculated by
the two models increases gradually with the increase of the particle size
parameter. For the SP model, due to the large difference between its
shape and the BC model, there is a large difference in the scattering
phase matrix results.
4.3. Comparative analysis of integrated scattering characteristics in single
particle
This section compares the scattering, extinction, and absorption
cross sections calculated from different raindrop particles, and their
relative differences are also calculated to analyze the effects caused by
particles’ different shapes. In this comparison, the equal volume radius
of the rain particles is set as 1.5 mm, 3 mm and 4.5 mm respectively, the
frequency of the incident wave is shown in Table 1, and complex
refractive index of the rain particle is adopted from Smith’s model. The
scattering, extinction and absorption cross sections obtained by different
rain shape models are shown in Figs. 9, 10 and 11, respectively,
At the particle equal volume radius of 1.5 mm, due to the similarity
of the particle shapes calculated by the three models, the scattering,
extinction and absorption cross-sections are also in strong coherence,
and the differences of the results calculated by the BC and AE models are
<2%. When the particle size rises to 3 mm, the difference between the
AE model and the BC model remains a low level, but the difference
between the SP model and the BC model increases obviously, and rea­
ches 30% when the frequency reaches about 10 GHz. For the absorption
cross section, the SP model results are generally lower. For the scattering
and extinction cross sections, the SP model results are higher for some
frequencies. When the particle size reached 4.5 mm, the difference of the
SP model from the BC model reached 40%, and the deviation of the AE
model from the BC model is in the range of 2% to 10%.
For the calculation of single-particle integral scattering characteris­
tics, the analytical results are similar to those of the scattering phase
matrix, and the results of the three models also have a strong coherence
when the particle size is small. As the particle size increases, the SP
model and the AE model gradually deviate from the BC model, where

8
J. Zhao et al.
Fig. 10. Comparison of the extinction cross section in the BC、AE and SP. In the three subgraphs above, the blue line is the BC particle, the red line is the AE particle
and the yellow line is the SP particle. In the three subgraphs below, the orange line is the percentage difference between BC particle and AE particle(|AE-BC|/BC), and
the green line is the percentage difference between BC particle and SP particle(|SP-BC|/BC). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
the difference of the SP model is generally larger, up to 40%, and the
difference of the AE model is smaller, between 2% and 10%.
5. Experiments
To facilitate the use of the database, we have created an interface to
calculate the group particle scattering characteristics, which can directly
obtain the scattering parameters of group particle by entering the
raindrop size distribution. Users can calculate the group particle scat­
tering parameters based on its own raindrop size distribution. Here is an
example of the calculation. The propagation coefficients of group par­
ticles are calculated and analyzed at different rainfall intensities and
different incident light frequencies. The particle shapes are set as the BC
model, and the particle equal volume radii is ranging from 0.05 to 4.5
mm. The attenuation coefficient Gext, scattering coefficient Gsca, and
backscattering coefficient Gbsca of the group particles are calculated as
∫∞
Gj (dB/km) = 4.343 × 10− 3 Qj (D)N(D)dD (21)
0
2
where Qj(D) (mm ) is the scattering cross-section, extinction cross-
section or backscatter cross-section of the raindrop with diameter D
(mm), and N(D) (m− 3 mm− 1) is the drop-size-distribution function, the
9
Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206
calculation formula is
N(D) = N0 Du e− λD
(22)
This spectral distribution uses the commonly known Gamma spectral
distribution, which is a better match for all types of rainfall. The pa­
rameters are referred to the parameter settings in Liu et al. (2013),
which are N0 (m-3 mm-1 ) = 1.98 × 104 × R-0.384 , λ(mm-1 ) = 5.38 ×
R -0.186
, u = 2.93 (R is rain intensity in mm/h). The calculations of
attenuation, scattering, and backscattering coefficients are shown in
Figs. 12, 13, and 14.
