Comparison of gravimetric PM data from the Harvard Impactors and Gent Stacked Unit PM 10 Samplers in...
1
Comparison of gravimetric PM data from the Harvard Impactors and Gent Stacked Unit PM 10 Samplers in Prague 2004 M. CIVIŠ 1 , J. HOVORKA 1 and J. SCHWARZ 2 1 Institute for Environmental Studies, Charles University, Benátská 2, 128 01, Prague, Czech Republic 2 Institute of Chemical Process Fundamentals, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Rozvojová 2, 165 02, Prague, Czech Republic Motivation: • Systematic sampling (every third day) and during four intensive seasonal campaigns (14 days per campaign) of aerosol fractions PM 10 , PM 2.5 , PM 1 using Harvard impactors (HI) and PM 10 , PM 2.2 using Gent Stacked Unit PM 10 Samplers (SFU) on two locations in Prague within the year 2004. • Evaluation of the both manual PMx sampling methods regarding to meteorology parameters. • Comparison of HI method with SFU method on station 1 and comparison of SFU method on both stations. Station 2 (suburban) N 50º07.643´: E 014º23.064´ 285 m ASL Station 1 (urban) N 50º04.280´; E 014º25.253´ 225 m ASL Harvard Impactor – HI HI for PM 10 and PM 2.5 are single staged with flow rate 10 l/min while HI PM 1 has two stages and flow rate about 23 l/min. PM 10 was sampled on Quartz filters (37 mm, pore size 0.1-4 μm). PM 2.5 and PM 1 fractions were caught on PTFE filters (37 mm, PE holding ring, pore size 2 μm) Gent Stacked Unit PM 10 - SFU At the inlet of SFU sampler are single staged, PM 10 impactor with flow rate 16 l/min. Then aerosol passes through filter cassette, consisting in-serial two PTFE Nuclepore® filters. Pore size of the first filter is 8 μm. Pore size of the second filter is 0.4 μm. Coarse of particles from 10-2.2 μm is collected on the first filter, particles smaller than 2.2 μm are collected on the second filter The study was conducted within the project „Comprehensive size resolved characterization of atmospheric particulate matter in Prague“ supported by GACR grant No. 205/03/1560 Station 1 Station 2 PM 10 PM 2,5 PM 1 SFU 10 SFU 2,2 SFU 10 SFU 2,2 St. 1 PM 10 1 81/0.2 2 PM 2.5 0.44 1 81/0.2 2 80/0.2 2 PM 1 0.44 0.62 1 81/0.2 2 80/0.2 2 80/0. 22 SFU 10 0.2 0.63 0.51 1 71/0.2 3 73/0.2 3 68/0. 25 52/0.2 7 SFU 2.2 0.04 0.33 0.34 0.88 1 58/0.2 7 57/0.2 7 57/0. 27 52/0.2 7 52/0.27 St. 2 SFU 10 0.24 0.46 0.29 0.52 0.42 1 81/0.2 2 80/0.2 2 80/0. 22 52/0.2 7 52/0.27 81/0.2 2 SFU 2.2 0.43 0.56 0.74 0.43 0.44 0.93 1 81/0.2 2 80/0.2 2 80/0. 22 52/0.2 7 52/0.27 81/0.2 2 81/0.2 2 Observed time period Method and location Regression equation Correlation coefficient, number of pairs/critical values Spring campaign 20.5.- 5.6. PM 10 St.1 y=0.02x+1.3 0.4 (14/0.48) Summer campaign 6.6.- 20.6. PM 2.5 St. 1 y=0.09x+1.5 0.76 (15/0.48) PM 1 St. 1 y=0.07x+1.3 0.49 (15/0.48) SFU 10 St. 2 y=0.09x+1.3 0.78 (13/0.51) Autumn campaign 9.10.