光散射原理的大气PM_(2.5)小型传感器监测性能评估研究  

Performance Evaluation of Atmospheric PM_(2.5)Light Scattering Sensor

作　　者：刘保献 姜南 金萌 王莉华 景宽 安欣欣 王书肖[1] 郝吉明[1] LIU Baoxian;JIANG Nan;JIN Meng;WANG Lihua;JING Kuan;AN Xinxin;WANG Shuxiao;HAO Jiming(School of Environment,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China;Beijing Key Laboratory of Airborne Particulate Matter Monitoring Technology,Beijing Municipal Ecological and Environmental Monitoring Center,Beijing 100048,China)

机构地区：[1]清华大学环境学院,北京100084 [2]北京市生态环境监测中心,大气颗粒物监测技术北京市重点实验室,北京100048

出　　处：《环境科学研究》2023年第3期510-518,共9页Research of Environmental Sciences

基　　金：国家重点研发计划项目(No.2021YFC1809001)。

摘　　要：随着大气污染治理的不断深入,精细化、精准化和智能化的环境管理需求不断增加,迫切需要在特定区域开展高密度的监测,以弥补现有传统监测的不足.在此背景下,PM_(2.5)传感器监测方法在国内迅速发展,为研究光散射原理的大气PM_(2.5)小型传感器监测性能,于2018年7月—2019年7月在北京市建立了比对测试平台,对不同原理、不同品牌的PM_(2.5)传感器设备进行为期1年的测试与分析.结果表明:(1)激光粒子计数法PM_(2.5)传感器性能优于红外法PM_(2.5)传感器,激光粒子计数法PM_(2.5)传感器设备与自动标准设备比对的相关系数(R^(2))均大于0.45,红外法PM_(2.5)传感器设备与自动标准设备比对的R^(2)均小于0.40.采用激光粒子计数法的工业级PM_(2.5)传感器数据有效率均在95%以上,更适用于业务化PM_(2.5)监测.(2)多数激光粒子计数法的工业级传感器设备与标准设备有较好的一致性[R^(2)大于0.70,标准偏差(SD)小于10μg/m^(3),变异系数(CV)小于15%],且同品牌同型号PM_(2.5)传感器设备之间的比对结果[R^(2)高于0.97,均方根误差(RMSE)低于6.0μg/m^(3)]优于不同品牌传感器设备之间的比对结果(R^(2)范围为0.67~0.79,RMSE范围为14.1~23.1μg/m^(3)).(3)相对湿度对PM_(2.5)传感器监测值影响较大,随着环境相对湿度的升高,PM_(2.5)传感器设备与自动标准设备测定结果的绝对误差(Ea)呈增加趋势,在高相对湿度区间各品牌传感器设备中位数的Ea均大于19μg/m^(3).(4)受颗粒物化学组成和环境等多种因素的共同影响,在不同污染场景下传感器设备监测结果与标准设备的监测结果最大相对偏差范围为-22.7%~67.0%.(5)传感器设备运行的稳定期一般为6个月,在PM_(2.5)传感器设备业务化应用时,需根据本地化的性能评估结果,建立适合的质控校准体系并定期开展质控工作.研究显示,激光粒子计数法PM_(2.5)传感器适用于开展大规模、高密度的网格The need for better air pollution control has spurred the need for refined,precise,and intelligent environmental management.Therefore,it is essential to perform high-density monitoring in specific areas to make up for the shortcomings of the existing traditional monitoring.In this context,researchers have adopted different PM_(2.5)sensor monitoring methods in China.To evaluate the monitoring performance of small atmospheric PM_(2.5)sensors using the principle of light scattering,a comparative test platform was established to test and analyze PM_(2.5)sensor monitoring equipment with different principles and brands in Beijing from July 2018 to July 2019.The results are summarized below.First,the PM_(2.5)sensor performance of laser particle counting method(R^(2)>0.45)is better than that of infrared method(R2<0.40).The data efficiency of the industrial-grade PM_(2.5)sensor is above 95%,which is more suitable for commercial PM_(2.5)monitoring.Second,most of the industrial sensors based on the laser particle counting method are consistent with the standard equipment(R^(2)>0.70,standard deviation(SD)<10μg/m^(3),coefficient of variation(CV)<15%).The comparison results between PM_(2.5)sensors of the same brand and model(R^(2)higher than 0.97,root mean square error(RMSE)lower than 6.0μg/m^(3))are better than the comparison results between sensors of different brands(R2 range:0.67-0.79,RMSE range:14.1-23.1μg/m3).Third,relative humidity has a huge influence on PM_(2.5)sensor.With the increase of ambient relative humidity,the absolute error between PM_(2.5)sensor and the standard equipment tends to increase.In the high relative humidity range,the median absolute error of each brand sensor exceeds 19μg/m3.Fourth,under the influence of various factors(such as the chemical composition of particulate matter and environment),the maximum relative deviation between the monitoring results of sensor equipment and the standard equipment in different pollution scenarios is-22.7%-67.0%.Fifth,the stable operation period of a sensor is

关 键 词：PM_(2.5)传感器 光散射原理 性能评估 网格化监测 

分 类 号：X831[环境科学与工程—环境工程]