Response Characterization of an Inexpensive Aerosol Sensor

被引:17
作者
Kuula, Joel [1 ]
Makela, Timo [1 ]
Hillamo, Risto [1 ]
Timonen, Hilkka [1 ]
机构
[1] Finnish Meteorol Inst, Erik Palmenin Aukio 1, FIN-00560 Helsinki, Finland
关键词
inexpensive aerosol sensor; novel evaluation method; particulate matter; FINE PARTICULATE MATTER; LOW-COST SENSORS; AIR-POLLUTION; CHEMICAL-COMPOSITION; LABORATORY EVALUATION; ORGANIC-CARBON; LONG-RANGE; URBAN; MASS; SPECTROMETER;
D O I
10.3390/s17122915
中图分类号
O65 [分析化学];
学科分类号
070302 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Inexpensive aerosol sensors have been considered as a complementary option to address the issue of expensive but low spatial coverage air quality monitoring networks. However, the accuracy and response characteristics of these sensors is poorly documented. In this study, inexpensive Shinyei PPD42NS and PPD60PV sensors were evaluated using a novel laboratory evaluation method. A continuously changing monodisperse size distribution of particles was generated using a Vibrating Orifice Aerosol Generator. Furthermore, the laboratory results were validated in a field experiment. The laboratory tests showed that both of the sensors responded to particulate mass (PM) concentration stimulus, rather than number concentration. The highest detection efficiency for the PPD42NS was within particle size range of 2.5-4 mu m, and the respective optimal size range for the PPD60PV was 0.7-1 mu m. The field test yielded high PM correlations (R-2 = 0.962 and R-2 = 0.986) for viable detection ranges of 1.6-5 and 0.3-1.6 mu m, when compared to a medium cost optical dust monitor. As the size distribution of atmospheric particles tends to be bimodal, it is likely that indicatively valid results could be obtained for the PM10-2.5 size fraction (particulate mass in size range 2.5-10 mu m) with the PPD42NS sensor. Respectively, the PPD60PV could possibly be used to measure the PM2.5 size fraction (particulate mass in size below 2.5 mu m).
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
Baron P.A., 2001, AEROSOL MEASUREMENT, V2nd
[2]   PARTICLE BOUNCE ERRORS IN CASCADE IMPACTORS [J].
DZUBAY, TG ;
HINES, LE ;
STEVENS, RK .
ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 1976, 10 (03) :229-234
[3]  
[EC] European Commission, 2008, OFFICIAL J EUROPEAN, VL354
[4]   A distributed network of low-cost continuous reading sensors to measure spatiotemporal variations of PM2.5 in Xi'an, China [J].
Gao, Meiling ;
Cao, Junji ;
Seto, Edmund .
ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, 2015, 199 :56-65
[5]   Source attribution of air pollution by spatial scale separation using high spatial density networks of low cost air quality sensors [J].
Heimann, I. ;
Bright, V. B. ;
McLeod, M. W. ;
Mead, M. I. ;
Popoola, O. A. M. ;
Stewart, G. B. ;
Jones, R. L. .
ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2015, 113 :10-19
[6]  
Hinds WC., 1999, Aerosol Technology, Properties, Behavior and Measurement of Airborne Particles, DOI [10.1016/0021-8502(83)90049-6, DOI 10.1016/0021-8502(83)90049-6]
[7]   Field calibrations of a low-cost aerosol sensor at a regulatory monitoring site in California [J].
Holstius, D. M. ;
Pillarisetti, A. ;
Smith, K. R. ;
Seto, E. .
ATMOSPHERIC MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES, 2014, 7 (04) :1121-1131
[8]  
Järvi L, 2009, ATMOS CHEM PHYS, V9, P7847
[9]   Validating novel air pollution sensors to improve exposure estimates for epidemiological analyses and citizen science [J].
Jerrett, Michael ;
Donaire-Gonzalez, David ;
Popoola, Olalekan ;
Jones, Roderic ;
Cohen, Ronald C. ;
Almanza, Estela ;
de Nazelle, Audrey ;
Mead, Iq ;
Carrasco-Turigas, Gloria ;
Cole-Hunter, Tom ;
Triguero-Mas, Margarita ;
Seto, Edmund ;
Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark .
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, 2017, 158 :286-294
[10]   Community Air Sensor Network (CAIRSENSE) project: evaluation of low-cost sensor performance in a suburban environment in the southeastern United States [J].
Jiao, Wan ;
Hagler, Gayle ;
Williams, Ronald ;
Sharpe, Robert ;
Brown, Ryan ;
Garver, Daniel ;
Judge, Robert ;
Caudill, Motria ;
Rickard, Joshua ;
Davis, Michael ;
Weinstock, Lewis ;
Zimmer-Dauphinee, Susan ;
Buckley, Ken .
ATMOSPHERIC MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES, 2016, 9 (11) :5281-5292