| Literature DB >> 31861447 |
Brandon Feenstra1,2,3, Vasileios Papapostolou1, Berj Der Boghossian1, David Cocker2,3, Andrea Polidori1.
Abstract
Recent technological advances in both air sensing technology and Internet of Things (IoT) connectivity have enabled the development and deployment of remote monitoring networks of air quality sensors. The compact size and low power requirements of both sensors and IoT data loggers allow for the development of remote sensing nodes with power and connectivity versatility. With these technological advancements, sensor networks can be developed and deployed for various ambient air monitoring applications. This paper describes the development and deployment of a monitoring network of accurate ozone (O3) sensor nodes to provide parallel monitoring in an air monitoring site relocation study. The reference O3 analyzer at the station along with a network of three O3 sensing nodes was used to evaluate the spatial and temporal variability of O3 across four Southern California communities in the San Bernardino Mountains which are currently represented by a single reference station in Crestline, CA. The motivation for developing and deploying the sensor network in the region was that the single reference station potentially needed to be relocated due to uncertainty that the lease agreement would be renewed. With the implication of siting a new reference station that is also a high O3 site, the project required the development of an accurate and precise sensing node for establishing a parallel monitoring network at potential relocation sites. The deployment methodology included a pre-deployment co-location calibration to the reference analyzer at the air monitoring station with post-deployment co-location results indicating a mean absolute error (MAE) < 2 ppb for 1-h mean O3 concentrations. Ordinary least squares regression statistics between reference and sensor nodes during post-deployment co-location testing indicate that the nodes are accurate and highly correlated to reference instrumentation with R2 values > 0.98, slope offsets < 0.02, and intercept offsets < 0.6 for hourly O3 concentrations with a mean concentration value of 39.7 ± 16.5 ppb and a maximum 1-h value of 94 ppb. Spatial variability for diurnal O3 trends was found between locations within 5 km of each other with spatial variability between sites more pronounced during nighttime hours. The parallel monitoring was successful in providing the data to develop a relocation strategy with only one relocation site providing a 95% confidence that concentrations would be higher there than at the current site.Entities:
Keywords: mountain community monitoring; ozone; parallel monitoring; sensor network; sensor node; site relocation study
Year: 2019 PMID: 31861447 PMCID: PMC6982912 DOI: 10.3390/s20010016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Federal and State standards for ozone (obtained September 2019).
| Standard for Ozone | 1-h Average | 8-h Average (Year Established) |
|---|---|---|
| National Ambient Air Quality Standard | 120 ppb (1979) | 70 ppb (2015) |
| California Ambient Air Quality Standard | 90 ppb | - |
Figure 1Ozone sensor node with labeled components.
Deployment dates and number of days per deployment period.
| Period | Dates | # of Days |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-deployment co-location | 7/11/17 to 7/19/17 | 8 |
| Deployment | 7/19/17 to 9/19/17 | 62 |
| Post-deployment co-location | 9/19/17 to 9/29/17 | 10 |
Figure 2Map of Eastern San Bernardino Mountain Communities and deployment locations.
Figure 3Pre-deployment co-location at Crestline time series for 1-h mean O3 concentrations after the in-situ field calibration was performed.
Figure 4Pre-deployment co-location correlation plots for 1-h O3 concentrations after the in-situ field calibration was performed.
Figure 5Post-deployment co-location time series for 1-h mean O3 concentrations.
Figure 6Post-deployment co-location correlation plots for 1-h O3 concentrations.
Summary information and 1-h statistics for the four monitoring locations.
| Location | Crestline | Lake Arrowhead | Skyforest | Running Springs | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instrument | Thermo 49i | POM 1145 | POM 1122 | POM 1148 | Units |
| Population | 10,700 | 12,400 | 300 | 4800 | no. residents |
| Elevation | 1390 | 1753 | 1733 | 1858 | m |
| Distance from Crestline AMS | 0 | 5.8 | 9.5 | 17.1 | km |
|
| |||||
| Mean Ozone Conc. | 54.2 | 64.0 | 54.2 | 56.7 | ppb |
| Standard Deviation | 24.2 | 18.9 | 21.8 | 20.0 | ppb |
| Minimum Conc. | 4.5 | 21.5 | 13.4 | 15.4 | ppb |
| Maximum Conc. | 146.2 | 137.1 | 135.2 | 137.3 | ppb |
| Hourly data points | 1032 | 1032 | 1032 | 1032 | count |
| Slope | - | 0.65 | 0.81 | 0.62 | - |
| Intercept | - | 28.8 | 10.5 | 22.8 | - |
| R2 | - | 0.69 | 0.80 | 0.57 | - |
| Mean Bias Deviation (MBD) | - | 9.8 | 0.0 | 2.5 | ppb |
| Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD) | - | 11.7 | 8.3 | 12.1 | ppb |
| MAD—Daytime | 7.1 | 6.7 | 8.7 | ppb | |
| MAD—Nighttime | 16.7 | 10.0 | 15.9 | ppb |
Figure 7Box plots for the 1-h mean O3 concentrations for the four deployment locations.
Summary Statistics and 95% confidence interval for the daily 1-h maximum O3 concentration.
| Location | Crestline | Lake Arrowhead | Skyforest | Running Springs | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instrument | Thermo 49i | POM 1145 | POM 1122 | POM 1148 | Units |
| Mean Conc. | 100.8 | 106.9 | 101.9 | 104.6 | ppb |
| MBD | - | 6.08 | 1.08 | 3.81 | ppb |
| SD MBD | - | 8.89 | 8.29 | 11.93 | ppb |
| Lower limit of MBD (95% CI) | - | 2.10 | −2.63 | −1.53 | ppb |
| Upper Limit of MBD (95% CI) | - | 10.05 | 4.79 | 9.15 | ppb |
| Lower Limit % | - | 2.0 | −2.6 | −1.5 | % |
| Upper Limit % | - | 9.7 | 4.7 | 8.9 | % |
| Slope | - | 0.61 | 0.90 | 0.63 | - |
| Intercept | - | 45.7 | 11.3 | 41.5 | - |
| R2 | - | 0.59 | 0.70 | 0.40 | - |
Figure 8Timeseries for deployment, subset between 22 August and 1 September 2017.
Figure 9Time series for deployment subset between August 24 and 26, 2017.
Exceedances of the U.S. EPA 2015 8-h ozone standard of 70 ppb.
| Location—Unit | No. of Exceedances (Days) |
|---|---|
| Crestline—Thermo 49i | 32 |
| Skyforest—POM 1122 | 27 |
| Lake Arrowhead—POM 1145 | 38 |
| Running Springs—POM 1148 | 28 |
Figure 10Annual Average Daily Traffic estimates by location for the monitoring region of interest. * SR: State Route.