Evaluation of low-cost optical particle counters for monitoring individual indoor aerosol sources

Abstract

Low-cost optical particle counters (OPC) have gained increasing attention in recent years in exposure studies. Previous studies reported that the OPCs’ performance varies considerably with type of particles being measured; however, little information on their performance in monitoring common indoor aerosols is available. Given the significance of exposure to indoor aerosols and their associated adverse health effects, this experimental study investigates the performance of low-cost OPCs in monitoring individual aerosols that are commonly found indoors in a controlled chamber environment. Performances of four low-cost OPCs were examined under exposure to varying concentrations of biological (dust mite, pollen, cat, and dog fur) and non-biological (monodisperse silica and melamine resin) aerosols. Each particle sample was dispersed into the chamber using a computer-controlled syringe injection system, while size-resolved particle number concentrations were simultaneously measured by four low-cost OPCs (OPC N2, IC Sentinel, Speck, and Dylos) as well as a lab-grade reference sensor (AeroTrak). The study results showed measurable effects of particle size, particle type, and concentration on the low-cost OPC responses. Particle concentration had the most dominant effect on the linearity of low-cost sensors. Results also revealed that the sensor responses to four biological particles follow a similar pattern and converge to a linear line as the number concentration increases above 5 cm⁻³. As for non-biological particles, the OPC responses were more varied depending on the particle type and size, especially in the concentration range <10 cm⁻³. Calibration equations developed in this study provide baseline information for correcting low-cost OPC readings when utilized to measure concentrations of individual indoor aerosol sources.

Copyright © 2019 American Association for Aerosol Research

EDITOR:

• Kihong Park

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge assistance of Paul Kremer who was lab manager of Penn State Architectural Engineering Department at the time this experiment was conducted, as well as Sean M. Eagan and Camilla V. McCrary who helped perform laboratory experiments through their undergraduate research experience (REU) training. The authors are also thankful for the valuable and constructive feedback from the reviewers and Aerosol Science and Technology journal editors and especially the editorial assistant, Luba Slabyj, for her support and assistance throughout the review process.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by the Penn State Institute of the Energy and Environment (IEE) and American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Graduate Student Grant-in-Aid.