Comparability of mobility particle sizers and diffusion chargers

Kaminski, Heinz; Kuhlbusch, Thomas A. J.; Rath, Stefan; Götz, U.; Sprenger, Manfred; Wels, Detlef; Polloczek, Jens; Bachmann, V.; Dziurowitz, Nico; Kiesling, Heinz-Jürgen; Schwiegelshohn, Angelika; Monz, Christian; Dahmann, D.; Asbach, Christof

doi:10.1016/j.jaerosci.2012.10.008

Cited by 98 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even larger differences were observed in prior research using titanium dioxide agglomerates, wherein the peak modal concentration differed by over a factor of three, but in those experiments the FMPS exhibited consistently higher modal peak concentrations than an SMPS incorporating an isobutanol-based CPC and a long-DMA (Leskinen et al 2012). Further, in that research and in a study of soot particles (Kaminski et al 2013), both the GMD and σ g from an FMPS were negatively biased relative to measurements using an SMPS. The variation in GMD for the experiment shown in Figures 3c and d is ±4.2% across all five instruments, and thus is of larger magnitude than uncertainties in sizing due to variations in DMA voltage to size conversions with atmospheric pressure (which are reported to be 1% for a 3 kPa pressure fluctuation [Wiedensohler et al 2012]), but within the uncertainty deriving from applying the FMPS discretization to the SMPS measurements.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…Previous research has focused on particle morphology as a key determinant of discrepancies between PNSD from FMPS and SMPS (Asbach et al 2009;Kaminski et al 2013). This study shows that particles of a similar nature (i.e., inorganic salts in aqueous suspension) also produce different results between SMPS systems (and relative to an FMPS).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An in situ study conducted with a mixed particle population found that when a diffusion loss correction was applied to an SMPS (TSI EC3080, nano-DMA TSI 3085) and a TSI 3786 ultrafine water-based CPC) the total number concentration for Dp = 6-100 nm was an average of 15% above that reported by a colocated FMPS (Jeong and Evans 2009), and a different study found that for Dp < 300 nm the SMPS overestimated gravimetric mass concentrations by a factor of 1.5-1.6 (Sioutas et al 1999). Evidence that relative instrument performance is a function of aerosol particle morphology has evolved in a number of studies (Kaminski et al 2013;Asbach et al 2009). One laboratory study found that an PNSD from TSI SMPS systems exhibited greater variations with particle type than those from an FMPS, but also reported clear evidence that SMPS and FMPS respond differently to NaCl and diesel soot particles (Asbach et al 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…One laboratory study found that an PNSD from TSI SMPS systems exhibited greater variations with particle type than those from an FMPS, but also reported clear evidence that SMPS and FMPS respond differently to NaCl and diesel soot particles (Asbach et al 2009). While a further study which compared PNSD and total number concentrations for NaCl (modal diameter 40 nm), Di-Ethyl-Hexyl-Sebacate (250 nm) and soot (100 nm or 60 nm) particles as measured using Grimm SMPS, TSI SMPS, and TSI FMPS along with an array of unipolar diffusion-based instruments found that the consistency was greatest in comparisons of like instruments (e.g., SMPS agree best with other SMPS, and FMPS with FMPS) but that size distributions between the SMPS and FMPS differed by up to ±30% in terms of GMD (Kaminski et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Laboratory Comparison of Real-Time Measurement Methods for 10–100-nm Particle Size Distributions

Hornsby

Pryor

2014

Aerosol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present information regarding the relative performance of five TSI particle sizing instruments when presented with several log-normally distributed particle populations that vary in terms of composition, concentration, and modal mean diameter (in the range of 10-100 nm) in a controlled laboratory environment. In experiments conducted with NaCl, NaNO 3 , and organic aerosols, across a total particle concentration suite ranging from approximately 1 × 10 4 cm −3 to 1 × 10 6 cm −3 , total number concentrations of sub-100-nm diameter particles from four SMPS systems and an FMPS all fall within ±50% of each other (and generally are within ±30%). However, larger discrepancies are evident in the particle size distribution, particularly for the NaCl particles, with an SMPS operated with a water-based CPC exhibiting large negative bias in modal peak concentrations relative to the isobutanol-based SMPS systems and the FMPS. Much closer agreement is found for NaNO 3 particles, although the SMPS systems tended to exhibit higher modal peak concentrations, and a slight shifting toward lower modal peak diameter than the FMPS.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Laboratory Comparison of Real-Time Measurement Methods for 10–100-nm Particle Size Distributions

