Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3454
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3454
15 Nov 2024
 | 15 Nov 2024
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Measurement Techniques (AMT).

Seasonal effects in the application of the MOMA remote calibration tool to outdoor PM2.5 air sensors

Lena F. Weissert, Geoff S. Henshaw, Andrea L. Clements, Rachelle M. Duvall, and Carry Croghan

Abstract. Air sensors are being used more frequently to measure hyper-local air quality. The PurpleAir sensor is among one of the most popular air sensors used worldwide to measure fine particulate matter (PM2.5). However, there is a need to understand PurpleAir data quality especially under different environmental conditions with varying particulate matter (PM) sources and size distributions. Several correction factors have been developed to make the PurpleAir sensor data more comparable to reference monitor data. The goal of this work was to determine the performance of a remote calibration tool called MOment MAtching (MOMA) for temporally varying PM2.5 sources. MOMA performs calibrations using reference site data within 0–15 km from the sensor. Data from 20 PurpleAir sensors deployed across a network in Phoenix, Arizona from July 2019 to April 2021 were used. The results showed that the MOMA calibration tool improved the accuracy of PurpleAir sensor data across Phoenix and was comparable to the EPA correction factor with a root mean square error (RMSE) of 4.19 – 7.92 µg m-3 vs. 4.23 – 9.27 µg m-3. However, MOMA provided a better estimate of daily exceedances compared to the reference data for smoke conditions. Using speciated PM data, MOMA was able to distinguish between different PM sources such as winter wood burning, and wildfires and dust events in the summer.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Lena F. Weissert, Geoff S. Henshaw, Andrea L. Clements, Rachelle M. Duvall, and Carry Croghan

Status: open (until 23 Dec 2024)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Lena F. Weissert, Geoff S. Henshaw, Andrea L. Clements, Rachelle M. Duvall, and Carry Croghan
Lena F. Weissert, Geoff S. Henshaw, Andrea L. Clements, Rachelle M. Duvall, and Carry Croghan

Viewed

Total article views: 56 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
48 7 1 56 0 0
  • HTML: 48
  • PDF: 7
  • XML: 1
  • Total: 56
  • BibTeX: 0
  • EndNote: 0
Views and downloads (calculated since 15 Nov 2024)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 15 Nov 2024)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 56 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 56 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 20 Nov 2024
Download
Short summary
This study evaluates a remote calibration tool, referred to as MOMA for calibrating PurpleAir PM2.5 sensors, especially for varying PM sources, and compares it with the EPA correction. MOMA improved the accuracy of PurpleAir sensor data comparable to the EPA correction. Although reliant on nearby reference sites, MOMA offers valuable insights into potential PM sources, thereby increasing the overall value of PurpleAir sensor networks.