Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation...
Transcript of Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation...
![Page 1: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric
and Speciation Measurements and
What Can We Learn from Them
• William Malm• Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Colorado State University,
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1375
• Bret A. Schichtel • National Park Service-Air Resources Division, CIRA, Colorado State University,
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1375
• Marc L. Pitchford• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-Air Resources Laboratory, c/o
Desert Research Institute, 755 E Flamingo Rd, Las Vegas, NV 89119-7363
![Page 2: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Non-urban and urban PM2.5
networksInteragency Monitoring of
PROtected Visual Environments
(IMPROVE) Network
Chemical Speciation Network (CSN)
Virgin Islands
![Page 3: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
OBJECTIVES
• Estimate bias in some measured aerosol
species.
• Estimate average bias in gravimetric
PM2.5 measurement.
• Estimate average bias in reconstructed
PM2.5 from measured aerosol species.
• What effect does PM2.5 measurement
bias have on estimating atmospheric
extinction?
![Page 4: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Sampler Intercomparison and
Artifact Correction
• Comparison of carbon across samplers
– Warren H. White, 16 April 2008 EPA
workshop
• Additional effort by Bret A. Schichtel
![Page 5: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Sampler Design Characteristics
Variable Speciation
Sampler
Network IMPROVE CSN CSN CSN CSN CSN
Sampler type IMPROVE Andersen Met One SASS URG MASS R&P2300
R&P2025
sequential
FRM
Number of Sites (2006) 181 18 179 6 14 22
Number of Channels 4 4 5 2 4 2
Flow Rate 22.7l/min 7.3l/min 6.7l/min 16.7l/min 10.0l/min 16.7l/min
Filter Face Velocity107.2cm/s
ec10.3cm/sec 9.5cm/sec 23.7cm/sec 14.2cm/sec 23.6cm/sec
Sampling Frequency 3rd day 3rd day 3rd day 3rd day 3rd day/6th day 3rd day/6th day
Quartz Filter Pack
Configuration
Q For
QBQQF QF QF QF QF
Quartz Filter Type 25mmPall 47mmWhatma 47mmWhatma 47mmWhatma 47mmWhatma 47mmWhatma
![Page 6: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
The multiplicative artifact (1+bOC) and the monthly positive additive
organic artifact (a) used to relate CSN and IMPROVE carbon
concentrations. The units for the positive artifacts are g/m3 and 1+bOC
is unitless.
Variable MetOne
α 1.3
1+bOC 1.2
aJan 1.1
aFeb 1.3
aMar 1.2
aApr 1.4
aMay 1.6
aJun 1.7
aJul 1.8
aAug 1.9
aSep 1.5
aOct 1.2
aNov 1
Correction Factors
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
1+bO
CJa
nFeb M
ar
Apr
il
May
June
July
Aug S
ep Oct
Nov D
ec
Facto
rO
FF
SE
T
![Page 7: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Bias Between Estimated Fine Mass
and Gravimetric Fine Mass and
![Page 8: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Governing equations
)
lab(RHss
'SSfSoi l
LACstuff) of (lotsoc
OCR)lab
(RHf 3
NO4
NH4
xSOPM '
i n o rg2 . 5
• PM2.5 loss due to nitrate and SVOC volatilization
• All variable may have some spatially dependent measurement bias
• x=(NH4)2SO4/H2SO4<=1.35 – lowest in summer – acidic aerosol
• highest in summer (D/Do)3≈1.3
• Roc(lots of stuff) probably highest in summer months
• f‘ss(RHlab) ≈ 1.3
• LAC may have a multiplier
3
)lab
(RHoD
D
3
speciesρ
speciesm ix,ρ
)lab
(RH'f
![Page 9: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Bias as function of massPM2.5 = 1.375*SO4 +1.29*NO3+1.8*OC+Other
PM
2.5
/R
PM
2.5
![Page 10: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Temporal plot of PM2.5-PM2.5avg and the
percent difference between reconstructed
and gravimetric mass (Brigantine WR) %DM=[(PM2.5-RPM2.5)/PM2.5]*100 = b1+b2(cos(f(T))
![Page 11: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Average percent seasonal variability
between reconstructed and gravimetric
mass for the IMPROVE monitoring network
%DM=[(PM2.5-RPM2.5)/PM2.5]*100 = b1+b2(cos(f(T))
![Page 12: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Average percent bias between reconstructed and
gravimetric mass for the IMPROVE monitoring
network. The red or green color indicates that
reconstructed mass is an over or underestimate of
gravimetric mass respectively.
