Browsing by Author "Henzing, J.S."
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemCharacterization and intercomparison of aerosol absorption photometers: Result of two intercomparison workshops(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2011) Müller, T.; Henzing, J.S.; de Leeuw, G.; Wiedensohler, A.; Alastuey, A.; Angelov, H.; Bizjak, M.; Collaud Coen, M.; Engström, J.E.; Gruening, C.; Hillamo, R.; Hoffer, A.; Imre, K.; Ivanow, P.; Jennings, G.; Sun, J.Y.; Kalivitis, N.; Karlsson, H.; Komppula, M.; Laj, P.; Li, S.-M.; Lunder, C.; Marinoni, A.; Martins dos Santos, S.; Moerman, M.; Nowak, A.; Ogren, J.A.; Petzold, A.; Pichon, J.M.; Rodriquez, S.; Sharma, S.; Sheridan, P.J.; Teinilä, K.; Tuch, T.; Viana, M.; Virkkula, A.; Weingartner, E.; Wilhelm, R.; Wang, Y.Q.Absorption photometers for real time application have been available since the 1980s, but the use of filter-based instruments to derive information on aerosol properties (absorption coefficient and black carbon, BC) is still a matter of debate. Several workshops have been conducted to investigate the performance of individual instruments over the intervening years. Two workshops with large sets of aerosol absorption photometers were conducted in 2005 and 2007. The data from these instruments were corrected using existing methods before further analysis. The inter-comparison shows a large variation between the responses to absorbing aerosol particles for different types of instruments. The unit to unit variability between instruments can be up to 30% for Particle Soot Absorption Photometers (PSAPs) and Aethalometers. Multi Angle Absorption Photometers (MAAPs) showed a variability of less than 5%. Reasons for the high variability were identified to be variations in sample flow and spot size. It was observed that different flow rates influence system performance with respect to response to absorption and instrumental noise. Measurements with non absorbing particles showed that the current corrections of a cross sensitivity to particle scattering are not sufficient. Remaining cross sensitivities were found to be a function of the total particle load on the filter. The large variation between the response to absorbing aerosol particles for different types of instruments indicates that current correction functions for absorption photometers are not adequate.
- ItemIntercomparison and evaluation of global aerosol microphysical properties among AeroCom models of a range of complexity(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2014) Mann, G.W.; Carslaw, K.S.; Reddington, C.L.; Pringle, K.J.; Schulz, M.; Asmi, A.; Spracklen, D.V.; Ridley, D.A.; Woodhouse, M.T.; Lee, L.A.; Zhang, K.; Ghan, S.J.; Easter, R.C.; Liu, X.; Stier, P.; Lee, Y.H.; Adams, P.J.; Tost, H.; Lelieveld, J.; Bauer, S.E.; Tsigaridis, K.; van Noije, T.P.C.; Strunk, A.; Vignati, E.; Bellouin, N.; Dalvi, M.; Johnson, C.E.; Bergman, T.; Kokkola, H.; von Salzen, K.; Yu, F.; Luo, G.; Petzold, A.; Heintzenberg, J.; Clarke, A.; Ogren, J.A.; Gras, J.; Baltensperger, U.; Kaminski, U.; Jennings, S.G.; O'Dowd, C.D.; Harrison, R.M.; Beddows, D.C.S.; Kulmala, M.; Viisanen, Y.; Ulevicius, V.; Mihalopoulos, N.; Zdimal, V.; Fiebig, M.; Hansson, H.-C.; Swietlicki, E.; Henzing, J.S.Many of the next generation of global climate models will include aerosol schemes which explicitly simulate the microphysical processes that determine the particle size distribution. These models enable aerosol optical properties and cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) concentrations to be determined by fundamental aerosol processes, which should lead to a more physically based simulation of aerosol direct and indirect radiative forcings. This study examines the global variation in particle size distribution simulated by 12 global aerosol microphysics models to quantify model diversity and to identify any common biases against observations. Evaluation against size distribution measurements from a new European network of aerosol supersites shows that the mean model agrees quite well with the observations at many sites on the annual mean, but there are some seasonal biases common to many sites. In particular, at many of these European sites, the accumulation mode number concentration is biased low during winter and Aitken mode concentrations tend to be overestimated in winter and underestimated in summer. At high northern latitudes, the models strongly underpredict Aitken and accumulation particle concentrations compared to the measurements, consistent with previous studies that have highlighted the poor performance of global aerosol models in the Arctic. In the marine boundary layer, the models capture the observed meridional variation in the size distribution, which is dominated by the Aitken mode at high latitudes, with an increasing concentration of accumulation particles with decreasing latitude. Considering vertical profiles, the models reproduce the observed peak in total particle concentrations in the upper troposphere due to new particle formation, although modelled peak concentrations tend to be biased high over Europe. Overall, the multi-model-mean data set simulates the global variation of the particle size distribution with a good degree of skill, suggesting that most of the individual global aerosol microphysics models are performing well, although the large model diversity indicates that some models are in poor agreement with the observations. Further work is required to better constrain size-resolved primary and secondary particle number sources, and an improved understanding of nucleation and growth (e.g. the role of nitrate and secondary organics) will improve the fidelity of simulated particle size distributions.
