Selection and evaluation of commercial low-cost devices for indoor air quality monitoring in schools

被引:4
作者
Sa, J. P. [1 ,2 ]
Chojer, H. [1 ,2 ]
Branco, P. T. B. S. [1 ,2 ]
Forstmaier, A. [3 ]
Alvim-Ferraz, M. C. M. [1 ,2 ]
Martins, F. G. [1 ,2 ]
Sousa, S. I. V. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Porto, Fac Engn, LEPABE Lab Proc Engn Biotechnol & Energy, Rua Dr Roberto Frias, P-4200465 Porto, Portugal
[2] Univ Porto, Fac Engn, ALiCE Associate Lab Chem Engn, Rua Dr Roberto Frias, P-4200465 Porto, Portugal
[3] Tech Univ Munchen TUM, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, Arcisstr 21, D-80333 Munich, Germany
关键词
Low-cost sensor; Indoor air pollution; Nursery school; Primary school; Performance evaluation; URBAN NURSERY SCHOOLS; PARTICULATE MATTER; CHILDRENS EXPOSURE; GASEOUS-POLLUTANTS; SENSORS; POLLUTION; PERFORMANCE; HEALTH; HOMES;
D O I
10.1016/j.jobe.2024.110952
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
The use of low-cost sensors for monitoring Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) in schools has shown promising results, with the commercialisation of these devices increasing worldwide. This study aims to identify an effective, commercially available low-cost device for IAQ monitoring in schools. Four low-cost devices (AirVisual Pro, PocketLab Air, PurpleAir PA-II-SD and uRAD Monitor A3) were selected for both qualitative and performance evaluations. Field tests were conducted in six indoor microenvironments within a nursery and a primary school. The low-cost devices were co- located with research-grade instruments to obtain reference concentrations of PM1, 1 , PM2.5, 2.5 , PM10, 10 , CO2, 2 , VOC, formaldehyde and O3. 3 . The qualitative evaluation revealed limitations, including data loss, negative or erratic values, inconsistent timestamps, and connectivity issues. PM low-cost devices exhibited better performance during non-occupancy periods but faced challenges during periods of occupancy. All devices tended to underestimate measurements compared to reference data, although AirVisual Pro performed better for PM 2.5 during occupancy. Furthermore, CO2 2 concentrations were slightly overestimated, showing improved accuracy during occupancy periods. While formaldehyde peaks were detected by the low-cost device, overall performance was weak for both formaldehyde and O3. 3 . The results indicated that AirVisual Pro demonstrated the best overall performance, and presents itself as a promising tool for IAQ monitoring in schools. However, performance evaluations should be tailored to specific microenvironments and occupancy periods. Despite some acceptable performance results, real-context use of the selected low-cost device should be preceded by a proper calibration. Additionally, long-term performance evaluation should be considered in future studies.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 78 条
[1]  
Adair-Rohani H., 2018, Air Pollution And Child Health: Prescribing Clean Air
[2]   Evaluation of low-cost formaldehyde sensors calibration [J].
Alonso, Maria Justo ;
Madsen, Henrik ;
Liu, Peng ;
Jorgensen, Rikke Bramming ;
Jorgensen, Thomas Berg ;
Christiansen, Even Johan ;
Myrvang, Olav Aleksander ;
Bastien, Diane ;
Mathisen, Hans Martin .
BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2022, 222
[3]   Exposure to secondhand aerosol from electronic cigarettes at homes: A real-life study in four European countries [J].
Amalia, Beladenta ;
Fu, Marcela ;
Tigova, Olena ;
Ballbe, Montse ;
Paniello, Blanca ;
Castellano, Yolanda ;
Vyzikidou, Vergina K. ;
O'Donnell, Rachel ;
Dobson, Ruaraidh ;
Lugo, Alessandra ;
Veronese, Chiara ;
Perez-Ortuno, Raul ;
Pascual, Jose A. ;
Cortes, Nuria ;
Gil, Fernando ;
Olmedo, Pablo ;
Soriano, Joan B. ;
Boffi, Roberto ;
Ruprecht, Ario ;
Ancochea, Julio ;
Lopez, Maria J. ;
Gallus, Silvano ;
Vardavas, Constantine ;
Semple, Sean ;
Fernandez, Esteve .
SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2023, 854
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2021, Who global air quality guidelines
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2013, EMPREGO SEGURANCA SO, V253
[6]  
AQ-SPEC, 2017, Field evaluation Purple air (PA-II) PM sensor
[7]  
ASHRAE, 2016, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2016
[8]  
Bartonova A., 2019, Eionet Report-ETC/ACM 2018/21
[9]   Publicly available low-cost sensor measurements for PM2.5 exposure modeling: Guidance for monitor deployment and data selection [J].
Bi, Jianzhao ;
Carmona, Nancy ;
Blanco, Magali N. ;
Gassett, Amanda J. ;
Seto, Edmund ;
Szpiro, Adam A. ;
V. Larson, Timothy ;
Sampson, Paul D. ;
Kaufman, Joel D. ;
Sheppard, Lianne .
ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL, 2022, 158
[10]   Validation of low-cost air quality monitoring platforms using model-based control charts [J].
Boulic, Mikael ;
Phipps, Robyn ;
Wang, Yu ;
Vignes, Matthieu ;
Adegoke, Nurudeen A. .
JOURNAL OF BUILDING ENGINEERING, 2024, 82