ebooks logo journals logo reference works logo abstract databases logo
bullet  SIGN IN Register | Why Register? | Got a Voucher? alerts   marked lists   shopping cart 

informaworld

HOME   |   SEARCH   |   BROWSE
    Issues List       Latest Issue       Volume 42 Issue 10       Subscribe       Article       References       Related articles      
Publisher Logo Publication Cover
Search within this journal
iFirst
immediate access to the latest key research articles

An Ultrafine, Water-Based Condensation Particle Counter and its Evaluation under Field Conditions 

Authors: Kenjiro Iida a;  Mark R. Stolzenburg a;  Peter H. McMurry a;  James N. Smith b;  Frederick R. Quant c;  Derek R. Oberreit c;  Patricia B. Keady c;  Arantza Eiguren-Fernandez d;  Gregory S. Lewis e;  Nathan M. Kreisberg e; Susanne V. Hering e
Affiliations:   a Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
b National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
c Quant Technologies LLC, Blaine, Minnesota, USA
d University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA
e Aerosol Dynamics Inc., Berkeley, California, USA
DOI: 10.1080/02786820802339579
Publication Frequency: 12 issues per year
Published in: journal Aerosol Science and Technology, Volume 42, Issue 10 October 2008 , pages 862 - 871
First Published on: 01 October 2008
Formats available: HTML (English) : PDF (English)
You have: FREE ACCESS FREE ACCESS
Article Requests: Order Reprints : Request Permissions


Abstract

An ultrafine, water-based condensation particle counter (U-WCPC, TSI Model 3786) has been compared to a butanol-based ultrafine counter (U-BCPC, TSI Model 3025) for measurement of atmospheric and freeway-tunnel aerosols. The U-WCPC utilizes a warm, wet-walled growth tube to activate and grow particles through water condensation in a laminar-flow. It has an aerosol sampling rate of 0.3 L/min, and a nominal detection limit near 3 nm. Several field comparisons were made to the butanol-based instrument with the same nominal detection limit. For measurements of size-selected aerosols with diameters of 5 nm and larger the two instruments generally agreed, with a mean response within 5%. At 3 nm particle size differences were observed, and these differences varied with the data set. Measurements of ambient aerosol in Boulder, Colorado showed higher counting efficiency at 3 nm with the U-BCPC, while in a California freeway tunnel the opposite trend was observed, with higher counting efficiencies at 3 nm observed by the U-WCPC. For direct measurement of atmospheric aerosols, the two types of instruments yielded equivalent concentrations, independent of particle number concentration.
view references (26)
Bookmark with:
  • CiteULike
  • Del.icio.us
  • BibSonomy
  • Connotea
  • More bookmarks
Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Accessibility | RSS
FAQs in: English . Français . Español . 中文(简体和繁體)
© 2009 Informa plc