Development of a calibration chamber to evaluate the performance of low-cost particulate matter sensors.
Clicks: 344
ID: 44741
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
75.9
/100
344 views
235 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #38 of 145 articles by views in Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987)
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 145 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Low-cost particulate matter (PM) air quality sensors are becoming widely available and are being increasingly deployed in ambient and home/workplace environments due to their low cost, compactness, and ability to provide more highly resolved spatiotemporal PM concentrations. However, the PM data from these sensors are often of questionable quality, and the sensors need to be characterized individually for the environmental conditions under which they will be making measurements. In this study, we designed and assessed a cost-effective (∼$700) calibration chamber capable of continuously providing a uniform PM concentration simultaneously to multiple low-cost PM sensors and robust calibration relationships that are independent of sensor position. The chamber was designed and evaluated with a Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) model and a rigorous experimental protocol. We then used this new chamber to calibrate 242 Plantower PMS 3003 sensors from two production lots (Batches I and II) with two aerosol types: ammonium nitrate (for Batches I and II) and alumina oxide (for Batch I). Our CFD models and experiments demonstrated that the chamber is capable of providing uniform PM concentration to 8 PM sensors at once within 6% error and with excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.771). The study identified two malfunctioning sensors and showed that the remaining sensors had high linear correlations with a DustTrak monitor that was calibrated for each aerosol type (R > 0.978). Finally, the results revealed statistically significant differences between the responses of Batches I and II sensors to the same aerosol (P-value<0.001) and the Batch I sensors to the two different aerosol types (P-value<0.001). This chamber design and evaluation protocol can provide a useful tool for those interested in systematic laboratory characterization of low-cost PM sensors.
| Reference Key |
sayahi2019developmentenvironmental
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Sayahi, T;Kaufman, D;Becnel, T;Kaur, K;Butterfield, A E;Collingwood, S;Zhang, Y;Gaillardon, P-E;Kelly, K E; |
| Journal | Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987) |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
S0269-7491(19)32273-0
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.