Characterization of a high-resolution supercritical differential mobility analyzer at reduced flow rates

References

• Almeida, J., S. Schobesberger, A. Kürten, I. K. Ortega, O. Kupiainen-Määttä, A. P. Praplan, A. Adamov, A. Amorim, F. Bianchi, M. Breitenlechner, et al. 2013. Molecular understanding of sulphuric acid-amine particle nucleation in the atmosphere. Nature 502 (7471):359–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attoui, M., M. Paragano, J. Cuevas, and J. Fernández de la Mora. 2013. Tandem DMA generation of strictly monomobile 1–3.5 nm particle standards. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 47 (5):499–511.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bezantakos, S., L. Huang, K. Barmpounis, M. Attoui, A. Schmidt-Ott, and G. Biskos. 2015. A cost-effective electrostatic precipitator for aerosol nanoparticle segregation. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 49 (1):iv–vi.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunelli, N. A., R. C. Flagan, and K. P. Giapis. 2009. Radial differential mobility analyzer for one nanometer particle classification. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 43 (1):53–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai, R., D.-R. Chen, J. Hao, and J. Jiang. 2017. A miniature cylindrical differential mobility analyzer for sub-3 nm particle sizing. J. Aerosol Sci. 106:111–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai, R., J. Jiang, S. Mirmec, and J. Kangasluoma. 2018. Parameters governing the performance of electrical mobility spectrometers for measuring aerosol size distributions down to ∼1 nm. J. Aerosol Sci.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, D.-R., D. Y. H. Pui, D. Hummes, H. Fissan, F. R. Quant, and G. J. Sem. 1998. Design and evaluation of a nanometer aerosol differential mobility analyzer (nano-DMA). J. Aerosol Sci. 29 (5–6):497–509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, Y. S. 2011. Condensation detection and diffusion size separation techniques. in Aerosol measurement: Principles, techniques, and applications, ed. P. Kulkarni, P. A. Baron, and K. Willeke, 366–67. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Fernández de la Mora, J. 2017. Expanded flow rate range of high-resolution nanoDMAs via improved sample flow injection at the aerosol inlet slit. J. Aerosol Sci. 113:265–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernández de la Mora, J., and J. Kozlowski. 2013. Hand-held differential mobility analyzers of high resolution for 1–30nm particles: Design and fabrication considerations. J. Aerosol Sci. 57:45–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flagan, R. C. 1999. On differential mobility analyzer resolution. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 30 (6):556–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrmann, W., T. Eichler, N. Bernardo, and J. Fernández de la Mora. 2000. Turbulent transition arises at Reynolds number 35,000 in a short Vienna type DMA with a large laminarization Inlet, in AAAR annual conference, St. Louis, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Jiang, J., M. Attoui, M. Heim, N. A. Brunelli, P. H. McMurry, G. Kasper, R. C. Flagan, K. Giapis, and G. Mouret. 2011a. Transfer functions and penetrations of five differential mobility analyzers for Sub-2 nm particle classification. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 45 (4):480–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang, J., M. Chen, C. Kuang, M. Attoui, and P. H. McMurry. 2011b. Electrical mobility spectrometer using a diethylene glycol condensation particle counter for measurement of aerosol size distributions down to 1 nm. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 45 (4):510–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang, J., J. Zhao, M. Chen, L. F. Eisele, J. Scheckman, J. B. Williams, C. Kuang, and P. H. McMurry. 2011c. First measurements of neutral atmospheric cluster and 1-2 nm particle number size distributions during nucleation events. Aerosol Sci. Technol. (ARL) 45 (4):ii–iv.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kandlikar, M., and C. Ramachandran. 1999. Inverse methods for analysing aerosol spectrometer measurements: A critical review. J. Aerosol Sci. 30 (4):413–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kangasluoma, J., L. R. Ahonen, T. M. Laurila, R. Cai, J. Enroth, S. B. Mazon, F. Korhonen, P. P. Aalto, M. Kulmala, M. Attoui, et al. 2018. Laboratory verification of a new high flow differential mobility particle sizer, and field measurements in Hyytiälä. J. Aerosol Sci. 124:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kangasluoma, J., M. Attoui, F. Korhonen, L. Ahonen, E. Siivola, and T. Petäjä. 2016. Characterization of a Herrmann-type high-resolution differential mobility analyzer. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 50 (3):222–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kangasluoma, J., H. Junninen, K. Lehtipalo, J. Mikkilä, J. Vanhanen, M. Attoui, M. Sipilä, D. R. Worsnop, M. Kulmala, and T. Petäjä. 2013. Remarks on ion generation for CPC detection efficiency studies in Sub-3-nm size range. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 47 (5):556–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kangasluoma, J., and J. Kontkanen. 2017. On the sources of uncertainty in the sub-3 nm particle concentration measurement. J. Aerosol Sci. 112:34–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlsson, M. N. A., and B. G. Martinsson. 2003. Methods to measure and predict the transfer function size dependence of individual DMAs. J. Aerosol Sci. 34 (5):603–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerminen, V.-M., X. Chen, V. Vakkari, T. Petäjä, M. Kulmala, and F. Biachi. 2018. Atmospheric new particle formation and growth: Review of field observations. Environ. Res. Lett. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aadf3c.
