Articles | Volume 14, issue 11
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7369–7379, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7369-2021
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7369–7379, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7369-2021

Research article 25 Nov 2021

Research article | 25 Nov 2021

Evaluation methods for low-cost particulate matter sensors

Jeffrey K. Bean

Related subject area

Subject: Aerosols | Technique: In Situ Measurement | Topic: Instruments and Platforms
Simulation-aided characterization of a versatile water-based condensation particle counter for atmospheric airborne research
Fan Mei, Steven Spielman, Susanne Hering, Jian Wang, Mikhail S. Pekour, Gregory Lewis, Beat Schmid, Jason Tomlinson, and Maynard Havlicek
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 7329–7340, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7329-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-7329-2021, 2021
Short summary
Development of an in situ dual-channel thermal desorption gas chromatography instrument for consistent quantification of volatile, intermediate-volatility and semivolatile organic compounds
Rebecca A. Wernis, Nathan M. Kreisberg, Robert J. Weber, Yutong Liang, John Jayne, Susanne Hering, and Allen H. Goldstein
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 6533–6550, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6533-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6533-2021, 2021
Short summary
Assessment of online water-soluble brown carbon measuring systems for aircraft sampling
Linghan Zeng, Amy P. Sullivan, Rebecca A. Washenfelder, Jack Dibb, Eric Scheuer, Teresa L. Campos, Joseph M. Katich, Ezra Levin, Michael A. Robinson, and Rodney J. Weber
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 6357–6378, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6357-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6357-2021, 2021
Short summary
Characterizing the performance of a POPS miniaturized optical particle counter when operated on a quadcopter drone
Zixia Liu, Martin Osborne, Karen Anderson, Jamie D. Shutler, Andy Wilson, Justin Langridge, Steve H. L. Yim, Hugh Coe, Suresh Babu, Sreedharan K. Satheesh, Paquita Zuidema, Tao Huang, Jack C. H. Cheng, and James Haywood
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 6101–6118, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6101-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6101-2021, 2021
Short summary
A low-cost monitor for simultaneous measurement of fine particulate matter and aerosol optical depth – Part 3: Automation and design improvements
Eric A. Wendt, Casey Quinn, Christian L'Orange, Daniel D. Miller-Lionberg, Bonne Ford, Jeffrey R. Pierce, John Mehaffy, Michael Cheeseman, Shantanu H. Jathar, David H. Hagan, Zoey Rosen, Marilee Long, and John Volckens
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 6023–6038, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6023-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6023-2021, 2021
Short summary

Cited articles

Ahangar, F. E., Freedman, F. R., and Venkatram, A.: Using Low-Cost Air Quality Sensor Networks to Improve the Spatial and Temporal Resolution of Concentration Maps, Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. He., 16, 1252, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071252, 2019. 
Apte, J. S., Messier, K. P., Gani, S., Brauer, M., Kirchstetter, T. W., Lunden, M. M., Marshall, J. D., Portier, C. J., Vermeulen, R. C. H., and Hamburg, S. P.: High-Resolution Air Pollution Mapping with Google Street View Cars: Exploiting Big Data, Environ. Sci. Technol., 51, 6999–7008, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00891, 2017. 2017. 
Barkjohn, K. K., Gantt, B., and Clements, A. L.: Development and application of a United States-wide correction for PM2.5 data collected with the PurpleAir sensor, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 4617–4637, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-4617-2021, 2021. 
Bauerová, P., Šindelářová, A., Rychlík, Š., Novák, Z., and Keder, J.: Low-Cost Air Quality Sensors: One-Year Field Comparative Measurement of Different Gas Sensors and Particle Counters with Reference Monitors at Tušimice Observatory, Atmosphere, 11, 492, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11050492, 2020. 
Bi, J., Stowell, J., Seto, E. Y. W., English, P. B., Al-Hamdan, M. Z., Kinney, P. L., Freedman, F. R., and Liu, Y.: Contribution of low-cost sensor measurements to the prediction of PM2.5 levels: A case study in Imperial County, California, USA, Environ. Res., 180, 108810, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2019.108810, 2020. 
Download
Short summary
Understanding and improving the quality of data generated from low-cost air quality sensors are crucial steps in using these sensors. This work investigates how averaging time, choice of reference instrument, and the observation of higher pollutant concentrations can impact the perceived performance of low-cost sensors in an evaluation. The influence of these factors should be considered when comparing one sensor to another or determining if a sensor can produce data that fit a specific need.