Correction to “Modeling the Radical Chemistry in an Oxidation Flow

Addition/Correction pubs.acs.org/JPCA

Correction to “Modeling the Radical Chemistry in an Oxidation Flow Reactor: Radical Formation and Recycling, Sensitivities, and the OH Exposure Estimation Equation” Rui Li, Brett B. Palm, Amber M. Ortega, James Hlywiak, Weiwei Hu, Zhe Peng, Douglas A. Day, Christoph Knote, William H. Brune, Joost A. de Gouw, and Jose L. Jimenez* J. Phys. Chem. A 2015, 119 (19), 4418−4432. DOI: 10.1021/jp509534k Equation 5 in the article should read as follows

Accordingly, some of the data points in Figure 9 are updated using the corrected eq 5. However, changes are small and they do not affect any of the conclusions of the paper. The corrected Figure 9 is given here. Finally, we also correct Table 3, due to some values in the original table not having enough digits for accurate results. This update does not affect the conclusions of the article. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused to readers.

⎡ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ 3⎞ log OHexp = ⎢a + ⎜b + d ·OHR f + g · log⎜O3 · ⎟ ·OHRh⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎣ t ⎤ ⎛ t 3⎞ × log⎜O3 · ⎟ + (c + e·OHR) ·log H 2O⎥ + ⎝ ⎦ t⎠ 3

Figure 9. OHexp estimated from the estimation equation (see text) versus OHexp calculated from added/ambient tracer decay for different field studies. The uncertainty of OHexp obtained from the estimation equation (vertical bars) is estimated as a factor of 2. The uncertainty of OHexp calculated from trace species decay in the field measurements (horizontal bars) was estimated for each case (see detailed calculation in the Supporting Information). On average, the uncertainties for OHexp estimated from SO2, CO, and monoterpenes are 34, 30, and 29%.

Table 3. Fit Parameters and One Standard Deviation (SD) for the OHexp Estimation Equation Based on Model Results

a

parameters

values

SD

a b c d e fa

26.89 −1.7629 −1.2947 0.076549 0.14469 0.046

0.929 0.0935 0.0681 0.00243 0.00422

This parameter was constrained to this value in the fit. © 2016 American Chemical Society

Published: April 20, 2016 2605

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpca.6b03251 J. Phys. Chem. A 2016, 120, 2605−2605