The Experts below are selected from a list of 168 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Delbert J. Eatough - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • aerosol measurement the use of optical light scattering for the determination of particulate size distribution and particulate mass including the semi volatile fraction
    Journal of The Air & Waste Management Association, 2009
    Co-Authors: Hans Grimm, Delbert J. Eatough
    Abstract:

    Abstract The GRIMM model 1.107 monitor is designed to measure particle size distribution and particulate mass based on a light scattering measurement of individual particles in the sampled air. The design and operation of the instrument are described. Protocols used to convert the measured size number distribution to a mass concentration consistent with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency protocols for measuring particulate matter (PM) less than 10 μm (PM10) and less than 2.5 μm (PM2.5) in aeroDynamic diameter are described. The performance of the resulting continuous monitor has been evaluated by comparing GRIMM monitor PM2.5 measurements with results obtained by the Rupprecht and Patashnick Co. (R&P) Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS). Data were obtained during month-long studies in Rubidoux, CA, in July 2003 and in Fresno, CA, in December 2003. The results indicate that the GRIMM monitor does respond to total PM2.5 mass, including the semi-volatile components, giving results comparable to the FD...

  • aerosol measurement the use of optical light scattering for the determination of particulate size distribution and particulate mass including the semi volatile fraction
    Journal of The Air & Waste Management Association, 2009
    Co-Authors: Hans Grimm, Delbert J. Eatough
    Abstract:

    The GRIMM model 1.107 monitor is designed to measure particle size distribution and particulate mass based on a light scattering measurement of individual particles in the sampled air. The design and operation of the instrument are described. Protocols used to convert the measured size number distribution to a mass concentration consistent with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency protocols for measuring particulate matter (PM) less than 10 microm (PM10) and less than 2.5 microm (PM2.5) in aeroDynamic diameter are described. The performance of the resulting continuous monitor has been evaluated by comparing GRIMM monitor PM2.5 measurements with results obtained by the Rupprecht and Patashnick Co. (R&P) Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS). Data were obtained during month-long studies in Rubidoux, CA, in July 2003 and in Fresno, CA, in December 2003. The results indicate that the GRIMM monitor does respond to total PM2.5 mass, including the semi-volatile components, giving results comparable to the FDMS. The data also indicate that the monitor can be used to estimate water content of the fine particles. However, if the inlet to the monitor is heated, then the instrument measures only the nonvolatile material, more comparable to results obtained with a conventional heated Filter tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) monitor. A recent modification of the model 180, with a Nafion dryer at the inlet, measures total PM2.5 including the nonvolatile and semi-volatile components, but excluding fine particulate water. Model 180 was in agreement with FDMS data obtained in Lindon, UT, during January through February 2007.

  • Source Apportionment of One-Hour Semi-Continuous Data Using Positive Matrix Factorization with Total Mass (Nonvolatile plus Semi-Volatile) Measured by the R&P FDMS Monitor
    Aerosol Science and Technology, 2008
    Co-Authors: Brett D. Grover, Delbert J. Eatough
    Abstract:

    Positive matrix factorization (PMF) was used to elucidate sources of fine particulate material (PM 2.5 ) for a study conducted during July 2003 in Rubidoux, CA. One-h averaged semi-continuous measurements were made with a suite of instruments to provide PM 2.5 mass and chemical composition data. Total PM 2.5 mass concentrations (nonvolatile plus semi-volatile) were measured with a R&P Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS) and a conventional TEOM monitor was used to measure nonvolatile mass concentrations. Semi-volatile material (SVM) was calculated as the FDMS minus the TEOM determined PM 2.5 mass. PM 2.5 chemical species monitors included a R&P 5400 carbon monitor, an Anderson Aethalometer and a R&P 8400N nitrate monitor. Gas phase data including CO, NO 2 , NO x , and O 3 were also collected during the sampling period. Two distinct PMF analysis were performed. In analysis 1, the TEOM was excluded from the analysis and in analysis 2, the SVM was excluded from the analysis. PMF2 was able to identify six...

