Published in

American Chemical Society, Environmental Science and Technology, 17(48), p. 10251-10258, 2014

DOI: 10.1021/es502170j

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Vapor–Wall Deposition in Chambers: Theoretical Considerations

Journal article published in 2014 by Renee C. McVay ORCID, Christopher D. Cappa, John H. Seinfeld
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
  • Must obtain written permission from Editor
  • Must not violate ACS ethical Guidelines
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
  • Must obtain written permission from Editor
  • Must not violate ACS ethical Guidelines
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

In order to constrain the effects of vapor–wall deposition on measured secondary organic aerosol (SOA) yields in laboratory chambers, researchers recently varied the seed aerosol surface area in toluene oxidation and observed a clear increase in the SOA yield with increasing seed surface area (Zhang, X.; et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2014, 111, 5802). Using a coupled vapor–particle dynamics model, we examine the extent to which this increase is the result of vapor–wall deposition versus kinetic limitations arising from imperfect accommodation of organic species into the particle phase. We show that a seed surface area dependence of the SOA yield is present only when condensation of vapors onto particles is kinetically limited. The existence of kinetic limitation can be predicted by comparing the characteristic time scales of gas-phase reaction, vapor–wall deposition, and gas–particle equilibration. The gas–particle equilibration time scale depends on the gas–particle accommodation coefficient α_p. Regardless of the extent of kinetic limitation, vapor–wall deposition depresses the SOA yield from that in its absence since vapor molecules that might otherwise condense on particles deposit on the walls. To accurately extrapolate chamber-derived yields to atmospheric conditions, both vapor–wall deposition and kinetic limitations must be taken into account.