Practical Field Calibration of Portable Monitors for Mobile Measurements of Multiple Air Pollutants

Abstract

Abstract:To reduce inaccuracies in the measurement of air pollutants by portable monitors it is necessary to establish quantitative calibration relationships against their respective reference analyser. This is usually done under controlled laboratory conditions or one-off static co-location alongside a reference analyser in the field, neither of which may adequately represent the extended use of portable monitors in exposure assessment research. To address this, we investigated ways of establishing and evaluating portable monitor calibration relationships from repeated intermittent deployment cycles over an extended period involving stationary deployment at a reference site, mobile monitoring, and completely switched off. We evaluated four types of portable monitors: Aeroqual Ltd. (Auckland, New Zealand) S500 O 3 metal oxide and S500 NO 2 electrochemical; RTI (Berkeley, CA, USA) MicroPEM PM 2.5 ; and, AethLabs (San Francisco, CA, USA) AE51 black carbon (BC). Innovations in our study included: (i) comparison of calibrations derived from the individual co-locations of a portable monitor against its reference analyser or from all the co-location periods combined into a single dataset; and, (ii) evaluation of calibrated monitor estimates during transient measurements with the portable monitor close to its reference analyser at separate times from the stationary co-location calibration periods. Within the~7 month duration of the study, 'combined' calibration relationships for O 3 , PM 2.5 , and BC monitors from all co-locations agreed more closely on average with reference measurements than 'individual' calibration relationships from co-location deployment nearest in time to transient deployment periods. 'Individual' calibrations relationships were sometimes substantially unrepresentative of the 'combined' relationships. Reduced quantitative consistency in field calibration relationships for the PM 2.5 monitors may have resulted from generally low PM 2.5 concentrations that were encountered in this study. Aeroqual NO 2 monitors were sensitive to both NO 2 and O 3 and unresolved biases. Overall, however, we observed that with the 'combined' approach, 'indicative' measurement accuracy (±30% for O 3 , and ±50% for BC and PM 2.5 ) for 1 h time averaging could be maintained over the 7-month period for the monitors evaluated here.

Citizen sensing for environmental information

“…Formal environmental sensing data have generally been considered expensive and inadequate for capturing the spatial and temporal dynamics required in environmental monitoring. This is due to static and sparse coverage of stations (Kumar et al, 2015;Little et al, 2016). This perception was confirmed in our research.…”

A methodology for the characterization of portable sensors for air quality measure with the goal of deployment in citizen science

“…This test involved the following sensors: sensor B, sensor C and sensor F. The BC sensor A was not involved in this mobility tests because studies (Ezani et al, 2018;Lin et al, 2017) have already demonstrated its ability to perform mobile measurements. Fig.…”

In Situ Calibration Algorithms for Environmental Sensor Networks: A Review

“…Pairwise strategies a) Reference-based pairwise: Relatively few papers address methodological issues related to reference-based pairwise strategies, as this approach is the closest to a "traditional" calibration approach with measurement standards. Primarily, reference instruments may be directly co-located in the field with non-reference instruments to achieve their calibration [38] [41] [42] [54] [55].…”