<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AMT</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Measurement Techniques</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AMT</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Meas. Tech.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1867-8548</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/amt-16-3505-2023</article-id><title-group><article-title>Characterisation of a self-sustained, water-based condensation particle counter for aircraft cruising pressure level operation</article-title><alt-title>Characterisation of a water-based CPC for low-pressure operation​​​​​​​</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Characterisation of a water-based CPC for low-pressure operation​​​​​​​}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{P. Weber et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff4">
          <name><surname>Weber</surname><given-names>Patrick</given-names></name>
          <email>p.weber@fz-juelich.de</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6617-7189</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Bischof</surname><given-names>Oliver F.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Fischer</surname><given-names>Benedikt</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Berg</surname><given-names>Marcel</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Hering</surname><given-names>Susanne</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6536-310X</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Spielman</surname><given-names>Steven</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Lewis</surname><given-names>Gregory</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff4">
          <name><surname>Petzold</surname><given-names>Andreas</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2504-1680</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Bundke</surname><given-names>Ulrich</given-names></name>
          <email>u.bundke@fz-juelich.de</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5484-8099</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Institute of Energy and Climate Research 8 – Troposphere (IEK-8), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Jülich, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Particle Instruments, TSI GmbH, Aachen, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Aerosol Dynamics Inc, Berkeley, CA 94710, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Institute for Atmospheric and Environmental Research, University of
Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Institute of Energy and Climate Research 5 – Photovoltaic (IEK-5), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Jülich, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Patrick Weber (p.weber@fz-juelich.de) and Ulrich Bundke (u.bundke@fz-juelich.de)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>21</day><month>July</month><year>2023</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>16</volume>
      <issue>14</issue>
      <fpage>3505</fpage><lpage>3514</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>11</day><month>November</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>28</day><month>November</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>5</day><month>May</month><year>2023</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>14</day><month>May</month><year>2023</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2023 Patrick Weber et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2023</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023.html">This article is available from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e184">Aerosol particle number concentration measurements are a
crucial part of aerosol research. Vertical profile measurements and
high-altitude/low-pressure performance of the respective instruments become
more important for remote sensing validation and a vital tool for the
observation of climate variables. This study tests the new, commercially
available water condensation particle counter (MAGIC 210-LP) for the
deployment at aircraft cruising pressure levels that the European research
infrastructure IAGOS (In-service Aircraft for a Global Observing System;
<uri>http://www.iagos.org</uri>, last access: 2 May 2023) is aiming for by operating measurement instrumentation onboard passenger aircraft. We conducted laboratory experiments for conditions
to simulate passenger aircraft flight altitude at operation pressure. We
demonstrate that this type of water condensation particle counter shows
excellent agreement with a butanol-based instrument used in parallel. A
Faraday cup aerosol electrometer serves as the reference instrument.
Experiments are performed with test aerosol ammonium sulfate and fresh
combustion soot at pressure levels ranging from 700 to 200 hPa. For soluble particles like ammonium sulfate, the 50 % detection efficiency cut-off diameter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is around 5 nm and does not differ significantly for all
performed experiments. For non-soluble fresh soot particles, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
cut-off diameter of approximately 10 nm does not vary substantially as a
function of pressure, whereas the 90 % detection efficiency cut-off
diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increases from 19 nm at 700 hPa to 37 nm at 200 hPa. The overall counting efficiency for particles larger than 40 nm reaches 100 % for working pressures of 200 hPa and higher.</p>
  </abstract>
    
<funding-group>
<award-group id="gs1">
<funding-source>Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung</funding-source>
<award-id>01LK1301A</award-id>
</award-group>
<award-group id="gs2">
<funding-source>Forschungszentrum Jülich</funding-source>
<award-id>HITEC</award-id>
</award-group>
</funding-group>
</article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e232">Condensation particle counters (CPCs) experienced a rise in use in recent
years, driven by the increasing awareness of the adverse effects of
particles on air quality and public health (von
Schneidemesser et al., 2015). Specifically, the monitoring of atmospheric
aerosol on the ground (McMurry, 2000) as well as on airborne platforms
(Petzold et al., 2013) and the measurement of exhaust aerosol
from various sources (Giechaskiel et al., 2009; Petzold et al., 2011;
Bischof et al., 2020), indoor aerosol (Salimifard et al., 2020),
and airborne viruses in the still ongoing pandemic (Somsen et al., 2020) are current key applications of condensation particles counters.</p>
      <p id="d1e235">A condensation particle counter (CPC) measures the aerosol particle number
concentration by activating nanometre-sized particles in a supersaturated
environment and further growing them to optically detectable droplets in the
lower micrometre size range. Single particles are subsequently detected and
counted utilising a photodetector to measure the intensity of the scattered
radiation of a laser beam. John Aitken is known for his early experiments in
which he counted particles that had grown in an expansion<?pagebreak page3506?> chamber due to the
supersaturation of water vapour (Aitken, 1888).</p>
      <p id="d1e238">In general terms, the measurement principle of a CPC can be broken down into
three steps: saturation, by which a saturated vapour of a working fluid is
formed inside the CPC; supersaturation and subsequent condensation, by which
vapour condenses on the particle; and detection, by which the enlarged
particles scatter light when passing through a laser beam which is then
counted with a photodiode – see e.g. Bischof (2022), Hinds (1999), and
Cheng (2011).</p>
      <p id="d1e241">Today, mainly three working fluids are in use: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-butyl alcohol (or
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-butanol), water, and isopropyl alcohol (2-propanol) or isopropanol. For
low-pressure applications, perfluorotributylamine can be used. For all
working fluids, detection efficiency experiments have been conducted over a
specific operation pressure range (e.g. Brock et al., 2000; Bundke et
al., 2015; Gallar et al., 2006; Hermann et al., 2007; Williamson et al.,
2018), which demonstrated the applicability of each working fluid for
low-pressure operation CPCs. It should be noted that the use of both butanol
and isopropanol is limited by the fact that (1) both are flammable liquids
and (2) can take up water at high humidity, which influences the counting
efficiency, whereas water has the advantage to avoid health and safety
concerns of butanol. Disadvantageously, water has a three times higher mass
diffusion coefficient than butanol, which increases the consumption of the
