{"title":"选择和评估用于监测学校室内空气质量的低成本商用设备","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jobe.2024.110952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The use of low-cost sensors for monitoring Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) in schools has shown promising results, with the commercialisation of these devices increasing worldwide. This study aims to identify an effective, commercially available low-cost device for IAQ monitoring in schools.</div><div>Four low-cost devices (AirVisual Pro, PocketLab Air, PurpleAir PA-II-SD and uRAD Monitor A3) were selected for both qualitative and performance evaluations. Field tests were conducted in six indoor microenvironments within a nursery and a primary school. The low-cost devices were co-located with research-grade instruments to obtain reference concentrations of PM<sub>1</sub>, PM<sub>2.5</sub>, PM<sub>10</sub>, CO<sub>2</sub>, VOC, formaldehyde and O<sub>3</sub>.</div><div>The qualitative evaluation revealed limitations, including data loss, negative or erratic values, inconsistent timestamps, and connectivity issues. PM low-cost devices exhibited better performance during non-occupancy periods but faced challenges during periods of occupancy. All devices tended to underestimate measurements compared to reference data, although AirVisual Pro performed better for PM<sub>2.5</sub> during occupancy. Furthermore, CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations were slightly overestimated, showing improved accuracy during occupancy periods. While formaldehyde peaks were detected by the low-cost device, overall performance was weak for both formaldehyde and O<sub>3</sub>.</div><div>The results indicated that AirVisual Pro demonstrated the best overall performance, and presents itself as a promising tool for IAQ monitoring in schools. However, performance evaluations should be tailored to specific microenvironments and occupancy periods. Despite some acceptable performance results, real-context use of the selected low-cost device should be preceded by a proper calibration. Additionally, long-term performance evaluation should be considered in future studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15064,"journal":{"name":"Journal of building engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Selection and evaluation of commercial low-cost devices for indoor air quality monitoring in schools\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jobe.2024.110952\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The use of low-cost sensors for monitoring Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) in schools has shown promising results, with the commercialisation of these devices increasing worldwide. This study aims to identify an effective, commercially available low-cost device for IAQ monitoring in schools.</div><div>Four low-cost devices (AirVisual Pro, PocketLab Air, PurpleAir PA-II-SD and uRAD Monitor A3) were selected for both qualitative and performance evaluations. Field tests were conducted in six indoor microenvironments within a nursery and a primary school. The low-cost devices were co-located with research-grade instruments to obtain reference concentrations of PM<sub>1</sub>, PM<sub>2.5</sub>, PM<sub>10</sub>, CO<sub>2</sub>, VOC, formaldehyde and O<sub>3</sub>.</div><div>The qualitative evaluation revealed limitations, including data loss, negative or erratic values, inconsistent timestamps, and connectivity issues. PM low-cost devices exhibited better performance during non-occupancy periods but faced challenges during periods of occupancy. All devices tended to underestimate measurements compared to reference data, although AirVisual Pro performed better for PM<sub>2.5</sub> during occupancy. Furthermore, CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations were slightly overestimated, showing improved accuracy during occupancy periods. While formaldehyde peaks were detected by the low-cost device, overall performance was weak for both formaldehyde and O<sub>3</sub>.</div><div>The results indicated that AirVisual Pro demonstrated the best overall performance, and presents itself as a promising tool for IAQ monitoring in schools. However, performance evaluations should be tailored to specific microenvironments and occupancy periods. Despite some acceptable performance results, real-context use of the selected low-cost device should be preceded by a proper calibration. Additionally, long-term performance evaluation should be considered in future studies.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of building engineering\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of building engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352710224025208\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of building engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352710224025208","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
使用低成本传感器监测学校室内空气质量(IAQ)已取得了可喜的成果,这些设备在全球范围内的商业化程度也在不断提高。本研究旨在为学校的室内空气质量监测确定一种有效的商用低成本设备。研究人员选择了四种低成本设备(AirVisual Pro、PocketLab Air、PurpleAir PA-II-SD 和 uRAD Monitor A3)进行质量和性能评估。在一所幼儿园和一所小学的六个室内微环境中进行了实地测试。定性评估发现了一些局限性,包括数据丢失、数值为负或不稳定、时间戳不一致以及连接问题。PM 低成本设备在非占用期表现较好,但在占用期面临挑战。与参考数据相比,所有设备都倾向于低估测量值,不过 AirVisual Pro 在占用期间的 PM2.5 测量值表现较好。此外,二氧化碳浓度被略微高估,但在占用期间的准确性有所提高。结果表明,AirVisual Pro 的整体性能最佳,是学校室内空气质量监测的理想工具。不过,性能评估应根据具体的微环境和占用时间进行。尽管取得了一些可以接受的性能结果,但在实际使用所选的低成本设备之前,应先进行适当的校准。此外,在今后的研究中还应考虑长期性能评估。
Selection and evaluation of commercial low-cost devices for indoor air quality monitoring in schools
The use of low-cost sensors for monitoring Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) in schools has shown promising results, with the commercialisation of these devices increasing worldwide. This study aims to identify an effective, commercially available low-cost device for IAQ monitoring in schools.
Four low-cost devices (AirVisual Pro, PocketLab Air, PurpleAir PA-II-SD and uRAD Monitor A3) were selected for both qualitative and performance evaluations. Field tests were conducted in six indoor microenvironments within a nursery and a primary school. The low-cost devices were co-located with research-grade instruments to obtain reference concentrations of PM1, PM2.5, PM10, CO2, VOC, formaldehyde and O3.
The qualitative evaluation revealed limitations, including data loss, negative or erratic values, inconsistent timestamps, and connectivity issues. PM low-cost devices exhibited better performance during non-occupancy periods but faced challenges during periods of occupancy. All devices tended to underestimate measurements compared to reference data, although AirVisual Pro performed better for PM2.5 during occupancy. Furthermore, CO2 concentrations were slightly overestimated, showing improved accuracy during occupancy periods. While formaldehyde peaks were detected by the low-cost device, overall performance was weak for both formaldehyde and O3.
The results indicated that AirVisual Pro demonstrated the best overall performance, and presents itself as a promising tool for IAQ monitoring in schools. However, performance evaluations should be tailored to specific microenvironments and occupancy periods. Despite some acceptable performance results, real-context use of the selected low-cost device should be preceded by a proper calibration. Additionally, long-term performance evaluation should be considered in future studies.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Building Engineering is an interdisciplinary journal that covers all aspects of science and technology concerned with the whole life cycle of the built environment; from the design phase through to construction, operation, performance, maintenance and its deterioration.