# Presentation: 802651

## PM 2.5 Continuous Methods

**Lynnwood, Washington Site**

## Study Objectives

**To share information regarding Continuous Fine Particle Monitoring vs the Federal Reference Method for PM 2.5 at a Woodsmoke Impacted Site**
**To specifically compare the technologies employed by vendors in continuous fine particle monitoring **
**To assist us in Long Term Network Management Decisions**
**Which Device (s) should we invest in for future Fine Particle Monitoring for Woodsmoke Impacted Areas?**

## Abstract

- The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency has a long history of using continuous fine particle monitors in the Seattle Metropolitan Area. In an ongoing continuous improvement effort, we have used a site in a wood smoke impacted area to test new technologies for continuous fine particle monitoring. This presentation is a data update studying both the technical data issues of intercomparison and quality assurance, and the practical issues of maintenance and operations between various samplers including the Rupprecht & Patashnik TEOM (tapered element oscillating microbalance), the TEOM FDMS (filter dynamics measurement system), the Radiance Research Nephelometer, and the Met-One 1020 BAM (beta attenuation monitor) and E-BAM. The standard PM 2.5 method that will be used for comparison is the Federal Reference Method.

## Lynnwood, Washington Site

**Lynnwood Site**

## Detailed Site Description

- Lynnwood Monitoring Site

## 2003 Study Design

**In 2003, we collected data:**
**FRM PM 2.5   --  1 in 6**
**TEOM PM 2.5**
**Nephelometer PM 2.5**
**TEOM FDMS PM 2.5**
**Looking for a measure of performance with significant aerosol volatility**

## Regression: Continuous vs FRM 2003

## Time Series: First Half of 2003

## Time Series: Second Half of 2003

## Statistics – Annual Averages

## 2004 Study Design

**Look at “Wood Smoke” Season comparing:**
**FRM PM 2.5   --  1 in 3**
**TEOM PM 2.5**
**Nephelometer PM 2.5**
**TEOM FDMS PM 2.5**
**Met-One BAM PM 2.5**
**Met-One E-BAM PM 2.5**

## Slide 12

## Slide 13

## Slide 14

## Slide 15

## Slide 16

## Aethalometer Experience

**Dual Channel Aethalometer**
**Project objective: to learn more about nature of Carbon Aerosol **
**Some Surprising results...**
**Darrington, WA Sampling Site**
**High Concentration of Wood Smoke**

## Darrington, Washington

## Darrington  High School

## Daily Averages

## Hourly Averages

## Dual Channel Aethalometer Graphic

## Maintenance Issues

**Federal Reference Method (1 in 3)**
**Use R&P 2025 Sequential Samplers**
**Problems with Leak Checks **
**Going into Stop Mode causes a lot of filter data retrieval and filter exchange problems**
**R&P  TEOM and/or TEOM FDMS (Continuous)**
**Generally, R&P is very good about Service and Manuals**
**We spend more time troubleshooting these than what is desirable, but we have had good data completeness numbers.**
**Radiance Research Nephelometers (Continuous)**
**Technology and Device very well understood. **
**Service from Radiance Research lacks**
**Met-One Beta Attenuation Monitors (Semi-Continuous)**
**Met One Service very good**
**Problems with Leak Checks and Flow Checks **
**New to us, so we’re getting used to the Software Interfaces.**

## Summary	

**2003 Data suggests that the FDMS (Filter Dynamics Measurement System) sees aerosol that possibly volatilize from other sampling systems**
**For example:**
**Nephelometer uses a heated probe to knock out the moisture effects that we see in certain environmental conditions**
**TEOM is heated to 50****°**** C in Summer and 30****°**** C in Winter to maintain a constant operating temperature for more consistent measurement**
**FRM is kept near ambient by it’s internal pump, but there could be volatiles that come off the filters before they are weighed in the laboratory. **

## Summary	

**All of the devices seem to do a credible job**
**No one device is perfect!**
**Determining network decisions **
**Know the customer**
**Cost and operation**