Chemical composition and mass emission factors of candle smoke particles

Abstract

Chemical composition and mass emission factors of candle smoke particlesPagels, Joakim; Wierzbicka, Aneta; Fors, Erik; Isaxon, Christina; Dahl, Andreas; Gudmundsson, Anders; Swietlicki, Erik; Bohgard, Mats Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Pagels, J., Wierzbicka, A., Fors, E., Isaxon, C., Dahl, A., Gudmundsson, A., ... Bohgard, M. (2009). Chemical composition and mass emission factors of candle smoke particles. Journal of Aerosol Science, 40(3), 193-208. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2008 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Carbonaceous Nanoparticle Layers Prepared using Candle Soot by Direct- and Spray-based Depositions

“…One reference discusses that the insufficient oxygen region appears in the yellow bright part of the flame. That the oxygen deficiency is the main cause of generation of larger soot particle has been shown experimentally by Pagels (Pagels et al, 2009) and an older study in diesel soot by Haynes and Wagner (Haynes and Wagner, 1981).…”

Uptake of NO<sub>3</sub> and N<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> to Saharan dust, ambient urban aerosol and soot: a relative rate study

“…Also, the ratio of uptake coefficient was larger, favouring NO 3 uptake more strongly. The sampling of soot from a candle flame is a haphazard process and we attribute the different reactivity of the two soot samples to chaotic sampling from steady burning and flickering flames, which lead to very different chemical characteristics of the soot and different organic/inorganic contents (Pagels et al, 2009). A lack of characterisation of our soot samples means that no real quantitative comparison can be made with results from other studies.…”

“…The soot particles did not adhere well to the PFA filters and their weight was not obtained. The composition of soot generated using a candle flame is expected to depend on the burning mode of the candle and on chemical additives to the wax and wick (Pagels et al, 2009), hence the mass fractions of elemental carbon, inorganic and organic matter in our samples are not known.…”

Comparison of Measured Particle Lung-Deposited Surface Area Concentrations by an Aerotrak 9000 Using Size Distribution Measurements for a Range of Combustion Aerosols

“…NaCl atomized aerosols may be agglomerated (Weis and Ewing 1999) or remain as primary particles (Park et al 2009). Additionally, they tend to be cubic in shape (Weis and Ewing 1999;Park et al 2009;Tumolva et al 2010), and hygroscopic (Pagels et al 2009). Coal and biomass aerosols were generated in a methane-air flat flame, while TiO 2 was produced by oxidizing titanium tetra isopropoxide (TTIP) in a methane-air diffusion flame.…”