Evaluating the Performance of Low-Cost PM_2.5Sensors in Mobile Settings

Abstract

Low-cost sensors (LCSs) for measuring air pollution are increasingly being deployed in mobile applications, but questions concerning the quality of the measurements remain unanswered. For example, what is the best way to correct LCS data in a mobile setting? Which factors most significantly contribute to differences between mobile LCS data and those of higher-quality instruments? Can data from LCSs be used to identify hotspots and generate generalizable pollutant concentration maps? To help address these questions, we deployed low-cost PM2.5 sensors (Alphasense OPC-N3) and a research-grade instrument (TSI DustTrak) in a mobile laboratory in Boston, MA, USA. We first collocated these instruments with stationary PM2.5 reference monitors (Teledyne T640) at nearby regulatory sites. Next, using the reference measurements, we developed different models to correct the OPC-N3 and DustTrak measurements and then transferred the corrections to the mobile setting. We observed that more complex correction models appeared to perform better than simpler models in the stationary setting; however, when transferred to the mobile setting, corrected OPC-N3 measurements agreed less well with the corrected DustTrak data. In general, corrections developed by using minute-level collocation measurements transferred better to the mobile setting than corrections developed using hourly-averaged data. Mobile laboratory speed, OPC-N3 orientation relative to the direction of travel, date, hour-of-the-day, and road class together explain a small but significant amount of variation between corrected OPC-N3 and DustTrak measurements during the mobile deployment. Persistent hotspots identified by the OPC-N3s agreed with those identified by the DustTrak. Similarly, maps of PM2.5 distribution produced from the mobile corrected OPC-N3 and DustTrak measurements agreed well. These results suggest that identifying hotspots and developing generalizable maps of PM2.5 are appropriate use-cases for mobile LCS data.

Hyperlocal Air Pollution in London: Validating Low-Cost Sensors for Mobile Measurements from Vehicles

“…Results from static testing and calibration of LCS colocated with reference stations will also not necessarily transfer to mobile monitoring. It has been shown that calibration models, particularly complex models that are well fitted to a specific environment, are often not transferable between different locations. ,− Moreover, mobile use introduces additional factors such as vibration of the nodes, high and variable wind speeds, interference from vehicular pollution, rapid changes in concentrations and environmental factors, and nonisokinetic sampling of particles. Depending on the type of sampling, the inlet orientation, relative to the direction of movement, may affect the sample flow rate.…”