% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Wisthaler:59609,
author = {Wisthaler, A. and Apel, E. C. and Bossmeyer, J. and Hansel,
A. and Junkermann, W. and Koppmann, R. and Meier, R. and
Müller, K. and Solomon, S. J. and Steinbrecher, R. and
Tillmann, R. and Brauers, T.},
title = {{T}echnical {N}ote: {I}ntercomparison of formaldehyde
measurements at the atmosphere simulation chamber {SAPHIR}},
journal = {Atmospheric chemistry and physics},
volume = {8},
issn = {1680-7316},
address = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
publisher = {EGU},
reportid = {PreJuSER-59609},
pages = {2189 - 2200},
year = {2008},
note = {Record converted from VDB: 12.11.2012},
abstract = {The atmosphere simulation chamber SAPHIR at the Research
Centre Julich was used to test the suitability of
state-of-the-art analytical instruments for the measurement
of gas-phase formaldehyde (HCHO) in air. Five analyzers
based on four different sensing principles were deployed: a
differential optical absorption spectrometer (DOAS),
cartridges for $2,4-dinitro\-phenyl\-hydrazine$ (DNPH)
derivatization followed by off-line high pressure liquid
chromatography (HPLC) analysis, two different types of
commercially available wet chemical sensors based on
Hantzsch fluorimetry, and a proton-transfer-reaction mass
spectrometer (PTR-MS). A new optimized mode of operation was
used for the PTR-MS instrument which significantly enhanced
its performance for online HCHO detection at low absolute
humidities.The instruments were challenged with typical
ambient levels of HCHO ranging from zero to several ppb.
Synthetic air of high purity and particulate-filtered
ambient air were used as sample matrices in the atmosphere
simulation chamber onto which HCHO was spiked under varying
levels of humidity and ozone. Measurements were compared to
mixing ratios calculated from the chamber volume and the
known amount of HCHO injected into the chamber; measurements
were also compared between the different instruments. The
formal and blind intercomparison exercise was conducted
under the control of an independent referee. A number of
analytical problems associated with the experimental set-up
and with individual instruments were identified, the overall
agreement between the methods was fair.},
keywords = {J (WoSType)},
cin = {ICG-2},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB791},
pnm = {Atmosphäre und Klima},
pid = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK406},
shelfmark = {Meteorology $\&$ Atmospheric Sciences},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000255511300003},
doi = {10.5194/acp-8-2189-2008},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/59609},
}