Effect of dry or wet substrate deposition on the organic volume fraction of core–shell aerosol particles

Lee, Hansol D.; Kaluarachchi, Chathuri P.; Hasenecz, Elias S.; Zhu, Jonic Z.; Popa, Eduard; Stone, Elizabeth A.; Tivanski, Alexei V.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2033-2019

Articles | Volume 12, issue 3

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2033-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-2033-2019

© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 12, issue 3

Research article

|

02 Apr 2019

Research article |

| 02 Apr 2019

Effect of dry or wet substrate deposition on the organic volume fraction of core–shell aerosol particles

Hansol D. Lee, Chathuri P. Kaluarachchi, Elias S. Hasenecz, Jonic Z. Zhu, Eduard Popa, Elizabeth A. Stone, and Alexei V. Tivanski

Download

Final revised paper (published on 02 Apr 2019)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 20 Nov 2018)
Supplement to the preprint

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Comments', Anonymous Referee #1, 13 Dec 2018
- AC3: 'reply to Anonymous Referee #1', Alexei Tivanski, 08 Jan 2019
RC2: 'Interactive comment on “Dry versus wet? Implications on aerosol impaction and organic volume fraction” by Lee et al.', Anonymous Referee #2, 18 Dec 2018
- AC2: 'reply to Anonymous Referee #2', Alexei Tivanski, 08 Jan 2019
AC1: 'reply to Anonymous Referee #1', Alexei Tivanski, 08 Jan 2019

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

AR by Alexei Tivanski on behalf of the Authors (22 Jan 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (27 Jan 2019) by Mingjin Tang

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (10 Feb 2019)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Effect of dry or wet substrate deposition on aerosol organic volume fraction

Lee et al.,

The authors used AFM to determine organic volume fraction in internally mixed particle SSA. They generated the glucose and NaCl bineray mixture to form core-shell model particles. The mixing state were quantified by measuring the organic volume of individual particles from AFM and compared to the filter-based sample measured by HPLC. They concluded the dry deposited single particle OVF deviated from the bulk HPLC data by up to 60%, but consistent with wet deposited single particles. Furtherly, they used hygroscopic system to make hydr-dehy cycle and found the OVF can be corrected during the cycle. As the technique paper, I might be thinking the paper is acceptable for AMT. This paper could be useful for microscopic analysis for single particles to calculate the OVF. However, the substantial revision should be needed.

(1) The title is not property. In many literatures for single particle analysis using electron microscopy, the organic coating is very common on secondary sulfate {Adachi, 2008;Li, 2016;Ault, 2017 }. However, these internally mixed particles have not clear boundary between OM and sulfate. Because AFM could not determine chemical compositions and completely identifies the coating and core based on their boundary or phases, it not easily identifies the SOA coating. In this study, the authors choose very typical model of NaCl and glucose. I might suspect that the model could not be used in all the internally mixed particles. To concisely deliver the information, the title should be revised properties.
Effect of dry or wet substrate deposition on organic volume fraction based on the internal mixture of glucose and NaCl?
Ault, A. P., and J. L. Axson (2017), Atmospheric Aerosol Chemistry: Spectroscopic and Microscopic Advances, Analytical Chemistry, 89(1), 430-452.
Li et al., (2016), A conceptual framework for mixing structures in individual aerosol particles, J. Geophys. Res., 121(22), 13,784-713,798.
Adachi, K., and P. R. Buseck (2008), Internally mixed soot, sulfates, and organic matter in aerosol particles from Mexico City, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8(21), 6469-6481.

(2) I also might suggest that the authors should add statements whether the model could be extendedly in somewhere context?
(3) P2 5-10. I think the authors should separate what references are concerning the bulk and other concerning single particles. That should be readable for the potential readers. I also noticed that some important references are missed here. Recently, they {Chi, 2015;Laskin, 2012}proved the aged SSA particles have clearly coating and these coating gernally internally mixed with organic matter. This could be useful for the purposes of this study.
Chi et al., (2015), Sea salt aerosols as a reactive surface for inorganic and organic acidic gases in the Arctic troposphere, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15(19), 11341-11353.
Laskin et al., (2012), Tropospheric chemistry of internally mixed sea salt and organic particles: Surprising reactivity of NaCl with weak organic acids, J. Geophys. Res., 117(D15), D15302.

(4) P3 L10 core-shell
(5) I am confused why the dry deposition of single particles still has spread on the substrate. If the authors called dry deposition, are these single particles solid? If they are solid particles, how they make morphology deform? Do these particles deforming as shown in Figure 3 influence by the high volume flow of MOUDI? Maybe the authors need write more to explain a little.
(6) It is not clear how to use these findings in the future for other studies. I might ask the authors tell the potential readers their useful meaning in the future. P8 L30 I would like see some specific fields.

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (23 Feb 2019) by Mingjin Tang

AR by Alexei Tivanski on behalf of the Authors (05 Mar 2019) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (07 Mar 2019) by Mingjin Tang

Short summary

Dry and wet aerosol deposition modes are commonly used to collect particles on a solid substrate for experiments. We demonstrate, using single-particle microscopy and bulk methods, how the substrate-deposited particles with two components can yield the same core–shell morphology but different shell thicknesses depending on the deposition method. Thus we strongly advise future works to use wet deposition when possible to obtain accurate assessment of the single-particle organic volume fraction.