For the calculated extinction and scattering coefficients, the varia­
tion with rain intensity and frequency is basically consistent. From the
figure, it can be seen that rainfall has the strongest attenuation of
electromagnetic waves at 20-80GHz. The main reason is that with the
increase of particle size parameters, the extinction and absorption cross-
sections of single particles gradually tend to be constant. For the weather
radar band (2Ghz-10GHz), the attenuation coefficient is all <5 dB/km,
but when the incident light frequency raises to more than 20Ghz, the
attenuation coefficient is mainly 15–20 dB/km, which is 3–4 time higher
than that of weather radar band. For the backscattering coefficient, its
numerical data are mostly <0.6 dB/km. when the rainfall intensity is
above 50 mm/h and the frequency is around 10 GHz, the backscattering
J. Zhao et al. Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206

Fig. 11. Comparison of the absorption cross section in the BC、AE and SP. In the three subgraphs above, the blue line is the BC particle, the red line is the AE particle
and the yellow line is the SP particle. In the three subgraphs below, the orange line is the percentage difference between BC particle and AE particle(|AE-BC|/BC), and
the green line is the percentage difference between BC particle and SP particle(|SP-BC|/BC). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

coefficient contains a large numerical range, which is generally >0.8
dB/km. The backscattering coefficient is highest at the incident light
frequency of 10 GHz, up to about 1.4 dB/km.
6. Conclusions and future work
In this study, based on the IIM T-matrix method, a database of
scattering parameters for non-spherical raindrops has been developed.
The non-spherical particle model from Beard and Chuang (1990) was
selected. The scattering parameters database has a frequency coverage
of 3–1000 GHz and contains the usual bands of millimeter and sub-
millimeter wavelengths. To validate the reliability of the data calcu­
lated in the RP database, the calculated scattering phase matrix was
compared with the data in the database of Ekelund et al.; To quantita­
tively compare the effect of particle shape, a comparison of the scat­
tering phase matrix and the single-particle integrated scattering
characteristics for three particle shapes was presented; in order to sup­
port the applicability of RP database, we have created an interface to the
group particle scattering characteristics calculation program and given
an example of the calculation. Several conclusions were drawn and are
as follows:
(1) There is a good agreement between the RP database and database
built by Ekelund et al. The differences of the scattering phase
function are generally <5%, and the differences of the polariza­
tion characteristics calculation are generally <2%. The difference
of the scattering phase function may be due to the different
calculation models of the complex refractive index. From the
comparison, it can be found that the scattering data in the RP
database are accurate.
(2) There is a remarkable difference of the scattering characteristics
between those of the equal-volume spherical particles and the BC
model particles. When the particle equal-volume radius increases
up to 3 mm, the spherical particles are not applicable at all, and
the difference of the calculation results of BC model and SP model
reaches 30%. For a small equal volume radius, the results ob­
tained by the approximate ellipsoidal model and the BC model
are in high consistency, and their differences are between 1% and
2%. The difference gradually increases with the rise of the par­
ticle size, where the difference of the scattering phase matrix
reaches about 10%, and the difference of the single-particle in­
tegrated scattering characteristics is also in the range of 5% to
10%. It can be seen that as the frequency increases, the difference
caused by shape also increases. Therefore, when aiming for

10
J. Zhao et al.
Fig. 12. Extinction coefficient of group particles calculated from BC model.
Numerical size increases from cool to warm tones.
Fig. 13. Scattering coefficient of group particles calculated from BC model.
Numerical size increases from cool to warm tones.
computational accuracy or considering polarization, it is neces­
sary to use the BC model instead to calculate its scattering pa­
rameters. When there are more particles with radius >2 mm, the
spherical model starts to become unsuitable, especially when
there are more particles with radius >3 mm or the calculation
frequency is greater than 200GHZ, using BC model for calculation
is a better choice.
It is noted that the RP database developed in this study contains only
randomly oriented particles and a single orientation with its bottom
vertical to the incident light, and has a single setting for temperature. It
is planned to supplement the RP database with single-particle scattering
parameters at different orientations and temperatures; in addition, in
order to build a complete database system, we will try to establish a
database of ice crystal particle scattering parameters and merge it with
the RP database.
11
Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206
Fig. 14. Back Scattering coefficient of group particles calculated from BC
model. Numerical size increases from cool to warm tones.
Open research
The data and the program will be included in RP scattering database
that is available at Zenodo, using the database DOI https://doi.org/10.
5281/zenodo.7889256. Scattering paremeters data of all the models
shown here are distributed, i.e. the spheroid, ellipsoid and BC models.
The main parameters provided are the phase matrix and integrated
scattering characteristics (extinction cross-section, scattering cross-
section and absorption cross-section). The data are provided under the
CC BY 4.0, allowing the user to share and adapt the material, under the
conditions that appropriate credit is given and indication of any changes
made is given.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Jiaqi Zhao: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation.
