| Literature DB >> 28503004 |
Taina Yli-Juuti1, Aki Pajunoja1, Olli-Pekka Tikkanen1, Angela Buchholz1, Celia Faiola1, Olli Väisänen1, Liqing Hao1, Eetu Kari1, Otso Peräkylä2, Olga Garmash2, Manabu Shiraiwa3, Mikael Ehn2, Kari Lehtinen1,4, Annele Virtanen1.
Abstract
Secondary organic aerosols (SOA) forms a major fraction of organic aerosols in the atmosphere. Knowledge of SOA properties that affect their dynamics in the atmosphere is needed for improving climate models. By combining experimental and modeling techniques, we investigated the factors controlling SOA evaporation under different humidity conditions. Our experiments support the conclusion of particle phase diffusivity limiting the evaporation under dry conditions. Viscosity of particles at dry conditions was estimated to increase several orders of magnitude during evaporation, up to 109 Pa s. However, at atmospherically relevant relative humidity and time scales, our results show that diffusion limitations may have a minor effect on evaporation of the studied α-pinene SOA particles. Based on previous studies and our model simulations, we suggest that, in warm environments dominated by biogenic emissions, the major uncertainty in models describing the SOA particle evaporation is related to the volatility of SOA constituents.Entities:
Keywords: SOA; VBS; viscosity; volatility; α‐pinene
Year: 2017 PMID: 28503004 PMCID: PMC5405578 DOI: 10.1002/2016GL072364
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Geophys Res Lett ISSN: 0094-8276 Impact factor: 4.720
Figure 1Measured evaporation of particles with initial size 80 nm and model simulations at 80% RH. (a) Time evolution of particle diameter normalized with the initial diameter. Markers show measured evaporation under different humidity. The error bars in time originate from the chamber filling time. Well‐mixed particle model simulations at 80% RH: Size evolution with the best fit initial volatility distribution for 80% RH (red line in Figure 1a), and size evolution for the best fits from 20 genetic algorithm simulations (gray lines in Figure 1a). Size evolution with the initial volatility distribution calculated based on the flow tube mass loading and the Pathak et al. [2007] VBS parameterization and assuming varying vapor wall loss rate from complete instantaneous wall loss to no wall loss (light red shaded area in Figure 1a). (b‐e) Best fit initial particle volatility distribution for 80% RH and the evolution of particle composition. Variability in the initial volatility distribution (minimum and maximum as error bars) within the 20 genetic algorithm simulations is also shown in Figure 1b.
Figure 2Model simulations for evaporation of particles with initial size 80 nm under dry and 40% RH conditions. Time evolution of particle diameter normalized with the initial diameter (Figures 2a and 2b). Markers show measured evaporation under different humidity. The error bars in time originate from the chamber filling time. (a) Simulations for dry conditions: multilayer model using the initial VBS from the 80% RH experiment and assuming constant (dashed lines) or a composition‐dependent particle viscosity (black line) and well‐mixed particle model with the best fit initial composition for the dry 2 experiment (blue solid line). (b) Simulations for 40% RH: well‐mixed particle model with the initial VBS from 80% RH assuming an ideal solution (red dashed line) and with water uptake calculated based on HGF (blue dashed line; see Figure S3), multilayer model with the initial VBS from 80% RH and assuming a composition‐dependent particle viscosity (black line) and well‐mixed particle model simulation with the best fit initial composition at 40% RH. (c) Particle viscosities correspond to the model simulations shown with black lines in Figures 2a and 2b. Effective VBSs show the best fit initial VBS (bars) and variability within 20 genetic algorithm simulations (error bars) from the optimization of the well‐mixed particle model for (d) the dry and (e) 40% RH cases.