Efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers to collect PM10, PM2.5 and PM1
The internal efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers for trapping PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 were tested in a wind tunnel, at two wind speeds (3.0 and 6.8 m s 1) in the saltation zone (SAZ) and the suspension zone (SAZ). PM concentrations measured in the...
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Elsevier
2018
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/3906 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1875963716300064?via%3Dihub https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2016.02.003 |
| _version_ | 1855483327791759360 |
|---|---|
| author | Mendez, Mariano Javier Funk, Roger Buschiazzo, Daniel Eduardo |
| author_browse | Buschiazzo, Daniel Eduardo Funk, Roger Mendez, Mariano Javier |
| author_facet | Mendez, Mariano Javier Funk, Roger Buschiazzo, Daniel Eduardo |
| author_sort | Mendez, Mariano Javier |
| collection | INTA Digital |
| description | The internal efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC)
samplers for trapping PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 were tested in a wind tunnel, at two wind speeds (3.0
and 6.8 m s 1) in the saltation zone (SAZ) and the suspension zone (SAZ). PM concentrations measured
in the inlet and the outlet of both samplers were correlated and the slopes of fitting equations were used
for calculating sampling efficiencies. Results showed that BSNE efficiencies ranged from 12% to 32% for
PM10, from 0% to 19% for PM2.5 and from 0% to 12% for PM1. The BSNE’s efficiency decreased with
decreasing particle sizes in SAZ and SUZ at both wind speeds as a consequence of the very low deposition
velocity of the finest size particles. The BSNE’s efficiency increased with increasing wind speed in SAZ for
PM10 and PM2.5 and in SUZ for PM2.5. The MWAC’s efficiency ranged from 1% to 20% for PM10, from 0%
to 15% for PM2.5 and from 0% to 16% for PM1. The MWAC efficiency was 0% for PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 in
the SUZ at 3 m s 1 and for PM2.5 and PM1 in the SUZ at 6.8 m s 1. These results provide evidence that the
efficiency of BSNE and MWAC for trapping PM10 change with wind speed and position of the sampler.
Results also show that BSNEs and MWACs can potentially be used for PM10 emission studies but more
research is needed in order to understand and improve their efficiency. |
| format | Artículo |
| id | INTA3906 |
| institution | Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA -Argentina) |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2018 |
| publishDateRange | 2018 |
| publishDateSort | 2018 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| publisherStr | Elsevier |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | INTA39062018-11-15T15:32:30Z Efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers to collect PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 Mendez, Mariano Javier Funk, Roger Buschiazzo, Daniel Eduardo Sampling Catch Efficiency PM10 Big Spring Number Eight BSNE Modified Wilson and Cook MWAC Particulate Matter The internal efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers for trapping PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 were tested in a wind tunnel, at two wind speeds (3.0 and 6.8 m s 1) in the saltation zone (SAZ) and the suspension zone (SAZ). PM concentrations measured in the inlet and the outlet of both samplers were correlated and the slopes of fitting equations were used for calculating sampling efficiencies. Results showed that BSNE efficiencies ranged from 12% to 32% for PM10, from 0% to 19% for PM2.5 and from 0% to 12% for PM1. The BSNE’s efficiency decreased with decreasing particle sizes in SAZ and SUZ at both wind speeds as a consequence of the very low deposition velocity of the finest size particles. The BSNE’s efficiency increased with increasing wind speed in SAZ for PM10 and PM2.5 and in SUZ for PM2.5. The MWAC’s efficiency ranged from 1% to 20% for PM10, from 0% to 15% for PM2.5 and from 0% to 16% for PM1. The MWAC efficiency was 0% for PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 in the SUZ at 3 m s 1 and for PM2.5 and PM1 in the SUZ at 6.8 m s 1. These results provide evidence that the efficiency of BSNE and MWAC for trapping PM10 change with wind speed and position of the sampler. Results also show that BSNEs and MWACs can potentially be used for PM10 emission studies but more research is needed in order to understand and improve their efficiency. EEA Anguil Fil: Mendez, Mariano Javier. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra y Ambientales de La Pampa. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra y Ambientales de La Pampa; Argentina Fil: Funk, Roger. Institute of Soil Landscape Research. Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research; Alemania Fil: Buschiazzo, Daniel Eduardo. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra y Ambientales de La Pampa. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra y Ambientales de La Pampa; Argentina 2018-11-15T15:28:47Z 2018-11-15T15:28:47Z 2016-06 info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/3906 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1875963716300064?via%3Dihub 1875-9637 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2016.02.003 eng info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess application/pdf Elsevier Aeolian research 21: 37-44. (June 2016) |
| spellingShingle | Sampling Catch Efficiency PM10 Big Spring Number Eight BSNE Modified Wilson and Cook MWAC Particulate Matter Mendez, Mariano Javier Funk, Roger Buschiazzo, Daniel Eduardo Efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers to collect PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 |
| title | Efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers to collect PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 |
| title_full | Efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers to collect PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 |
| title_fullStr | Efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers to collect PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 |
| title_full_unstemmed | Efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers to collect PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 |
| title_short | Efficiency of Big Spring Number Eight (BSNE) and Modified Wilson and Cook (MWAC) samplers to collect PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 |
| title_sort | efficiency of big spring number eight bsne and modified wilson and cook mwac samplers to collect pm10 pm2 5 and pm1 |
| topic | Sampling Catch Efficiency PM10 Big Spring Number Eight BSNE Modified Wilson and Cook MWAC Particulate Matter |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/3906 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1875963716300064?via%3Dihub https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeolia.2016.02.003 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mendezmarianojavier efficiencyofbigspringnumbereightbsneandmodifiedwilsonandcookmwacsamplerstocollectpm10pm25andpm1 AT funkroger efficiencyofbigspringnumbereightbsneandmodifiedwilsonandcookmwacsamplerstocollectpm10pm25andpm1 AT buschiazzodanieleduardo efficiencyofbigspringnumbereightbsneandmodifiedwilsonandcookmwacsamplerstocollectpm10pm25andpm1 |