- 25.10. PM 2.5 St. 1 y=0.11x+2.2 0.57 (15/0.48) PM 1 St. 1 y=0.12x+1.7 0.62 (15/0.48) SFU 10 St. 2 y=0.08x+2.3 0.50 (14/0.5) Year 2004 SFU Observed time period Method and location Regression equation Correlation coefficient, number of pairs/ critical values Winter campaign 16.2.-27.2. PM 2.5 St. 1 y=-0.21x+4.5 -0.59 (12/0.53) Spring campaign 20.5.-5.6. PM 2.5 St. 1 y=-0.09x+3.5 -0.51 (15/0.48) SFU 2.2 St. 2 y=-0.53x+3.4 -0.49 (15/048) Year 2004 SFU 10 St. 1 y=-0.13x+3.2 -0.39 (74/0.23) SFU 10 St. 2 y=-0.11x+3.3 -0.22 (94/0.21) HI coarse St. 1 y=-5.79x+52.7 -0.31(89/0.22) SFU coarse St. 1 y=-2.17x+16.7 -0.28 (76/0.23) Pearsont Correlation of the methods Relations between PM and average day temperature Relations between PM and average day wind speed Conclusion: • Sampling with HI method measured ( =0.05) higher concentrations of PM 10 and PM 2.5 than SFU PM 10 and PM 2.2 on both stations. Results show that air masses are better mixed in Prague for PM 2.5 which does not apply for PM 10 . • SFU 2.2 on both stations correlated well with average day temperature during the whole year 2004. SFU 10 on both stations correlated with average day wind speed during the whole year 2004. Correlation of aerosol fractions with relative humidity was not found. Negative correlations between coarse fractions and average wind speed measured by both methods on station 1 was observed. Highest concentrations of HI coarse occurred with wind blowing 2-3 m/s. Highest SFU coarse concentrations occurred with wind speed 1-2 m/s. N S tation 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 30.1.2004 2.2.2004 5.2.2004 8.2.2004 11.2.2004 14.2.2004 17.2.2004 20.2.2004 23.2.2004 26.2.2004 29.2.2004 3.3.2004 6.3.2004 9.3.2004 12.3.2004 15.3.2004 18.3.2004 21.3.2004 24.3.2004 27.3.2004 30.3.2004 2.4.2004 5.4.2004 8.4.2004 11.4.2004 14.4.2004 17.4.2004 20.4.2004 23.4.2004 26.4.2004 29.4.2004 2.5.2004 5.5.2004 8.5.2004 11.5.2004 14.5.2004 17.5.2004 20.5.2004 23.5.2004 26.5.2004 29.5.2004 1.6.2004 4.6.2004 7.6.2004 10.6.2004 13.6.2004 16.6.2004 19.6.2004 22.6.2004 25.6.2004 28.6.2004 1.7.2004 4.7.2004 7.7.2004 10.7.2004 13.7.2004 16.7.2004 19.7.2004 22.7.2004 25.7.2004 28.7.2004 31.7.2004 3.8.2004 6.8.2004 9.8.2004 12.8.2004 15.8.2004 18.8.2004 21.8.2004 24.8.2004 27.8.2004 30.8.2004 2.9.2004 5.9.2004 8.9.2004 11.9.2004 14.9.2004 17.9.2004 20.9.2004 23.9.2004 26.9.2004 29.9.2004 2.10.2004 5.10.2004 8.10.2004 11.10.2004 14.10.2004 17.10.2004 20.10.2004 23.10.2004 26.10.2004 29.10.2004 1.11.2004 4.11.2004 7.11.2004 10.11.2004 13.11.2004 16.11.2004 19.11.2004 22.11.2004 25.11.2004 28.11.2004 1.12.2004 4.12.2004 7.12.2004 10.12.2004 13.12.2004 16.12.2004 19.12.2004 22.12.2004 25.12.2004 28.12.2004 31.12.2004 3.1.2005 6.1.2005 Date μg/m3 P M 10 PM 2,5 PM 1 SFU 10 S FU 2,2 S tation 2 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 30.1.2004 2.2.2004 