- ItemNovel insights on new particle formation derived from a pan-european observing system(London : Nature Publishing Group, 2018) Dall’Osto, M.; Beddows, D.C.S.; Asmi, A.; Poulain, L.; Hao, L.; Freney, E.; Allan, J.D.; Canagaratna, M.; Crippa, M.; Bianchi, F.; de Leeuw, G.; Eriksson, A.; Swietlicki, E.; Hansson, H.C.; Henzing, J.S.; Granier, C.; Zemankova, K.; Laj, P.; Onasch, T.; Prevot, A.; Putaud, J. P.; Sellegri, K.; Vidal, M.; Virtanen, A.; Simo, R.; Worsnop, D.; O’Dowd, C.; Kulmala, M.; Harrison, Roy M.The formation of new atmospheric particles involves an initial step forming stable clusters less than a nanometre in size (<~1 nm), followed by growth into quasi-stable aerosol particles a few nanometres (~1-10 nm) and larger (>~10 nm). Although at times, the same species can be responsible for both processes, it is thought that more generally each step comprises differing chemical contributors. Here, we present a novel analysis of measurements from a unique multi-station ground-based observing system which reveals new insights into continental-scale patterns associated with new particle formation. Statistical cluster analysis of this unique 2-year multi-station dataset comprising size distribution and chemical composition reveals that across Europe, there are different major seasonal trends depending on geographical location, concomitant with diversity in nucleating species while it seems that the growth phase is dominated by organic aerosol formation. The diversity and seasonality of these events requires an advanced observing system to elucidate the key processes and species driving particle formation, along with detecting continental scale changes in aerosol formation into the future.
- ItemPrimary versus secondary contributions to particle number concentrations in the European boundary layer(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2011) Reddington, C.L.; Carslaw, K.S.; Spracklen, D.V.; Frontoso, M.G.; Collins, L.; Merikanto, J.; Minikin, A.; Hamburger, T.; Coe, H.; Kulmala, M.; Aalto, P.; Flentje, H.; Plass-Dülmer, C.; Birmili, W.; Wiedensohler, A.; Wehner, B.; Tuch, T.; Sonntag, A.; O'Dowd, C.D.; Jennings, S.G.; Dupuy, R.; Baltensperger, U.; Weingartner, E.; Hansson, H.-C.; Tunved, P.; Laj, P.; Sellegri, K.; Boulon, J.; Putaud, J.-P.; Gruening, C.; Swietlicki, E.; Roldin, P.; Henzing, J.S.; Moerman, M.; Mihalopoulos, N.; Kouvarakis, G.; Ždímal, V.; Zíková, N.; Marinoni, A.; Bonasoni, P.; Duchi, R.It is important to understand the relative contribution of primary and secondary particles to regional and global aerosol so that models can attribute aerosol radiative forcing to different sources. In large-scale models, there is considerable uncertainty associated with treatments of particle formation (nucleation) in the boundary layer (BL) and in the size distribution of emitted primary particles, leading to uncertainties in predicted cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) concentrations. Here we quantify how primary particle emissions and secondary particle formation influence size-resolved particle number concentrations in the BL using a global aerosol microphysics model and aircraft and ground site observations made during the May 2008 campaign of the European Integrated Project on Aerosol Cloud Climate Air Quality Interactions (EUCAARI). We tested four different parameterisations for BL nucleation and two assumptions for the emission size distribution of anthropogenic and wildfire carbonaceous particles. When we emit carbonaceous particles at small sizes (as recommended by the Aerosol Intercomparison project, AEROCOM), the spatial distributions of campaign-mean number concentrations of particles with diameter >50 nm (N50) and >100 nm (N100) were well captured by the model (R2≥0.8) and the normalised mean bias (NMB) was also small (−18% for N50 and −1% for N100). Emission of carbonaceous particles at larger sizes, which we consider to be more realistic for low spatial resolution global models, results in equally good correlation but larger bias (R2≥0.8, NMB = −52% and −29%), which could be partly but not entirely compensated by BL nucleation. Within the uncertainty of the observations and accounting for the uncertainty in the size of emitted primary particles, BL nucleation makes a statistically significant contribution to CCN-sized particles at less than a quarter of the ground sites. Our results show that a major source of uncertainty in CCN-sized particles in polluted European air is the emitted size of primary carbonaceous particles. New information is required not just from direct observations, but also to determine the "effective emission size" and composition of primary particles appropriate for different resolution models.