Atmos. Meas. Tech., 3, 91-112, 2010
www.atmos-meas-tech.net/3/91/2010/
doi:10.5194/amt-3-91-2010
© Author(s) 2010. This work is distributed
under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Field inter-comparison of eleven atmospheric ammonia measurement techniques
K. von Bobrutzki1,2, C. F. Braban1, D. Famulari1, S. K. Jones1, T. Blackall3, T. E. L. Smith3, M. Blom4, H. Coe5, M. Gallagher5, M. Ghalaieny5, M. R. McGillen5, C. J. Percival5, J. D. Whitehead5, R. Ellis6, J. Murphy6, A. Mohacsi7, A. Pogany8, H. Junninen9, S. Rantanen9, M. A. Sutton1, and E. Nemitz1
1Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) Edinburgh, Bush Estate, Penicuik, EH26 0QB, UK
2Leibniz-Institute for Agricultural Engineering, Potsdam, Germany
3Department of Geography, King's College London, London, UK
4Energy Research Foundation of the Netherlands, Petten, The Netherland
5School of Earth, Atmospheric and Environmental Science, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
6Department of Chemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
7Research Group on Laser Physics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary
8Department of Optics and Quantum Electronics, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary
9Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

Abstract. Eleven instruments for the measurement of ambient concentrations of atmospheric ammonia gas (NH3), based on eight different measurement methods were inter-compared above an intensively managed agricultural field in late summer 2008 in Southern Scotland. To test the instruments over a wide range of concentrations, the field was fertilised with urea midway through the experiment, leading to an increase in the average concentration from 10 to 100 ppbv. The instruments deployed included three wet-chemistry systems, one with offline analysis (annular rotating batch denuder, RBD) and two with online-analysis (Annular Denuder sampling with online Analysis, AMANDA; AiRRmonia), two Quantum Cascade Laser Absorption Spectrometers (a large-cell dual system; DUAL-QCLAS, and a compact system; c-QCLAS), two photo-acoustic spectrometers (WaSul-Flux; Nitrolux-100), a Cavity Ring Down Spectrosmeter (CRDS), a Chemical Ionisation Mass Spectrometer (CIMS), an ion mobility spectrometer (IMS) and an Open-Path Fourier Transform Infra-Red (OP-FTIR) Spectrometer. The instruments were compared with each other and with the average concentration of all instruments. An overall good agreement of hourly average concentrations between the instruments (R2>0.84), was observed for NH3 concentrations at the field of up to 120 ppbv with the slopes against the average ranging from 0.67 (DUAL-QCLAS) to 1.13 (AiRRmonia) with intercepts of −0.74 ppbv (RBD) to +2.69 ppbv (CIMS). More variability was found for performance for lower concentrations (<10 ppbv). Here the main factors affecting measurement precision are (a) the inlet design, (b) the state of inlet filters (where applicable), and (c) the quality of gas-phase standards (where applicable). By reference to the fast (1 Hz) instruments deployed during the study, it was possible to characterize the response times of the slower instruments.

Citation: von Bobrutzki, K., Braban, C. F., Famulari, D., Jones, S. K., Blackall, T., Smith, T. E. L., Blom, M., Coe, H., Gallagher, M., Ghalaieny, M., McGillen, M. R., Percival, C. J., Whitehead, J. D., Ellis, R., Murphy, J., Mohacsi, A., Pogany, A., Junninen, H., Rantanen, S., Sutton, M. A., and Nemitz, E.: Field inter-comparison of eleven atmospheric ammonia measurement techniques, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 3, 91-112, doi:10.5194/amt-3-91-2010, 2010.
 
Search AMT
Final Revised Paper
PDF XML
Citation
Discussion Paper
Share