| Literature DB >> 35884239 |
Liangbo Li1, Ang Chen1, Tian Deng1,2, Jin Zeng1, Feifan Xu1, Shu Yan1, Shu Wang1, Wenqing Cheng1,2, Ming Zhu1,2, Wenbo Xu1,2.
Abstract
Mass concentration is a commonly used but insufficient metric to evaluate the particulate matter (PM) exposure hazard. Recent studies have declared that small particles have more serious impacts on human health than big particles given the same mass concentration. However, state-of-the-art PM sensors cannot provide explicit information of the particle size for further analysis. In this work, we adopt Sauter mean diameter (SMD) as a key metric to reflect the particle size besides the mass concentration. To measure SMD, an effective optical sensing method and a proof-of-concept prototype sensor are proposed by using dual wavelengths technology. In the proposed method, a non-linear conversion model is developed to improve the SMD measurement accuracy for aerosol samples of different particle size distributions and reflective indices based on multiple scattering channels. In the experiment of Di-Ethyl-Hexyl-Sebacate (DEHS) aerosols, the outputs of our prototype sensor demonstrated a good agreement with existing laboratory reference instruments with maximum SMD measurement error down to 7.04%. Furthermore, the simplicity, feasibility and low-cost features of this new method present great potential for distributed PM monitoring, to support sophisticated human exposure hazard assessment.Entities:
Keywords: Sauter mean diameter; light scattering; mass concentration; particulate matter monitoring
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35884239 PMCID: PMC9312855 DOI: 10.3390/bios12070436
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosensors (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6374
Figure 1The general relationship between scattering intensity and particle size.
Figure 2The derivation scheme of .
The optional optical parameters.
| Channel Number | Incident Light Wave Lengths | Observing Angle |
|---|---|---|
| 2:1:5 |
| 4:5:140 |
The PM and DEHS parameters in human main activity areas.
| Aerosol Type | Particle Size Distribution Range (nm) | Count Median Diameter | Geometric Standard Deviation | Refractive Index |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OM & Dust | 10:10:10,000 | 100:25:2500 | 1.5:0.1:2.0 |
|
| BC | 10:10:10,000 | 100:25:2500 | 1.5:0.1:2.0 |
|
| DEHS & Dust | 10:10:10,000 | 100:25:2500 | 1.1:0.1:1.4 | 1.45 |
The optimal optical parameters.
| Channel Number | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| RSD | 70% | 9% | 6% | 6% |
Figure 3Relative standard deviation versus observing angles with dual-wavelength LED.
Figure 4The design of the prototype sensor. (a) The 3D model of sensor. (b) The prototype sensor.
Figure 5The experimental platform. (a) Block diagram of aerosol chamber and particle sizing system. (b) Photograph of aerosol samples testing system and aerosol sizing system.
Figure 6The mass concentration of DEHS samples obtained by our prototype sensor versus the reference instruments.
Data of the mass concentration of DEHS samples obtained by our prototype sensor versus the reference instruments.
| Groups | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reference | 97.20 | 90.70 | 130.00 | 108.00 | 149.00 | 107.00 | 175.00 |
| Single Channel | 162 | 126 | 115 | 105 | 87 | 78 | 93 |
| Prototype Sensor | 81.04 | 96.09 | 123.35 | 123.54 | 113.71 | 110.91 | 212.53 |
Figure 7The of aerosol samples with different particle size distributions are mapped in the ratio vector space of scattering signals.
Figure 8The performance of our prototype sensor evaluated by the simulation experiments. (a) The contrast between and . (b) The relative measurement error of aerosol samples.