Precision and Accuracy in the Determination of Sulfur Oxides, Fluoride, and Spherical Aluminosilicate Fly Ash Particles in Project MOHAVE

Abstract

The precision and accuracy of the determination of particu-late sulfate and fluoride, and gas phase SO and HF are estimated from the results obtained from collocated replicate samples and from collocated comparison samples for high-and low-volume filter pack and annular diffusion denuder samplers. The results of replicate analysis of collocated samples and replicate analyses of a given sample for the determination of spherical aluminosilicate fly ash particles have also been compared. Each of these species is being used in the chemical mass balance source apportionment of sulfur oxides in the Grand Canyon region as part of Project MOHAVE, and the precision and accuracy analyses given in this paper provide input to that analysis. The precision of the various measurements reported here is ±1.8 nmol/m and ±2.5 nmol/m for the determination of SO and sulfate, respectively, with an annular denuder. The precision is ±0.5 nmol/m and ±2.0 nmol/m for the determination of the same species with a high-volume or low-volume filter pack. The precision for the determination of the sum of HF(g) and fine particulate fluoride is ±0.3 nmol/m. The precision for the determination of aluminosilicate fly ash particles is ±100 particles/m. At high concentrations of the various species, reproducibility of the various measurements is ±10% to ±14% of the measured concentration. The concentrations of sulfate determined using filter pack samplers are frequently higher than those determined using diffusion denuder sampling systems. The magnitude of the difference (e.g., 2-10 nmol sulfate/m) is small, but important relative to the precision of the data and the concentrations of particulate sul-fate present (typically 5-20 nmol sulfate/m). The concentrations of SO(g) determined using a high-volume cascade impactor filter pack sampler are correspondingly lower than those obtained with diffusion denuder samplers. The concentrations of SO (SO(g) plus particulate sulfate) determined using the two samplers during Project MOHAVE at the Spirit Mountain, NV, and Hopi Point, AZ, sampling sites were in agreement. However, for samples collected at Painted Desert, AZ, and Meadview, AZ, the concentrations of SO and SO(g) determined with a high-volume cascade impactor filter pack sampler were frequently lower than those determined using a diffusion denuder sampling system. These two sites had very low ambient relative humidity, an average of 25%. Possible causes of observed differences in the SO(g) and sulfate results obtained from different types of samplers are given.

Sulfate Sampling Artifact from SO2 and Alkaline Soil

“…If a set of criteria is used to reject any points, it must be applied for all points. BYU used what Taylor calls ‘the rule of the huge error' rather than the more established Gibbs or Dixon criteria ( , ). The rule deletes a point if the difference from the mean of all other points exceeds four times the standard deviation of all other points.…”