5.2.2004 8.2.2004 11.2.2004 14.2.2004 17.2.2004 20.2.2004 23.2.2004 26.2.2004 29.2.2004 3.3.2004 6.3.2004 9.3.2004 12.3.2004 15.3.2004 18.3.2004 21.3.2004 24.3.2004 27.3.2004 30.3.2004 2.4.2004 5.4.2004 8.4.2004 11.4.2004 14.4.2004 17.4.2004 20.4.2004 23.4.2004 26.4.2004 29.4.2004 2.5.2004 5.5.2004 8.5.2004 11.5.2004 14.5.2004 17.5.2004 20.5.2004 23.5.2004 26.5.2004 29.5.2004 1.6.2004 4.6.2004 7.6.2004 10.6.2004 13.6.2004 16.6.2004 19.6.2004 22.6.2004 25.6.2004 28.6.2004 1.7.2004 4.7.2004 7.7.2004 10.7.2004 13.7.2004 16.7.2004 19.7.2004 22.7.2004 25.7.2004 28.7.2004 31.7.2004 3.8.2004 6.8.2004 9.8.2004 12.8.2004 15.8.2004 18.8.2004 21.8.2004 24.8.2004 27.8.2004 30.8.2004 2.9.2004 5.9.2004 8.9.2004 11.9.2004 14.9.2004 17.9.2004 20.9.2004 23.9.2004 26.9.2004 29.9.2004 2.10.2004 5.10.2004 8.10.2004 11.10.2004 14.10.2004 17.10.2004 20.10.2004 23.10.2004 26.10.2004 29.10.2004 1.11.2004 4.11.2004 7.11.2004 10.11.2004 13.11.2004 16.11.2004 19.11.2004 22.11.2004 25.11.2004 28.11.2004 1.12.2004 4.12.2004 7.12.2004 10.12.2004 13.12.2004 16.12.2004 Date μg/m3 SFU 10 S FU 2,2
-
Upload
lenard-dawson -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
1
Transcript of Comparison of gravimetric PM data from the Harvard Impactors and Gent Stacked Unit PM 10 Samplers in...
Comparison of gravimetric PM data from the Harvard Impactors and Gent Stacked Unit PM10
Samplers in Prague 2004M. CIVIŠ1, J. HOVORKA1 and J. SCHWARZ2
1Institute for Environmental Studies, Charles University, Benátská 2, 128 01, Prague, Czech Republic2Institute of Chemical Process Fundamentals, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic,
Rozvojová 2, 165 02, Prague, Czech Republic
Motivation:
• Systematic sampling (every third day) and during four intensive seasonal campaigns (14 days per campaign) of aerosol fractions PM 10, PM2.5 , PM1 using Harvard impactors (HI) and PM10, PM2.2 using Gent Stacked Unit PM10 Samplers (SFU) on two locations in Prague within the year 2004.
• Evaluation of the both manual PMx sampling methods regarding to meteorology parameters.
• Comparison of HI method with SFU method on station 1 and comparison of SFU method on both stations.
Station 2 (suburban)
N 50º07.643´: E 014º23.064´
285 m ASL
Station 1(urban)
N 50º04.280´; E 014º25.253´ 225 m ASL
Harvard Impactor – HI
HI for PM10 and PM2.5 are single staged with flow rate 10 l/min while HI PM1 has two stages and flow rate about 23 l/min. PM10 was sampled on Quartz filters (37 mm, pore size 0.1-4 μm). PM2.5 and PM1 fractions were caught on PTFE filters (37 mm, PE holding ring, pore size 2 μm)
Gent Stacked Unit PM10 - SFU
At the inlet of SFU sampler are single staged, PM10 impactor with flow rate 16 l/min. Then aerosol passes through filter cassette, consisting in-serial two PTFE Nuclepore® filters. Pore size of the first filter is 8 μm. Pore size of the second filter is 0.4 μm. Coarse of particles from 10-2.2 μm is collected on the first filter, particles smaller than 2.2 μm are collected on the second filter