   Google Scholar
• Knutson, E. O. 1976. Extended electric mobility method for measuring aerosol particle size and concentration. In Fine particles: Aerosol generation, measurement, sampling, and analysis, ed. B. Y. H. Liu, 739–62. New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knutson, E. O., and K. T. Whitby. 1975. Aerosol classification by electric mobility: Apparatus, theory, and applications. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 6 (6):443–51.
   Google Scholar
• Kulmala, M., J. Kontkanen, H. Junninen, K. Lehtipalo, H. E. Manninen, T. Nieminen, T. Petaja, M. Sipila, S. Schobesberger, P. Rantala, et al. 2013. Direct observations of atmospheric aerosol nucleation. Science 339 (6122):943–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehtipalo, K., J. Leppä, J. Kontkanen, J. Kangasluoma, A. Franchin, D. Wimmer, S. Schobesberger, H. Junninen, T. Petäjä, M. Sipilä, et al. 2014. Methods for determining particle size distribution and growth rates between 1 and 3 nm using the particle size magnifier. Boreal Environ. Res. 19:215–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mui, W., H. Mai, A. J. Downard, J. H. Seinfeld, and R. C. Flagan. 2017. Design, simulation, and characterization of a radial opposed migration ion and aerosol classifier (ROMIAC). Aerosol Sci. Technol. 51 (7):801–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mui, W., D. A. Thomas, A. J. Downard, J. L. Beauchamp, J. H. Seinfeld, and R. C. Flagan. 2013. Ion mobility-mass spectrometry with a radial opposed migration ion and aerosol classifier (ROMIAC). Anal. Chem. 85 (13):6319–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Namgung, H. G., J. B. Kim, S. H. Woo, S. Park, M. Kim, M. S. Kim, G. N. Bae, D. Park, and S. B. Kwon. 2016. Generation of nanoparticles from friction between railway brake disks and pads. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50 (7):3453–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peineke, C., M. Attoui, and A. Schmidt-Ott. 2006. Using a glowing wire generator for production of charged, uniformly sized nanoparticles at high concentrations. J. Aerosol Sci. 37 (12):1651–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramachandran, G., and D. W. Cooper. 2011. Size distribution data analysis and presentation. In Aerosol measurement: Principles, techniques, and applications, ed. P. Kulkarni, P. A. Baron, and K. Willeke. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Reineking, A., and J. Porstendörfer. 1986. Measurements of particle loss functions in a differential mobility analyzer (TSI, model 3071) for different flow rates. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 5(4):483–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rönkkö, T., H. Kuuluvainen, P. Karjalainen, J. Keskinen, R. Hillamo, J. V. Niemi, L. Pirjola, H. J. Timonen, S. Saarikoski, E. Saukko, et al. 2017. Traffic is a major source of atmospheric nanocluster aerosol. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 114 (29):7549–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosser, S., and J. Fernández de la Mora. 2005. Vienna-Type DMA of high resolution and high flow rate. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 39 (12):1191–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sgro, L. A., A. Borghese, L. Speranza, A. C. Barone, P. Minutolo, A. Bruno, A. D’anna, and A. D’alessio. 2008. Measurements of nanoparticles of organic carbon and soot in flames and vehicle exhausts. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (3):859–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolzenburg, D., G. Steiner, and P. M. Winkler. 2017. A DMA-train for precision measurement of Sub-10 nm aerosol dynamics. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 10 (4):1639–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolzenburg, M. R. 1988. An ultrafine aerosol size distribution measuring system. PhD thesis, University of Minnesota.
   Google Scholar
• Stolzenburg, M. R. 2018. A review of transfer theory and characterization of measured performance for differential mobility analyzers. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 1. doi:10.1080/02786826.2018.1514101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolzenburg, M. R., and P. H. McMurry. 2008. Equations governing single and tandem DMA configurations and a new lognormal approximation to the transfer function. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 42 (6):421–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolzenburg, M. R., J. H. T. Scheckman, M. Attoui, H.-S. Han, and P. H. McMurry. 2018. Characterization of the TSI model 3086 differential mobility analyzer for classifying aerosols down to 1 nm. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 52 (7):748–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ude, S., and J. Fernández de la Mora. 2005. Molecular monodisperse mobility and mass standards from electrosprays of tetra-alkyl ammonium halides. J. Aerosol Sci. 36 (10):1224–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, H., A. G. Hallar, Y. You, A. Sedlacek, S. Springston, V. P. Kanawade, Y.-N. Lee, J. Wang, C. Kuang, R. L. McGraw, et al. 2014. Sub-3nm particles observed at the coastal and continental sites in the United States. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 119 (2):860–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar