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      
<< firstfirst   < prevprev   Table of contentstoc   next >next   last >>last
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