  • Source apportionment of 1 h semi-continuous data during the 2005 Study of Organic Aerosols in Riverside (SOAR) using positive matrix factorization
    Atmospheric Environment, 2008
    Co-Authors: Delbert J. Eatough, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Brett D. Grover, Woods R. Woolwine, Robert J. Farber
    Abstract:

    Abstract Positive matrix factorization (PMF2) was used to elucidate sources of fine particulate material (PM2.5) for a study conducted during July and August 2005, in Riverside, CA. One-hour averaged semi-continuous measurements were made with a suite of instruments to provide PM2.5 mass and chemical composition data. Total PM2.5 mass concentrations (non-volatile plus semi-volatile) were measured with an R&P Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS TEOM) and a conventional TEOM monitor was used to measure non-volatile mass concentrations. PM2.5 chemical species monitors included a dual-oven Sunset monitor to measure both non-volatile and semi-volatile carbonaceous material, an ion chromatographic-based monitor to measure sulfate and nitrate and an Anderson Aethalometer to measure black carbon (BC). Gas phase data including CO, NO2, NOx and O3 were also collected during the sampling period. In addition, single-particle measurements were made using aerosol time-of-flight mass spectrometry (ATOFMS). Twenty different single-particle types consistent with those observed in previous ATOFMS studies in Riverside were identified for the PMF2 analysis. Finally, time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometry (ToF-AMS) provided data on markers of primary and secondary organic aerosol. Two distinct PMF2 analyses were performed. In analysis 1, all the data except for the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were used in an initial evaluation of sources at Riverside during the study. PMF2 was able to identify six factors from the data set corresponding to both primary and secondary sources, primarily from automobile emissions, diesel emissions, secondary nitrate formation, a secondary photochemical associated source, organic emissions and Basin transported pollutants. In analysis 2, the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were included in the analysis. In the second analysis, PMF2 was able to identify 16 factors with a variety of both primary and secondary factors being identified, corresponding to both primary and secondary material from both anthropogenic and natural sources. Based on relationships with Basin meteorology, the PMF identified source profiles and diurnal patterns in the source concentrations, sources were identified as being of local origin or resulting from transport of pollutants across the Basin due to onshore flow. Good agreement was observed between the PMF2 predicted mass and the FDMS measured mass for both analyses.

  • Measurement of total PM2.5 mass (nonvolatile plus semivolatile) with the Filter Dynamic Measurement System tapered element oscillating microbalance monitor : Particulate matter supersites
    Journal of Geophysical Research, 2005
    Co-Authors: Brett D. Grover, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Delbert J. Eatough, William E. Wilson, Michael Kleinman, Philip K. Hopke, Michael Meyer, Jeffrey L. Ambs
    Abstract:

    Field studies have been performed in Lindon, Utah (February 2003) and Rubidoux, California (July 2003) to determine if the Rupprecht and Patashnick (R&P) Filter Dynamic Measurement System (FDMS) determines total fine particulate mass, including the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material. Collocated measurements were made with the FDMS, a conventional tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) monitor with a heated Filter, an R&P differential TEOM monitor, the Brigham Young University (BYU) Real-Time Total Ambient Mass Sampler (RAMS), the BYU particle concentrator-organic sampling system (PC-BOSS), a PM 2.5 Federal Reference Method (FRM), a PM 2.5 speciation sampler, an R&P continuous nitrate monitor, and two Sunset continuous carbon monitors (one to measure quartz Filter-retained particulate carbon and one to measure particulate semivolatile carbonaceous material lost from the particles on a Filter during sampling). The RAMS and PC-BOSS samplers have been shown to determine fine particulate material, including both the semivolatile and the nonvolatile components. Linear regression analysis at the Lindon site between the FDMS (X) and the PC-BOSS (Y), and the FDMS (X) and the RAMS (Y), resulted in zero-intercept slopes of 1.01 ± 0.06 (r2 = 0.63) and 1.00 ± 0.01 (r2 = 0.69), respectively. At the Rubidoux sampling site, linear regression analysis between the PC-BOSS (X) and the FDMS (Y) gave a zero-intercept slope of 0.96 ± 0.02 (r2 = 0.90). Linear regression analysis between the FDMS (X) and the RAMS (Y) resulted in a zero-intercept slope of 0.99 ± 0.01 (r2 = 0.80). Measurements made at the two sites indicate that the FDMS and the R&P differential TEOM monitors do measure total fine particulate mass, including the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material. Both the heated TEOM monitor and PM 2.5 FRM did not measure the semivolatile material. The difference between the FDMS and a heated TEOM monitor was explained by the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material measured by the various chemical composition monitors.