Shuai Hu: Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Resources, Supervi­
sion, Writing – review & editing. Xichuan Liu: Conceptualization, Data
curation. Ruijun Dang: Funding acquisition, Resources, Validation. Yao
Xiao: Resources, Visualization.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
I have placed the link to the data in the manuscript.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foun­
dation of China (Grant 62105367, 42175154 and 42205122) and the
Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (2020JJ4662,
2021JJ40666).
References
Battaglia, A., Saavedra, P., Simmer, C., Rose, T., 2009. Rain observations by a
multifrequency dual-polarized radiometer. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 6 (2),
354–358. https://doi.org/10.1109/LGRS.2009.2013484.
J. Zhao et al.
Baum, B.A., Yang, P., Kattawar, G.W., Hu, Y.X., Mishchenko, M.I., Wei, H., et al., 2005.
Scattering and absorption property database for nonspherical ice particles in the
near-through far-infrared spectral region. Appl. Opt. 44 (26), 5512–5523. https://
doi.org/10.1364/AO.44.005512.
Bi, L., Yang, P., Kattawar, G.W., Mishchenko, M.I., 2013. Efficient implementation of the
invariant imbedding T-matrix method and the separation of variables method
applied to large non-spherical inhomogeneous particles. J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat.
Transf. 116 (2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2012.11.
Camille, B., Jean-François, M., Mathias, M., Jana, M., Stefan, A.B., Manfred, B., 2017a.
Information content on hydrometeors from millimeter and sub-millimeter
wavelengths. Tellus Ser. A Dyn. Meteorol. Oceanogr. 69 (1), 7198–7201. https://doi.
org/10.1080/16000870.2016.1271562.
Camille, B., Jean-François, M., Mathias, M., Jana, M., Stefan, B., Manfred, B., 2017b.
Information content on hydrometeors from millimeter and sub-millimeter
wavelengths. Tellus 69 (1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/16000870.2016.1271562.
Cheng, T.H., Gu, X.F., Yu, T., Tian, G.L., 2010. The reflection and polarization properties
of non-spherical aerosol particles. J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 111 (6),
895–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2009.11.019.
Chuang, C.C., Beard, K.V., 1990. A numerical model for the equilibrium shape of
electrified raindrops. J. Atmos. Sci. 47 (11), 1374–1389. https://doi.org/10.1175/
1520-0469(1990)047<1374:ANMFTE>2.0.CO;2.
Czekala, H., Crewell, S., Simmer, C., Thiele, A., 2001. Discrimination of cloud and rain
liquid water path by groundbased polarized microwave radiometry. Geophys. Res.
Lett. 28 (2), 267–270. https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL012247.
Dubovik, O., Sinyuk, A., Lapyonok, T., Holben, B.N., Mishchenko, M., Yang, P., et al.,
2006. Application of spheroid models to account for aerosol particle nonsphericity in
remote sensing of desert dust. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 111 (11), D11208. https://
doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006619.
Ekelund, R., Eriksson, P., Kahnert, M., 2020a. Microwave single-scattering properties of
non-spheroidal raindrops. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 13 (12), 6933–6944. https://doi.org/
10.5194/amt-13-6933-2020.
Ekelund, R., Eriksson, P., Pfreundschuh, S., 2020b. Using passive and active observations
at microwave and sub-millimetre wavelengths to constrain ice particle modelsm.
Atmos. Meas. Tech. 13 (2), 501–520. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-501-2020.
Eriksson, P., Ekelund, R., Mendrok, J., Brath, M., Lemke, O., Buehler, S., 2018. A general
database of hydrometeor single scattering properties at microwave and sub-
millimetre wavelengths. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 10 (3), 1301–1326. https://doi.org/
10.5194/essd-10-1301-2018.
Evans, K.F., Stephens, G.L., 1991. A new polarized atmospheric radiative transfer model.
J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 46 (5), 413–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-
4073(91)90043-P.
Fox, S., 2020a. An evaluation of radiative transfer simulations of cloudy scenes from a
numerical weather prediction model at sub-millimetre frequencies using airborne
observations. Remote Sens. 12 (17), 2758. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12172758.
Fox, S., 2020b. An evaluation of radiative transfer simulations of cloudy scenes from a
numerical weather prediction model at sub-millimetre frequencies using airborne
observations. Remote Sens. 12 (17), 2758. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12172758.
Fox, S., Mendrok, J., Eriksson, P., Ekelund, R., O’Shea, S., Bower, K.N., et al., 2019.
Airborne validation of radiative transfer modelling of ice clouds at millimetre and
sub-millimetre wavelengths. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 12 (3), 1599–1617. https://doi.
org/10.5194/amt-12-1599-2019.
