Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-9-9551-2009
https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-9-9551-2009
16 Apr 2009
 | 16 Apr 2009
Status: this preprint was under review for the journal ACP. A revision for further review has not been submitted.

A comparison of water uptake by aerosols using two thermodynamic models

L. Xu, J. E. Penner, S. Metzger, and J. Lelieveld

Abstract. A comprehensive comparison between two aerosol thermodynamic equilibrium models used in chemistry-climate simulations, EQUISOLV II and EQSAM3, is conducted for various relative humidities and chemical compositions. Our results show that the concentration of total particulate matter as well as the associated aerosol liquid water content predicted by these two models is comparable for all conditions, which is important for radiative forcing estimates. The normalized absolute difference in the concentration of total particulate matter is 6% on average for all 200 conditions studied, leading to a regression coefficient of about 0.8 for the water associated with the aerosol between these two models. Relatively large discrepancies occur, however, at high ammonium, low nitrate/sodium concentrations at low and medium relative humidities (RH<60–70%), which is analyzed and discussed in detail. In addition, the prediction of the partitioning of ammonium and nitrate is investigated under realistic atmospheric conditions. The data collected during the Mediterranean Intensive Oxidant Study (MINOS) campaign are simulated using both models. The results show that both models can reproduce the concentration of total particulate matter for 90% of the time within a factor of 2, while the predicted concentration of aerosol water by these two models is significantly correlated. The largest difference exists near RH's of 70–80% which is the RH range for the transition of mixed ammonium salts from the solid to the liquid phase.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
L. Xu, J. E. Penner, S. Metzger, and J. Lelieveld
 
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
 
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
L. Xu, J. E. Penner, S. Metzger, and J. Lelieveld
L. Xu, J. E. Penner, S. Metzger, and J. Lelieveld

Viewed

Total article views: 1,852 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
1,226 438 188 1,852 182 174
  • HTML: 1,226
  • PDF: 438
  • XML: 188
  • Total: 1,852
  • BibTeX: 182
  • EndNote: 174
Views and downloads (calculated since 01 Feb 2013)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 01 Feb 2013)

Cited

Latest update: 13 Dec 2024
Download
Altmetrics