Assessment of the Accuracy of Analyzers for Automatic Determination of PM10 and PM2.5 Particulate Matter in Ambient Air

Abstract

The paper presents the test results regarding the evaluation of the accuracy of the PM2.5 and PM10 particulate matter concentration measurement performed with the uRADMonitor A3 fixed air quality monitoring station produced by SC MAGNASCI SRL. The procedure involves the calculation of the accuracy elements: trueness and precision, based on the experimental data obtained by measuring the concentration of particulate matter using the tested analysers in parallel with the reference method, SR EN 12341: 2014, and analysis of data series by Pearson correlation and linear regression.Starting from the nowadays pollution reality, when the level of ambient air pollution is at an unprecedented level both in terms of the diversity of the identified pollutants in the air and the increasing concentrations [1-4], continuous and accurate monitoring is an important first step in the process of stopping and improving air quality. In accordance with ISO 5725 standard series -The accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and measurement results, accuracy reflects the degree of concordance between the result of an attempt and the accepted reference value. The general term of accuracy is used to refer to trueness and precision, at the same time.Evaluating the trueness of a method involves comparing the value of the acquired results by applying the tested method, which may be a certified reference material (if present) or may be the result of measurement by another method, preferably a reference one. The value of trueness is usually expressed by the trueness error, i.e. the difference between the value obtained by the tested equipment and the value obtained by the reference method. Precision is the general term for the variability of the results of a repeated measurement and is usually expressed based on the values of standard deviations obtained under repeatability/reproducibility conditions with a probability of 95%.The paper presents the procedure and the results obtained within a project that aimed the establish the accuracy of measurements of PM2.5 and PM10 made with uRADMonitor A3 a fixed air quality monitoring station ( fig. 1a); the trueness and variability were calculated, based on experimental data obtained by parallel measurement of the concentration of PM2.5 and PM10 using automatic monitors and the reference method, SR EN 12341:2014 and compared with the requirements of acceptability imposed by the regulations under these conditions:1)the variability condition: to be in line with the uncertainty established by the environmental regulations in force; 2)the Pearson correlation coefficient values, r ≥ 0.97 according to SR EN 14793: 2017 [5]; Pearson correlation and linear regression methods have been used to verify these requirements, these methods being more and more used in different areas of activity, including environmental protection [6][7][8][9]. Experimental partFor the test, PM2.5 and PM10 particulate matter were determined with two uRADMonitor monitors A and B in parallel with 2 Sven Leckel LVS3 typ...

Evaluation of Work-Related Personal Exposure to Aerosol Particles

“…The concentration of PM in the air is determined by a high-quality laser scatter sensor. From the comparative study of the URAD monitor A3 with quartz filter measurements according to SR EN 12341:2014 [ 23 ], it appears that the monitor measures with an uncertainty of ±12% from the limit value (LV 2.5 = 35 μg/m 3 ) in the case of PM 2.5, and ±11% from the limit value (LV 10 = 50 μg/m 3 ) in the case of PM 10 . This statement is valid for concentrations >~10 μg/m 3 in both cases.…”

Statistical Processing and Correlations Between Concentrations of Some Atmospheric Pollutants in Suceava and Botosani Counties

“…Several species resulting from the combustion processes occurring either in the large scale power plants production by using fossil fuels or solid combustible waste, or resulted from the automotive engine working (nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, benzene and particulate matter) are responsible for acid rains, deforesting, soil deterioration, intensive corrosion and architecture damaging, agricultural production decrease, as well as for the initiation of various human and animal serious diseases (especially respiratory problems and carcinogenic effects) [3][4][5]. Therefore, the authorities have the obligation of monitoring the air quality, communicate the results in real time to the community, emit alerts when necessary and eventually establish activity restrictions and/or special fees in the urban agglomerations, aiming to reduce the number and density of mobile emitters of toxic gases and particles.…”

“…An extensive bibliometric study performed in the preamble of this work helped us to establish several connections between the main keywords used in the air quality characterization. This analysis gives an image of how the effects of different pollutants have changed in the priority lists of the scientists, since the pollution of the atmosphere has a strong effect on the entire population state of health [1][2][3][4][5]. In this respect, the weight of practical studies versus pure theoretical approach increased in the period of four years.…”