The effects of particulate matter on environment and public health have been widely studied in recent years. In spite of the presence of numerous studies about this topic there is no agreement on the relative importance of the particles’ size and origin with respect to health effects among researchers. Nevertheless, air quality standards are moving, as the epidemiological attention, towards greater focus on the smaller particles. The most reliable method used in measuring particulate matter (PM) is the gravimetric method since it directly measures PM concentration, guaranteeing an effective traceability to international standards. This technique, however, neglects the possibility to correlate short term intraday atmospheric parameter variations that can influence ambient particle concentration and size distribution as well as human activity patterns. Besides, a continuous method to determine PM concentrations through the measurement of the number size distribution is the system constituted by a Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS) and an Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS). In this article, the evaluation of the uncertainty budget in measuring PM through the SMPS–APS system, as well as a metrological comparison with the gravimetric reference method in order to analyze the compatibility, was carried out and applied with reference to an experimental campaign developed in a rural site. This choice allowed to assume the hypothesis of spherical particlemorphology. The average PM10, PM2.5, and PM1 uncertainties obtained for the SMPS–APS system are equal to 27%, 29%, and 31%, respectively. Here the principle influence parameter is the particle density that has to be directlymeasured with low uncertainty in order to reduce the PM uncertainty.

Uncertainty Budget of the SMPS-APS System in the Measurement of PM1, PM2.5, and PM10

BUONANNO, Giorgio;DELL'ISOLA, Marco;STABILE, Luca;VIOLA, Agostino
2009

Abstract

The effects of particulate matter on environment and public health have been widely studied in recent years. In spite of the presence of numerous studies about this topic there is no agreement on the relative importance of the particles’ size and origin with respect to health effects among researchers. Nevertheless, air quality standards are moving, as the epidemiological attention, towards greater focus on the smaller particles. The most reliable method used in measuring particulate matter (PM) is the gravimetric method since it directly measures PM concentration, guaranteeing an effective traceability to international standards. This technique, however, neglects the possibility to correlate short term intraday atmospheric parameter variations that can influence ambient particle concentration and size distribution as well as human activity patterns. Besides, a continuous method to determine PM concentrations through the measurement of the number size distribution is the system constituted by a Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS) and an Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (APS). In this article, the evaluation of the uncertainty budget in measuring PM through the SMPS–APS system, as well as a metrological comparison with the gravimetric reference method in order to analyze the compatibility, was carried out and applied with reference to an experimental campaign developed in a rural site. This choice allowed to assume the hypothesis of spherical particlemorphology. The average PM10, PM2.5, and PM1 uncertainties obtained for the SMPS–APS system are equal to 27%, 29%, and 31%, respectively. Here the principle influence parameter is the particle density that has to be directlymeasured with low uncertainty in order to reduce the PM uncertainty.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11580/18825
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 58
social impact