Gong, J., Wu, D.L., Eriksson, P., 2021. The first global 883 GHz cloud ice survey: IceCube
Level 1 data calibration, processing and analysis. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 13 (11),
5369–5387. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-5369-2021.
12
Atmospheric Research 299 (2024) 107206
Hess, M., Wiegner, M., 1994. COP: a data library of optical properties of hexagonal ice
crystals. Appl. Opt. 33, 7740–7746.
Hu, S., Liu, L., Zeng, Q., Gao, T., Zhang, F., Liu, X., 2020. Efficient design of the
realization scheme of the Invariant Imbedding (IIM) T-matrix light scattering model
for atmospheric nonspherical particles. J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 251,
106999 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2020.106999.
Hu, S., Liu, L., Zeng, Q., Gao, T., Zhang, F., 2021. An investigation of the symmetrical
properties in the invariant imbedding T-matrix method for the nonspherical particles
with symmetrical geometry. J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 259, 107401
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2020.107401.
Li, M., Letu, H., Ishimoto, H., Li, S., Liu, L., Nakajima, T.Y., Ji, D., Shang, H., Shi, C.,
2023. Retrieval of terahertz ice cloud properties from airborne measurements based
on the irregularly shaped Voronoi ice scattering models. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 16,
331–353. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-331-2023.
Manić, S.B., Thurai, M., Bringi, V.N., Notaroš, B.M., 2018. Scattering calculations for
asymmetric raindrops during a line convection event: comparison with radar
measurements. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 35 (6), 1169–1180. https://doi.org/
10.1175/JTECH-D-17-0196.1.
Morgan, M.A., 1980. Finite element computation of microwave scattering by raindrops.
Radio Sci. 15 (6), 1109–1119. https://doi.org/10.1029/RS015i006p01109.
Oguchi, T., 1977. Scattering properties of Pruppacher-and-Pitter form raindrops and
cross polarization due to rain: Calculations at 11, 13, 19.3, and 34.8 GHz. Radio Sci.
12 (1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.1029/RS012i001p00041.
Panetta, L.R., Zhang, J., Bi, L., Yang, P., Tang, G., 2016. Light scattering by hexagonal ice
crystals with distributed inclusions. J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 178,
336–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jqsrt.2016.02.023.
Pruppacher, H.R., Beard, K.V., 1970. A wind tunnel investigation of the internal
circulation and shape of water drops falling at terminal velocity in air. Q. J. R.
Meteorol. Soc. 96 (408), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49709640807.
Ross, O.N., Bradley, S.G., 2002. Model for optical forward scattering by nonspherical
raindrops. Appl. Opt. 41 (24), 5130–5141. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.41.005130.
Ryde, J.W., 1946. The attenuation of centimetre radio waves and the echo intensities
resulting from atmospheric phenomena. Electr. Eng. 93 (1), 101–103. https://doi.
org/10.1049/ji-3a-1.1946.0029.
Teng, S.W., Hu, H.F., Liu, C., Hu, F.C., Wang, Z.H., Yin, Y., 2018. Numerical simulation of
raindrop scattering for C-band dual-polarization Doppler weather radar parameters.
J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transf. 213, 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jqsrt.2018.04.004.
Thurai, M., Huang, G.J., Bringi, V.N., Randeu, W.L., Schönhuber, M., 2007. Drop shapes,
model comparisons, and calculations of polarimetric radar parameters in rain. Am.
Meteorol. Soc. 24 (6), 1019–1032. https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH2051.1.
Thurai, M., Bringi, V.N., Manić, A.B., Šekeljić, N.J., Notaroš, B.M., 2014. Investigating
raindrop shapes, oscillation modes, and implications for radio wave propagation.
Radio Sci. 49 (10), 921–932. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014RS005503.
Uijlenhoet, R., Overeem, A., Leijnse, H., 2018. Opportunistic remote sensing of rainfall
using microwave links from cellular communication networks. Wiley Interdiscip.
Rev. Water 5 (4), e1289. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1289.
Yang, P., Liou, K., Bi, L., Liu, C., Yi, B., Baum, B.A., 2014. On the radiative properties of
ice clouds: Light scattering, remote sensing, and radiation parameterization. Adv.
Atmos. Sci. 32 (1), 32–63.
Liu, X.C., Gao, T.C., Liu, L., 2013. Effect of rainfall on laser transmission attenuation
based on non-spherical raindrops. Infrared Laser Eng. 42 (1), 167–173 (in Chinese).