Comparison of sampling methods for Carbonaceous aerosols in ambient air

S. V. Hering, B. R. Appel, W. Cheng, F. Salaymeh, S. H P A Cadle Mulawa, T. A. Cahill, A. Eldred, M. Surovik, D. Fitz, J. E. Howes, K. T. Knapp, L. Stockburger, B. J. Turpin, James Huntzicker, X. Q. Zhang, P. H. McMurry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

67 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Measurement methods for fine particle carbon were compared under field sampling conditions. Sampling methods included filtration, impaction, and adsorptioncorrected filtration. Systems were operated side-by-side for nine consecutive days in the Los Angeles Basin. Analytical M methods were compared separately. For organic carbon and total carbon, ambient measurements showed greater variability than could be accounted for by differences in analytical methods, and these differences are attributed to sampling methodology. The highest reported concentrations were obtained by quartz filter sampling; the lowest were from the sum of the impactor stages (excluding the quartz alterfilters). Positive artifact from the adsorption of gaseous vapors on quartz fiber filters was significant. However, correction for vapor adsorption by subtraction of the carbon value on the second of two filters in series did not completely elimenate the dependence of the apparent total aerosol carbon concentration on filter face velocity or sample duration.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)200-213
Number of pages14
JournalAerosol Science and Technology
Volume12
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1990
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Aerosols
ambient air
Quartz
Carbon
aerosol
Sampling
filter
carbon
sampling
quartz
Air
Vapors
adsorption
Adsorption
measurement method
Organic carbon
Particles (particulate matter)
artifact
analytical method
organic carbon

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Science(all)
  • Environmental Chemistry
  • Mechanical Engineering
  • Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)

Cite this

Hering, S. V., Appel, B. R., Cheng, W., Salaymeh, F., Cadle Mulawa, S. H. P. A., Cahill, T. A., ... McMurry, P. H. (1990). Comparison of sampling methods for Carbonaceous aerosols in ambient air. Aerosol Science and Technology, 12(1), 200-213.

Comparison of sampling methods for Carbonaceous aerosols in ambient air. / Hering, S. V.; Appel, B. R.; Cheng, W.; Salaymeh, F.; Cadle Mulawa, S. H P A; Cahill, T. A.; Eldred, A.; Surovik, M.; Fitz, D.; Howes, J. E.; Knapp, K. T.; Stockburger, L.; Turpin, B. J.; Huntzicker, James; Zhang, X. Q.; McMurry, P. H.