Brett D. Grover - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Source Apportionment of One-Hour Semi-Continuous Data Using Positive Matrix Factorization with Total Mass (Nonvolatile plus Semi-Volatile) Measured by the R&P FDMS Monitor
    Aerosol Science and Technology, 2008
    Co-Authors: Brett D. Grover, Delbert J. Eatough
    Abstract:

    Positive matrix factorization (PMF) was used to elucidate sources of fine particulate material (PM 2.5 ) for a study conducted during July 2003 in Rubidoux, CA. One-h averaged semi-continuous measurements were made with a suite of instruments to provide PM 2.5 mass and chemical composition data. Total PM 2.5 mass concentrations (nonvolatile plus semi-volatile) were measured with a R&P Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS) and a conventional TEOM monitor was used to measure nonvolatile mass concentrations. Semi-volatile material (SVM) was calculated as the FDMS minus the TEOM determined PM 2.5 mass. PM 2.5 chemical species monitors included a R&P 5400 carbon monitor, an Anderson Aethalometer and a R&P 8400N nitrate monitor. Gas phase data including CO, NO 2 , NO x , and O 3 were also collected during the sampling period. Two distinct PMF analysis were performed. In analysis 1, the TEOM was excluded from the analysis and in analysis 2, the SVM was excluded from the analysis. PMF2 was able to identify six...

  • Source apportionment of 1 h semi-continuous data during the 2005 Study of Organic Aerosols in Riverside (SOAR) using positive matrix factorization
    Atmospheric Environment, 2008
    Co-Authors: Delbert J. Eatough, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Brett D. Grover, Woods R. Woolwine, Robert J. Farber
    Abstract:

    Abstract Positive matrix factorization (PMF2) was used to elucidate sources of fine particulate material (PM2.5) for a study conducted during July and August 2005, in Riverside, CA. One-hour averaged semi-continuous measurements were made with a suite of instruments to provide PM2.5 mass and chemical composition data. Total PM2.5 mass concentrations (non-volatile plus semi-volatile) were measured with an R&P Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS TEOM) and a conventional TEOM monitor was used to measure non-volatile mass concentrations. PM2.5 chemical species monitors included a dual-oven Sunset monitor to measure both non-volatile and semi-volatile carbonaceous material, an ion chromatographic-based monitor to measure sulfate and nitrate and an Anderson Aethalometer to measure black carbon (BC). Gas phase data including CO, NO2, NOx and O3 were also collected during the sampling period. In addition, single-particle measurements were made using aerosol time-of-flight mass spectrometry (ATOFMS). Twenty different single-particle types consistent with those observed in previous ATOFMS studies in Riverside were identified for the PMF2 analysis. Finally, time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometry (ToF-AMS) provided data on markers of primary and secondary organic aerosol. Two distinct PMF2 analyses were performed. In analysis 1, all the data except for the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were used in an initial evaluation of sources at Riverside during the study. PMF2 was able to identify six factors from the data set corresponding to both primary and secondary sources, primarily from automobile emissions, diesel emissions, secondary nitrate formation, a secondary photochemical associated source, organic emissions and Basin transported pollutants. In analysis 2, the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were included in the analysis. In the second analysis, PMF2 was able to identify 16 factors with a variety of both primary and secondary factors being identified, corresponding to both primary and secondary material from both anthropogenic and natural sources. Based on relationships with Basin meteorology, the PMF identified source profiles and diurnal patterns in the source concentrations, sources were identified as being of local origin or resulting from transport of pollutants across the Basin due to onshore flow. Good agreement was observed between the PMF2 predicted mass and the FDMS measured mass for both analyses.

  • Measurement of total PM2.5 mass (nonvolatile plus semivolatile) with the Filter Dynamic Measurement System tapered element oscillating microbalance monitor : Particulate matter supersites
    Journal of Geophysical Research, 2005
    Co-Authors: Brett D. Grover, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Delbert J. Eatough, William E. Wilson, Michael Kleinman, Philip K. Hopke, Michael Meyer, Jeffrey L. Ambs
    Abstract:

    Field studies have been performed in Lindon, Utah (February 2003) and Rubidoux, California (July 2003) to determine if the Rupprecht and Patashnick (R&P) Filter Dynamic Measurement System (FDMS) determines total fine particulate mass, including the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material. Collocated measurements were made with the FDMS, a conventional tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) monitor with a heated Filter, an R&P differential TEOM monitor, the Brigham Young University (BYU) Real-Time Total Ambient Mass Sampler (RAMS), the BYU particle concentrator-organic sampling system (PC-BOSS), a PM 2.5 Federal Reference Method (FRM), a PM 2.5 speciation sampler, an R&P continuous nitrate monitor, and two Sunset continuous carbon monitors (one to measure quartz Filter-retained particulate carbon and one to measure particulate semivolatile carbonaceous material lost from the particles on a Filter during sampling). The RAMS and PC-BOSS samplers have been shown to determine fine particulate material, including both the semivolatile and the nonvolatile components. Linear regression analysis at the Lindon site between the FDMS (X) and the PC-BOSS (Y), and the FDMS (X) and the RAMS (Y), resulted in zero-intercept slopes of 1.01 ± 0.06 (r2 = 0.63) and 1.00 ± 0.01 (r2 = 0.69), respectively. At the Rubidoux sampling site, linear regression analysis between the PC-BOSS (X) and the FDMS (Y) gave a zero-intercept slope of 0.96 ± 0.02 (r2 = 0.90). Linear regression analysis between the FDMS (X) and the RAMS (Y) resulted in a zero-intercept slope of 0.99 ± 0.01 (r2 = 0.80). Measurements made at the two sites indicate that the FDMS and the R&P differential TEOM monitors do measure total fine particulate mass, including the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material. Both the heated TEOM monitor and PM 2.5 FRM did not measure the semivolatile material. The difference between the FDMS and a heated TEOM monitor was explained by the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material measured by the various chemical composition monitors.

Robert J. Farber - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Source apportionment of 1 h semi-continuous data during the 2005 Study of Organic Aerosols in Riverside (SOAR) using positive matrix factorization
    Atmospheric Environment, 2008
    Co-Authors: Delbert J. Eatough, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Brett D. Grover, Woods R. Woolwine, Robert J. Farber
    Abstract:

    Abstract Positive matrix factorization (PMF2) was used to elucidate sources of fine particulate material (PM2.5) for a study conducted during July and August 2005, in Riverside, CA. One-hour averaged semi-continuous measurements were made with a suite of instruments to provide PM2.5 mass and chemical composition data. Total PM2.5 mass concentrations (non-volatile plus semi-volatile) were measured with an R&P Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS TEOM) and a conventional TEOM monitor was used to measure non-volatile mass concentrations. PM2.5 chemical species monitors included a dual-oven Sunset monitor to measure both non-volatile and semi-volatile carbonaceous material, an ion chromatographic-based monitor to measure sulfate and nitrate and an Anderson Aethalometer to measure black carbon (BC). Gas phase data including CO, NO2, NOx and O3 were also collected during the sampling period. In addition, single-particle measurements were made using aerosol time-of-flight mass spectrometry (ATOFMS). Twenty different single-particle types consistent with those observed in previous ATOFMS studies in Riverside were identified for the PMF2 analysis. Finally, time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometry (ToF-AMS) provided data on markers of primary and secondary organic aerosol. Two distinct PMF2 analyses were performed. In analysis 1, all the data except for the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were used in an initial evaluation of sources at Riverside during the study. PMF2 was able to identify six factors from the data set corresponding to both primary and secondary sources, primarily from automobile emissions, diesel emissions, secondary nitrate formation, a secondary photochemical associated source, organic emissions and Basin transported pollutants. In analysis 2, the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were included in the analysis. In the second analysis, PMF2 was able to identify 16 factors with a variety of both primary and secondary factors being identified, corresponding to both primary and secondary material from both anthropogenic and natural sources. Based on relationships with Basin meteorology, the PMF identified source profiles and diurnal patterns in the source concentrations, sources were identified as being of local origin or resulting from transport of pollutants across the Basin due to onshore flow. Good agreement was observed between the PMF2 predicted mass and the FDMS measured mass for both analyses.

Norman L. Eatough - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Source apportionment of 1 h semi-continuous data during the 2005 Study of Organic Aerosols in Riverside (SOAR) using positive matrix factorization
    Atmospheric Environment, 2008
    Co-Authors: Delbert J. Eatough, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Brett D. Grover, Woods R. Woolwine, Robert J. Farber
    Abstract:

    Abstract Positive matrix factorization (PMF2) was used to elucidate sources of fine particulate material (PM2.5) for a study conducted during July and August 2005, in Riverside, CA. One-hour averaged semi-continuous measurements were made with a suite of instruments to provide PM2.5 mass and chemical composition data. Total PM2.5 mass concentrations (non-volatile plus semi-volatile) were measured with an R&P Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS TEOM) and a conventional TEOM monitor was used to measure non-volatile mass concentrations. PM2.5 chemical species monitors included a dual-oven Sunset monitor to measure both non-volatile and semi-volatile carbonaceous material, an ion chromatographic-based monitor to measure sulfate and nitrate and an Anderson Aethalometer to measure black carbon (BC). Gas phase data including CO, NO2, NOx and O3 were also collected during the sampling period. In addition, single-particle measurements were made using aerosol time-of-flight mass spectrometry (ATOFMS). Twenty different single-particle types consistent with those observed in previous ATOFMS studies in Riverside were identified for the PMF2 analysis. Finally, time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometry (ToF-AMS) provided data on markers of primary and secondary organic aerosol. Two distinct PMF2 analyses were performed. In analysis 1, all the data except for the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were used in an initial evaluation of sources at Riverside during the study. PMF2 was able to identify six factors from the data set corresponding to both primary and secondary sources, primarily from automobile emissions, diesel emissions, secondary nitrate formation, a secondary photochemical associated source, organic emissions and Basin transported pollutants. In analysis 2, the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were included in the analysis. In the second analysis, PMF2 was able to identify 16 factors with a variety of both primary and secondary factors being identified, corresponding to both primary and secondary material from both anthropogenic and natural sources. Based on relationships with Basin meteorology, the PMF identified source profiles and diurnal patterns in the source concentrations, sources were identified as being of local origin or resulting from transport of pollutants across the Basin due to onshore flow. Good agreement was observed between the PMF2 predicted mass and the FDMS measured mass for both analyses.

  • Measurement of total PM2.5 mass (nonvolatile plus semivolatile) with the Filter Dynamic Measurement System tapered element oscillating microbalance monitor : Particulate matter supersites
    Journal of Geophysical Research, 2005
    Co-Authors: Brett D. Grover, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Delbert J. Eatough, William E. Wilson, Michael Kleinman, Philip K. Hopke, Michael Meyer, Jeffrey L. Ambs
    Abstract:

    Field studies have been performed in Lindon, Utah (February 2003) and Rubidoux, California (July 2003) to determine if the Rupprecht and Patashnick (R&P) Filter Dynamic Measurement System (FDMS) determines total fine particulate mass, including the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material. Collocated measurements were made with the FDMS, a conventional tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) monitor with a heated Filter, an R&P differential TEOM monitor, the Brigham Young University (BYU) Real-Time Total Ambient Mass Sampler (RAMS), the BYU particle concentrator-organic sampling system (PC-BOSS), a PM 2.5 Federal Reference Method (FRM), a PM 2.5 speciation sampler, an R&P continuous nitrate monitor, and two Sunset continuous carbon monitors (one to measure quartz Filter-retained particulate carbon and one to measure particulate semivolatile carbonaceous material lost from the particles on a Filter during sampling). The RAMS and PC-BOSS samplers have been shown to determine fine particulate material, including both the semivolatile and the nonvolatile components. Linear regression analysis at the Lindon site between the FDMS (X) and the PC-BOSS (Y), and the FDMS (X) and the RAMS (Y), resulted in zero-intercept slopes of 1.01 ± 0.06 (r2 = 0.63) and 1.00 ± 0.01 (r2 = 0.69), respectively. At the Rubidoux sampling site, linear regression analysis between the PC-BOSS (X) and the FDMS (Y) gave a zero-intercept slope of 0.96 ± 0.02 (r2 = 0.90). Linear regression analysis between the FDMS (X) and the RAMS (Y) resulted in a zero-intercept slope of 0.99 ± 0.01 (r2 = 0.80). Measurements made at the two sites indicate that the FDMS and the R&P differential TEOM monitors do measure total fine particulate mass, including the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material. Both the heated TEOM monitor and PM 2.5 FRM did not measure the semivolatile material. The difference between the FDMS and a heated TEOM monitor was explained by the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material measured by the various chemical composition monitors.