working fluid during operation (Hering et al., 2005; Mei et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e259">Global aerosol observation is targeted by the European research
infrastructure IAGOS (In-service Aircraft for a Global Observing System) (Petzold et al., 2015), which aims to cover all
essential climate variables of the atmosphere, including aerosol particles
(Bojinski et al., 2014) by regular and global-scale measurements
conducted on board of a fleet of passenger aircraft equipped with automated
scientific instrumentation. The IAGOS aerosol instrument using butanol-based
CPC is described in detail by Bundke et al. (2015) and provided the first
results during the observation of the Raikoke volcanic ash plume by IAGOS
(Osborne et al., 2022). However, because of
its flammability, butanol on passenger aircraft requires special permission,
which we could not attain. Instead, the application of water-based CPCs is
highly advisable, mainly under consideration of flight security aspects.</p>
      <p id="d1e262">This study is part of the development of a new air quality instrument for
IAGOS in response to these flight safety aspects. The package consists of a
modified portable optical particle spectrometer (POPS; Gao et al., 2016; originally
developed by NOAA), which measures the particle size distribution in the
diameter range from 125 nm to 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m; four cavity attenuated phase
shift (CAPS; Kebabian et al., 2005, 2007; Aerodyne
Research Inc., Billerica, MA, USA) instruments to measure the particle
extinction coefficients at different wavelengths as well as the NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
concentration; and finally the water-based MAGIC 210-LP CPC to measure the
total particle number concentration, which is characterised in this work.</p>
      <p id="d1e282">The new water-based condensation particle counter (MAGIC 210-LP; Moderated
Aerosol Growth with Internal water Cycling – Low Pressure) for low-pressure
applications down to 300 hPa characterised in this study was recently
introduced to the market by Aerosol Dynamics Inc. and is based on the
standard MAGIC CPC, which contains a pre-humidifier, where the aerosol
sampling flow is guided to a continuous wet wick with different temperature
zones. The humidified sample flow starts with the cold conditioner region,
then the warm initiator and a cold moderator zone before finally passing the
optics head (Hering et al., 2019). The MAGIC 210-LP CPC was
subjected to counting efficiency experiments for a pressure range down to
200 hPa and different types of test aerosol particles representing salt
particles and non-soluble particles. The conducted experiments were part of
the qualification of the individual components of the new IAGOS air quality
instrument.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Methods</title>
      <p id="d1e293">A schematic of the experimental set-up is shown in Fig. 1. We used a
nebuliser to atomise an ammonium sulfate (AS) solution to provide a steady
and constant particle production in size distribution and number
concentration (constant output atomiser; Model 3076, TSI Inc., Shoreview,
MN, USA) (Liu and Pui, 1975; TSI Inc. Model 3076, manual).
After the aerosol flow passes through a diffusion dryer tube, the relative
humidity reaches levels below 5 %. The sample flow follows a charging
process by passing through a radioactive Am-241 source and the
classification in a monodisperse aerosol takes place by a Vienna-type
differential mobility analyser (DMA; Model M-DMA 55-U, Grimm Aerosol Technik
GmbH &amp; Co. KG, Ainring, Germany). The aerosol enters the low-pressure
zone by passing through a critical orifice. The aerosol is diluted in the
mixing chamber with aerosol-filtered air. The pressure is controlled by a
LabVIEW programme through multiple mass flow controllers with a PID
(proportional integral derivative) controller approach. At 200 hPa, the
measured standard deviation was less than 0.1 hPa with an integration time
of 100 s. Furthermore, the relative humidity is actively controlled by
adding a stable humidified air flow into the system through the mixing
chamber, which is limited to approximately 30 % relative humidity.
Temperature, inline pressure, and relative humidity are measured in the
mixing chamber. Water vapour can be added to test particle activation growth
effects for different relative humidity levels. The volume of the mixing
chamber is 500 mL with a flow rate of 10 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. This leads to a flushing
time of roughly 3 s and an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mi>e</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-folding time of 1.8 s for 63 %. After
passing through the mixing chamber, the aerosol flow is guided to the
measuring instruments using individual isokinetic, iso-axial samplers
located in the centre of the<?pagebreak page3507?> sample line. The diffusion losses are similar
for all instruments. The flexible conductive sampling tubing length from the
line to the instruments is set to 25 cm for instruments sampling at a flow
of 0.6 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and adjusted proportionally to instruments with a different
sampling flow. A Sky-CPC 5.411 (Grimm) was used as a well-characterised
butanol condensation particle counter (Bundke et al., 2015). An aerosol
electrometer was used as a traceable reference instrument for particle
counting measurements (FCE; Model 5.705, Grimm). The instrument of interest
was the newly developed Moderated Aerosol Growth with Internal Water Cycling
CPC (MAGIC 210-LP; Aerosol Dynamics Inc, Berkeley CA, USA). For the fresh
flame soot measurements, the nebuliser and the dehydration tube were
replaced by a miniature inverted flame soot generator (Argonaut Scientific
Corp., Edmonton, AB, Canada). Prior studies provide greater detail
(Bundke et al., 2015; Bischof, 2022).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e329">Flow schematic of the laboratory set-up for the low-pressure
characterisation with two aerosol sources. The inline pressure is controlled
via mass flow controllers (MFCs), the aerosol size classification is ensured
with a differential mobility analyser (DMA), and the Faraday cup electrometer
(FCE) functions as a reference instrument for particle counting.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e338">The DMA was operated stepwise for 30 s for each voltage level
corresponding to different particle sizes starting at an upper limit of 140 nm and going down to 2.5 nm. This size limit is set by the fact that we used the 8.8 cm tube and a 6 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> sheath flow for a high accuracy and low-mobility size half-width. To avoid transition effects and to achieve a uniform aerosol inside all measuring instruments, the first 15 s for
each particle size setting of the DMA were excluded from the dataset.
Earlier experiments have shown that this time is sufficient to flush the
system.</p>
      <p id="d1e354">The inverted flame soot generator was operated with an
oxidation-air-to-propane ratio of 7.5 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> air to 0.0625 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> propane.
This flow setting ensures stable low organic carbon soot production
(Bischof et al., 2020; Kazemimanesh et al., 2019).</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SSx1" specific-use="unnumbered">
  <title>Data analysis procedure</title>
      <p id="d1e386">A significant issue for measuring nanometre-sized particles arises from
using a DMA as a size selector based on particle mobility; therefore,
multiply charged particles must be accounted for when analysing electrometer
counting statistics. The DMA selects particles according to their
charge-to-size ratio by the DMA because their electrical mobility is
identical compared to singly charged particles but are larger in size. These
multiple charges lead to a notable difference in the counting rate between a
condensation particle counter and an aerosol electrometer. A correction
scheme was used to address multiply charged particles biasing the
concentration discrepancy. The routine was first introduced by Bundke
(Bundke et al., 2015; Bischof, 2022). The full data inversion is simplified and shown as a flowchart in Fig. 2. Further explanation is given
in the Supplement.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e391">Flowchart of the data inversion procedure for particle
concentration determination.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e400">An exponential function (Eq. 1) introduced by Wiedensohler et al. (1997) is used to give quantitative information about the cut-off efficiencies. Here, the revised formulation by Banse et al. (2001) provides a
more quantitative description of the particle counting efficiency curves
compared to the electrometer.
