Interference of some trace gases with ozone measurements by the KI method

Schenkel, Andreas; Broder, B.

doi:10.1016/0004-6981(82)90289-x

Cited by 38 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At that time the ash plume arrived from north-westerly direction at the Netherlands and Northern Germany. Part of the registered low ozone values maybe caused by SO 2 interfering with the wetchemical measurement: 1 ppb SO 2 is registered as −1 ppb O 3 (Schenkel and Broder, 1982). Effects of volcanic ash on the measurements can also not be excluded.…”

Section: Ozone Sondes and Total Column Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The launch on April 19th supported a flight campaign carried out by the Falcon research aircraft of the German Aerospace Center (DLR) in the afternoon around 14:15 UTC. Little is known about the impact of volcanic ash and/or volcanic sulphur dioxide (and precursor components) on ozone sonde measurements (Schenkel and Broder, 1982).…”

Section: Ozone Sondes and Total Column Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Eyjafjallajökull eruption in April 2010 – detection of volcanic plume using in-situ measurements, ozone sondes and lidar-ceilometer profiles

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Ozone Sondes and Total Column Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ozone Sondes and Total Column Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Eyjafjallajökull eruption in April 2010 – detection of volcanic plume using in-situ measurements, ozone sondes and lidar-ceilometer profiles

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This process converts the iodide ions to iodine, which was then measured by a coulometric method [Attmannspacher, 1971]. A chromium trioxide (CrO3) filter was added to the instrument in 1976 to remove sulphur dioxide (SO2), which can cause negative interference in ozone measurements [Attmannspacher et al, 1979;Attmannspacher and Hartrnannsgruber, 1980;Schenkel and Broder, 1982]. In 1976 a chemiluminescent sensor was installed at the observatory, and in 1978 a UVphotometer was installed [Attmannspacher and Hartmannsgvuber, 1980].…”

Section: Hohenpeissenberg Data Setmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The possible implications of this uncertainty for surface ozone trends at Hohenpeissenberg are discussed by Low et al [1990]. Unlike SO•, NO2 can cause positive interference in wet chemical sensors [Schenkel and Broder, 1982] Arkona before 1972 was negligible, but Crutzen [1988] pointed out that the surface ozone trend at this station may have been confounded by the introduction of the SO•. scrubber.…”

Section: Hohenpeissenberg Data Setmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in surface ozone at Hohenpeissenberg and Arkona

Low¹,

Davies²,

Kelly³

et al. 1990

J. Geophys. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variations in the 18‐year (1971–1988) Hohenpeissenberg (Federal Republic of Germany) and the 33‐year (1956–1988) Arkona (German Democratic Republic) surface ozone data sets are analyzed. Over the full period of the records (as made available to us), both stations, which are about 800 km apart, show a positive long‐term trend of about 1.0% per year (strongest in winter at Hohenpeissenberg and in spring at Arkona). There are, however, marked differences in the fluctuations over various subperiods at the two locations. For example, the Hohenpeissenberg data show a larger increase in mean surface ozone concentration in the 1970s (about 2.1% per year, strongest in winter) compared with that in the 1980s (about 0.5% per year, strongest in summer). The Arkona data show a significant linear increase from 1956 to 1979 (about 2.4% per year, strongest in winter in the 1960s and in summer in the 1970s) but a linear decrease in the 1980s (about −2.4% per year, strongest in winter) and over the period 1971–1988 (about −1.2% per year, strongest in autumn and weakest in spring). The decrease is caused by the considerably lower concentrations in the 1980–1985 period when concentrations declined at about −10% per year. Over the same period 1971–1988, the seasonal cycle at Hohenpeissenberg exhibits a summer maximum in July (with a broad peak), while that at Arkona displays a spring maximum in May (with a sharp peak). The causes of these differences are likely to be complex: a combination of photochemistry (which depends on the distribution of precursors, particularly NOx), differences in surface deposition, local departures in the atmospheric circulation and, possibly, data quality. The pre‐1976 Hohenpeissenberg data and the pre‐1972 Arkona data (before filters were used to remove SO2) and the post‐1982 Arkona data (after a new measuring instrument was installed) may need to be further scrutinized to ensure consistency in data quality.

show abstract

“…The uncertainty of ozonesonde measurements is typically larger in the troposphere than that in the stratosphere (Liu et al, 2009). It has been reported that the ECC sondes suffer interference from SO 2 (Flentje et al, 2010) with 1 ppb SO 2 being registered as −1 ppb ozone (Schenkel and Broder, 1982). Elevated SO 2 can be a concern for lidar-ozonesonde intercomparison for some li-dar wavelengths (e.g., 289-299 nm) because of the opposite signs of the measurement error arising from SO 2 for lidar and ozonesondes.…”

Section: Ozonesondesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying TOLNet ozone lidar accuracy during the 2014 DISCOVER-AQ and FRAPPÉ campaigns

Wang¹,

Newchurch²,

Alvarez³

et al. 2017

Atmos. Meas. Tech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The Tropospheric Ozone Lidar Network (TOLNet) is a unique network of lidar systems that measure highresolution atmospheric profiles of ozone. The accurate characterization of these lidars is necessary to determine the uniformity of the network calibration. From July to August 2014, three lidars, the TROPospheric OZone (TROPOZ) lidar, the Tunable Optical Profiler for Aerosol and oZone (TOPAZ) lidar, and the Langley Mobile Ozone Lidar (LMOL), of TOLNet participated in the Deriving Information on Surface conditions from Column and Vertically Resolved Observations Relevant to Air Quality (DISCOVER-AQ) mission and the Front Range Air Pollution and Photochemistry Éxperiment (FRAPPÉ) to measure ozone variations from the boundary layer to the top of the troposphere. This study presents the analysis of the intercomparison between the TROPOZ, TOPAZ, and LMOL lidars, along with comparisons between the lidars and other in situ ozone instruments including ozonesondes and a P-3B airborne chemiluminescence sensor. The TOLNet lidars measured vertical ozone structures with an accuracy generally better than ±15 % within the troposphere. Larger differences occur at some individual altitudes in both the near-field and far-field range of the lidar systems, largely as expected. In terms of column average, the TOLNet lidars measured ozone with an accuracy better than ±5 % for both the intercomparison between the lidars and between the lidars and other instruments. These results indicate that these three TOLNet lidars are suitable for use in air quality, satellite validation, and ozone modeling efforts.

show abstract

Interference of some trace gases with ozone measurements by the KI method

Cited by 38 publications

References 8 publications

The Eyjafjallajökull eruption in April 2010 – detection of volcanic plume using in-situ measurements, ozone sondes and lidar-ceilometer profiles

The Eyjafjallajökull eruption in April 2010 – detection of volcanic plume using in-situ measurements, ozone sondes and lidar-ceilometer profiles

Trends in surface ozone at Hohenpeissenberg and Arkona

Quantifying TOLNet ozone lidar accuracy during the 2014 DISCOVER-AQ and FRAPPÉ campaigns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About