<p>When you want to take into account as many contributing factors as possible, you will need a complete <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_radiative_transfer_codes" rel="nofollow noreferrer">radiative transfer model</a>, preferably a physics-based one (as opposed to fast radiative transfer models that are often incorporated into weather or climate models).</p>
<p>A radiative transfer model takes as input atmospheric composition in one or three dimensions, scattering databases for suspended matter such as aerosols or clouds (if the model includes scattering from particles), a molecular spectroscopic database such as HITRAN, as well as many configuration parameters.  Some models are only valid for certain areas of the atmospheric spectrum.  Some make line-by-line calculations (where &quot;line&quot; here means a location in the spectrum), others make broadband estimates directly.  Examples of well-known line-by-line models that cover visible wavelengths include <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LBLRTM" rel="nofollow noreferrer">LBLRTM</a> and <a href="http://www.libradtran.org/doku.php" rel="nofollow noreferrer">LibRadtran</a>. They may not be able to calculate visibility directly, but they should be able to calculate those quantities from which visibility can be estimated.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-23T11:18:27.280Z
Thanks, this is a great insight.
Fima Rotter
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-23T11:24:29.037Z
Such models, however, are not feasible for my use-case, and I am not versed enough in the sciences to deduce a simpler solution for visibility from such complex models.
However now I understand that I phrased my question incorrectly.
What I actually looking for is an analytical formula, that gives a sufficiently good estimate for horizontal visibility, and that takes into account multiple parameters from a single sampling point (or homogeneous atmosphere)
Fima Rotter
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-04-21T10:51:11.623Z
2022-04-21T13:47:36.607Z
2022-04-21T13:47:36.607Z
gerrit
<p>This is best answered with the Koschmeider Equation. The Koschmeider Equation which estimates visible range based on the particulate matter is as follows:</p>
<p>Koschmeider Equation (units in ft. or m) = (1200 km μg/m^3 )/(particle concentration (μg/m^3 ) )</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-06T08:30:41.030Z
A reference for this would improve the answer.
Fred
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-05T19:45:17.673Z
2022-07-05T19:45:17.673Z
MeteorologyLover06
<p>I have found here an answer that provides formula that only takes into account vapors, pressure and temperature - <a href="https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/7517/what-is-the-formula-used-for-atmospheric-visibility">What is the formula used for atmospheric visibility?</a></p>
<p>Is there an approach that also considers particulate matter and gases concentration? I am actually looking to account for as many contributing factors as possible, to achieve the best estimation, such as hydrometeors density,and whatever else may be related.</p>

<meteorology><atmosphere-modelling><air-pollution><atmospheric-dust>
Estimating meteorological visibility from air chemical and particulate composition
Fima Rotter
# Estimating meteorological visibility from air chemical and particulate composition

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-04-21)

I have found here an answer that provides formula that only takes into account vapors, pressure and temperature - [What is the formula used for atmospheric visibility?](https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/7517/what-is-the-formula-used-for-atmospheric-visibility)

Is there an approach that also considers particulate matter and gases concentration? I am actually looking to account for as many contributing factors as possible, to achieve the best estimation, such as hydrometeors density,and whatever else may be related.

**Tags:** meteorology, atmosphere-modelling, air-pollution, atmospheric-dust


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2022-04-21. Score: 4

When you want to take into account as many contributing factors as possible, you will need a complete [radiative transfer model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_radiative_transfer_codes), preferably a physics-based one (as opposed to fast radiative transfer models that are often incorporated into weather or climate models).

A radiative transfer model takes as input atmospheric composition in one or three dimensions, scattering databases for suspended matter such as aerosols or clouds (if the model includes scattering from particles), a molecular spectroscopic database such as HITRAN, as well as many configuration parameters. Some models are only valid for certain areas of the atmospheric spectrum. Some make line-by-line calculations (where "line" here means a location in the spectrum), others make broadband estimates directly. Examples of well-known line-by-line models that cover visible wavelengths include [LBLRTM](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LBLRTM) and [LibRadtran](http://www.libradtran.org/doku.php). They may not be able to calculate visibility directly, but they should be able to calculate those quantities from which visibility can be estimated.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks, this is a great insight.  
> **username_0**: Such models, however, are not feasible for my use-case, and I am not versed enough in the sciences to deduce a simpler solution for visibility from such complex models. However now I understand that I phrased my question incorrectly. What I actually looking for is an analytical formula, that gives a sufficiently good estimate for horizontal visibility, and that takes into account multiple parameters from a single sampling point (or homogeneous atmosphere)  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-07-05. Score: 1

This is best answered with the Koschmeider Equation. The Koschmeider Equation which estimates visible range based on the particulate matter is as follows:

Koschmeider Equation (units in ft. or m) = (1200 km μg/m^3 )/(particle concentration (μg/m^3 ) )

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: A reference for this would improve the answer.  

---