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M14" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          Here, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the counting efficiency; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the particle size; and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are fitting parameters of this four-parameter exponential function. The fitting parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the maximum of the function and gives the value of the plateau.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results and discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e530">Two critical variables for low-pressure measurements automatically control
the MAGIC 210-LP CPC counting efficiency. The first variable is the laser
power, which is adjusted to compensate for variations in droplet size as a
function of the operating pressure. With decreasing pressure levels, droplet
growth is affected, making the droplets smaller. The laser power
automatically increases as the internal instrument pressure decreases to
compensate for the smaller droplet size. The second variable is the
detection threshold voltage, which is adjusted to compensate for variations
in background scattered light (i.e. measured light with zero particle
counts) as the laser power varies, since the background light scattering on
molecules increases with increasing laser power. A detailed description is
given in the Supplement. In the experiments, the MAGIC 210-LP CPC was operated with
the temperature settings recommended for low pressures by the manufacturer
in the operational manual. During normal (ambient; 1000 hPa) operation, the
conditioner is maintained at 18 K below and the initiator at 17 K above the
heat sink temperature, typically a few degrees above ambient. The moderator
temperature is usually set as a function of input dew point to minimise
water usage. The user has the option of changing this temperature or setting
fixed temperatures. The manual for the MAGIC 210-LP states that the
conditioner temperature should be kept at 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and the moderator
at 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C for low-pressure operations. The initiator is fixed at
45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C to remain below the boiling point when operating at
pressures as low as 150 hPa. However, these working points cannot be reached
if the heat sink exceeds temperatures of 33 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. During measurement,
a heatwave occurred, and it became clear that the thermoelectrical devices
had reached their limits. It was then observed that in case the
temperatures of the conditioner and the moderator are about 3 K above their
recommended values, the counting efficiency decreases by about 20 % from
100 % to 80 % overall counting efficiency at pressure levels 250 hPa and below. This limitation, however, is solvable by maintaining the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> between all temperature zones of the sections of the growth tube equally.</p>
      <p id="d1e579">The manufacturer's settings were not optimised for operating pressure down
to 200 hPa. For 250 hPa, we found that the required laser power was
increased so high by the firmware<?pagebreak page3508?> to compensate for the smaller droplet
sizes, thus the electronics could not compensate the baseline voltage
correctly. By adjusting the values for the laser power and detector
threshold, we solved this issue. Therefore, the MAGIC LP-210 is now able to
operate even below 250 hPa. The new settings are applicable for the complete
pressure range without change. Further explanation on this is given in the
Supplement. To give an overview of the two particle types we used for the evaluation studies, the aerosol size distribution for the test aerosol is shown in Fig. 3.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e584">Particle size distributions were measured by an electrometer and
sized by DMA for ammonium sulfate and fresh combustion soot. For this work,
the particle mobility sizes were measured to 138 nm, so the size resolution
at smaller sizes is suitable for the cut-off characterisation. The full
particle size distributions are available (Weber et al., 2022).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023-f03.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e594">To achieve a high resolution for smaller particle sizes, we used the model
M-DMA 55-U. The 8.8 cm DMA tube and a 6 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> sheath flow as operational
parameters determining upper and lower size limit. The upper size limit is
at 138 nm mobility particle sizes. This upper size limit is sufficient to
characterise the ammonium sulfate size distribution, but this size limit
covers only parts of the fresh combustion soot size distribution. The ratio
of the sample flow to sheath flow rate of 0.12 leads to a narrow mobility
size half-width.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e611">Compilation of the efficiency ratio curves of the SKY-CPC 5.411
(SKY-CPC) <bold>(a)</bold> and the MAGIC 210-LP CPC <bold>(b)</bold> to the FCE reference – at different operation pressures as a function of the particle size using ammonium sulfate particles. The variance of the measurement is indicated by vertical bars.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023-f04.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e626">The overall counting efficiency, the cut-off diameter, and the linearity of
the two condensation particle counters compared to the electrometer was used as
a reference instrument. This is essential for the instrument validation for
IAGOS operation conditions. The measured particle concentrations were
compared to the electrometer concentrations corrected for multiple-charged
particles. First, we demonstrate the overall efficiency of the instrument by
using ammonium sulfate as a particle type. Ammonium sulfate is a common
particulate matter compound in the atmosphere. Fresh combustion soot as a
second aerosol type is interesting because it may serve as a proxy for
anthropogenic aerosol. In particular, the MAGIC should be able to measure
non-volatile particle matter emissions from aircraft engines operating on
IAGOS. Figure 4 shows the particle size-dependent counting efficiency of the
SKY-CPC and the MAGIC 210-LP with<?pagebreak page3509?> respect to the multiple-charge-corrected
FCE reference measurements. To offer a clear picture of the cut-off
diameter, we do not show detailed data above 50 nm, since the instrument
reaches a stable plateau of the counting efficiency. In Fig. 5, the
scatterplot demonstrates the overall linearity between the instruments by
using the number concentration distribution visible in Fig. 3.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e631">Comparison of the counting linearity between both CPC types and
the electrometer at different pressure levels for nebulised ammonium
sulfate.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023-f05.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e640">Using ammonium sulfate as a particle material, the instruments respond with
an excellent agreement with the FCE reference instrument, with a slope of
1.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.05 regardless of the inline pressure. The MAGIC 210-LP and the
SKY-CPC scatter around the 1 : 1 line, showing counting linearity for the full spectrum of particle concentrations.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e654">Coefficients of the exponential function of the counting efficiency
curves for the SKY-CPC 5.411 (SKY-CPC) and the MAGIC 210-LP CPC and for
different line pressure values and ammonium sulfate.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Instrument</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Line</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Equation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Exp.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Equation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">pressure</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">calculated</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">calculated</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nm)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKY-CPC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.96</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">9.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MAGIC 210-LP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">18.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKY-CPC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">250</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">9.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MAGIC 210-LP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">250</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">12.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKY-CPC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">500</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">7.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MAGIC 210-LP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">500</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">10.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKY-CPC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">700</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">8.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MAGIC 210-LP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">700</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">4.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">12.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{1}?></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1134">When looking deeper into the detail at small particle sizes, both CPCs show
a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cut-off diameter of around 5 nm at all pressure levels (see Table 1). The reported <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value is in accordance with previous measurements performed with the standard MAGIC instrument, using ammonium sulfate as aerosol material (Hering et al., 2005). When operated at
reduced pressures, the SKY-CPC shows no significant change in counting
efficiency behaviour. The MAGIC 210-LP counts at least 90 % of the
particles compared to the electrometer for pressure levels higher than 250 hPa and particle sizes larger than 30 nm. As the operation pressure reaches 200 hPa, the counting efficiency suffers from a small drop to about 80 %,
but only for particles smaller than 15 nm. The laser power and detector
threshold parameters were chosen to cover all pressures down to 200 hPa.</p>
      <p id="d1e1159">We used combustion soot as a second particle type utilising the miniature
inverted flame soot generator (Bischof et al., 2020). We used
the second type to show the behaviour of an aerosol that does not dissolve
in a liquid. The experimental set-up was therefore adjusted by replacing the
nebuliser and its subsequent diffusion dryer with the inverted flame soot
