Research on the fractal model and calibration of the aerosol mass concentration measurement based on the particle group light scattering

Fang Gu; Yi Liu; Jiahong Zhang; Yunyun Chen; Fengping Cui

doi:10.3788/COL201614.112901

Journals >Chinese Optics Letters >Volume 14 >Issue 11 >Page 112901 > Article

Chinese Optics Letters
Vol. 14, Issue 11, 112901 (2016)

Research on the fractal model and calibration of the aerosol mass concentration measurement based on the particle group light scattering

Fang Gu^1、*, Yi Liu³, Jiahong Zhang^2、4, Yunyun Chen¹, and Fengping Cui¹

Author Affiliations

¹School of Physics and Optoelectronic Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China

²Jiangsu Collaborative Innovation Center on Atmospheric Environment and Equipment Technology, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China

³School of Electronic & Information Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China

⁴Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Meteorological Observation and Signal Processing, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China

show less

DOI: 10.3788/COL201614.112901 Cite this Article Set citation alerts

Fang Gu, Yi Liu, Jiahong Zhang, Yunyun Chen, Fengping Cui. Research on the fractal model and calibration of the aerosol mass concentration measurement based on the particle group light scattering[J]. Chinese Optics Letters, 2016, 14(11): 112901 Copy Citation Text

EndNote(RIS)

BibTex

Plain Text

show less

Abstract

In order to improve the inversion precision of aerosol mass concentrations based on the particle group light scattering method, the concept that particles through a laser beam are equivalent to an aggregate is proposed. A fractal model for aerosol mass concentration using the signal amplitude distribution of aggregates is presented, and then the subsection calibration method is given. The experimental results show that the mass concentrations inversed by this model agree well with those measured by the norm-referenced instrument. The average relative errors of the two experiments are 5.6% and 6.0%, respectively, which are less than those obtained by the conventional inversion model.