the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Condensation Diffusion Charging – Particle Number Measurement of High Concentrations Down to 2.5 nm
Abstract. Particle number (PN) measurement of particles smaller than 10 nm is challenging and has so far primarily relied on condensation particle counters (CPCs). In this work, we present a concept that combines a condensational growth stage with a diffusion charger to allow for PN measurement with a lower particle cut-off diameter of 2.5 nm with the ability to measure PN concentrations exceeding 106 cm-3. We use diethylene glycol as working fluid to magnify ultrafine particles into monodisperse µm-sized droplets, which are then charged by a corona charger and finally detected with a Faraday cup electrometer. The sensor developed in this work, the Condensation Diffusion Charger (CDC), shows a size-independent counting efficiency above 10 nm, similar to CPCs. Finite element simulations were performed to model the particle activation and subsequent droplet growth. The particle activation was verified experimentally and showed a counting efficiency of 50 % for particles with 3 nm mobility diameter. The CDC was tested on exhaust emissions at a chassis dynamometer for category L-vehicles to demonstrate its viability for vehicle emission measurements. The results closely correlate with a 2.5 nm reference CPC. Our findings indicate that this method offers an approach for a compact and portable PN measurement system for ultrafine particles at very high concentrations without the need for dilution.
- Preprint
(1911 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(1079 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 07 Aug 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on ar-2025-20', Anonymous Referee #1, 16 Jul 2025
reply
In this manuscript an interesting new approach for particle counting is presented. Two techniques, condensation particle counting and electrical measurement based on diffusion charging are combined. Particles are first grown to micrometer sizes by condensation and are then charged in a corona charger and measured in a Faraday cup electrometer. This could result in a lower detection limit for size and concentration compared to DC-Devices and to higher measurable concentrations compared to CPC’s. The paper is in most parts clearly written and easy to read.
Here are some remarks, which tom my opinion would be helpful for the reader:
It would be nice to have a real quantitative comparison between the new device and in particular CPC’s, including the photometric mode offered by several CPC’s. Now many statements are more qualitative, the photometric mode is not mentioned. What are the quantitative advantages?
Lines 55ff: A slightly more detailed description of the Saturator/Condenser would be helpful.
Information, how the diffusion charger is influenced by the working fluid should be given (may significantly influence ion mobility)
Equation (2): as written here is for strictly monodisperse aerosol and the exponent (here 1.1) depends on the charger design, this should at least me mentioned or the integral form could be shown.
Equation (3): As the detector is operated in the mode where the induced current is measured, there is no stationary current while the precipitator is on or off (the stationary current is zero in both cases, this should be described better.
Line 161: an explanation why DEG can condense on sub 3 nm particles without homogeneous nucleation would be interesting
Chapter 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3: effects are discussed qualitatively, but not the specific impact on the device.
5.1: Did I correctly understand that in a first step a COMSOL simulation treats the flow ant heat transfer, determining the space resolved supersaturation. Then the particle growth is calculated in Matlab? If I am right, how is the change in supersaturation by the condensation process considered?
Experiment: Some experiments are done in pure N2, some in air, some with influence of the WF. This will result in different charging efficiencies, which are not mentioned or did I misunderstand something?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/ar-2025-20-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
80 | 15 | 11 | 106 | 14 | 7 | 11 |
- HTML: 80
- PDF: 15
- XML: 11
- Total: 106
- Supplement: 14
- BibTeX: 7
- EndNote: 11
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1