generator.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e1164">Comparison of the efficiency ratio curves of the SKY-CPC 5.411
(SKY-CPC) <bold>(a)</bold> and the MAGIC 210-LP CPC <bold>(b)</bold> to the electrometer reference at different operating pressures as a function of the particle size using fresh combustion soot. The variance of the measurement is
indicated by vertical bars.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023-f06.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1179">Figures 6 and 7 show the comparison between the Grimm CPC, MAGIC 210-LP, and the electrometer for the freshly generated combustion aerosol at
different operating pressure levels. The SKY-CPC and the MAGIC 210-LP show
nearly identical behaviour for counting efficiencies at pressures higher
than 250 hPa. For lower pressure, the SKY-CPC continues to measure with the
same efficiency. As with a gradual shift with decreasing pressure to 200 hPa, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cut-off of the MAGIC 210-LP increases to around 15 nm and its <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to about 40 nm.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e1207">Comparison of the counting linearity between CPC and the electrometer
at different pressure levels for fresh combustion soot.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/3505/2023/amt-16-3505-2023-f07.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?pagebreak page3510?><p id="d1e1216">As an insoluble hydrophobic substance, fresh combustion soot is not
activated for droplet formation inside a CPC as efficiently as hydrophilic
substances (Petzold et al., 2005). Therefore, soot
particles need to be more prominent in diameter for nucleus activation than
hydrophilic particles, which explains the increase of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared
to our ammonium sulfate experiments. For overall airborne measurements, it
is unlikely to encounter fresh combustion soot. The only case where we have
identified fresh soot emissions at these heights are areas of crossing fresh
aircraft plume visible as 1–2 s peaks in the time series in heavily used
flight corridor routes. Furthermore, fresh combustion soot is a good proxy
for non-hydrophilic substances.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1233">Coefficients of the exponential function of the counting efficiency
curves for the SKY-CPC 5.411 (SKY-CPC) and the MAGIC 210-LP CPC for
different line pressure values and fresh combustion soot.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Instrument</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Line</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Equation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Exp.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Equation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">pressure</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">calculated</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">calculated</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(nm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (nm)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKY-CPC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">700</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">8.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">19.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MAGIC 210-LP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">700</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">8.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">19.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKY-CPC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">500</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">3.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">7.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">14.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MAGIC 210-LP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">500</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">9.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">21.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKY-CPC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">250</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">8.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">19.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MAGIC 210-LP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">250</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">8.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">11.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">11 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">27.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKY-CPC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">6.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">15.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MAGIC 210-LP</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">7.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">13.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">13 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">35.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{2}?></table-wrap>

      <?pagebreak page3511?><p id="d1e1713">Tables 1 and 2 give an overview of the counting linearity of the CPC-type
instruments with respect to the FCE reference instrument, for both aerosol
types. The Pearson correlation coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> never drops
below 0.99 for each measurement. Concerning the instrument linearity for
soot particles, the MAGIC 210-LP and the SKY-CPC underdetermines particle
number concentration compared to the FCE with increasing total number
concentrations at 700 hPa. However, this effect was not observed for the
other pressure ranges. The average counting efficiency for the 700 hPa
trials is still within the overall uncertainty (10 %)
(Petzold et al., 2011) for all counting efficiency
measurements; see parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in Tables 1 and 2 for details.</p>
      <p id="d1e1734">Looking at the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value in Tables 1 and 2, both instruments show a
cut-off diameter close to 5 nm for ammonium sulfate. This agrees with the
reported detection limit for both instruments from the manufacturer and
publications (Hering et al., 2014; Bischof, 2022).</p>
      <p id="d1e1749">The overall trend for the MAGIC 210-LP becomes apparent when looking deeper
into the cut-off efficiency measurements. The difference between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increases with decreasing pressure, resulting in a less steep
decrease in the counting efficiency towards smaller particle sizes. This
feature then causes a higher uncertainty for measurements of the total
number concentration of an aerosol with a strong Aitken mode, particularly
for low-pressure surroundings. Whereas the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value does not change
significantly, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increases significantly. The overall difference
between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> indicates a shallow decrease in counting
efficiency over a wide particle size range. Switching the particle type to
soot, the lower size detection limits increase because of its less efficient
activation.</p>
      <p id="d1e1819">Analysing the behaviour of the fitting parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, which represents the
plateau of the fit function, and the derived parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the
fitting function in Tables 1 and 2, no clear trend is visible for the two
aerosol types and instruments. The values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, deduced from the
fitting curves, are close to 5 nm for both condensation particle counters
and all pressure levels in the case of ammonium sulfate (Table 1) and fit
the experimental data. For fresh combustion soot (Table 2), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values
for the SKY-CPC instrument are slightly larger at a value of 8 nm, while for
the MAGIC 210-LP, the increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared to ammonium sulfate is
more pronounced. Overall, the agreement between values derived directly from
the experiment and values deduced from the fitting procedure is within the
error margin of the individual mobility size.</p>
      <p id="d1e1873">At lower pressures, the particle counting efficiency drops for small
particle sizes in the Aitken mode range and below. Because of particle line
losses during sampling, the overall efficiency of the measurement system is
determined by the instrumental efficiency times the inlet efficiency. Thus,
inlet line loss impacts the quality of the measurements directly. In case in
the foreseen application of the instrument onboard passenger aircraft
equipped with IAGOS instruments using a sampling line of more than 1 m
length line losses are significant: here 50 % (85 %) of 5 nm (13 nm) particles will penetrate to the instrument (at 150 hPa and 2.4 L min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> total flow) (Bundke et al., 2015) mostly caused by diffusion losses. We show curves for the expected inlet efficiencies, including losses, in the Supplement (see Fig. S5). Yet, the overall uncertainties must be
determined by modelling MAGIC 210-LP and SKY-CPC instrument responses for
different aerosol size distributions, mainly with and without a nucleation
mode, for IAGOS-characteristic sample line lengths.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Conclusions and recommendations</title>
      <p id="d1e1896">The MAGIC CPC was recently introduced as a new water-based CPC with
excellent overall performance compared to a standard butanol CPC (Hering
et al., 2014, 2019). In this work, we characterised a
modified “LP” (low pressure; version: MAGIC-LP 210) model of that
water-based CPC design for flight altitude pressure levels as low as 200 hPa. We recommend testing each unit for low-pressure applications and
adjusting the manufacturer settings when operating at pressures lower than
500 hPa if necessary. The factory settings were sufficient for operating the
instrument at pressures <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 500 hPa. We briefly examined the
performance of five MAGIC-LP 210 units at laboratory pressure and found that
the inter instrumental scatterplots follow the 1 : 1 correlation between
unit. However, a side-by-side analysis of the cut-off diameter for different
pressures has not been performed yet. For the units we tested, we found that
laser power and detector threshold are critical for a high counting
efficiency at all tested pressures. It is noted that since this study, the
manufacturer has acted on the insights from this work and modified the
firmware and design of the MAGIC 210-LP we tested to improve the performance
at high altitudes.<?pagebreak page3512?> Automatic adjustments in the laser and detector settings
with operating pressure were incorporated in the newest model MAGIC 250-LP.