In: Aerosol Science and Technology, Vol. 12, No. 1, 01.1990, p. 200-213.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hering, SV, Appel, BR, Cheng, W, Salaymeh, F, Cadle Mulawa, SHPA, Cahill, TA, Eldred, A, Surovik, M, Fitz, D, Howes, JE, Knapp, KT, Stockburger, L, Turpin, BJ, Huntzicker, J, Zhang, XQ & McMurry, PH 1990, 'Comparison of sampling methods for Carbonaceous aerosols in ambient air', Aerosol Science and Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 200-213.
Hering SV, Appel BR, Cheng W, Salaymeh F, Cadle Mulawa SHPA, Cahill TA et al. Comparison of sampling methods for Carbonaceous aerosols in ambient air. Aerosol Science and Technology. 1990 Jan;12(1):200-213.
Hering, S. V. ; Appel, B. R. ; Cheng, W. ; Salaymeh, F. ; Cadle Mulawa, S. H P A ; Cahill, T. A. ; Eldred, A. ; Surovik, M. ; Fitz, D. ; Howes, J. E. ; Knapp, K. T. ; Stockburger, L. ; Turpin, B. J. ; Huntzicker, James ; Zhang, X. Q. ; McMurry, P. H. / Comparison of sampling methods for Carbonaceous aerosols in ambient air. In: Aerosol Science and Technology. 1990 ; Vol. 12, No. 1. pp. 200-213.
@article{cfe6a0423a6741c6b2ab7d02dbad597c,
title = "Comparison of sampling methods for Carbonaceous aerosols in ambient air",
abstract = "Measurement methods for fine particle carbon were compared under field sampling conditions. Sampling methods included filtration, impaction, and adsorptioncorrected filtration. Systems were operated side-by-side for nine consecutive days in the Los Angeles Basin. Analytical M methods were compared separately. For organic carbon and total carbon, ambient measurements showed greater variability than could be accounted for by differences in analytical methods, and these differences are attributed to sampling methodology. The highest reported concentrations were obtained by quartz filter sampling; the lowest were from the sum of the impactor stages (excluding the quartz alterfilters). Positive artifact from the adsorption of gaseous vapors on quartz fiber filters was significant. However, correction for vapor adsorption by subtraction of the carbon value on the second of two filters in series did not completely elimenate the dependence of the apparent total aerosol carbon concentration on filter face velocity or sample duration.",
author = "Hering, {S. V.} and Appel, {B. R.} and W. Cheng and F. Salaymeh and {Cadle Mulawa}, {S. H P A} and Cahill, {T. A.} and A. Eldred and M. Surovik and D. Fitz and Howes, {J. E.} and Knapp, {K. T.} and L. Stockburger and Turpin, {B. J.} and James Huntzicker and Zhang, {X. Q.} and McMurry, {P. H.}",
year = "1990",
month = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "200--213",
journal = "Aerosol Science and Technology",
issn = "0278-6826",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of sampling methods for Carbonaceous aerosols in ambient air

AU - Hering, S. V.

AU - Appel, B. R.

AU - Cheng, W.

AU - Salaymeh, F.

AU - Cadle Mulawa, S. H P A

AU - Cahill, T. A.

AU - Eldred, A.

AU - Surovik, M.

AU - Fitz, D.

AU - Howes, J. E.

AU - Knapp, K. T.

AU - Stockburger, L.

AU - Turpin, B. J.

AU - Huntzicker, James

AU - Zhang, X. Q.

AU - McMurry, P. H.

PY - 1990/1

Y1 - 1990/1

N2 - Measurement methods for fine particle carbon were compared under field sampling conditions. Sampling methods included filtration, impaction, and adsorptioncorrected filtration. Systems were operated side-by-side for nine consecutive days in the Los Angeles Basin. Analytical M methods were compared separately. For organic carbon and total carbon, ambient measurements showed greater variability than could be accounted for by differences in analytical methods, and these differences are attributed to sampling methodology. The highest reported concentrations were obtained by quartz filter sampling; the lowest were from the sum of the impactor stages (excluding the quartz alterfilters). Positive artifact from the adsorption of gaseous vapors on quartz fiber filters was significant. However, correction for vapor adsorption by subtraction of the carbon value on the second of two filters in series did not completely elimenate the dependence of the apparent total aerosol carbon concentration on filter face velocity or sample duration.

AB - Measurement methods for fine particle carbon were compared under field sampling conditions. Sampling methods included filtration, impaction, and adsorptioncorrected filtration. Systems were operated side-by-side for nine consecutive days in the Los Angeles Basin. Analytical M methods were compared separately. For organic carbon and total carbon, ambient measurements showed greater variability than could be accounted for by differences in analytical methods, and these differences are attributed to sampling methodology. The highest reported concentrations were obtained by quartz filter sampling; the lowest were from the sum of the impactor stages (excluding the quartz alterfilters). Positive artifact from the adsorption of gaseous vapors on quartz fiber filters was significant. However, correction for vapor adsorption by subtraction of the carbon value on the second of two filters in series did not completely elimenate the dependence of the apparent total aerosol carbon concentration on filter face velocity or sample duration.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025198554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025198554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0025198554

VL - 12

SP - 200

EP - 213

JO - Aerosol Science and Technology

JF - Aerosol Science and Technology

SN - 0278-6826

IS - 1

ER -