Hornsby

Pryor

2014

Aerosol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As more data became available from EEPS users, it became evident that the default matrix did not accurately report the size distribution for near-spherical particles, and discrepancies relative to reference methods, such as the SMPS, were even more severe when measuring soot particles characterized by more fractal morphologies (Rubino et al 2005;Wang et al 2009;Jeong and Evans, 2009;Asbach et al 2009;Kaminski et al 2013;Quiros et al 2014). Generally, the EEPS agrees better with the SMPS for compact shape particles <»75 nm, such as NaCl aerosol, but much narrower COMPARISON OF EEPS AND SMPS MEASUREMENTS distributions are reported for EEPS when characterizing more fractal-like particles, such as diesel exhaust (Asbach et al 2009;Kaminski et al 2013;Zimmerman et al 2014). Wang et al (Submitteda) showed that the geometric mean diameters (GMDs) measured by EEPS agreed with those by SMPS within 15% for diesel engine exhaust particles <50 nm, but underestimated by 20-50% for larger particles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Vehicle Exhaust Particle Size Distributions Measured by SMPS and EEPS During Steady-State Conditions

Xue

Wang

et al. 2015

Aerosol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fast-sizing spectrometers, such as the TSI Engine Exhaust Particle Sizer (EEPS), have been widely used to measure transient particle size distributions of vehicle exhaust. Recently, size distributions measured during different test cycles have begun to be used for calculating suspended particulate mass; however, several recent evaluations have shown some deficiencies in this approach and discrepancies relative to the gravimetric reference method. The EEPS converts electrical charge carried by particles into size distributions based on mobility classification and a specific calibration, and TSI recently released a matrix optimized for vehicle emissions as described by Wang et al. (Submitteda). This study evaluates the performance of the new matrix (soot matrix) relative to the original matrix (default matrix) and reference size distributions measured by a scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS). Steady-state particle size distributions were generated from the following five sources to evaluate exhaust particulates with various morphologies estimated by mass-mobility scaling exponent: (1) A diesel generator operating on ultralow sulfur diesel, (2) a diesel generator operating on biodiesel, (3) a gasoline direct-injection vehicle operating at two speeds, (4) a conventional port-fuel injection gasoline vehicle, and (4) a light-duty diesel (LDD) vehicle equipped with a diesel particulate filter. Generally, the new soot matrix achieved much better agreement with the SMPS reference for particles smaller than 30 nm and larger than 100 nm, and also broadened the accumulation mode distribution that was previously too narrow using the default matrix. However, EEPS distributions still did not agree with SMPS reference measurements when challenged by a strong nucleation mode during high-load operation of the LDD vehicle. This work quantifies the range of accuracy that can be expected when measuring particle size distribution, number concentration, and integrated particle mass of vehicle emissions when using the new static calibration derived based on the properties of classical diesel soot.

show abstract

Rapidly evolving ultrafine and fine mode biomass smoke physical properties: Comparing laboratory and field results

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Combining field and laboratory results, we present biomass smoke physical properties. We report sub-0.56 μm diameter (D p ) particle sizing (fast mobility particle sizer, FMPS) plus light absorption and scattering at 870 nm (photoacoustic extinctiometer). For D p < 200 nm, the FMPS characterized sizing within ±20% compared to standards. As compared to the traditional scanning mobility particle sizer, the FMPS responded most accurately to single-mode polydispersions with mean D p < 200 nm, which characterized the smoke sampled here. Smoke was measured from laboratory fresh emissions (seconds to hours old), the High Park Fire (hours to < 1 day), and from regional biomass burning (several days). During a High Park Fire episode, light extinction rapidly reached a maximum of σ ep = 569 ± 21 Mm À1 (10 min) with aerosol single scattering albedo peaking at ω = 0.955 ± 0.004. Concurrently, number concentration and size peaked with maximum D p = 126 nm and a unimodal distribution with σ g = 1.5. Long-range transported smoke was substantially diluted (N tot factor of 7 lower) and shifted larger (maximum D p = 143) and wider (σ g = 2.2). We compared ambient data to laboratory burns with representative western U.S. forest fuels (coniferous species Ponderosa pine and Alaska black spruce). Smoldering pine produced an aerosol dominated by larger, more strongly light scattering particles (D p > 100 nm), while flaming combustion produced very high number concentrations of smaller (D p~5 0 nm) absorbing particles. Due to smoldering and particle growth processes, D p approached 100 nm within 3 h after emission. Increased particle cross-sectional area and Mie scattering efficiency shifted the relative importance of light absorption (flaming maximum) and light scattering (smoldering maximum), increasing ω over time. Measurements showed a consistent picture of smoke properties from emission to aging. CARRICO ET AL.RAPIDLY EVOLVING BIOMASS SMOKE 5750

show abstract

Comparability of mobility particle sizers and diffusion chargers

Cited by 98 publications

References 44 publications

A Laboratory Comparison of Real-Time Measurement Methods for 10–100-nm Particle Size Distributions

A Laboratory Comparison of Real-Time Measurement Methods for 10–100-nm Particle Size Distributions

Comparison of Vehicle Exhaust Particle Size Distributions Measured by SMPS and EEPS During Steady-State Conditions

Rapidly evolving ultrafine and fine mode biomass smoke physical properties: Comparing laboratory and field results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About