We will apply these new settings as part of the evaluation of the additional
MAGIC-LP 210 models planned for the IAGOS payloads and recommend this for
all low-pressure applications of the MAGIC 210 LP.</p>
      <p id="d1e1906">The MAGIC 210-LP operates at all pressure levels tested and reports reliable
particle concentrations with overall detection efficiencies close to 100 % for particles larger than 40 nm. For the continuous operation on IAGOS aircraft packages, its water recycling mechanism makes the instrument
attractive for long-term operation in harsh conditions with limited
opportunities for instrument access and maintenance. To evaluate the
instrument performance and in particular, the counting efficiency, as a
function of the aerosol type and pressure, an aerosol electrometer and a
butanol condensation particle counter were used as established reference
instruments. For ammonium sulfate particles, the MAGIC 210-LP CPC shows
excellent stability of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cut-off diameter and overall linearity
with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.99. Verified by experimental data and shown
with parameters of an exponential function, the overall counting efficiency
reaches 100 % for pressure levels higher than 200 hPa and particles larger than 30 nm, regardless of the particle type. However, at 200 hPa, the counting efficiency for particles smaller than 30 nm drops notably to 90 %
compared to the electrometer or the butanol CPC. When the MAGIC 210-LP is
exposed to a hydrophobic and insoluble particle type like fresh combustion
soot, the water condensation particle counter shows similar behaviour for
almost all particle sizes down to 30 nm for ambient pressure levels down to
250 hPa with linearity within 95 %. This pressure range covers the
operational conditions present during IAGOS aircraft flights. For pressures
down to 200 hPa, the efficiency of the MAGIC 210-LP reaches 100 %
linearity towards the reference instrument for an extensive particle range.
For particles smaller than 30 nm, the counting efficiency is lower than 90 %, decreasing to 70 % (60 %) for 20 nm (15 nm) particles. Because of
the reduction of the counting efficiency for particles smaller than 30 nm
for operational pressure levels below 250 hPa, the uncertainty of the
reported number concentration is enhanced, particularly when sampling an
aerosol with a strong nucleation mode, and the lower counting efficiency of
the MAGIC 210-LP for smaller particle sizes results in a higher uncertainty
of the total particle count.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e1936">Measurement data are available from Zenodo: <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8115927" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.8115927</ext-link> (Weber et al., 2023).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e1942">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-3505-2023-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-3505-2023-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e1951">PW performed all instrument calibrations, the instrumental set-up, and the data analysis. UB and BF designed the LabVIEW environment of the experimental set-up. MB helped during instrument preparations. StS, GL, and SH provided technical details of the instrumentation. PW, OFB, UB, and AP contributed to the paper and the interpretation of the results.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e1957">Gregory Lewis and Susanne Hering are owners and Steven Spielman is an employee of Aerosol Dynamics Inc,
which developed and sells the MAGIC 210-LP. The other authors declare that
they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e1963">Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e1969">Parts of this work were supported by the German Ministry of Research and
Education in the joint research project IAGOS-D (grant agreement no. 01LK1301A) and by the HITEC Graduate School for Energy and Climate at
Forschungszentrum Jülich.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e1974">This research has been supported by the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (grant no. 01LK1301A) and the Forschungszentrum Jülich (HITEC).<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>The article processing charges for this open-access <?xmltex \notforhtml{\newline}?>publication were covered by the Forschungszentrum Jülich.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1985">This paper was edited by Charles Brock and reviewed by Konrad Kandler, Christina Williamson, and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Aitken, J.: On the Number of Dust Particles in the Atmosphere, Nature, 37, 428–430, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/037428a0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/037428a0</ext-link>, 1888.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Banse, D. F., Esfeld, K., Hermann, M., Sierau, B., and Wiedensohler, A.:
Particle counting efficiency of the TSI CPC 3762 for different operating
parameters, J. Aerosol Sci., 32, 157–161,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-8502(00)00060-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0021-8502(00)00060-4</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bischof, O., Weber, P., Bundke, U., Petzold, A., and Kiendler-Scharr, A.:
Characterization of the Miniaturized Inverted Flame Burner as a Combustion
Source to Generate a Nanoparticle Calibration Aerosol, Aerosol, Emiss.
