The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Intercomparison of four different in-situ techniques for ambient formaldehyde measurements in urban air
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. Results from an intercomparison of several currently used in-situ techniques for the measurement of atmospheric formaldehyde (CH2O) are presented. The measurements were carried out at Bresso, an urban site in the periphery of Milan (Italy) as part of the FORMAT-I field campaign. Eight instruments were employed by six independent research groups using four different techniques: Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy (DOAS), Fourier Transform Infra Red (FTIR) interferometry, the fluorimetric Hantzsch reaction technique (five instruments) and a chromatographic technique employing C18-DNPH-cartridges (2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine). White type multi-reflection systems were employed for the optical techniques in order to avoid spatial CH2O gradients and ensure the sampling of nearly the same air mass by all instruments. Between 23 and 31 July 2002, up to 13 ppbv of CH2O were observed. The concentrations lay well above the detection limits of all instruments. The formaldehyde concentrations determined with DOAS, FTIR and the Hantzsch instruments were found to agree within ±11%, with the exception of one Hantzsch instrument, which gave systematically higher values. The two hour integrated samples by DNPH yielded up to 25% lower concentrations than the data of the continuously measuring instruments averaged over the same time period. The consistency between the DOAS and the Hantzsch method was better than during previous intercomparisons in ambient air with slopes of the regression line not significantly differing from one. The differences between the individual Hantzsch instruments could be attributed in part to the calibration standards used. Possible systematic errors of the methods are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Formaldehyde in the Indoor Environment
Salthammer, T., Mentese, S., & Marutzky, R. (2010) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr800399g · Cited by 1,808
Atmospheric composition change – global and regional air quality
Monks, P. S., Granier, C., Fuzzi, S., Stohl, A., Williams, M. L., Akimoto, H., Amann, M., Baklanov, A., Baltensperger, U., Bey, I., et al. (2009) · Atmospheric Environment · doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.08.021 · Cited by 872
Self-citationThe Molecular Identification of Organic Compounds in the Atmosphere: State of the Art and Challenges
Nozière, B., Kalberer, M., Claeys, M., Allan, J., D’Anna, B., Decesari, S., Finessi, E., Glasius, M., Grgić, I., Hamilton, J. F., et al. (2015) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr5003485 · Cited by 656
TUNABLE DIODE LASER ABSORPTION SPECTROSCOPY (TDLAS) IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES – A REVIEW
Lackner, M. (2007) · Reviews in Chemical Engineering · doi:10.1515/revce.2007.23.2.65 · Cited by 349
Derivatization techniques for determination of carbonyls in air
Szulejko, J. E., & Kim, K.-H. (2015) · TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.trac.2014.08.010 · Cited by 67
Metadata
- Authors
- Hak, C., Pundt, I., Trick, S., Kern, C., Platt, U., Dommen, J., Ordóñez, C., Prévôt, A. S. H., Junkermann, W., Astorga-Lloréns, C., Larsen, B. R., Mellqvist, J., Strandberg, A., Yu, Y., Galle, B., Kleffmann, J., Lörzer, J. C., Braathen, G. O., & Volkamer, R.
- Venue
- Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2005-11-02
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2881-2900
- ISSN
- 1680-7316 (ISSN-L)
- 1680-7324
- OpenAlex
- W2105970143
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Intercomparison of four different in-situ techniques for ambient formaldehyde measurements in urban air. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/acp-5-2881-2005
- The paper
- Hak, C., Pundt, I., Trick, S., Kern, C., Platt, U., Dommen, J., Ordóñez, C., Prévôt, A. S. H., Junkermann, W., Astorga-Lloréns, C., Larsen, B. R., Mellqvist, J., Strandberg, A., Yu, Y., Galle, B., Kleffmann, J., Lörzer, J. C., Braathen, G. O., & Volkamer, R. (2005). Intercomparison of four different in-situ techniques for ambient formaldehyde measurements in urban air. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-2881-2005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.