Download - Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations
![Page 1: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations
Roya BahreiniAMS Clinic 2012
Especially an important consideration when presenting AMS data to those outside the users’
community!
![Page 2: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Calculating mass concentrations
QCERIEIEmass
speciesNOspecies
1111
3
Bahreini et al., JGR, 2009
Parameter Uncertainty Procedure Reference
IENO3 10% Routine NH4NO3 cals
RIEspecies Jimenez et al., 2003; Alfarra et al., 2004; Canagaratna et al., 2007
NH4+ 10% Routine NH4NO3 cals
SO42- 15% Previous lab+
computational resultsOA 20% Previous lab+
computational resultsCE 30% Previous lab+ field
resultsMatthew et al., 2008, Middlebrook
et al., 2012Q <0.5% Routine cals
TE 10% Lens transmission
![Page 3: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Error propagation
John R. Taylor. (1997) An Introduction to Error Analysis: The study of uncertainties in physical measurements. (Second Edition) Sausalito, CA: University Science books.
![Page 4: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Overall uncertainty
Q, IE, CE uncertainties
Q, IE, CE, TE uncertainties
NH4+ 33% 34%
NO3- 33% 34%
SO42- 35% 36%
OA 37% 38%
• Total AMS mass: Overall uncertainty of 20-35%
• Note: uncertainty in the ratios may be better since some of the parameters cancel out (for example, NH4/SO4 has a better uncertainty since uncertaitny in IENO3, CE, and Q cancel out.
![Page 5: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Accuracy (uncertainty) vs. Precision
• Precision: • Noise in the data • detection limit
High AccuracyLow Precision
Low AccuracyHigh Precision
![Page 6: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Mass Closure• Mass Ratio =(AMS mass+BC mass)/(volume×r)
– AMS mass: 30% uncertainty– BC mass: 15% uncertainty– Volume: 30-45% uncertainty from UHSAS– mass weighted density (r): 7% uncertainty (10%
uncertainty of rOA )
8.1/25.1/75.1/)( 2434
2434
BCOASONONHBCOASONONH
r
Mass Ratio: Overall uncertainty of 45%
![Page 7: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Mass closure:Mass Ratio
Middlebrook et al., AST, 2012
2s circle of combined uncertainties
x
![Page 8: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Aerosol Acidity Effect
NH4+
,predict=18×(2×SO42-/96 +NO3
-/62 +Cl-/35)
“Apparent CE”(AMS w/ CE=1)
• Acidity , CE
CEdry = max (0.45, 1.0 − 0.73 ×NH4/NH4,predict) [Eq. 4]
![Page 9: Uncertainties in AMS mass concentrations](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56816286550346895dd2f78e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Aerosol Nitrate Effect
ANMF=80/62×NO3-/(SO4
2-+NO3-+Cl-+NH4
++OA)
ANMF , CE
CEdry = max(0.45, 0.0833 + 0.9167×ANMF) [ Eq. 6]
“Apparent CE”(AMS w/ CE=1)