Control Sci. Technol., 6, 37–46, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40825-019-00147-w" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s40825-019-00147-w</ext-link>​​​​​​​, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bischof, O. F.: Application-Specific Calibration of Condensation Particle
Counters under Low Pressure Conditions, Dissertation, Verlag des
Forschungszentrums Jülich, Energie Umwelt, Band 576, ISBN 978-3-95806-629-8, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bojinski, S., Verstraete, M., Peterson, T. C., Richter, C., Simmons, A., and
Zemp, M.: The Concept of Essential Climate Variables i<?pagebreak page3513?>n Support of Climate
Research, Applications, and Policy, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 1431–1443, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00047.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00047.1</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brock, C. A., Schröder, F., Kärcher, B., Petzold, A., Busen, R., and
Fiebig, M.: Ultrafine particle size distributions measured in aircraft
exhaust plumes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 26555–26567, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900360" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000JD900360</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bundke, U., Berg, M., Houben, N., Ibrahim, A., Fiebig, M., Tettich, F.,
Klaus, C., Franke, H., and Petzold, A.: The IAGOS-CORE aerosol package:
instrument design, operation and performance for continuous measurement
aboard in-service aircraft, Tellus B, 67, 286–302, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28339" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusb.v67.28339</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Cheng, Y. S.: Condensation Particle Counters, in: Aerosol Measurements,
edited by: Kulkarni, P., Baron​​​​​​​, P. A., and Willeke, K., John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc, New Jersey, 381–392, ISBN 978-0-470-38741-2, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gallar, C., Brock, C. A., Jimenez, J. L., and Simons, C.: A Variable
Supersaturation Condensation Particle Sizer, Aerosol Sci. Tech.,
40, 431–436, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820600643339" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786820600643339</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gao, R. S., Telg, H., McLaughlin, R. J., Ciciora, S. J., Watts, L. A.,
Richardson, M. S., Schwarz, J. P., Perring, A. E., Thornberry, T. D.,
Rollins, A. W., Markovic, M. Z., Bates, T. S., Johnson, J. E., and Fahey, D.
W.: A light-weight, high-sensitivity particle spectrometer for PM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> aerosol measurements, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 50, 88–99,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2015.1131809" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786826.2015.1131809</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Giechaskiel, B., Wang, X., Horn, H. G., Spielvogel, J., Gerhart, C.,
Southgate, J., Jing, L., Kasper, M., Drossinos, Y., and Krasenbrink, A.:
Calibration of Condensation Particle Counters for Legislated Vehicle Number
Emission Measurements, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 43, 1164–1173, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820903242029" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786820903242029</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hering, S. V., Stolzenburg, M. R., Quant, F. R., Oberreit, D. R., and Keady,
P. B.: A Laminar-Flow, Water-Based Condensation Particle Counter (WCPC),
Aerosol Sci. Tech., 39, 659–672, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820500182123" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786820500182123</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hering, S. V., Spielman, S. R., and Lewis, G. S.: Moderated, Water-Based,
Condensational Particle Growth in a Laminar Flow, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 48, 401–408, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2014.881460" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786826.2014.881460</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hering, S. V., Lewis, G. S., Spielman, S. R., and Eiguren-Fernandez, A.: A
MAGIC concept for self-sustained, water-based, ultrafine particle counting,
Aerosol Sci. Tech., 53, 63–72, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2018.1538549" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786826.2018.1538549</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hermann, M., Wehner, B., Bischof, O. F., Han, H.-S., Krinke, T., Liu, W. S.,
Zerrath, A. F., and Wiedensohler, A.: Particle counting efficiencies of new
TSI condensation particle counters, J. Aerosol Sci., 38, 674–682, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hinds, W. C.: Aerosol Technology: Properties, Behavior, and Measurement of
Airborne Particles, Wiley, ISBN 978-1-119-49404-1, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kazemimanesh, M., Moallemi, A., Thomson, K., Smallwood, G., Lobo, P., and
Olfert, J.: A novel miniature inverted-flame burner for the generation of
soot nanoparticles, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 53, 184–195, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2018.1556774" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786826.2018.1556774</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kebabian, P. L., Herndon, S. C., and Freedman, A.: Detection of nitrogen
dioxide by cavity attenuated phase shift spectroscopy, Anal. Chem.,
77, 724–728, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/ac048715y" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/ac048715y</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kebabian, P. L., Robinson, W. A., and Freedman, A.: Optical extinction
monitor using cw cavity enhanced detection, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 78, 063102, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2744223" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1063/1.2744223</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, B. Y. H. and Pui, D. Y. H.: On the performance of the electrical
aerosol analyzer, J. Aerosol Sci., 6, 249–264,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8502(75)90093-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0021-8502(75)90093-2</ext-link>, 1975.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>McMurry, P. H.: A review of atmospheric aerosol measurements, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1959–1999, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s1352-2310(99)00455-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/s1352-2310(99)00455-0</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mei, F., Spielman, S., Hering, S., Wang, J., Pekour, M. S., Lewis, G., Schmid, B., Tomlinson, J., and Havlicek, M.: Simulation-aided characterization of a versatile water-based condensation particle counter for atmospheric airborne research, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7329–7340, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7329-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-14-7329-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Osborne, M. J., de Leeuw, J., Witham, C., Schmidt, A., Beckett, F., Kristiansen, N., Buxmann, J., Saint, C., Welton, E. J., Fochesatto, J., Gomes, A. R., Bundke, U., Petzold, A., Marenco, F., and Haywood, J.: The 2019 Raikoke volcanic eruption – Part 2: Particle-phase dispersion and concurrent wildfire smoke emissions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2975–2997, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2975-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-22-2975-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Petzold, A., Gysel, M., Vancassel, X., Hitzenberger, R., Puxbaum, H., Vrochticky, S., Weingartner, E., Baltensperger, U., and Mirabel, P.: On the effects of organic matter and sulphur-containing compounds on the CCN activation of combustion particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 3187–3203, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-3187-2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-5-3187-2005</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Petzold, A., Marsh, R., Johnson, M., Miller, M., Sevcenco, Y., Delhaye, D.,
Ibrahim, A., Williams, P., Bauer, H., Crayford, A., Bachalo, W. D., and
