3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- ItemNumber size distributions and seasonality of submicron particles in Europe 2008–2009(München : European Geopyhsical Union, 2011) Asmi, A.; Wiedensohler, A.; Laj, P.; Fjaeraa, A.-M.; Sellegri, K.; Birmili, W.; Weingartner, E.; Baltensperger, U.; Zdimal, V.; Zikova, N.; Putaud, J.-P.; Marinoni, A.; Tunved, P.; Hansson, H.-C.; Fiebig, M.; Kivekäs, N.; Lihavainen, H.; Asmi, E.; Ulevicius, V.; Aalto, P.P.; Swietlicki, E.; Kristensson, A.; Mihalopoulos, N.; Kalivitis, N.; Kalapov, I.; Kiss, G.; de Leeuw, G.; Henzing, B.; Harrison, R.M.; Beddows, D.; O'Dowd, C.; Jennings, S.G.; Flentje, H.; Weinhold, K.; Meinhardt, F.; Ries, L.; Kulmala, M.Two years of harmonized aerosol number size distribution data from 24 European field monitoring sites have been analysed. The results give a comprehensive overview of the European near surface aerosol particle number concentrations and number size distributions between 30 and 500 nm of dry particle diameter. Spatial and temporal distribution of aerosols in the particle sizes most important for climate applications are presented. We also analyse the annual, weekly and diurnal cycles of the aerosol number concentrations, provide log-normal fitting parameters for median number size distributions, and give guidance notes for data users. Emphasis is placed on the usability of results within the aerosol modelling community. We also show that the aerosol number concentrations of Aitken and accumulation mode particles (with 100 nm dry diameter as a cut-off between modes) are related, although there is significant variation in the ratios of the modal number concentrations. Different aerosol and station types are distinguished from this data and this methodology has potential for further categorization of stations aerosol number size distribution types. The European submicron aerosol was divided into characteristic types: Central European aerosol, characterized by single mode median size distributions, unimodal number concentration histograms and low variability in CCN-sized aerosol number concentrations; Nordic aerosol with low number concentrations, although showing pronounced seasonal variation of especially Aitken mode particles; Mountain sites (altitude over 1000 m a.s.l.) with a strong seasonal cycle in aerosol number concentrations, high variability, and very low median number concentrations. Southern and Western European regions had fewer stations, which decreases the regional coverage of these results. Aerosol number concentrations over the Britain and Ireland had very high variance and there are indications of mixed air masses from several source regions; the Mediterranean aerosol exhibit high seasonality, and a strong accumulation mode in the summer. The greatest concentrations were observed at the Ispra station in Northern Italy with high accumulation mode number concentrations in the winter. The aerosol number concentrations at the Arctic station Zeppelin in Ny-\AA lesund in Svalbard have also a strong seasonal cycle, with greater concentrations of accumulation mode particles in winter, and dominating summer Aitken mode indicating more recently formed particles. Observed particles did not show any statistically significant regional work-week or weekday related variation in number concentrations studied. Analysis products are made for open-access to the research community, available in a freely accessible internet site. The results give to the modelling community a reliable, easy-to-use and freely available comparison dataset of aerosol size distributions.
- 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.