2018
DOI: 10.6028/nist.tn.1989
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

NIST interlaboratory study of aerosol absorption measurements using photoacoustic spectroscopy

Abstract: The National Institute of Standards and Technology coordinated an interlaboratory study for laboratories that use photoacoustic spectroscopy to measure and report aerosol absorption. This report describes the design and results for the NIST Interlaboratory Study of Aerosol Absorption Measurements using Photoacoustic Spectroscopy from twelve participating laboratories using a material that was characterized and distributed by NIST on June 12, 2017. Participants were requested to provide measurement results by A… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The resulting correlations at λ = 532 nm were C abs = (5.28 ± 0.41) × 10 −14 m 2 · ( D m /250 nm) 2.51 ± 0.14 = (1.14 ± 0.13) × 10 −14 · ( m m (fg)) 0.816 ± 0.034 for (150 ≤ D m ≤ 500) nm, where D m is the particle mobility diameter (i.e., particle diameter from a differential mobility analyzer with a bipolar charger, which size-selects aerosol of known electrical mobility) and m m is the corresponding particle mass (based on D m ). Using these correlations and the calculated value for trueC¯abs of 1.485 × 10 −14 m 2 (as based on the measured particle size distribution for this study and given refractive index, see Table 3), D m = 150.8 nm (within the range of the aerosol geometric mean mobility diameter reported in Zangmeister and Radney (2018) and similar to the surface-area mean diameter, D 20 = 156.0 nm) and m m = 1.38 fg. Note that the average geometric mean mobility diameter among the 11 reported values was 134.0 nm, compared to 136.7 nm for this investigation.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 55%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The resulting correlations at λ = 532 nm were C abs = (5.28 ± 0.41) × 10 −14 m 2 · ( D m /250 nm) 2.51 ± 0.14 = (1.14 ± 0.13) × 10 −14 · ( m m (fg)) 0.816 ± 0.034 for (150 ≤ D m ≤ 500) nm, where D m is the particle mobility diameter (i.e., particle diameter from a differential mobility analyzer with a bipolar charger, which size-selects aerosol of known electrical mobility) and m m is the corresponding particle mass (based on D m ). Using these correlations and the calculated value for trueC¯abs of 1.485 × 10 −14 m 2 (as based on the measured particle size distribution for this study and given refractive index, see Table 3), D m = 150.8 nm (within the range of the aerosol geometric mean mobility diameter reported in Zangmeister and Radney (2018) and similar to the surface-area mean diameter, D 20 = 156.0 nm) and m m = 1.38 fg. Note that the average geometric mean mobility diameter among the 11 reported values was 134.0 nm, compared to 136.7 nm for this investigation.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 55%
“…This may be an artifact of the larger uncertainty associated with estimating the particle mass on the lighter coated filters. However, this observed change in c abs with mass loading may be evidence that the underlying particle size distribution is also a function of loading (assumed to be untrue) since at λ = 532 nm, c abs for the carbon-black particles measured presently is size dependent (Zangmeister and Radney 2018). The table also provides an estimate of the corresponding decrease in particle number concentration (as determined from the above-mentioned definition for α p ) for each filter.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…and that has a known constant refractive index for several years. Zangmeister and Radney (2018) are currently developing a substance that can be atomized from aqueous solution that would have a constant known refractive index and could eventually be a NIST aerosol absorption standard, but at this point that approach still requires selection of a monodisperse distribution. This paper presents a novel calibration technique that utilizes polydisperse absorbing aerosol and does not require a substance with a known refractive index.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%