sensors-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Special Issue "Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring"

A special issue of Sensors (ISSN 1424-8220). This special issue belongs to the section "Physical Sensors".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 15 September 2020.

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Klaus Schäfer

Guest Editor
Atmospheric Physics Consultant, 82467 Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany
Interests: meteorological influences upon air pollution; air pollution formation processes; emissions of air pollutants; remote sensing of the atmosphere
Special Issues and Collections in MDPI journals
Dr. Matthias Budde
Website
Guest Editor
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
Interests: environmental sensing; mobile computing; Internet of Things (IoT); human-computer-interaction (HCI); pervasive games/gamification; context and activity recognition

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

New sensors to detect air pollutants like fine dust (PM10, PM2.5), O3, NO2, or CO as well as greenhouse gases like CO2 are available and applied in different areas of atmospheric observations. These sensors are not only small, lightweight, fast, and cheap, but also relatively unstable and inaccurate. It is time to provide an overview about

- The possibilities and shortcomings of the new sensing techniques and applications;

- The methodologies to overcome their disadvantages;

- The solutions to integrate networks of these sensors into the existing, well-calibrated air-quality monitoring networks;

- The solutions to use them for air-quality monitoring; and

- Their application to new tasks such as the detection of air pollution hot spots or the evaluation of emission inventories and numerical air pollution simulations.

Further, it is necessary to extend our knowledge about harmful compounds in the atmosphere. This is possible by measurements in the atmosphere, but also at the source of emissions into the atmosphere. Emission measurements are required because some air pollutants are secondary (i.e., these compounds are formed in the atmosphere under certain meteorological conditions and together with other atmospheric compounds).

So, we ask physicists, chemists, engineers, information scientists, and corresponding researchers to send in their papers for this Special Issue.

Otherwise, the requirements to develop new sensors are defined by environmental physicians and epidemiologists and their working results originate the development of new sensors. The way is now open to detect personal air pollution exposure and maybe in the future for personal pollen and fungi exposure as a basis for new measures to improve human health. Papers from this research are very welcome.

Prof. Dr. Klaus Schäfer
Dr. Matthias Budde
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Sensors is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2000 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • air pollution measurements
  • air quality networks
  • new air pollutants
  • emission inventory evaluation
  • air pollution hot spots
  • air quality simulation evaluation
  • personal air pollution exposure
  • epidemiology
  • environmental medicine

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessArticle
Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM2.5 Monitors with Optical Sensors
Sensors 2020, 20(13), 3683; https://doi.org/10.3390/s20133683 - 30 Jun 2020
Abstract
Air quality monitors using low-cost optical PM2.5 sensors can track the dispersion of wildfire smoke; but quantitative hazard assessment requires a smoke-specific adjustment factor (AF). This study determined AFs for three professional-grade devices and four monitors with low-cost sensors based on measurements [...] Read more.
Air quality monitors using low-cost optical PM2.5 sensors can track the dispersion of wildfire smoke; but quantitative hazard assessment requires a smoke-specific adjustment factor (AF). This study determined AFs for three professional-grade devices and four monitors with low-cost sensors based on measurements inside a well-ventilated lab impacted by the 2018 Camp Fire in California (USA). Using the Thermo TEOM-FDMS as reference, AFs of professional monitors were 0.85 for Grimm mini wide-range aerosol spectrometer, 0.25 for TSI DustTrak, and 0.53 for Thermo pDR1500; AFs for low-cost monitors were 0.59 for AirVisual Pro, 0.48 for PurpleAir Indoor, 0.46 for Air Quality Egg, and 0.60 for eLichens Indoor Air Quality Pro Station. We also compared public data from 53 PurpleAir PA-II monitors to 12 nearby regulatory monitoring stations impacted by Camp Fire smoke and devices near stations impacted by the Carr and Mendocino Complex Fires in California and the Pole Creek Fire in Utah. Camp Fire AFs varied by day and location, with median (interquartile) of 0.48 (0.44–0.53). Adjusted PA-II 4-h average data were generally within ±20% of PM2.5 reported by the monitoring stations. Adjustment improved the accuracy of Air Quality Index (AQI) hazard level reporting, e.g., from 14% to 84% correct in Sacramento during the Camp Fire. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
Comparing Airborne Particulate Matter Intake Dose Assessment Models Using Low-Cost Portable Sensor Data
Sensors 2020, 20(5), 1406; https://doi.org/10.3390/s20051406 - 04 Mar 2020
Abstract
Low-cost sensors can be used to improve the temporal and spatial resolution of an individual’s particulate matter (PM) intake dose assessment. In this work, personal activity monitors were used to measure heart rate (proxy for minute ventilation), and low-cost PM sensors were used [...] Read more.
Low-cost sensors can be used to improve the temporal and spatial resolution of an individual’s particulate matter (PM) intake dose assessment. In this work, personal activity monitors were used to measure heart rate (proxy for minute ventilation), and low-cost PM sensors were used to measure concentrations of PM. Intake dose was assessed as a product of PM concentration and minute ventilation, using four models with increasing complexity. The two models that use heart rate as a variable had the most consistent results and showed a good response to variations in PM concentrations and heart rate. On the other hand, the two models using generalized population data of minute ventilation expectably yielded more coarse information on the intake dose. Aggregated weekly intake doses did not vary significantly between the models (6–22%). Propagation of uncertainty was assessed for each model, however, differences in their underlying assumptions made them incomparable. The most complex minute ventilation model, with heart rate as a variable, has shown slightly lower uncertainty than the model using fewer variables. Similarly, among the non-heart rate models, the one using real-time activity data has less uncertainty. Minute ventilation models contribute the most to the overall intake dose model uncertainty, followed closely by the low-cost personal activity monitors. The lack of a common methodology to assess the intake dose and quantifying related uncertainties is evident and should be a subject of further research. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Back to TopTop