气候变化领域集成服务门户(CCPortal): On the concentration differences between PM2.5 FEM monitors and FRM samplers

CCPortal

DOI	10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.117138
	On the concentration differences between PM2.5 FEM monitors and FRM samplers
	Le T.-C.; Shukla K.K.; Chen Y.-T.; Chang S.-C.; Lin T.-Y.; Li Z.; Pui D.Y.H.; Tsai C.-J.
发表日期	2020
ISSN	13522310
卷号	222
英文摘要	BAM-1020 and TEOM-FDMS have undergone rigorous testing and analysis protocols to become the Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) monitors and serve as reliable near real-time monitors for compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and references for low-cost PM2.5 sensor calibration. However, differences between the FEM and FRM (Federal Reference Method) data still exist, which cause inconsistency in PM2.5 measurements. This study carried out the field tests across five geographically diverse stations in different seasons in Taiwan with 265 daily samples collected by the collocated BAM-1020 and TEOM-FDMS and the FRM sampler and found that the biases between the FEM and FRM values increased with the decreasing PM2.5 concentrations and varied with ambient conditions. The measurement uncertainties exist in the BAM-1020 were mainly due to the aerosol water content, while the TEOM-FDMS always over-measured PM2.5 compared to the FRM sampler since it corrects for the evaporation loss of semi-volatile particle materials. To reduce the biases between the FEM monitors and FRM samplers, empirical equations based on PM2.5 concentrations (μg m−3), temperature (oC), and relative humidity (%) were derived to convert the FEM data to the FRM data. After correction, the mean normalized biases were decreased from +1.67 ± 12.43% to +0.63 ± 8.75% for the BAM-1020 and from +13.86 ± 14.50% to −0.85 ± 9.0% for the TEOM-FDMS. Also, the same empirical equation was used to convert the FRM PM2.5 values to the “true” or “actual” PM2.5 values represented by the TEOM-FDMS with the bias reduced from −10.76 ± 11.42% to +1.33 ± 8.44% after conversion. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd
英文关键词	BAM-1020; Evaporation loss; FEM monitors; FRM samplers; PM2.5 artifacts; TEOM-FDMS
学科领域	Air quality; Air quality standards; Evaporation; Finite element method; Regulatory compliance; Uncertainty analysis; BAM-1020; Evaporation loss; Federal equivalent methods; Federal reference methods; FRM samplers; Measurement uncertainty; National ambient air quality standards; PM2.5 artifacts; Data handling; organic matter; aerosol composition; air quality; air sampling; compliance; concentration (composition); environmental monitoring; particulate matter; relative humidity; ambient air; comparative study; controlled study; environmental temperature; humidity; particulate matter; priority journal; Taiwan; uncertainty; water content; Taiwan
语种	英语
scopus关键词	Air quality; Air quality standards; Evaporation; Finite element method; Regulatory compliance; Uncertainty analysis; BAM-1020; Evaporation loss; Federal equivalent methods; Federal reference methods; FRM samplers; Measurement uncertainty; National ambient air quality standards; PM2.5 artifacts; Data handling; organic matter; aerosol composition; air quality; air sampling; compliance; concentration (composition); environmental monitoring; particulate matter; relative humidity; ambient air; comparative study; controlled study; environmental temperature; humidity; particulate matter; priority journal; Taiwan; uncertainty; water content; Taiwan
来源期刊	Atmospheric Environment
文献类型	期刊论文
条目标识符	http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/120818
作者单位	Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan; Department of Environmental Monitoring and Information Management, Environmental Protection Administration Executive Yuan, Taiwan; Industrial Technology Research Institute, Hsinchu, Taiwan; School of Energy and Environmental Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing, China; Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States; School of Science and Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Le T.-C.,Shukla K.K.,Chen Y.-T.,et al. On the concentration differences between PM2.5 FEM monitors and FRM samplers[J],2020,222.
APA	Le T.-C..,Shukla K.K..,Chen Y.-T..,Chang S.-C..,Lin T.-Y..,...&Tsai C.-J..(2020).On the concentration differences between PM2.5 FEM monitors and FRM samplers.Atmospheric Environment,222.
MLA	Le T.-C.,et al."On the concentration differences between PM2.5 FEM monitors and FRM samplers".Atmospheric Environment 222(2020).