The Ddevelopment and Designation Testing of a New USEPA-Approved Fine Particle Inlet: A Study of the USEPA Designation Process

This article discusses the practical challenge of meeting USEPA requirements for equivalency between novel particulate matter monitoring instruments and the USEPA WINS PM2.5 Impactor (i.e., the Federal Reference Method sampler for fine particulate matter). A project was undertaken to develop a new PM2.5 instrument in which the WINS impactor was substituted by a cyclone, to give superior performance over long sampling periods under heavy loading. Empirical cyclone models were used to develop a new generation of very sharp cut cyclones (VSCC), together with a particular VSCC specimen suited to PM2.5 sampling at 16.67 l min−1. In laboratory tests, this VSCC demonstrated a precise 2.5 μm D50 cutpoint and sharpness as good as the WINS. A formal application was then undertaken to achieve USEPA Class II Equivalency designation. The process included aerosol laboratory loading trials, with results showing no change in cutpoint after up to 90 days between cleaning cycles. Field trials to compare the VSCC to the WINS FRM were then performed in both western and eastern air sheds to demonstrate the precision and accuracy of the candidate VSCC FEM. The results showed that the VSCC instrument yielded precision and accuracy within USEPA requirements, although the USEPA data requirements for the field trials (in terms of aerosol size distribution and concentration) were not fully met. The outcome of the project was that the Class II equivalency designation was achieved, but not without major difficulties in gathering suitable and sufficient data to meet the stringent test requirements laid down by USEPA. Some changes in the designation procedure are recommended in light of this experience.

[1]  T. Peters,et al.  On the Modification of the Low Flow-Rate PM10 Dichotomous Sampler Inlet , 2001 .

[2]  T. Peters,et al.  Evaluation of PM2.5 Size Selectors Used in Speciation Samplers , 2001 .

[3]  Thomas M. Peters,et al.  Evaluation of the Loading Characteristics of the EPA WINS PM2.5 Separator , 2001 .

[4]  T. Peters,et al.  Design and Calibration of the EPA PM2.5 Well Impactor Ninety-Six (WINS) , 2001 .

[5]  T. Peters,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis of the USEPA WINS PM2.5 Separator , 2001 .

[6]  L. C Kenny,et al.  A DIRECT APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF CYCLONES FOR AEROSOL-MONITORING APPLICATIONS , 2000 .

[7]  L. C. Kenny,et al.  Development of a Sharp-Cut Cyclone for Ambient Aerosol Monitoring Applications , 2000 .

[8]  J. Schwartz,et al.  Is Daily Mortality Associated Specifically with Fine Particles? , 1996, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[9]  L. C. Kenny,et al.  Characterization and modelling of a family of cyclone aerosol preseparators , 1995 .

[10]  Andrew D. Maynard,et al.  Performance assessment of three personal cyclone models, using an Aerodynamic Particle Sizer , 1995 .

[11]  S. Lawson,et al.  A direct approach to the design of multidimensional PCAS digital filters satisfying gain and group delay specifications simultaneously , 1993 .

[12]  J. Agarwal,et al.  A criterion for accurate aerosol sampling in calm air. , 1980, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[13]  Wallace B. Smith,et al.  A five-stage cyclone system for in situ sampling. , 1979 .