Low-cost PM2.5 Sensors: An Assessment of Their Suitability for Various Applications

ABSTRACT Recently, there has been a substantial increase in the availability and use of low-cost particulate matter sensors in a wide range of air quality applications. They carry the promise of revolutionising air quality monitoring, yet considerable reservations exist regarding their performance and capabilities, thus hindering the broader-scale utilization of these devices. In order to address these concerns and assess their feasibility and accuracy for various applications, we evaluated six low-cost PM2.5 sensors (the Sharp GP2Y1010AU0F, Shinyei PPD42NS, Plantower PMS1003, Innociple PSM305, Nova SDS011 and Nova SDL607) in laboratory and field conditions using two combustion aerosols, concrete dust and ambient particles. In assessing the performance of these sensors, we focussed on indicators such as the linearity, accuracy and precision, critically differentiating between these qualities, and employed inter-comparison (the coefficient of determination, R2). In the laboratory, all sensors responded well, with an R2 > 0.91 when the PM2.5 concentration was > 50 µg m–3, as measured by the DustTrak. In particular, the PMS1003 demonstrated good accuracy and precision in both laboratory and ambient conditions. However, some limitations were noted for the tested sensors at lower concentrations. For example, the Sharp and Shinyei sensors showed poor correlations (R2 < 0.1) with the DustTrak when the ambient PM2.5 concentration was < 20 µg m–3. These results suggest that the sensors should be calibrated individually for each source in the environment of their intended use. We demonstrate that when tested appropriately and used with a full understanding of their capabilities and limitations, low-cost sensors can serve as an unprecedented aid in a broad spectrum of air quality applications, including the emerging field of citizen science.

[1]  E. R. Jayaratne,et al.  Particle and carbon dioxide emissions from passenger vehicles operating on unleaded petrol and LPG fuel. , 2005, The Science of the total environment.

[2]  W. Lahoz,et al.  Mapping urban air quality in near real-time using observations from low-cost sensors and model information. , 2017, Environment international.

[3]  K. Koehler,et al.  Evaluation of consumer monitors to measure particulate matter. , 2017, Journal of aerosol science.

[4]  Jian Gao,et al.  Applications of low-cost sensing technologies for air quality monitoring and exposure assessment: How far have they gone? , 2018, Environment international.

[5]  G. Hagler,et al.  Community Air Sensor Network (CAIRSENSE) project: evaluation of low-cost sensor performance in a suburban environment in the southeastern United States. , 2016, Atmospheric measurement techniques.

[6]  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.

[7]  B. Kerkez,et al.  Field and Laboratory Evaluations of the Low-Cost Plantower Particulate Matter Sensor. , 2019, Environmental science & technology.

[8]  R. Levy,et al.  Impact of California Fires on Local and Regional Air Quality: The Role of a Low‐Cost Sensor Network and Satellite Observations , 2018, GeoHealth.

[9]  Ronak Sutaria,et al.  Field evaluation of low-cost particulate matter sensors in high- and low-concentration environments , 2018, Atmospheric Measurement Techniques.

[10]  Michael Canu,et al.  Understanding the Shinyei PPD24NS low-cost dust sensor , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Environmental Engineering (EE).

[11]  Qiang Zhang,et al.  Performance calibration of low-cost and portable particular matter (PM) sensors , 2017 .

[12]  L. Morawska,et al.  Diesel bus emissions measured in a tunnel study. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  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.

[14]  Timo Mäkelä,et al.  Response Characterization of an Inexpensive Aerosol Sensor , 2017, Sensors.

[15]  P. Schneider,et al.  Performance Assessment of a Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensor for a near Four-Month Period in Oslo, Norway , 2019, Atmosphere.

[16]  I. Beverland,et al.  Intercomparison of five PM10 monitoring devices and the implications for exposure measurement in epidemiological research. , 2000, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[17]  Karoline K. Johnson,et al.  Using Low Cost Sensors to Measure Ambient Particulate Matter Concentrations and On-Road Emissions Factors , 2016 .

[18]  P. Hopke,et al.  Evaluation of new low-cost particle monitors for PM2.5 concentrations measurements , 2017 .

[19]  K. Kelly,et al.  Long-term field evaluation of the Plantower PMS low-cost particulate matter sensors. , 2019, Environmental pollution.

[20]  K. Kelly,et al.  Development of a calibration chamber to evaluate the performance of low-cost particulate matter sensors. , 2019, Environmental pollution.

[21]  Khairurrijal Khairurrijal,et al.  Aerosol Chamber Characterization for Commercial Particulate Matter (PM) Sensor Evaluation , 2019, Aerosol and Air Quality Research.

[22]  Elena Austin,et al.  Laboratory Evaluation of the Shinyei PPD42NS Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensor , 2015, PloS one.

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

[24]  Yang Wang,et al.  Laboratory Evaluation and Calibration of Three Low-Cost Particle Sensors for Particulate Matter Measurement , 2015 .

[25]  A. Bartoňová,et al.  On the use of small and cheaper sensors and devices for indicative citizen-based monitoring of respirable particulate matter. , 2015, Environmental pollution.

[26]  Randal S. Martin,et al.  Ambient and laboratory evaluation of a low-cost particulate matter sensor. , 2017, Environmental pollution.

[27]  A. Lewis,et al.  Validate personal air-pollution sensors , 2016, Nature.

[28]  Roderic L. Jones,et al.  Validating novel air pollution sensors to improve exposure estimates for epidemiological analyses and citizen science , 2017, Environmental research.

[29]  Lidia Morawska,et al.  Identification of technical problems affecting performance of DustTrak DRX aerosol monitors. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[30]  L. Morawska,et al.  Ultrafine particles in cities. , 2014, Environment international.

[31]  Xiaoting Liu,et al.  The influence of humidity on the performance of a low-cost air particle mass sensor and the effect of atmospheric fog , 2018 .

[32]  Benjamin J. Mullins,et al.  Performance evaluation of three optical particle counters with an efficient “multimodal” calibration method , 2008 .

[33]  M J Nieuwenhuijsen,et al.  Performance of low‐cost monitors to assess household air pollution , 2018, Environmental research.

[34]  Armistead G. Russell,et al.  Field Test of Several Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors in High and Low Concentration Urban Environments. , 2018, Aerosol and air quality research.

[35]  Alena Bartonova,et al.  Can commercial low-cost sensor platforms contribute to air quality monitoring and exposure estimates? , 2017, Environment international.