Russell Long - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Source apportionment of 1 h semi-continuous data during the 2005 Study of Organic Aerosols in Riverside (SOAR) using positive matrix factorization
    Atmospheric Environment, 2008
    Co-Authors: Delbert J. Eatough, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Brett D. Grover, Woods R. Woolwine, Robert J. Farber
    Abstract:

    Abstract Positive matrix factorization (PMF2) was used to elucidate sources of fine particulate material (PM2.5) for a study conducted during July and August 2005, in Riverside, CA. One-hour averaged semi-continuous measurements were made with a suite of instruments to provide PM2.5 mass and chemical composition data. Total PM2.5 mass concentrations (non-volatile plus semi-volatile) were measured with an R&P Filter Dynamic measurement system (FDMS TEOM) and a conventional TEOM monitor was used to measure non-volatile mass concentrations. PM2.5 chemical species monitors included a dual-oven Sunset monitor to measure both non-volatile and semi-volatile carbonaceous material, an ion chromatographic-based monitor to measure sulfate and nitrate and an Anderson Aethalometer to measure black carbon (BC). Gas phase data including CO, NO2, NOx and O3 were also collected during the sampling period. In addition, single-particle measurements were made using aerosol time-of-flight mass spectrometry (ATOFMS). Twenty different single-particle types consistent with those observed in previous ATOFMS studies in Riverside were identified for the PMF2 analysis. Finally, time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometry (ToF-AMS) provided data on markers of primary and secondary organic aerosol. Two distinct PMF2 analyses were performed. In analysis 1, all the data except for the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were used in an initial evaluation of sources at Riverside during the study. PMF2 was able to identify six factors from the data set corresponding to both primary and secondary sources, primarily from automobile emissions, diesel emissions, secondary nitrate formation, a secondary photochemical associated source, organic emissions and Basin transported pollutants. In analysis 2, the ATOFMS and ToF-AMS data were included in the analysis. In the second analysis, PMF2 was able to identify 16 factors with a variety of both primary and secondary factors being identified, corresponding to both primary and secondary material from both anthropogenic and natural sources. Based on relationships with Basin meteorology, the PMF identified source profiles and diurnal patterns in the source concentrations, sources were identified as being of local origin or resulting from transport of pollutants across the Basin due to onshore flow. Good agreement was observed between the PMF2 predicted mass and the FDMS measured mass for both analyses.

  • Measurement of total PM2.5 mass (nonvolatile plus semivolatile) with the Filter Dynamic Measurement System tapered element oscillating microbalance monitor : Particulate matter supersites
    Journal of Geophysical Research, 2005
    Co-Authors: Brett D. Grover, Russell Long, Norman L. Eatough, Delbert J. Eatough, William E. Wilson, Michael Kleinman, Philip K. Hopke, Michael Meyer, Jeffrey L. Ambs
    Abstract:

    Field studies have been performed in Lindon, Utah (February 2003) and Rubidoux, California (July 2003) to determine if the Rupprecht and Patashnick (R&P) Filter Dynamic Measurement System (FDMS) determines total fine particulate mass, including the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material. Collocated measurements were made with the FDMS, a conventional tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) monitor with a heated Filter, an R&P differential TEOM monitor, the Brigham Young University (BYU) Real-Time Total Ambient Mass Sampler (RAMS), the BYU particle concentrator-organic sampling system (PC-BOSS), a PM 2.5 Federal Reference Method (FRM), a PM 2.5 speciation sampler, an R&P continuous nitrate monitor, and two Sunset continuous carbon monitors (one to measure quartz Filter-retained particulate carbon and one to measure particulate semivolatile carbonaceous material lost from the particles on a Filter during sampling). The RAMS and PC-BOSS samplers have been shown to determine fine particulate material, including both the semivolatile and the nonvolatile components. Linear regression analysis at the Lindon site between the FDMS (X) and the PC-BOSS (Y), and the FDMS (X) and the RAMS (Y), resulted in zero-intercept slopes of 1.01 ± 0.06 (r2 = 0.63) and 1.00 ± 0.01 (r2 = 0.69), respectively. At the Rubidoux sampling site, linear regression analysis between the PC-BOSS (X) and the FDMS (Y) gave a zero-intercept slope of 0.96 ± 0.02 (r2 = 0.90). Linear regression analysis between the FDMS (X) and the RAMS (Y) resulted in a zero-intercept slope of 0.99 ± 0.01 (r2 = 0.80). Measurements made at the two sites indicate that the FDMS and the R&P differential TEOM monitors do measure total fine particulate mass, including the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material. Both the heated TEOM monitor and PM 2.5 FRM did not measure the semivolatile material. The difference between the FDMS and a heated TEOM monitor was explained by the semivolatile ammonium nitrate and organic material measured by the various chemical composition monitors.