Raper, D.: Evaluation of methods for measuring particulate matter emissions
from gas turbines, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 3562–3568, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es103969v" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/es103969v</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Petzold, A., Formenti, P., Baumgardner, D., Bundke, U., Coe, H., Curtius,
J., DeMott, P. J., Flagan, R. C., Fiebig, M., Hudson, J. G., McQuaid, J.,
Minikin, A., Roberts, G. C., and Wang, J.: In Situ Measurements of Aerosol
Particles, in: Airborne Measurements for Environmental Research, Wiley-VCH
Verlag GmbH &amp; Co. KGaA, 157–223, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527653218.ch4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/9783527653218.ch4</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Petzold, A., Thouret, V., Gerbig, C., Zahn, A., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Gallagher, M., Hermann, M., Pontaud, M., Ziereis, H., Boulanger, D., Marshall, J., Nédélec, P., Smit, H. G. J., Friess, U., Flaud, J.-M., Wahner, A., Cammas, J.-P., Volz-Thomas, A., and IAGOS TEAM: Global-scale atmosphere monitoring by in-service aircraft – current achievements and future prospects of the European Research Infrastructure IAGOS, Tellus B, 67, 28452, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28452" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusb.v67.28452</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Salimifard, P., Rim, D., and Freihaut, J. D.: Evaluation of low-cost optical
particle counters for monitoring individual indoor aerosol sources, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 54, 217–231, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2019.1697423" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786826.2019.1697423</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Somsen, G. A., van Rijn, C. J. M., Kooij, S., Bem, R. A., and Bonn, D.:
Measurement of small droplet aerosol concentrations in public spaces using
handheld particle counters, Phys. Fluids, 32, 121707, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0035701" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1063/5.0035701</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page3514?><ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>von Schneidemesser, E., Monks, P. S., Allan, J. D., Bruhwiler, L., Forster,
P., Fowler, D., Lauer, A., Morgan, W. T., Paasonen, P., Righi, M.,
Sindelarova, K., and Sutton, M. A.: Chemistry and the Linkages between Air
Quality and Climate Change, Chem. Rev., 115, 3856–3897, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00089" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00089</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Weber, P., Petzold, A., Bischof, O. F., Fischer, B., Berg, M., Freedman, A., Onasch, T. B., and Bundke, U.: Relative errors in derived multi-wavelength intensive aerosol optical properties using cavity attenuated phase shift single-scattering albedo monitors, a nephelometer, and tricolour absorption photometer measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 3279–3296, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3279-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-15-3279-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Weber, P., Bischof, O., Fischer, B., Berg, M., Hering, S., Spielman, S., Lewis, G., Petzold, A., and Bundke, U.: Measurement Data of Characterisation of a self-sustained, water-based condensation particle counter for aircraft cruising pressure level operation, Zenodo [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8115927" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.8115927</ext-link>, 2023.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wiedensohler, A., Orsini, D., Covert, D. S., Coffmann, D., Cantrell, W., Havlicek, M., Brechtel, F. J., Russell, L. M., Weber, R. J., Gras, J., Hudson, J. G., and Litchy, M.: Intercomparison Study of the Size-Dependent Counting Efficiency of 26 Condensation Particle Counters, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 27, 224–242, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786829708965469" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/02786829708965469</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Williamson, C., Kupc, A., Wilson, J., Gesler, D. W., Reeves, J. M., Erdesz, F., McLaughlin, R., and Brock, C. A.: Fast time response measurements of particle size distributions in the 3–60 nm size range with the nucleation mode aerosol size spectrometer, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 3491–3509, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3491-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-3491-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Characterisation of a self-sustained, water-based condensation particle counter for aircraft cruising pressure level operation</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Aitken, J.: On the Number of Dust Particles in the Atmosphere, Nature, 37, 428–430, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/037428a0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/037428a0</a>, 1888.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
Banse, D. F., Esfeld, K., Hermann, M., Sierau, B., and Wiedensohler, A.:
Particle counting efficiency of the TSI CPC 3762 for different operating
parameters, J. Aerosol Sci., 32, 157–161,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-8502(00)00060-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-8502(00)00060-4</a>, 2001.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bischof, O., Weber, P., Bundke, U., Petzold, A., and Kiendler-Scharr, A.:
Characterization of the Miniaturized Inverted Flame Burner as a Combustion
Source to Generate a Nanoparticle Calibration Aerosol, Aerosol, Emiss.
Control Sci. Technol., 6, 37–46, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40825-019-00147-w" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s40825-019-00147-w</a>​​​​​​​, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bischof, O. F.: Application-Specific Calibration of Condensation Particle
Counters under Low Pressure Conditions, Dissertation, Verlag des
Forschungszentrums Jülich, Energie Umwelt, Band 576, ISBN 978-3-95806-629-8, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bojinski, S., Verstraete, M., Peterson, T. C., Richter, C., Simmons, A., and
Zemp, M.: The Concept of Essential Climate Variables in Support of Climate
Research, Applications, and Policy, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 1431–1443, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00047.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00047.1</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
Brock, C. A., Schröder, F., Kärcher, B., Petzold, A., Busen, R., and
Fiebig, M.: Ultrafine particle size distributions measured in aircraft
exhaust plumes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 26555–26567, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900360" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900360</a>, 2000.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bundke, U., Berg, M., Houben, N., Ibrahim, A., Fiebig, M., Tettich, F.,
Klaus, C., Franke, H., and Petzold, A.: The IAGOS-CORE aerosol package:
instrument design, operation and performance for continuous measurement
aboard in-service aircraft, Tellus B, 67, 286–302, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28339" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28339</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
Cheng, Y. S.: Condensation Particle Counters, in: Aerosol Measurements,
edited by: Kulkarni, P., Baron​​​​​​​, P. A., and Willeke, K., John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc, New Jersey, 381–392, ISBN 978-0-470-38741-2, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gallar, C., Brock, C. A., Jimenez, J. L., and Simons, C.: A Variable
Supersaturation Condensation Particle Sizer, Aerosol Sci. Tech.,
40, 431–436, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820600643339" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820600643339</a>, 2006.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gao, R. S., Telg, H., McLaughlin, R. J., Ciciora, S. J., Watts, L. A.,
Richardson, M. S., Schwarz, J. P., Perring, A. E., Thornberry, T. D.,
Rollins, A. W., Markovic, M. Z., Bates, T. S., Johnson, J. E., and Fahey, D.
