4.3 Article

Real refractive indices of α- and β-pinene and toluene secondary organic aerosols generated from ozonolysis and photo-oxidation

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2010JD014549

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Energy (Office of Science, BER) [DE-FG02-05ER64011:A004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The refractive index is the fundamental property controlling aerosol optical properties. Secondary organic aerosol (SOA) real refractive indices (m(r)) were derived from polar nephelometer measurements using parallel and perpendicular polarized 670 nm light, using a genetic algorithm method with Mie-Lorenz scattering theory and measured particle size distributions. The absolute error associated with the m(r) retrieval is +/- 0.03, and the instrument has sufficient sensitivity to achieve reliable retrievals for particles larger than about 200 nm. SOA generated by oxidizing alpha-pinene, beta-pinene, and toluene with ozone and NOx/sunlight are explored. Retrieved refractive indices for the SOA vary between 1.38 and 1.61, depending on several factors. For alpha- and beta-pinene ozonolysis, SOA m(r) ranges from 1.4 to 1.5 and, within the resolution of our method and bounds of our experiments, is not affected by the addition of an OH scavenger, and is only slightly dependent on the aerosol mass concentration. For photochemically generated SOA, m(r) generally increases as experiments progress, ranging from about 1.4 to 1.53 for alpha-pinene, 1.38 to 1.53 for beta-pinene, and 1.4 to 1.6 for toluene. The pinene SOA m(r) appear to decrease somewhat toward the end of the experiments. Aspects of the data suggest aerosol mass concentration, oxidation chemistry, temperature, and aerosol aging may all influence the refractive index. There is more work to be done before recommendations can be made for atmospheric applications, but our calculations of the resulting asymmetry parameter indicate that a single value for SOA refractive index will not be sufficient to accurately model radiative transfer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据