2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- 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.
- ItemIntercomparison of air ion spectrometers: An evaluation of results in varying conditions(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2011) Gagné, S.; Lehtipalo, K.; Manninen, H.E.; Nieminen, T.; Schobesberger, S.; Franchin, A.; Yli-Juuti, T.; Boulon, J.; Sonntag, A.; Mirme, S.; Mirme, A.; Hõrrak, U.; Petäjä, T.; Asmi, E.; Kulmala, M.We evaluated 11 air ion spectrometers from Airel Ltd. after they had spent one year in field measurements as a part of the EUCAARI project: 5 Air Ion Spectrometers (AIS), 5 Neutral cluster and Air Ion Spectrometers (NAIS) and one Airborne NAIS (ANAIS). This is the first time that an ANAIS is evaluated and compared so extensively. The ion spectrometers' mobility and concentration accuracy was evaluated. Their measurements of ambient air were compared between themselves and to reference instruments: a Differential Mobility Particle Sizer (DMPS), a Balanced Scanning Mobility Analyzer (BSMA), and an Ion-DMPS. We report on the simultaneous measurement of a new particle formation (NPF) event by all 11 instruments and the 3 reference instruments. To our knowledge, it is the first time that the size distribution of ions and particles is measured by so many ion spectrometers during a NPF event. The new particle formation rates (~0.2 cm−3 s−1 for ions and ~2 cm−3 s−1 for particles) and growth rates (~25 nm h−1 in the 3–7 nm size range) were calculated for all the instruments. The NAISs and the ANAIS gave higher concentrations and formation rates than the AISs. For example, the AISs agreed with the BSMA within 11 % and 28 % for negative and positive ion concentration respectively, whereas the NAISs agreed within 23 % and 29 %. Finally, based on the results presented here, we give guidelines for data evaluation, when data from different individual ion spectrometers are compared.