Development and On-Field Testing of Low-Cost Portable System for Monitoring PM2.5 Concentrations

Genikomsakis, Konstantinos N.; Galatoulas, Nikolaos-Fivos; Dallas, Panagiotis I.; Ibarra, L.; Margaritis, Dimitris

doi:10.3390/s18041056

Cited by 55 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(29 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…China [17] (Figure 1). The technology is based on laser diffraction theory, where particle density distribution is specified from the light intensity distribution patterns [21,29]. The sensor contains a digital output and a built-in fan ( Figure 2), which can measure the particle density distribution between 0.3 to 10 μm in the air.…”

Section: Nova Pm Sensor Sds011mentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Assessment of a Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensor for a near Four-Month Period in Oslo, Norway

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The very low-cost Nova particulate matter (PM) sensor SDS011 has recently drawn attention for its use for measuring PM mass concentration, which is frequently used as an indicator of air quality. However, this sensor has not been thoroughly evaluated in real-world conditions and its data quality is not well documented. In this study, three SDS011 sensors were evaluated by co-locating them at an official, air quality monitoring station equipped with reference-equivalent instrumentation in Oslo, Norway. The sensors’ measurement results for PM2.5 were compared with data generated from the air quality monitoring station over almost a four-month period. Five performance aspects of the sensors were examined: operational data coverage, linearity of response and accuracy, inter-sensor variability, dependence on relative humidity (RH) and temperature (T), and potential improvement of sensor accuracy, by data calibration using a machine-learning method. The results of the study are: (i) the three sensors provide quite similar results, with inter-sensor correlations exhibiting R values higher than 0.97; (ii) all three sensors demonstrate quite high linearity against officially measured concentrations of PM2.5, with R2 values ranging from 0.55 to 0.71; (iii) high RH (over 80%) negatively affected the sensor response; (iv) data calibration using only the RH and T recorded directly at the three sensors increased the R2 value from 0.71 to 0.80, 068 to 0.79, and 0.55 to 0.76. The results demonstrate the general feasibility of using these low cost SDS011 sensors for indicative PM2.5 monitoring under certain environmental conditions. Within these constraints, they further indicate that there is potential for deploying large networks of such devices, due to the sensors’ relative accuracy, size and cost. This opens up a wide variety of applications, such as high-resolution air quality mapping and personalized air quality information services. However, it should be noted that the sensors exhibit often very high relative errors for hourly values and that there is a high potential of abusing these types of sensors if they are applied outside the manufacturer-provided specifications particularly regarding relative humidity. Furthermore, our analysis covers only a relatively short time period and it is desirable to carry out longer-term studies covering a wider range of meteorological conditions.

show abstract

Section: Nova Pm Sensor Sds011mentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Assessment of a Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensor for a near Four-Month Period in Oslo, Norway

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To the best of our knowledge, there no reports on the performance of the SDS011 sensor model in climates similar to Santiago, specifically, the Mediterranean type with dry summers. A few studies have assessed the performance of the SDS011 in humid subtropical climates, for example, in Thessaloniki, Greece (Genikomsakis et al 2018) and Florence, Italy (Cavaliere et al 2018). In both of these locations, R 2 above 0.85 was observed for the correlations between the PM 2.5 averages informed by the SDS011 and standard optical instruments.…”

Section: Accuracy Of Rh Sensor Measurements Compared To Reference Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field performance of a low-cost sensor in the monitoring of particulate matter in Santiago, Chile

Tagle

Rojas

Reyes

et al. 2020

Environ Monit Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integration of low-cost air quality sensors with the internet of things (IoT) has become a feasible approach towards the development of smart cities. Several studies have assessed the performance of low-cost air quality sensors by comparing their measurements with reference instruments. We examined the performance of a low-cost IoT particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) sensor in the urban environment of Santiago, Chile. The prototype was assembled from a PM 10 -PM 2.5 sensor (SDS011), a temperature and relative humidity sensor (BME280) and an IoT board (ESP8266/ Node MCU). Field tests were conducted at three regulatory monitoring stations during the 2018 austral winter and spring seasons. The sensors at each site were operated in parallel with continuous reference air quality monitors (BAM 1020 and TEOM 1400) and a filterbased sampler (Partisol 2000i). Variability between sensor units (n = 7) and the correlation between the sensor and reference instruments were examined. Moderate inter-unit variability was observed between sensors for PM 2.5 (normalized root-mean-square error 9-24%) and PM 10 (10-37%). The correlations between the 1-h average concentrations reported by the sensors and continuous monitors were higher for PM 2.5 (R 2 0.47-0.86) than PM 10 (0.24-0.56). The correlations (R 2 ) between the 24-h PM 2.5 averages from the sensors and reference instruments were 0.63-0.87 for continuous monitoring and 0.69-0.93 for filter-based samplers. Correlation analysis revealed that sensors tended to overestimate PM concentrations in high relative humidity (RH > 75%) and underestimate when RH was below 50%. Overall, the prototype evaluated exhibited adequate performance and may be potentially suitable for monitoring daily PM 2.5 averages after correcting for RH.

show abstract

“…However, recently, inexpensive (<$300) particulate matter (PM) monitors (PM) have been introduced for home usage in South Korea. These devices can provide PM distribution patterns at high temporal and spatial resolution [3][4][5] which is a substantial improvement on establishing a pollution monitoring networking system as well as environmental epidemiologic study [6], as compared to traditional approaches that relied on relatively small number of ground-based fixed national air monitoring stations or mobile sampling techniques.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Performance of Inexpensive Laser Based PM2.5 Sensor Monitors for Typical Indoor and Outdoor Hotspots of South Korea

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inexpensive (<$300) real-time particulate matter monitors (IRMs), using laser as a light source, have been introduced for use with a Wi-Fi function enabling networking with a smartphone. However, the information of measurement error of these inexpensive but convenient IRMs are still limited. Using ESCORTAIR (ESCORT, Seoul, Korea) and PurpleAir (PA) (PurpleAir U.S.A.), we evaluated the performance of these two devices compared with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Federal Equivalent Monitoring (FEM) devices, that is, GRIMM180 (GRIMM Aerosol, Germany) for the indoor measurement of pork panfrying or secondhand tobacco smoking (SHS) and Beta-ray attenuation monitor (BAM) (MetOne, Grants Pass, OR) for outdoor measurement at the national particulate matter (PM2.5) monitoring site near an urban traffic hotspot in Daejeon, South Korea, respectively. The PM2.5 concentrations measured by ESCORTAIR and PA were strongly correlated to FEM (r = 0.97 and 0.97 from indoor pan frying; 0.92 and 0.86 from indoor SHS; 0.85 and 0.88 from outdoor urban traffic hotspot). The two IRMs showed that PM2.5 mass concentrations were increased with increased outdoor relative humidity (RH) levels. However, after applying correction factors for RH, the Median (Interquartile range) of difference compared to FEM was (14.5 (6.1~23.5) %) for PA and 16.3 (8.5–28.0) % for ESCORTAIR, supporting their usage in the home or near urban hotspots.

show abstract

Development and On-Field Testing of Low-Cost Portable System for Monitoring PM2.5 Concentrations

Cited by 55 publications

References 29 publications

Performance Assessment of a Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensor for a near Four-Month Period in Oslo, Norway

Performance Assessment of a Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensor for a near Four-Month Period in Oslo, Norway

Field performance of a low-cost sensor in the monitoring of particulate matter in Santiago, Chile

Evaluation of Performance of Inexpensive Laser Based PM2.5 Sensor Monitors for Typical Indoor and Outdoor Hotspots of South Korea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About