![Page 13: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Summary table of the percent seasonal
variability and average bias of
reconstructed versus gravimetric mass
Variable Mean Std Dev Min Max N
% Seasonal
Variability
(IMPROVE)
14.9 6.14 0.0 26.7 158
% Seasonal
Variability
(CSN)
7.6 4.51 0.0 19.0 168
AVG BIAS
(IMPROVE)-3.9 4.44 -17.9 9.4 158
AVG BIAS
(CSN)3.4 7.00 -17.7 22.7 168
![Page 14: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Assumptions
• Do not account for between sampler volatilization
of SVOC’s
• Comparing of CSN to IMPROVE implies SVOC
loss does not affect Roc multiplier
• SVOC loss on Teflon and quartz substrates are
the same
• Gravimetric mass of soil dust, sea salt, and non
volatilized POM are measured without bias
• Nitrate and sulfates are measured without loss
on nylon substrate and nitrate and sulfates are
fully ammoniated
![Page 15: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
IMPROVE
0
5
10
15
20
All Winter Spring Summer Fall
Co
nc
en
tra
tio
n (
ug
/m3
)
LAC
POM
SEAS
SOIL
NO3
SO4
STN Suburban
0
5
10
15
20
All Winter Spring Summer Fall
Co
nc
en
tra
tio
n (
ug
/m3
)
LAC
POM
SEAS
SOIL
NO3
SO4
STN Urban
0
5
10
15
20
All Winter Spring Summer Fall
Co
nc
en
tra
tio
n (
ug
/m3
)
LAC
POM
SEAS
SOIL
NO3
SO4
STN Suburban
0
5
10
15
20
All Winter Spring Summer Fall
Co
nc
en
tra
tio
n (
ug
/m3
)
LAC
POM
SEAS
SOIL
NO3
SO4
Stacked bar charts showing average concentrations of each species for all and seasonal data for IMPROVE, CSN suburban, and CSN urban.
Center City
![Page 16: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Inorganic water retention, nitrate
loss and Roc factor
![Page 17: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Water Fraction for Sulfate
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
1.25
1.30
Average Winter Spring Summer Fall
Fra
cti
on
Center City
Suburban
IMPROVE
Nitrate Loss (corrected for water)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
Average Winter Spring Summer Fall
Fra
ctio
n N
itra
te L
oss
Center City
Suburban
IMPROVE
Roc Factor
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1.90
Average Winter Spring Summer Fall
Ro
c F
acto
r
Center City
Suburban
IMPROVE
PM2.5 = a1*1.375*SO4+a2*1.29*NO3
+a3*OC+a4*Other
Nitrate Loss (corrected for water)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
Average Winter Spring Summer Fall
Fra
cti
on
Nit
rate
Lo
ss
Center City
Suburban
IMPROVE
![Page 18: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
SUM of Bias IMPROVE
-0.40
-0.20
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
Average Winter Spring Summer FallCo
ncen
trati
on
(u
g/m
3)
FMNO3-1.29*NO3
FMPOM-1.8*OC
FMSO4-1.375*SO4
FMother-Other
SUM
Bias (Center City)
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
Average Winter Spring Summer Fall
Co
ncen
trati
on
(u
g/m
3)
FMNO3-1.29*NO3
FMPOM-1.8*OC
FMSO4-1.375*SO4
FMother-Other
SUM
Bias (Suburban)
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
Average Winter Spring Summer FallCo
nc
en
tra
tio
n (
ug
/m3
)
FMNO3-1.29*NO3
FMPOM-1.8*OC
FMSO4-1.375*SO4
FMother-Other
SUM
PM2.5-RPM2.5= )RFM(FM i
i
i
= (PM2.5SO4-1.375*SO4)+( PM2.5NO3-1.29*NO3)+
(PM2.5POM-1.8*OC)+(PM2.5other-Other)
Bias (Center City)
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
Average Winter Spring Summer Fall
Co
ncen
trati
on
(u
g/m
3)
FMNO3-1.29*NO3
FMPOM-1.8*OC
FMSO4-1.375*SO4
FMother-Other
SUM
![Page 19: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Assumptions for estimating gravimetric
and reconstructed mass bias sans
accounting for SVOC loses• Weighing of Teflon filter includes retained water on sulfate and nitrate
aerosols
