Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 34 views

    Stages 1 2 3 4 5 Size Ranges, NM D, NM

    Uploaded by

    Muhammad Amin Nasution
    The document describes a 3-step process to simulate the size-resolved elemental carbon (EC) mass size distribution from offline filter measurements during cloud events: 1) Convert EC concentration measurements to a mass size distribution function using the measured size ranges and geometric mean diameters for each filter stage. 2) Use a polynomial interpolation method to simulate a continuous EC mass size distribution with 5nm bins from 50-6000nm, comparing it to the measurements. 3) Integrate the simulated curve over the size ranges to estimate the mass concentrations and account for uncertainty in supersaturation measurements from a calibration using ammonium sulfate.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Stages 1 2 3 4 5 Size Ranges, NM D, NM

    Uploaded by

    Muhammad Amin Nasution
    34 views3 pages
    The document describes a 3-step process to simulate the size-resolved elemental carbon (EC) mass size distribution from offline filter measurements during cloud events: 1) Convert EC concentration measurements to a mass size distribution function using the measured size ranges and geometric mean diameters for each filter stage. 2) Use a polynomial interpolation method to simulate a continuous EC mass size distribution with 5nm bins from 50-6000nm, comparing it to the measurements. 3) Integrate the simulated curve over the size ranges to estimate the mass concentrations and account for uncertainty in supersaturation measurements from a calibration using ammonium sulfate.

    Original Description:

    removal processsing

    Original Title

    MSD

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document describes a 3-step process to simulate the size-resolved elemental carbon (EC) mass size distribution from offline filter measurements during cloud events: 1) Convert EC concentration measurements to a mass size distribution function using the measured size ranges and geometric mean diameters for each filter stage. 2) Use a polynomial interpolation method to simulate a continuous EC mass size distribution with 5nm bins from 50-6000nm, comparing it to the measurements. 3) Integrate the simulated curve over the size ranges to estimate the mass concentrations and account for uncertainty in supersaturation measurements from a calibration using ammonium sulfate.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    34 views3 pages

    Stages 1 2 3 4 5 Size Ranges, NM D, NM

    Uploaded by

    Muhammad Amin Nasution
    The document describes a 3-step process to simulate the size-resolved elemental carbon (EC) mass size distribution from offline filter measurements during cloud events: 1) Convert EC concentration measurements to a mass size distribution function using the measured size ranges and geometric mean diameters for each filter stage. 2) Use a polynomial interpolation method to simulate a continuous EC mass size distribution with 5nm bins from 50-6000nm, comparing it to the measurements. 3) Integrate the simulated curve over the size ranges to estimate the mass concentrations and account for uncertainty in supersaturation measurements from a calibration using ammonium sulfate.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    SI1:

    The size-resolved elemental carbon (EC) concentrations are derived by offline analysis
    of BERNER impactor filters. The samples were only taken during cloud events. The
    sampling time periods spans from 15, September, 2010 to 24, October, 2010. In total,
    10 size-resolved samples were collected. The mean size-resolved EC concentrations
    are used to simulate the EC mass size distribution function.

    Step 1: To convert the size-resolved EC concentration (M) to particle mass size


    distribution (dM/dlogDp).

    𝑑𝑙𝑜𝑔𝐷𝑝 = log(𝐷𝑝 2) − log⁡(𝐷𝑝 1) [1]

    here DP1 and DP2 are respectively the lower and upper cut-off diameters of each
    stage, as given in Table 1. For example, in the first stage, Dp1 and Dp2 are 50 and
    140 nm, respectively. dM is EC mass concentration for each stage.

    The geometric mean value (Dp,m) of upper and lower diameters presents the
    mean diameter for each stage.

    𝐷𝑝,𝑚 = √𝐷𝑝 1 × 𝐷𝑝 2 [2]

    Table 1:

    stages 1 2 3 4 5
    Size ranges, nm 50-140 140-420 420-1200 1200-3500 3500-10000
    Dp,m, nm 83.67 242.49 709.93 2049.39 5916.08

    Step 2: To utilize the Interpolating Polynomial method to simulate EC mass size


    distribution with bin of 5 nm from 50 to 6000 nm. The Piecewise Cubic Hermite
    Interpolating Polynomial (PCHIP) method is used here. The comparison of dM/dlogDp
    between calculated in step 1 and simulated by PCHIP function is shown in Fig. 1.

    Step 3: To integrate the curve shown in Fig.1 for the size ranges in question to estimate
    the mass concentration.
    𝑑𝑝1
    𝑀𝑖 = ∫𝑑𝑝2 𝑑𝑀/𝑑𝑙𝑜𝑔𝐷𝑝 × 𝑑𝑙𝑜𝑔𝐷𝑝 [3]

    1.0
    Polynomial
    fitting curve
    0.8 Filter
    dM/dlogDp [g m ]
    -3

    measurements

    0.6

    0.4

    0.2 Dp±20 nm

    0.0
    4 6 8 2 4 6 8 2 4
    100 1000
    Particle mobility diameter [nm]
    Fig.1 : Red line is produced by PCHIP function. Green dots are dM/dlogDp derived from
    Berner measurements. Here, the particle aerodynamic diameter was converted to
    mobility diameter by division of particle density (1.6 g/cm 3).

    SI2:

    The uncertainty of supersaturation in CCN counter is quantified using the following


    method. The data from calibrations (standard salt: ammonium sulfate) done for our
    CCNc were collected and evaluated together, as show in Fig. 2. Within 95% confidence
    range, the uncertainty for supersaturations ≥ 0.2% is 0.068*SS. For supersaturations <
    0.2%, the same absolute uncertainty as for 0.2% was assumed: (0.1 +/- 0.014)%.
    Fig. 2: The relationship between ∆T and supersaturations (SS). The grey area shows
    the uncertainty in the derived supersaturations with the 95% confidence range.

    You might also like