The study was conducted within the project „Comprehensive size resolved characterization of atmospheric particulate matter in Prague“ supported by GACR grant No. 205/03/1560
Station 1 Station 2
PM10 PM2,5 PM1 SFU10 SFU2,2 SFU10 SFU2,2
St. 1
PM10 1
81/0.22
PM2.5 0.44 1
81/0.22 80/0.22
PM1 0.44 0.62 1
81/0.22 80/0.22 80/0.22
SFU10 0.2 0.63 0.51 1
71/0.23 73/0.23 68/0.25 52/0.27
SFU2.2 0.04 0.33 0.34 0.88 1
58/0.27 57/0.27 57/0.27 52/0.27 52/0.27
St. 2
SFU10 0.24 0.46 0.29 0.52 0.42 1
81/0.22 80/0.22 80/0.22 52/0.27 52/0.27 81/0.22
SFU2.2 0.43 0.56 0.74 0.43 0.44 0.93 1
81/0.22 80/0.22 80/0.22 52/0.27 52/0.27 81/0.22 81/0.22
Observed time period
Method and
locationRegression
equation
Correlation coefficient, number of
pairs/critical values
Spring campaign 20.5.-5.6. PM10 St.1 y=0.02x+1.3 0.4 (14/0.48)
Summer campaign 6.6.-20.6. PM2.5 St. 1 y=0.09x+1.5 0.76 (15/0.48)
PM1 St. 1 y=0.07x+1.3 0.49 (15/0.48)
SFU10 St. 2 y=0.09x+1.3 0.78 (13/0.51)
Autumn campaign 9.10.-25.10. PM2.5 St. 1 y=0.11x+2.2 0.57 (15/0.48)
PM1 St. 1 y=0.12x+1.7 0.62 (15/0.48)
SFU10 St. 2 y=0.08x+2.3 0.50 (14/0.5)
Year 2004 SFU2.2 St.1 y=-0.04x+2.7 -0.35 (58/0.27)
SFU2.2 St. 2 y=-0.02x+2.8 -0.27 (95/0.21)
PM10 St. 1 y=-0.02x+1.7 -0.29 (89/0.22)
Observed time periodMethod and
locationRegression
equation
Correlation coefficient, number of
pairs/ critical values
Winter campaign 16.2.-27.2. PM2.5 St. 1 y=-0.21x+4.5 -0.59 (12/0.53)
Spring campaign 20.5.-5.6. PM2.5 St. 1 y=-0.09x+3.5 -0.51 (15/0.48)
SFU2.2 St. 2 y=-0.53x+3.4 -0.49 (15/048)
Year 2004 SFU10 St. 1 y=-0.13x+3.2 -0.39 (74/0.23)
SFU10 St. 2 y=-0.11x+3.3 -0.22 (94/0.21)
HI coarse St. 1 y=-5.79x+52.7 -0.31(89/0.22)
SFU coarse St. 1 y=-2.17x+16.7 -0.28 (76/0.23)
Pearsont Correlation of the methods Relations between PM and average day temperature
Relations between PM and average day wind speed
Conclusion:
• Sampling with HI method measured ( =0.05) higher concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 than SFU PM10 and PM2.2 on both stations. Results show that air masses are better mixed in Prague for PM2.5 which does not apply for PM10.
•SFU2.2 on both stations correlated well with average day temperature during the whole year 2004. SFU10 on both stations correlated with average day wind speed during the whole year 2004. Correlation of aerosol fractions with relative humidity was not found. Negative correlations between coarse fractions and average wind speed measured by both methods on station 1 was observed. Highest concentrations of HI coarse occurred with wind blowing 2-3 m/s. Highest SFU coarse concentrations occurred with wind speed 1-2 m/s.
N
Station 1
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
30
.1.2
00
42
.2.2
00
45
.2.2
00
48
.2.2