• Nitrate and sulfates are measured without loss on nylon substrate
• Organic volatilization from Teflon and quartz substrates are the same
• Gravimetric mass of total carbon, soil dust, and sea salt determined
without bias
Gravimetric:
PM2.5 Bias = (a1 -1)*1.375 *SO4
+(a2-1)1.29*NO3Reconstructed:
RPM2.5 Bias=(1.8-a3)*OC+(1-a4)*Other
![Page 20: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Average bias in gravimetric and reconstructed
PM2.5 mass concentration for the IMPROVE
and CSN datasets
FM Bias on Teflon filter
-0.20
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
Winter Spring Summer Fall AVG
Conc
entra
tion
(ug/
m3)
IMPROVE Mass
Suburban Mass
Urban Mass
Reconstructed Mass Bias
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
Winter Spring Summer Fall AverageCon
cent
ratio
n (u
g/m
3)
IMPROVE
Suburban
City Center
Reconstructed Mass Bias
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
Winter Spring Summer Fall AverageCo
nce
ntr
atio
n (u
g/m
3)
IMPROVE
Suburban
City Center
![Page 21: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Seasonal and spatial variability in fine gravimetric
mass bias for the CSN monitoring network
PM2.5measured-PM2.5ambient
![Page 22: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Seasonal and spatial variability in fine gravimetric
mass bias for the IMPROVE monitoring network
PM2.5measured-PM2.5ambient
![Page 23: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Seasonal and spatial variability in reconstructed
mass bias for the CSN monitoring network.
PM2.5measured-PM2.5reconstructed
![Page 24: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Seasonal and spatial variability in reconstructed
mass bias for the IMPROVE monitoring network
PM2.5measured-PM2.5reconstructed
![Page 25: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
SUMMARY
• Approximately 20% of OC is volatilized in the IMPROVE sampling system
• The Roc factor (POM/OC) has a seasonal dependence that varies from about 1.4 in the winter to 1.6-1.8 in the summer
• Urban/suburban Roc factors may be marginally higher than rural factors
• Nitrate volatilization from the Teflon substrates vary from about 10% in the winter to 35-40% in the summer
• There doesn’t appear to be a systematic difference in nitrate volatilization between CSN and IMPROVE monitoring sites
• About 20% of inorganics species mass is retained water
![Page 26: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
SUMMARY (Cont)
• Bias between PM2.5 gravimetric and reconstructed mass is lowest (negative) in winter and highest (positive) in summer
• This bias is primarily driven by assuming a constant Roc factor and retained water by inorganic species
• Gravimetric PM2.5 in CSN network is biased high by one to two ug/m3 in most the east and during the summer biased low by about two ug/m3 in southern California
• IMPROVE reconstructed mass is biased high during all seasons but highest in winter. During summer it is biased low in the desert southwest
![Page 27: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
END
![Page 28: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Roc
N
N vs FM-LAC
![Page 29: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Neighborhood- and Urban-Scale
Monitoring Objectives
• Determine compliance with air quality
standards
• Validation of regional scale models
• Assess source/receptor relationships
• Evaluate health, radiative, and
ecological effects
![Page 30: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
IMPROVE Monitoring Objectives
• Tracking long term temporal changes in
visibility (extinction)
• Assess source/receptor relationships
