An airborne multi-axis differential optical absorption spectroscopic （AMAX-DOAS） instrument was developed and applied to measure tropospheric NO2 in the Pearl River Delta region in the south of China. By combining t...An airborne multi-axis differential optical absorption spectroscopic （AMAX-DOAS） instrument was developed and applied to measure tropospheric NO2 in the Pearl River Delta region in the south of China. By combining the measurements in nadir and zenith directions and analyzing the UV and visible spectral region using the DOAS method, information about tropospheric NO2 vertical columns was obtained. Strong tropospheric NO2 signals were detected when flying over heavilly polluted regions and point sources like plants. The AMAX-DOAS results were compared with ground-based MAX-DOAS observations in the southwest of Zhuhai city using the same parameters for radiative transport calculations. The difference in vertical column data between the two instruments is about 8%. Our data were also compared with those from OMI and fair agreement was obtained with a correlation coefficient R of 0.61. The difference between the two instruments can be attributed to the different spatial resolution and the temporal mismatch during the measurements.展开更多
基金supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(Grant Nos.41275037,41275038,and 41275027)
文摘An airborne multi-axis differential optical absorption spectroscopic （AMAX-DOAS） instrument was developed and applied to measure tropospheric NO2 in the Pearl River Delta region in the south of China. By combining the measurements in nadir and zenith directions and analyzing the UV and visible spectral region using the DOAS method, information about tropospheric NO2 vertical columns was obtained. Strong tropospheric NO2 signals were detected when flying over heavilly polluted regions and point sources like plants. The AMAX-DOAS results were compared with ground-based MAX-DOAS observations in the southwest of Zhuhai city using the same parameters for radiative transport calculations. The difference in vertical column data between the two instruments is about 8%. Our data were also compared with those from OMI and fair agreement was obtained with a correlation coefficient R of 0.61. The difference between the two instruments can be attributed to the different spatial resolution and the temporal mismatch during the measurements.
