Record Display for the EPA National Library Catalog

RECORD NUMBER: 14 OF 24

OLS Field Name OLS Field Data
Main Title Field Comparison of PM10 Inlets at Four Locations.
Author Rodes, C. E. ; Holland, D. M. ; Purdue, L. J. ; Rehme, K. A. ;
CORP Author Environmental Monitoring Systems Lab., Research Triangle Park, NC.
Year Published 1985
Report Number EPA/600/J-85/127;
Stock Number PB86-101706
Additional Subjects Samplers ; Aerosols ; Particles ; Assessments ; Field tests ; Comparison ; Sites ; Sampling ; Performance evaluation ; Mass ; Air pollution ; Particle size distribution ; Concentration(Composition) ; Experimental design ; Fines ; Statistical analysis ; Reprints ; Air pollution sampling ; Case studies ; Dichotomous samplers ; High volume samplers ; Federal reference method
Holdings
Library Call Number Additional Info Location Last
Modified
Checkout
Status
NTIS  PB86-101706 Most EPA libraries have a fiche copy filed under the call number shown. Check with individual libraries about paper copy. NTIS 06/21/1988
Collation 12p
Abstract
A comprehensive field study was conducted comparing the performance of PM(sub 10) inlets under a variety of field conditions. Inlets for low flow, medium flow, and high flow samplers were evaluated at four sampling locations providing a range of concentrations and particle sizes. Sampler precisions were determined at each location along with the regression parameter estimates comparing sampler types. The daily distributions of mass by aerodynamic diameter were measured using the Wide Range Aerosol Classifier and the composited data reported. The expected mass concentrations were calculated using the sampler effectiveness data and the size distributions and then compared to the measured values. This permitted examination of the utility of the proposed Federal Reference Method (FRM) approach for specifying PM(sub 10) samplers. The comparison results indicate that the precisions of the PM(sub 10) samplers are well within the FRM requirements. Exceptions included the Sierra/Andersen Model 321 hi-vol inlet, which appears to significantly overcollect as the result of dry particle bounce, and the GMW 9000 hi-vol inlet, which appears to significantly undercollect, perhaps as the result of the internal surfaces becoming dirty.