• Serve as a regional backdrop for
special studies and understanding non
urban background
• Used for regional modeling validation
studies
![Page 31: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Comparison of CSN and adjusted
CSN to IMPROVE Carbon
![Page 32: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
IMPROVE TC, ug/m3
CS
N-S
TN
TC
, u
g/m
3 MetOne
Anderson
R&P
URG
2005-6
1
10
100
1 10 100
IMPROVE TC, ug/m3
CS
N-S
TN
TC
, u
g/m
3
MetOne
Anderson
R&P
URG
2005-6
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
CSN TC, ug/m3
IMP
RO
VE
TC
+,
ug/m
3
MetOne 6.7 lpm
Anderson 7.3 lpm
R&P 16.7 lpm
URG 16.7 lpm
2005
![Page 33: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
![Page 34: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
0.1
1
10
0.1 1 10
routine MetOne EC, ug/m3
co
lloca
ted
Me
tOn
e E
C,
ug
/m3 2003-4
2005
2006
Considerably more scatter is observed in routine CSN measurements by collocated MetOne samplers, particularly in the earlier years.
Data are from Bakersfield,* Boston,* Cleveland,* New Brunswick* and Rubidoux. * Not collocated with IMPROVE
![Page 35: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
EXPECTATION:
[TC]CSN = [EC]IMP + (1+BIMP*)[OC]IMP + ACSN/VMetOne
OLS REGRESSION:
[TC]CSN = (1+bEC)[EC]IMP + (1+bOC)[OC]IMP + a1 +…+ a12 + e
2005-6 observations at 7 MetOne sites (excluding Phoenix):
bEC = 0.008 (+/-0.05)no sampling artifact for IMPROVE EC
bOC = 0.22 (+/-0.03)~ 20% sampling loss for IMPROVE OC
rms(e) = 0.9 ug/m3 (r2 = 0.94, n = 728)
amm next slide
![Page 36: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
EC – the short story:
-
-
-
- EC has little to no positive artifact for both IMPROVE and CSN
-Multiplicative bias between CSN and IMPROVE that is sampler independent
0,IMP _IMP artifact adj
,newIMP CSN 1
,CSN CSN samplers
![Page 37: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
TC – the short story:
_IMP artifact adj
,newIMP CSN 1,
,CSN CSN samplers
0
![Page 38: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Relating IMPROVE and CSN ECMaking CSN look like IMPROVE
• Recall - EC has little to no positive artifact for both IMPROVE
and CSN
- CSN and IMPROVE have a multiplicative bias that is
sampler independent
• ECIMP = α * ECCSN
• α ~ 1.3
![Page 39: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Non-urban and urban PM2.5
networks
Interagency Monitoring of
PROtected Visual Environments
(IMPROVE) Network
Chemical Speciation Network (CSN)
Virgin Islands
![Page 40: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
![Page 41: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
![Page 42: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Ammonium Sulfate
![Page 43: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Ammonium Nitrate
![Page 44: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Organic Carbon
![Page 45: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Fine Soil
![Page 46: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
46
Comparison of IMPROVE and CSN Carbon at Collocated Sites
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
-130 -120 -110 -100 -90 -80 -70 -60
Anderson R&P URG Met One
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
-130 -120 -110 -100 -90 -80 -70 -60
Anderson R&P URG Met One
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
-130 -120 -110 -100 -90 -80 -70 -60
Anderson Met One R&P URG
urban collocations of CSN and IMPROVE carbon measurements
![Page 47: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
47
• The EC difference between CSN and IMPROVE shows little dependence on the CSN sampler, suggesting that it is mainly analytical.
