Literature DB >> 29681677

Size-Selective Sampling Performance of Six Low-Volume "Total" Suspended Particulate (TSP) Inlets.

Robert W Vanderpool1, Jonathan D Krug1, Surender Kaushik1, Jerome Gilberry2,3, Andrew Dart2, Carlton L Witherspoon3.   

Abstract

Several low-volume inlets (flow rates ≤16.7 liters per minute (Lpm)) are commercially available as components of low-cost, portable ambient particulate matter samplers. Because the inlets themselves do not contain internal fractionators, they are often assumed to representatively sample "total" mass concentrations from the ambient air, independent of aerodynamic particle size and wind speed. To date, none of these so-called "TSP" inlets have been rigorously tested under controlled conditions. To determine their actual size-selective performance under conditions of expected use, wind tunnel tests of six commonly used omnidirectional, low-volume inlets were conducted using solid, polydisperse aerosols at wind speeds of 2, 8, and 24 km/hr. With the exception of axially-oriented, isokinetic sharp-edge nozzles operating at 5 and 10 Lpm, all low-volume inlets showed some degree of non-ideal sampling performance as a function of aerodynamic particle size and wind speed. Depending upon wind speed and assumed ambient particle size distribution, total mass concentration measurements were estimated to be negatively biased by as much as 66%. As expected from particle inertial considerations, inlet efficiency tended to degrade with increasing wind speed and particle size, although some exceptions were noted. The implications of each inlet's non-ideal behavior are discussed with regards to expected total mass concentration measurement during ambient sampling and the ability to obtain representative sampling for size ranges of interest, such as PM2.5 and PM10. Overall test results will aid in low-volume inlet selection and with proper interpretation of results obtained with their ambient field use.

Year:  2018        PMID: 29681677      PMCID: PMC5906806          DOI: 10.1080/02786826.2017.1386766

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aerosol Sci Technol        ISSN: 0278-6826            Impact factor:   2.908


  15 in total

1.  Calibration of sharp cut impactors for indoor and outdoor particle sampling.

Authors:  W A Turner; B A Olson; G A Allen
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.235

2.  Comparison of real-time instruments used to monitor airborne particulate matter.

Authors:  A Chung; D P Chang; M J Kleeman; K D Perry; T A Cahill; D Dutcher; E M McDougall; K Stroud
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 2.235

3.  Method comparisons for particulate nitrate, elemental carbon, and PM2.5 mass in seven U.S. cities.

Authors:  P Babich; M Davey; G Allen; P Koutrakis
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 2.235

4.  Evaluation of particulate matter abatement strategies for almond harvest.

Authors:  William B Faulkner; Daniel Downey; D Ken Giles; Sergio C Capareda
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.235

5.  Solid versus liquid particle sampling efficiency of three personal aerosol samplers when facing the wind.

Authors:  Kirsten A Koehler; T Renee Anthony; Michael Van Dyke; John Volckens
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2011-09-29

6.  Atmospheric aerosol composition and concentration as a function of particle size and of time.

Authors:  D A Lundgren
Journal:  J Air Pollut Control Assoc       Date:  1970-09

7.  Spatial differences in outdoor PM10 mass and aerosol composition in Mexico City.

Authors:  Judith C Chow; John G Watson; Sylvia A Edgerton; Elizabeth Vega; Elba Ortiz
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 2.235

Review 8.  Measurement methods to determine compliance with ambient air quality standards for suspended particles.

Authors:  J C Chow
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 2.235

9.  An association between air pollution and mortality in six U.S. cities.

Authors:  D W Dockery; C A Pope; X Xu; J D Spengler; J H Ware; M E Fay; B G Ferris; F E Speizer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-12-09       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Chemical characterization and factor analysis of PM2.5 in two sites of Monterrey, Mexico.

Authors:  Marco A Martinez; Porfirio Caballero; Olivia Carrillo; Alberto Mendoza; Gerardo Manuel Mejia
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 2.235

View more
  1 in total

1.  Development of Polydisperse Aerosol Generation and Measurement Procedures for Wind Tunnel Evaluation of Size-Selective Aerosol Samplers.

Authors:  Andrew Dart; Jonathan D Krug; Carlton L Witherspoon; Jerome Gilberry; Quentin Malloy; Surender Kaushik; Robert W Vanderpool
Journal:  Aerosol Sci Technol       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 2.908

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.