of Birmingham Evaluation of a low-cost optical particle counter (Alphasense OPC-N2) for ambient air monitoring

Abstract. A fast-growing area of research is the development of low-cost sensors for measuring air pollutants. The affordability and size of low-cost particle sensors makes them an attractive option for use in experiments requiring a number of instruments such as high-density spatial mapping. However, for these low-cost sensors to be useful for these types of studies their accuracy and precision need to be quantified. We evaluated the Alphasense OPC-N2, a promising low-cost miniature optical particle counter, for monitoring ambient airborne particles at typical urban background sites in the UK. The precision of the OPC-N2 was assessed by co-locating 14 instruments at a site to investigate the variation in measured concentrations. Comparison to two different reference optical particle counters as well as a TEOM-FDMS enabled the accuracy of the OPC-N2 to be evaluated. Comparison of the OPC-N2 to the reference optical instruments shows some limitations for measuring mass concentrations of PM 1 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 . The OPC-N2 demonstrated a significant positive artefact in measured particle mass during times of high ambient RH (> 85 %) and a calibration factor was developed based upon κ -Kohler theory, using average bulk particle aerosol hygroscopicity. Application of this RH correction factor resulted in the OPC-N2 measurements being within 33 % of the TEOM-FDMS, comparable to the agreement between a reference optical particle counter and the TEOM-FDMS (20 %). Inter-unit precision for the 14 OPC-N2 sensors of 22  ±  13 % for PM 10 mass concentrations was observed. Overall, the OPC-N2 was found to accurately measure ambient airborne particle mass concentration provided they are (i) correctly calibrated and (ii) corrected for ambient RH. The level of precision demonstrated between multiple OPC-N2s suggests that they would be suitable devices for applications where the spatial variability in particle concentration was to be determined.

[1]  Roy M. Harrison,et al.  Quantitative interpretation of divergence between PM10 and PM2.5 mass measurement by TEOM and gravimetric (Partisol) instruments , 2004 .

[2]  Ulrich Pöschl,et al.  Atmospheric aerosols: composition, transformation, climate and health effects. , 2005, Angewandte Chemie.

[3]  M. Petters,et al.  A single parameter representation of hygroscopic growth and cloud condensation nucleus activity , 2006 .

[4]  Ulrich Poeschl,et al.  Atmospheric Aerosols: Composition, Transformation, Climate and Health Effects , 2006 .

[5]  P. Hopke,et al.  Measurement of Both Nonvolatile and Semi-Volatile Fractions of Fine Particulate Matter in Fresno, CA , 2006 .

[6]  Jonathan Crosier,et al.  © Author(s) 2007. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics A revised linear ozone photochemistry parameterization for use in transport and general circulation models: multi-annual simulations , 2006 .

[7]  Meinrat O. Andreae,et al.  Aerosol cloud precipitation interactions. Part 1. The nature and sources of cloud-active aerosols , 2008 .

[8]  F. Pope.  Pollen grains are efficient cloud condensation nuclei , 2010 .

[9]  R Anthony Cox,et al.  Studies of single aerosol particles containing malonic acid, glutaric acid, and their mixtures with sodium chloride. I. Hygroscopic growth. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. A.

[10]  J. Lelieveld,et al.  Global distribution of the effective aerosol hygroscopicity parameter for CCN activation , 2010 .

[11]  Xin Yang,et al.  Hygroscopicity of Inorganic Aerosols: Size and Relative Humidity Effects on the Growth Factor , 2010 .

[12]  R. Harrison,et al.  Source apportionment of fine particles at urban background and rural sites in the UK atmosphere , 2010 .

[13]  Sonia M. Kreidenweis,et al.  A single parameter representation of hygroscopic growth and cloud condensation nucleus activity – Part 3: Including surfactant partitioning , 2012 .

[14]  E. Snyder,et al.  The changing paradigm of air pollution monitoring. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  Gb Stewart,et al.  The use of electrochemical sensors for monitoring urban air quality in low-cost, high-density networks , 2013 .

[16]  D. Holstius,et al.  Field calibrations of a low-cost aerosol sensor at a regulatory monitoring site in California , 2014 .

[17]  David Cappelletti,et al.  PMetro: Measurement of urban aerosols on a mobile platform , 2014 .

[18]  J. Sunyer,et al.  Field comparison of portable and stationary instruments for outdoor urban air exposure assessments , 2015 .

[19]  Chun Lin,et al.  Personal exposure monitoring of PM2.5 in indoor and outdoor microenvironments. , 2015, The Science of the total environment.

[20]  E. Seto,et al.  A distributed network of low-cost continuous reading sensors to measure spatiotemporal variations of PM2.5 in Xi'an, China. , 2015, Environmental pollution.

[21]  L. Morawska,et al.  The rise of low-cost sensing for managing air pollution in cities. , 2015, Environment international.

[22]  A. Lewis,et al.  Evaluating the performance of low cost chemical sensors for air pollution research. , 2016, Faraday discussions.

[23]  Laura Hallett,et al.  Evaluation of the Alphasense optical particle counter (OPC-N2) and the Grimm portable aerosol spectrometer (PAS-1.108) , 2016, Aerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research.

[24]  Olalekan Popoola,et al.  Development of a baseline-temperature correction methodology for electrochemical sensors and its implications for long-term stability , 2016 .

[25]  Laurent Francis,et al.  Assessment of air quality microsensors versus reference methods: The EuNetAir joint exercise , 2016 .

[26]  P. Hopke,et al.  Laboratory assessment of low-cost PM monitors , 2016 .

[27]  A. Lewis,et al.  Clustering approaches to improve the performance of low cost air pollution sensors. , 2017, Faraday discussions.

[28]  Audrey de Nazelle,et al.  Comparison of air pollution exposures in active vs. passive travel modes in European cities: A quantitative review. , 2017, Environment international.

[29]  Carlo Ratti,et al.  End-user perspective of low-cost sensors for outdoor air pollution monitoring. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[30]  Jonas Meyer,et al.  Design of an ozone and nitrogen dioxide sensor unit and its long-term operation within a sensor network in the city of Zurich , 2017 .