Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 3.248 IF 3.248
  • IF 5-year value: 3.650 IF 5-year 3.650
  • CiteScore value: 3.37 CiteScore 3.37
  • SNIP value: 1.253 SNIP 1.253
  • SJR value: 1.869 SJR 1.869
  • IPP value: 3.29 IPP 3.29
  • h5-index value: 47 h5-index 47
  • Scimago H index value: 60 Scimago H index 60
Volume 11, issue 8 | Copyright
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 4823-4846, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4823-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Research article 22 Aug 2018

Research article | 22 Aug 2018

Field evaluation of low-cost particulate matter sensors in high- and low-concentration environments

Tongshu Zheng1, Michael H. Bergin1, Karoline K. Johnson1, Sachchida N. Tripathi2, Shilpa Shirodkar2, Matthew S. Landis3, Ronak Sutaria4, and David E. Carlson1,5 Tongshu Zheng et al.
  • 1Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA
  • 2Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh 208016, India
  • 3US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA
  • 4Center for Urban Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400076, India
  • 5Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA

Abstract. Low-cost particulate matter (PM) sensors are promising tools for supplementing existing air quality monitoring networks. However, the performance of the new generation of low-cost PM sensors under field conditions is not well understood. In this study, we characterized the performance capabilities of a new low-cost PM sensor model (Plantower model PMS3003) for measuring PM2.5 at 1min, 1h, 6h, 12h, and 24h integration times. We tested the PMS3003 sensors in both low-concentration suburban regions (Durham and Research Triangle Park (RTP), NC, US) with 1h PM2.5 (mean±SD) of 9±9 and 10±3µgm−3, respectively, and a high-concentration urban location (Kanpur, India) with 1h PM2.5 of 36±17 and 116±57µgm−3 during monsoon and post-monsoon seasons, respectively. In Durham and Kanpur, the sensors were compared to a research-grade instrument (environmental β attenuation monitor, E-BAM) to determine how these sensors perform across a range of PM2.5 concentrations and meteorological factors (e.g., temperature and relative humidity, RH). In RTP, the sensors were compared to three Federal Equivalent Methods (FEMs) including two Teledyne model T640s and a Thermo Scientific model 5030 SHARP to demonstrate the importance of the type of reference monitor selected for sensor calibration. The decrease in 1h mean errors of the calibrated sensors using univariate linear models from Durham (201%) to Kanpur monsoon (46%) and post-monsoon (35%) seasons showed that PMS3003 performance generally improved as ambient PM2.5 increased. The precision of reference instruments (T640: ±0.5µgm−3 for 1h; SHARP: ±2µgm−3 for 24h, better than the E-BAM) is critical in evaluating sensor performance, and β-attenuation-based monitors may not be ideal for testing PM sensors at low concentrations, as underscored by (1) the less dramatic error reduction over averaging times in RTP against optically based T640 (from 27% for 1h to 9% for 24h) than in Durham (from 201% to 15%); (2) the lower errors in RTP than the Kanpur post-monsoon season (from 35% to 11%); and (3) the higher T640–PMS3003 correlations (R2 ≥ 0.63) than SHARP–PMS3003 (R2 ≥ 0.25). A major RH influence was found in RTP (1h RH = 64±22%) due to the relatively high precision of the T640 measurements that can explain up to  ∼ 30% of the variance in 1min to 6h PMS3003 PM2.5 measurements. When proper RH corrections are made by empirical nonlinear equations after using a more precise reference method to calibrate the sensors, our work suggests that the PMS3003 sensors can measure PM2.5 concentrations within  ∼ 10% of ambient values. We observed that PMS3003 sensors appeared to exhibit a nonlinear response when ambient PM2.5 exceeded  ∼ 125µgm−3 and found that the quadratic fit is more appropriate than the univariate linear model to capture this nonlinearity and can further reduce errors by up to 11%. Our results have substantial implications for how variability in ambient PM2.5 concentrations, reference monitor types, and meteorological factors can affect PMS3003 performance characterization.

Download & links
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
Low-cost particulate matter sensors are promising tools for supplementing existing air quality monitoring networks but their performance under field conditions is not well understood. We characterized how well Plantower PMS3003 sensors measure PM2.5 in a wide range of ambient conditions against different reference sensors. When a more precise reference method is used for calibration and proper RH corrections are made, our work suggests PMS3003's can measure PM2.5 within ~ 10 % of ambient values.
Low-cost particulate matter sensors are promising tools for supplementing existing air quality...
Citation
Share