1 / 24

BAM-1022 Continuous Beta Gauge

BAM-1022 Continuous Beta Gauge. David Gobeli , Ph.D., Thomas Pottberg Met One Instruments, Inc. Grants Pass Oregon USA. Agenda. Challenges facing continuous aerosol monitors under real-world conditions Moisture effect on measurement EPA field test of BAM-1022 continuous beta gauge

judith
Download Presentation

BAM-1022 Continuous Beta Gauge

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BAM-1022 Continuous Beta Gauge David Gobeli, Ph.D., Thomas Pottberg Met One Instruments, Inc. Grants Pass Oregon USA

  2. Agenda • Challenges facing continuous aerosol monitors under real-world conditions • Moisture effect on measurement • EPA field test of BAM-1022 continuous beta gauge • Additional field testing along Gulf Coast under very high dew point conditions

  3. Design Challenges in Criteria PM Monitor Design • Must provide accurate reliable results under a wide variety of climactic conditions and aerosol types • Testing at additional sites besides those required by EPA are useful validate known operating range to include very hot, humid regions such as US Gulf Coast • Complexity, reliability, sensitivity, and accuracy considerations/tradeoffs

  4. Class 3 PM2.5 Field Test • 5 Test Campaigns, 4 Test Sites • Site A (Mira Loma CA) – winter, summer • Site B (Salt Lake City UT) – winter • Site C (Dearborn MI) – winter • Site D (Elizabeth NJ) – summer • Site “E” (Baton Rouge LA) – year round

  5. Salt Lake City UT – Winter 2012

  6. Baton Rouge LA

  7. Moisture Effect

  8. Moisture Control • Temperature – based (usually elevated) • Humidity – temperature adjusted to maintain set point • Combination of temperature and humidity

  9. Moisture Compensation • Background will vary based upon moisture content (instrument artifact) • Artifacts can be subtracted out. • Water could bind to PM and skew results if humidity too high. • Cannot be subtracted out.

  10. Moisture Removal • Moisture removed using physical means (PermaPure Drier)

  11. BAM-1022 Approach • Extremelysimple • Measurement is made under near-ambient “in-situ” conditions. • Only slight warming to prevent condensation • Nearly eliminates moisture interference • Eliminates under-measurement due to excessive heating

  12. Mira Loma, CA (Winter, Summer 2012)

  13. Salt Lake City UT (Winter, 2012)

  14. Dearborn MI (Winter, 2012)

  15. Elizabeth NJ (Summer, 2012)

  16. Ambient Moisture Measured as • Partial pressure of H2O in the atmosphere • Temperature and relative humidity • Dew Point

  17. Test Site Dew Point Conditions

  18. Baton Rouge Test Site • Indicative of Gulf Coast/Southeast US Weather Conditions • Extremely high dew point during summer months • Wildly varying dew point and temperature during winter months • EPA “Class 3” style field test performed for almost 1 year • Triplicate BAM-1022 monitors & FRM samplers • Strict collocation, all Class 3 protocols followed

  19. Baton Rouge – Dew Point

  20. All Data

  21. Summer Only

  22. Winter Only

  23. Summary • Additional test sites demonstrates “in-situ” approach under expanded ambient/climactic conditions • Baton Rouge site conditions unlikely to be duplicated in EPA sites A-D for Class 3 test. • Additional testing currently underway for ultra-high sensitivity version with PTFE filter media.

  24. Questions • ?

More Related