•IMPROVE:TOR (DRI) – CSN: TOT(NIOSH)
![Page 48: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
48
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
CSN TC, ug/m3
IMP
RO
VE
TC
+,
ug
/m3
MetOne 6.7 lpm
Anderson 7.3 lpm
R&P 16.7 lpm
URG 16.7 lpm
2005
For TC, unlike EC, different CSN samplers show different biases relative to IMPROVE.
Note that the CSN offset is not determined simply by flow rate.
![Page 49: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
49
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
MetOne TC, ug/m3
IMP
RO
VE
TC
+,
ug
/m3
Dec, Jan, Feb
Mar, Apr, May
Jun, Jul, Aug
Sep, Oct, Nov
2005
The CSN offset shows no obvious seasonality. In that respect it behaves more like IMPROVE field blanks than IMPROVE backup filters.
![Page 50: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
50
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20
MetOne TC, ug/m3
IMP
RO
VE
TC
+,
ug
/m3
Birmingham
Detroit
Fresno
Phoenix
Pittsburgh
Rubidoux
2005
![Page 51: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
PM2.5 Federal Reference
Methods (FRMs)
Andersen RAASThermo Fisher Scientific, formerly Andersen Instruments, Smyrna, GA
URG MASSURG Corp., Raleigh, NC
Partisol SamplerThermo Fisher Scientific, formerly Rupprecht & Patashnick, Albany, NY
BGI PQ-200BGI, Inc., Waltham, MA
![Page 52: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Speciation Monitors (EPA Speciation Network)
Mass Aerosol Sampling System (MASS)URG Corporation, Raleigh, NC
Reference Ambient Air Sampler (RAAS)Andersen Instruments, Smyrna, GA
Spiral Aerosol Speciation Sampler (SASS)Met One Instruments, Grants Pass, OR
Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) SamplerAir Resource Specialists, Ft. Collins, CO
![Page 53: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Other Speciation Monitors
Dual Channel Sequential Filter Sampler
and Sequential Gas SamplerDesert Research Institute, Reno, NV
Dichotomous Virtual ImpactorAndersen Instruments, Smyrna, GA
Paired MinivolsAirmetrics, Inc., Springfield, OR
Partisol 2300 Speciation SamplerRupprecht & Patashnick, Albany, NY
Dichotomous Partisol-Plus SamplerRupprecht and Patashnick, Albany, NY
URG 3000NSpeciation Sampler URG Corporation, Raleigh, NC
![Page 54: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Relating IMPROVE and CSN TCMaking CSN look like IMPROVE
• Recall - Measured TC has a positive OC artifact.
- IMPROVE corrects for the artifact but CSN does not
- IMPROVE TC has a negative multiplicative artifact due loss of OC
from high face velocities (FV)- IMPROVE FV = 107.2 cm/s
- CSM MetOne FV = 9.5 cm/s
- Assume CSN negative artifact is 0
• Then[TC]IMP = [TC] – BIMP[OC] B - multiplicative artifact
[TC]CSN = [TC] + ACSN/VMetOne A/V – additive artifact
• Combine[TC]CSN = [TC]IMP + BIMP[OC] + ACSN/VMetOne
![Page 55: Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation ...vista.cira.colostate.edu/Improve/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/malm... · Uncertainties in PM2.5 Gravimetric and Speciation Measurements](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022020104/5ab0e2497f8b9a6b468bd149/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Comparison of regression and ratio
method for estimating Roc
Comparison of Regression and Ratio Roc Derivation
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
Average Winter Spring Summer Fall
Ro
c
Center City (Reg)
Suburban (Reg)
IMPROVE (Reg)
Center City (Ratio)
Suburban (Ratio)
IMPROVE (Ratio)
• Other= (NH4)2SO4+NH4NO3+Soil+LAC+SS
• POM = FM-Other
• Roc=(FM-Other)/OC