DCS Americas, Environment, AECOM, Houston, TX, USA.
J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2020 Mar;70(3):292-306. doi: 10.1080/10962247.2020.1713921. Epub 2020 Feb 12.
As public awareness and concern about air quality grows, companies and researchers have begun to develop small, low-cost sensors to measure local air quality. These sensors have been used in citizen science projects, in distributed networks within cities, and in combination with public health studies on asthma and other air-quality-associated diseases. However, sensor long-term performance under different environmental conditions and pollutant levels is not fully understood. In addition, further evaluation is needed for other long-term performance trends such as performance among sensors of the same model, comparison between sensors from different companies and comparison of sensor data to federal equivalence or reference method (FEM/FRM) measurements. A 10-month evaluation of two popular particulate matter (PM) sensors, Dylos DC1100 and AirBeam, and a popular ozone (O) sensor, Aeroqual 500, was performed as part of this study. Data from these sensors were compared to each other and to FEM/FRM data and local meteorology. The study took place at the Houston Regional Monitoring (HRM) site 3, located between the Houston Ship Channel and Houston's urban center. PM sensor performance was found to vary in time, with multivariate analysis, binning of data by meteorological parameter, and machine learning techniques able to account for some but not all performance variations. PM type (i.e., size distribution, fiber-flake-spheroid shape and black-brown-white color) likely played a role in the changing sensor performance. Triplicate individual Aeroqual O sensors tracked reasonably well with the FEM data for most of the measurement period but had irregular periods of O measurement offset. While the FEM data indicated 4 days where ozone levels were above the NAAQS, the Aeroqual ozone sensors indicated a substantially higher number of days, ranging from 9 to 16 for the three sensors.: This paper evaluated the long-term performance of several commercial low-cost sensors (PM and ozone) as compared to federal equivalence method (FEM) monitors under a range of meteorological and air quality conditions. PM sensors performed well on low humidity days with winds indicative of sea salt or dust PM sources but had poor correlation with FEM data under other conditions. Two types of PM sensors were studied (Dylos 1100 and AirBeam) and data only correlated well between sensors of the same type. Sensor networks with multiple PM sensor types would not be as useful for comparative purposes as sensor networks of the same type. Relative humidity corrections alone did not increase sensor agreement with FEM to acceptable levels, specific information about PM sources and sensor response in the area measured is needed. Low-cost ozone sensors tested (Aeroqual) performed well but were biased high and overestimated days above ozone NAAQS.
随着公众对空气质量的意识和关注不断提高,公司和研究人员开始开发小型、低成本的传感器来测量当地的空气质量。这些传感器已被用于公民科学项目、城市内的分布式网络以及与哮喘和其他与空气质量相关的疾病的公共卫生研究相结合。然而,不同环境条件和污染物水平下传感器的长期性能还不完全清楚。此外,还需要对其他长期性能趋势进行进一步评估,例如同型号传感器之间的性能、不同公司传感器之间的比较以及传感器数据与联邦等效或参考方法(FEM/FRM)测量值的比较。本研究对两种流行的颗粒物(PM)传感器,Dylos DC1100 和 AirBeam,以及一种流行的臭氧(O)传感器,Aeroqual 500,进行了为期 10 个月的评估。这些传感器的数据与彼此以及与 FEM/FRM 数据和当地气象数据进行了比较。该研究在休斯顿地区监测(HRM)站点 3 进行,该站点位于休斯顿航道和休斯顿市中心之间。通过多元分析、按气象参数对数据进行分组以及机器学习技术,发现 PM 传感器的性能随时间变化,这些技术能够解释部分但不是所有的性能变化。PM 类型(即大小分布、纤维片状球体形状和黑褐色白色颜色)可能在不断变化的传感器性能中起作用。三个单独的 Aeroqual O 传感器在大多数测量期间与 FEM 数据跟踪得相当好,但 O 测量的偏移有不规则的时期。虽然 FEM 数据显示有 4 天臭氧水平超过 NAAQS,但 Aeroqual 臭氧传感器显示的天数要高得多,三个传感器的范围从 9 到 16 天。本文评估了几种商业低成本传感器(PM 和臭氧)在一系列气象和空气质量条件下与联邦等效方法(FEM)监测器相比的长期性能。在湿度低、风向表明为海盐或尘埃 PM 源的情况下,PM 传感器性能良好,但在其他条件下与 FEM 数据相关性较差。研究了两种类型的 PM 传感器(Dylos 1100 和 AirBeam),并且只有相同类型的传感器之间的数据相关性良好。具有多种 PM 传感器类型的传感器网络在比较目的方面不会像相同类型的传感器网络那样有用。仅相对湿度校正并不能将传感器与 FEM 的一致性提高到可接受的水平,需要了解测量区域内 PM 源和传感器响应的具体信息。经过测试的低成本臭氧传感器(Aeroqual)性能良好,但存在偏高和高估臭氧 NAAQS 天数的偏差。