00
41
1.2
.20
04
14
.2.2
00
41
7.2
.20
04
20
.2.2
00
42
3.2
.20
04
26
.2.2
00
42
9.2
.20
04
3.3
.20
04
6.3
.20
04
9.3
.20
04
12
.3.2
00
41
5.3
.20
04
18
.3.2
00
42
1.3
.20
04
24
.3.2
00
42
7.3
.20
04
30
.3.2
00
42
.4.2
00
45
.4.2
00
48
.4.2
00
41
1.4
.20
04
14
.4.2
00
41
7.4
.20
04
20
.4.2
00
42
3.4
.20
04
26
.4.2
00
42
9.4
.20
04
2.5
.20
04
5.5
.20
04
8.5
.20
04
11
.5.2
00
41
4.5
.20
04
17
.5.2
00
42
0.5
.20
04
23
.5.2
00
42
6.5
.20
04
29
.5.2
00
41
.6.2
00
44
.6.2
00
47
.6.2
00
41
0.6
.20
04
13
.6.2
00
41
6.6
.20
04
19
.6.2
00
42
2.6
.20
04
25
.6.2
00
42
8.6
.20
04
1.7
.20
04
4.7
.20
04
7.7
.20
04
10
.7.2
00
41
3.7
.20
04
16
.7.2
00
41
9.7
.20
04
22
.7.2
00
42
5.7
.20
04
28
.7.2
00
43
1.7
.20
04
3.8
.20
04
6.8
.20
04
9.8
.20
04
12
.8.2
00
41
5.8
.20
04
18
.8.2
00
42
1.8
.20
04
24
.8.2
00
42
7.8
.20
04
30
.8.2
00
42
.9.2
00
45
.9.2
00
48
.9.2
00
41
1.9
.20
04
14
.9.2
00
41
7.9
.20
04
20
.9.2
00
42
3.9
.20
04
26
.9.2
00
42
9.9
.20
04
2.1
0.2
00
45
.10
.20
04
8.1
0.2
00
41
1.1
0.2
00
41
4.1
0.2
00
41
7.1
0.2
00
42
0.1
0.2
00
42
3.1
0.2
00
42
6.1
0.2
00
42
9.1
0.2
00
41
.11
.20
04
4.1
1.2
00
47
.11
.20
04
10
.11
.20
04
13
.11
.20
04
16
.11
.20
04
19
.11
.20
04
22
.11
.20
04
25
.11
.20
04
28
.11
.20
04
1.1
2.2
00
44
.12
.20
04
7.1
2.2
00
41
0.1
2.2
00
41
3.1
2.2
00
41
6.1
2.2
00
41
9.1
2.2
00
42
2.1
2.2
00
42
5.1
2.2
00
42
8.1
2.2
00
43
1.1
2.2
00
43
.1.2
00
56
.1.2
00
5
Date
μg
/m3
PM10
PM 2,5
PM 1
SFU 10
SFU 2,2
Station 2
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
30
.1.2
00
42
.2.2
00
45
.2.2
00
48
.2.2
00
41
1.2
.20
04
14
.2.2
00
41
7.2
.20
04
20
.2.2
00
42
3.2
.20
04
26
.2.2
00
42
9.2
.20
04
3.3
.20
04
6.3
.20
04
9.3
.20
04
12
.3.2
00
41
5.3
.20
04
18
.3.2
00
42
1.3
.20
04
24
.3.2
00
42
7.3
.20
04
30
.3.2
00
42
.4.2
00
45
.4.2
00
48
.4.2
00
41
1.4
.20
04
14
.4.2
00
41
7.4
.20
04
20
.4.2
00
42
3.4
.20
04
26
.4.2
00
42
9.4
.20
04
2.5
.20
04
5.5
.20
04
8.5
.20
04
11
.5.2
00
41
4.5
.20
04
17
.5.2
00
42
0.5
.20
04
23
.5.2
00
42
6.5
.20
04
29
.5.2
00
41
.6.2
00
44
.6.2
00
47
.6.2
00
41
0.6
.20
04
13
.6.2
00
41
6.6
.20
04
19
.6.2
00
42
2.6
.20
04
25
.6.2
00
42
8.6
.20
04
1.7
.20
04
4.7
.20
04
7.7
.20
04
10
.7.2
00
41
3.7
.20
04
16
.7.2
00
41
9.7
.20
04
22
.7.2
00
42
5.7
.20
04
28
.7.2
00
43
1.7
.20
04
3.8
.20
04
6.8
.20
04
9.8
.20
04
12
.8.2
00
41
5.8
.20
04
18
.8.2
00
42
1.8
.20
04
24
.8.2
00
42
7.8
.20
04
30
.8.2
00
42
.9.2
00
45
.9.2
00
48
.9.2
00
41
1.9
.20
04
14
.9.2
00
41
7.9
.20
04
20
.9.2
00
42
3.9
.20
04
26
.9.2
00
42
9.9
.20
04
2.1
0.2
00
45
.10
.20
04
8.1
0.2
00
41
1.1
0.2
00
41
4.1
0.2
00
41
7.1
0.2
00
42
0.1
0.2
00
42
3.1
0.2
00
42
6.1
0.2
00
42
9.1
0.2
00
41
.11
.20
04
4.1
1.2
00
47
.11
.20
04
10
.11
.20
04
13
.11
.20
04
16
.11
.20
04
19
.11
.20
04
22
.11
.20
04
25
.11
.20
04
28
.11
.20
04
1.1
2.2
00
44
.12
.20
04
7.1
2.2
00
41
0.1
2.2
00
41
3.1
2.2
00
41
6.1
2.2
00
4
Date
μg
/m3
SFU 10
SFU 2,2
