Intercomparison Of Particle Measuring Systems, Inc.'s Particle-Size Spectrometers

In August/September of 2001, the R/P FLIP and CIRPAS Twin Otter research aircraft were deployed to the eastern coast of Oahu, Hawaii, as part of the Rough Evaporation Duct (RED) experiment. Goals included the study of the air/sea exchange, turbulence, and sea‐salt aerosol particle characteristics at the subtropical marine Pacific site. Here we examine coarse mode particle size distributions. Similar to what has been shown for airborne dust, optical particle counters such as the Forward Scattering Spectrometer Probe (FSSP), Classical Scattering Aerosol Spectrometer Probe (CSASP) and the Cloud Aerosol Spectrometer (CAS) within the Cloud Aerosol and Precipitation Spectrometer (CAPS) instrument systematically overestimate particle size, and consequently volume, for sea salt particles. Ground‐based aerodynamic particle sizers (APS) and AERONET inversions yield much more reasonable results. A wing pod mounted APS gave mixed results and may not be appropriate for marine boundary layer studies. Relating our findings to previous studies does much to explain the bulk of the differences in the literature and leads us to conclude that the largest uncertainty facing flux and airborne cloud/aerosol interaction studies is likely due to the instrumentation itself. To our knowledge, there does not exist an in situ aircraft system that adequately measures the ambient volume distribution of coarse mode sea salt particles. Most empirically based sea salt flux parameterizations can trace their heritage to a clearly biased measurement technique. The current “state of the art” in this field prevents any true form of clear sky radiative “closure” for clean marine environments.

Section: Analysis and Reconciliation Of Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analysis and Reconciliation Of Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciliation of coarse mode sea‐salt aerosol particle size measurements and parameterizations at a subtropical ocean receptor site

Reid¹,

Brooks

Crahan

et al. 2006

“…Nevertheless, significant differences may occur between particle size distributions measured with similar optical particle counters [Jensen et al, 1980]. This problem could be solved by absolute calibration for the number of particles counted per sampled air volume, for example in a cloud chamber versus an absolute standard.…”

Section: Particle Counter (Cross) Calibrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Production of sea spray aerosol in the surf zone

Leeuw¹,

Neele²,

Hill³

et al. 2000

249

143

Abstract. A quantitative source function for sea spray aerosol produced by waves breaking in the surf zone was determined from data collected with optical particle counters at both sides of the surf zone at two locations on the Californian coast. Three optical particle counters were used to measure profiles at the base of a pier; a fourth instrument was used at the end of the pier. In contrast, the importance of the surf production on aerosol concentrations in littoral regions was recognized by Monahan [1995], who presented a simple calculation based on aerosol production by breaking waves, and a realistic assumption as regards the equivalent whitecap coverage of the surf zone and the surf width. The study of this (then hypothetical) effect was included as an applied research topic into the Electro-Optical Propagation Assessment in Coastal Environment (EOPACE) work program [Jensen, 1995]. A further basis to include studies on surf-generated aerosol in EOPACE was provided by lidar studies undertaken in 1990, showing backscatter increases over the surf of 2 orders of magnitude and the subsequent evolution of the surf-produced aerosol plume in the first 1.5 km from the coastline [Hooper and Martin, 1999].Earlier studies on aerosol produced in the surf by Blanchard and Woodcock [1957] were undertaken to measure bubbles and 29,397

“…The light-scattering aerosol counters manufactured by PMS have been used extensively in atmospheric aerosol studies, including previous studies at Alert [e.g., Trivett et al, 1988;Barrie et al, 1989]. Their principle of operation and associated problems have been dealt with in detail elsewhere [e.g., Jensen et al, 1983;Garvey and Pinnick, 1983;Szymanski and Liu, 1986;Liu et al, 1992]. Uncertainties involved in the measurement of atmospheric aerosols are discussed by Kim and Boatman [1990], Hering and McMurry [1991], and Strapp et al [1992].…”

Section: Laser-scattering Probesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aerosol size distributions in Arctic haze during the Polar Sunrise Experiment 1992

Staebler¹,

Hartog²,

Georgi³

et al. 1994

Measurements of particle number and mass size distributions of the atmospheric aerosol in the lower troposphere were made during the Polar Sunrise Experiment from January 20 to April 20, 1992, at Alert, Canada (82.5°N, 62.3°W). Particle number concentrations were determined by means of laser scattering particle counters and ranged from 50 to 600 cm−3 in the accumulation mode. Particle mass size distributions were measured using a Berner low‐pressure impactor; the total suspended particle mass ranged from 2.4 to 8.6 μg m−3. Average densities of (1.52±0.07) and (2.58±0.48) g cm−3 were calculated for accumulation and coarse mode particles, respectively, by combining impactor and optical size distributions. Boundary layer ozone concentrations were positively correlated with particles of diameters less than 0.35 μm and negatively with particles larger than 0.35 μm. Particles in the size range 6–12μm were detected exclusively during low ozone episodes.