W.: A light-weight, high-sensitivity particle spectrometer for PM<sub>2.5</sub> aerosol measurements, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 50, 88–99,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2015.1131809" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2015.1131809</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Giechaskiel, B., Wang, X., Horn, H. G., Spielvogel, J., Gerhart, C.,
Southgate, J., Jing, L., Kasper, M., Drossinos, Y., and Krasenbrink, A.:
Calibration of Condensation Particle Counters for Legislated Vehicle Number
Emission Measurements, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 43, 1164–1173, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820903242029" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820903242029</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hering, S. V., Stolzenburg, M. R., Quant, F. R., Oberreit, D. R., and Keady,
P. B.: A Laminar-Flow, Water-Based Condensation Particle Counter (WCPC),
Aerosol Sci. Tech., 39, 659–672, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820500182123" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820500182123</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hering, S. V., Spielman, S. R., and Lewis, G. S.: Moderated, Water-Based,
Condensational Particle Growth in a Laminar Flow, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 48, 401–408, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2014.881460" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2014.881460</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hering, S. V., Lewis, G. S., Spielman, S. R., and Eiguren-Fernandez, A.: A
MAGIC concept for self-sustained, water-based, ultrafine particle counting,
Aerosol Sci. Tech., 53, 63–72, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2018.1538549" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2018.1538549</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hermann, M., Wehner, B., Bischof, O. F., Han, H.-S., Krinke, T., Liu, W. S.,
Zerrath, A. F., and Wiedensohler, A.: Particle counting efficiencies of new
TSI condensation particle counters, J. Aerosol Sci., 38, 674–682, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hinds, W. C.: Aerosol Technology: Properties, Behavior, and Measurement of
Airborne Particles, Wiley, ISBN 978-1-119-49404-1, 1999.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kazemimanesh, M., Moallemi, A., Thomson, K., Smallwood, G., Lobo, P., and
Olfert, J.: A novel miniature inverted-flame burner for the generation of
soot nanoparticles, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 53, 184–195, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2018.1556774" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2018.1556774</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kebabian, P. L., Herndon, S. C., and Freedman, A.: Detection of nitrogen
dioxide by cavity attenuated phase shift spectroscopy, Anal. Chem.,
77, 724–728, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/ac048715y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/ac048715y</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kebabian, P. L., Robinson, W. A., and Freedman, A.: Optical extinction
monitor using cw cavity enhanced detection, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 78, 063102, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2744223" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2744223</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, B. Y. H. and Pui, D. Y. H.: On the performance of the electrical
aerosol analyzer, J. Aerosol Sci., 6, 249–264,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8502(75)90093-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8502(75)90093-2</a>, 1975.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
McMurry, P. H.: A review of atmospheric aerosol measurements, Atmos. Environ., 34, 1959–1999, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/s1352-2310(99)00455-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/s1352-2310(99)00455-0</a>, 2000.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mei, F., Spielman, S., Hering, S., Wang, J., Pekour, M. S., Lewis, G., Schmid, B., Tomlinson, J., and Havlicek, M.: Simulation-aided characterization of a versatile water-based condensation particle counter for atmospheric airborne research, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7329–7340, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7329-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7329-2021</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Osborne, M. J., de Leeuw, J., Witham, C., Schmidt, A., Beckett, F., Kristiansen, N., Buxmann, J., Saint, C., Welton, E. J., Fochesatto, J., Gomes, A. R., Bundke, U., Petzold, A., Marenco, F., and Haywood, J.: The 2019 Raikoke volcanic eruption – Part 2: Particle-phase dispersion and concurrent wildfire smoke emissions, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 2975–2997, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2975-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-2975-2022</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Petzold, A., Gysel, M., Vancassel, X., Hitzenberger, R., Puxbaum, H., Vrochticky, S., Weingartner, E., Baltensperger, U., and Mirabel, P.: On the effects of organic matter and sulphur-containing compounds on the CCN activation of combustion particles, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 5, 3187–3203, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-3187-2005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-3187-2005</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Petzold, A., Marsh, R., Johnson, M., Miller, M., Sevcenco, Y., Delhaye, D.,
Ibrahim, A., Williams, P., Bauer, H., Crayford, A., Bachalo, W. D., and
Raper, D.: Evaluation of methods for measuring particulate matter emissions
from gas turbines, Environ. Sci. Technol., 45, 3562–3568, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es103969v" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/es103969v</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
      
Petzold, A., Formenti, P., Baumgardner, D., Bundke, U., Coe, H., Curtius,
J., DeMott, P. J., Flagan, R. C., Fiebig, M., Hudson, J. G., McQuaid, J.,
Minikin, A., Roberts, G. C., and Wang, J.: In Situ Measurements of Aerosol
Particles, in: Airborne Measurements for Environmental Research, Wiley-VCH
Verlag GmbH &amp; Co. KGaA, 157–223, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527653218.ch4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527653218.ch4</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
      
Petzold, A., Thouret, V., Gerbig, C., Zahn, A., Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M., Gallagher, M., Hermann, M., Pontaud, M., Ziereis, H., Boulanger, D., Marshall, J., Nédélec, P., Smit, H. G. J., Friess, U., Flaud, J.-M., Wahner, A., Cammas, J.-P., Volz-Thomas, A., and IAGOS TEAM: Global-scale atmosphere monitoring by in-service aircraft – current achievements and future prospects of the European Research Infrastructure IAGOS, Tellus B, 67, 28452, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28452" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v67.28452</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
      
Salimifard, P., Rim, D., and Freihaut, J. D.: Evaluation of low-cost optical
particle counters for monitoring individual indoor aerosol sources, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 54, 217–231, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2019.1697423" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2019.1697423</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
      
Somsen, G. A., van Rijn, C. J. M., Kooij, S., Bem, R. A., and Bonn, D.:
Measurement of small droplet aerosol concentrations in public spaces using
handheld particle counters, Phys. Fluids, 32, 121707, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0035701" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0035701</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
      
von Schneidemesser, E., Monks, P. S., Allan, J. D., Bruhwiler, L., Forster,
P., Fowler, D., Lauer, A., Morgan, W. T., Paasonen, P., Righi, M.,
Sindelarova, K., and Sutton, M. A.: Chemistry and the Linkages between Air
Quality and Climate Change, Chem. Rev., 115, 3856–3897, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00089" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00089</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
      
Weber, P., Petzold, A., Bischof, O. F., Fischer, B., Berg, M., Freedman, A., Onasch, T. B., and Bundke, U.: Relative errors in derived multi-wavelength intensive aerosol optical properties using cavity attenuated phase shift single-scattering albedo monitors, a nephelometer, and tricolour absorption photometer measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 3279–3296, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3279-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-3279-2022</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
      
Weber, P., Bischof, O., Fischer, B., Berg, M., Hering, S., Spielman, S., Lewis, G., Petzold, A., and Bundke, U.: Measurement Data of Characterisation of a self-sustained, water-based condensation particle counter for aircraft cruising pressure level operation, Zenodo [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8115927" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8115927</a>, 2023.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wiedensohler, A., Orsini, D., Covert, D. S., Coffmann, D., Cantrell, W., Havlicek, M., Brechtel, F. J., Russell, L. M., Weber, R. J., Gras, J., Hudson, J. G., and Litchy, M.: Intercomparison Study of the Size-Dependent Counting Efficiency of 26 Condensation Particle Counters, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 27, 224–242, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02786829708965469" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/02786829708965469</a>, 1997.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
      
Williamson, C., Kupc, A., Wilson, J., Gesler, D. W., Reeves, J. M., Erdesz, F., McLaughlin, R., and Brock, C. A.: Fast time response measurements of particle size distributions in the 3–60&thinsp;nm size range with the nucleation mode aerosol size spectrometer, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 3491–3509, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3491-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-3491-2018</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
