Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 965

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Toward a standardised thermal-optical protocol for measuring atmospheric organic and elemental carbon: the EUSAAR protocol

Open access
Cavalli, F., Viana, M., Yttri, K. E., Genberg, J., Putaud, J.-P.·2010·Atmospheric Measurement Techniques

Abstract

Abstract. Thermal-optical analysis is a conventional method for determining the carbonaceous aerosol fraction and for classifying it into organic carbon, OC, and elemental carbon, EC. Unfortunately, the different thermal evolution protocols in use can result in a wide elemental carbon-to-total carbon variation by up to a factor of five. In Europe, there is currently no standard procedure for determining the carbonaceous aerosol fraction which implies that data from different laboratories at various sites are of unknown accuracy and cannot be considered comparable. In the framework of the EU-project EUSAAR (European Supersites for Atmospheric Aerosol Research), a comprehensive study has been carried out to identify the causes of differences in the EC measured using different thermal evolution protocols; thereby the major positive and negative biases affecting thermal-optical analysis have been isolated and minimised to define an optimised protocol suitable for European aerosols. Our approach to improve the accuracy of the discrimination between OC and EC was essentially based on four goals. Firstly, charring corrections rely on faulty assumptions – e.g. pyrolytic carbon is considered to evolve completely before native EC throughout the analysis –, thus we have reduced pyrolysis to a minimum by favoring volatilisation of OC. Secondly, we have minimised the potential negative bias in EC determination due to early evolution of light absorbing carbon species at higher temperatures in the He-mode, including both native EC and combinations of native EC and pyrolytic carbon potentially with different specific attenuation cross section values. Thirdly, we have minimised the potential positive bias in EC determination resulting from the incomplete evolution of OC during the He-mode which then evolves during the He/O2-mode, potentially after the split point. Finally, we have minimised the uncertainty due to the position of the OC/EC split point on the FID response profile by introducing multiple desorption steps in the He/O2-mode. Based on different types of carbonaceous PM encountered across Europe, we have defined an optimised thermal evolution protocol, the EUSAAR_2 protocol, as follows: step 1 in He, 200 °C for 120 s; step 2 in He 300 °C for 150 s; step 3 in He 450 °C for 180 s; step 4 in He 650 °C for 180 s. For steps 1–4 in He/O2, the conditions are 500 °C for 120 s, 550 °C for 120 s, 700 ° C for 70 s, and 850 °C for 80 s, respectively.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5194/amt-3-79-2010

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 965

Metadata

Authors
Cavalli, F., Viana, M., Yttri, K. E., Genberg, J., & Putaud, J.-P.
Venue
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Published
2010-01-26
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
79-89
ISSN
  • 1867-1381 (ISSN-L)
  • 1867-8548
OpenAlex
W2121749506
Cited by
965
References
1
FWCI
25.66
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

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.