The Composition of PM10 as collected by a Conventional TEOM, a Modified TEOM and a Partisol Gravimetric Monitor at a Kerbside Site in the North East of England
- 86 Downloads
The composition of airborne particulate matter sampled by a conventional TEOM®, an experimental modified TEOM, operated at a lower temperature but fitted with a drier to remove moisture and a Partisol®, installed at a kerbside site in the North East of England, has been investigated. The results indicate that there is a seasonal variation in the composition of PM10 as sampled by the three monitors, with chloride concentration being significantly higher in the winter. The Partisol was found to sample a higher mass of chloride and nitrate, however the differences between the monitors was only significant for chloride. Both TEOM's were found to sample a greater mass of sulphate, although the variability in the data collected meant that significance of the results was not proven statistically. The range of artifacts associated with PM10 monitors is reviewed. Difficulties in the interpretation of results due to the variable nature of airborne particulate matter and the ability of filter based systems to accurately represent the composition of atmospheric particles are considered.
Keywordsairborne particles monitoring composition TEOM Partisol
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- APEG: 1999, Source Apportionment of Airborne Particulate Matter in the UnitedKingdom, Airborne Particulates Expert Group.Google Scholar
- Ayers, G. P., Keywood, M. D. and Gras, J. L.: 1999, ‘TEOM vs. manual gravimetric methodsfor determination of PM2.5 aerosol mass concentrations’, AtmosphericEnvironment 33, 3717–3721.Google Scholar
- McMurry, P. H.: 2000, ‘A Review of Atmospheric Aerosol Measurements’, AtmosphericEnvironment 34, 1959–1999.Google Scholar
- Meyer, M., Lijek, J. and Ono, D.: 1992, ‘Continuous PM10 measurements in awoodsmoke environment, PM10 standards and non-traditional particulate controls’, in:J. C. Chow and D. M. Ono (Eds), J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 21(1), 24–38.Google Scholar
- Price, M., Bulpitt, S. and Meyer, M.: 2003, ‘A comparison of PM10 Monitors at aKerbside Site in the North East of England’, Atmospheric Environment (in press).Google Scholar
- Seinfeld, J. H. and Pandis, S. N.: 1997, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Wiley.Google Scholar
- tenBrink, H., Maenhaut, W., Hitzenberger, R., Gnauk, T., Spindler, G., Even, A., Xugang, C., Bauer, H., Puxbaum, H. and Putaud, J.: 2004, INTERCOMP 2000: The comparability of methods in usein Europe for measuring the carbon content of aerosol’, Atmospheric Environment 38(38).Google Scholar