Dataset Information

Inter-comparison of Low-cost Sensors for Measuring the Mass Concentration of Occupational Aerosols.

ABSTRACT: Low-cost sensors are effective for measuring the mass concentration of ambient aerosols and secondhand smoke in homes, but their use at concentrations relevant to occupational settings has not been demonstrated. We measured the concentrations of four aerosols (salt, Arizona road dust, welding fume, and diesel exhaust) with three types of low-cost sensors (a DC1700 from Dylos and two commodity sensors from Sharp), an aerosol photometer, and reference instruments at concentrations up to 6500 ?g/m3. Raw output was used to assess sensor precision and develop equations to compute mass concentrations. EPA and NIOSH protocols were used to assess the mass concentrations estimated with low-cost sensors compared to reference instruments. The detection efficiency of the DC1700 ranged from 0.04% at 0.1 ?m to 108% at 5 ?m, as expected, although misclassification of fine and coarse particles was observed. The raw output of the DC1700 had higher precision (lower coefficient of variation, CV = 7.4%) than that of the two sharp devices (CV = 25% and 17%), a finding attributed to differences in manufacturer calibration. Aerosol type strongly influenced sensor response, indicating the need for on-site calibration to convert sensor output to mass concentration. Once calibrated, however, the mass concentration estimated with low-cost sensors was highly correlated with that of reference instruments (R2=0.99). These results suggest that the DC1700 and Sharp sensors are useful in estimating aerosol mass concentration for aerosols at concentrations relevant to the workplace.

SUBMITTER: Sousan S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5580827 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Inter-comparison of Low-cost Sensors for Measuring the Mass Concentration of Occupational Aerosols.

Sousan Sinan S Koehler Kirsten K Thomas Geb G Park Jae Hong JH Hillman Michael M Halterman Andrew A Peters Thomas M TM

Aerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research 20160310 5

Low-cost sensors are effective for measuring the mass concentration of ambient aerosols and secondhand smoke in homes, but their use at concentrations relevant to occupational settings has not been demonstrated. We measured the concentrations of four aerosols (salt, Arizona road dust, welding fume, and diesel exhaust) with three types of low-cost sensors (a DC1700 from Dylos and two commodity sensors from Sharp), an aerosol photometer, and reference instruments at concentrations up to 6500 μg/m< ...[more]

PMID: 28867868

Similar Datasets

Project description:Many dental procedures are considered aerosol-generating procedures that may put the dental operator and patients at risk for cross-infection due to contamination from nasal secretions and saliva. This aerosol, depending on the size of the particles, may stay suspended in the air for hours. The primary objective of the study was to characterize the size and concentrations of particles emitted from 7 different dental procedures, as well as estimate the contribution of the nasal and salivary fluids of the patient to the microbiota in the emitted bioaerosol. This cross-sectional study was conducted in an open-concept dental clinic with multiple operators at the same time. Particle size characterization and mass and particle concentrations were done by using 2 direct reading instruments: Dust-Trak DRX (Model 8534) and optical particle sizer (Model 3330). Active bioaerosol sampling was done before and during procedures. Bayesian modeling (SourceTracker2) of long-reads of the 16S ribosomal DNA was used to estimate the contribution of the patients' nasal and salivary fluids to the bioaerosol. Aerosols in most dental procedures were sub-PM1 dominant. Orthodontic debonding and denture adjustment consistently demonstrated more particles in the PM1, PM2.5, PM4, and PM10 ranges. The microbiota in bioaerosol samples were significantly different from saliva and nasal samples in both membership and abundance (P < 0.05) but not different from preoperative ambient air samples. A median of 80.15% of operator exposure was attributable to sources other than the patients' salivary or nasal fluids. Median operator's exposure from patients' fluids ranged from 1.45% to 2.75%. Corridor microbiota showed more patients' nasal bioaerosols than oral bioaerosols. High-volume saliva ejector and saliva ejector were effective in reducing bioaerosol escape. Patient nasal and salivary fluids are minor contributors to the operator's bioaerosol exposure, which has important implications for COVID-19. Control of bioaerosolization of nasal fluids warrants further investigation.

Dataset Information

Inter-comparison of Low-cost Sensors for Measuring the Mass Concentration of Occupational Aerosols.

Publications

Inter-comparison of Low-cost Sensors for Measuring the Mass Concentration of Occupational Aerosols.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets