首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      

光散射法与β射线衰减-光散射联用法颗粒物在线测量方法对比
引用本文:王永敏,高健,徐仲均,宋英石,王淑兰,柴发合.光散射法与β射线衰减-光散射联用法颗粒物在线测量方法对比[J].环境科学研究,2017,30(3):433-443.
作者姓名:王永敏  高健  徐仲均  宋英石  王淑兰  柴发合
作者单位:1.北京化工大学, 北京 100029
基金项目:国家自然科学基金项目(41375132,91544226);美国能源基金会项目(G150623324)[ZK)]
摘    要:为考察光散射法和β射线衰减-光散射联用法的适用性,以β射线衰减法颗粒物自动监测仪(BAM)为标准,于2016年2月4日-4月18日,在中国环境科学研究院利用β射线衰减-光散射联用法颗粒物自动监测仪(MP-CPM)与光散射法传感器对ρ(PM10)和ρ(PM2.5)测量结果进行了对比.结果表明:① MP-CPM与BAM测量ρ(PM10)的结果具有较好的一致性,相关系数为0.92,平均相对偏差为0.04%;ρ(PM2.5)结果一致性较差,相关系数为0.69,MP-CPM测量ρ(PM2.5)整体较高于BAM,平均相对偏差为45.8%.② 光散射法传感器与BAM测量ρ(PM2.5)结果一致性较好,相关系数为0.85,平均相对偏差为11.24%,但ρ(PM10)远低于BAM,平均相对偏差为-44.64%.在特殊污染情景下,光散射法将因受到较大影响而严重错估颗粒物浓度.烟花燃放期间,MP-CPM和光散射法传感器严重低估颗粒物浓度,与BAM测量颗粒物浓度的平均相对偏差均低于-50%;沙尘污染过程中,MP-CPM严重高估ρ(PM2.5),与BAM测量ρ(PM2.5)结果平均相对偏差为79.27%,光散射法传感器严重低估ρ(PM10),与BAM测量ρ(PM10)结果平均相对偏差为-59.35%.研究显示,不同原理的仪器,在不同的使用场景下应该区别对待. 

关 键 词:β射线衰减法    光散射法    β射线衰减-光散射联用法    对比分析
收稿时间:2016/8/2 0:00:00
修稿时间:2016/9/27 0:00:00

Inter-Comparison between Light Scattering and Beta-Attenuation-Light Scattering Particulate Matter On-Line Monitoring
WANG Yongmin,GAO Jian,XU Zhongjun,SONG Yingshi,WANG Shulan and CHAI Fahe.Inter-Comparison between Light Scattering and Beta-Attenuation-Light Scattering Particulate Matter On-Line Monitoring[J].Research of Environmental Sciences,2017,30(3):433-443.
Authors:WANG Yongmin  GAO Jian  XU Zhongjun  SONG Yingshi  WANG Shulan and CHAI Fahe
Institution:1.Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing 100029, China2.Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012, China3.Collaborative Innovation Center of Atmospheric Environment and Equipment Technology, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing 210044, China
Abstract:In order to investigate the performance methods of light scattering and beta-attenuation-light scattering, inter-comparison between light scattering and beta-attenuation-light scattering combined method of particulate matter on-line monitoring equipment for PM10 and PM2.5 based on beta-attenuation method(BAM) was conducted from February 2016 to April 2016 at the Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences.The results showed that PM10 concentrations measured by MP-CPM were greatly correlated with BAM, with the correlation coefficient of 0.92 and average deviation 0.04%, much better than the results of PM2.5, for which the correlation coefficient was 0.69 and the average deviation was 45.8%.PM2.5 measured by light scattering sensor was closely correlated with BAM, with correlation coefficient 0.85 and average deviation 11.24%, but PM10 was far lower than the BAM results, with average deviation-44.64%.In some special pollution episodes, the result of light scattering misestimated the real value of ambient PM.During fireworks, MP-CPM and light scattering sensor underestimated the particulate mass concentration, the relative deviation of both to BAM was less than 50%.During dust pollution, PM2.5 measured by MP-CPM was overestimated, with average deviation between MP-CPM and BAM 79.27%, while PM10 measured by light scattering sensor was underestimated, with average deviation between light scattering sensor and BAM -59.35%.The research shows that different principles of instrument should be treated differently under the different usage scenarios.The study provides scientific reference for the methods of light scattering and beta-attenuation-light scattering. 
Keywords:
本文献已被 CNKI 等数据库收录!
点击此处可从《环境科学研究》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《环境科学研究》下载免费的PDF全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号