- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- UBC Faculty Research and Publications /
- A Co-Location Study of 87 Low-Cost Environmental Monitors:...
Open Collections
UBC Faculty Research and Publications
A Co-Location Study of 87 Low-Cost Environmental Monitors: Assessing Outliers, Variability, and Uncertainty Manu, Sanyogita; Rysanek, Adam
Abstract
While field research in indoor air quality (IAQ) increasingly uses large numbers of low-cost sensors, detailed validation of each sensor is becoming infeasible, ignored, or undeclared. Questions remain about whether these sensors meet manufacturer or third-party specifications and whether their utility improves with some validation, even under imperfect conditions. This study details the outcomes of a co-location experiment with 87 low-cost IAQ monitors, conducted with the objective of verifying their performance in measuring total volatile organic compounds (tVOCs), particulate matter 2.5 (PM₂.₅), carbon dioxide (CO₂), temperature, and relative humidity. The monitors were installed next to professional-grade reference IAQ instruments in an office with controlled ventilation. A mixed validation methodology was used, involving outlier detection, uncertainty quantification, and performance metric calculations. Results showed that CO₂, temperature, and humidity sensors reliably met manufacturer specifications, while tVOC sensors had significant accuracy issues, deviating by up to 79% from reference measurements—substantially more than the stated uncertainty of ±20%. PM2.5 sensors were more consistent but had an error margin of ±27%, compared to the stated ±15%. A total of 5 of the 87 sensors (5.7%) were outliers for at least one IAQ indicator. Despite the need for further long-term validation, this study highlights the importance of performing an experimental evaluation of low-cost IAQ monitors before field deployment.
Item Metadata
| Title |
A Co-Location Study of 87 Low-Cost Environmental Monitors: Assessing Outliers, Variability, and Uncertainty
|
| Creator | |
| Publisher |
Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
|
| Date Issued |
2024-09-19
|
| Description |
While field research in indoor air quality (IAQ) increasingly uses large numbers of low-cost sensors, detailed validation of each sensor is becoming infeasible, ignored, or undeclared. Questions remain about whether these sensors meet manufacturer or third-party specifications and whether their utility improves with some validation, even under imperfect conditions. This study details the outcomes of a co-location experiment with 87 low-cost IAQ monitors, conducted with the objective of verifying their performance in measuring total volatile organic compounds (tVOCs), particulate matter 2.5 (PM₂.₅), carbon dioxide (CO₂), temperature, and relative humidity. The monitors were installed next to professional-grade reference IAQ instruments in an office with controlled ventilation. A mixed validation methodology was used, involving outlier detection, uncertainty quantification, and performance metric calculations. Results showed that CO₂, temperature, and humidity sensors reliably met manufacturer specifications, while tVOC sensors had significant accuracy issues, deviating by up to 79% from reference measurements—substantially more than the stated uncertainty of ±20%. PM2.5 sensors were more consistent but had an error margin of ±27%, compared to the stated ±15%. A total of 5 of the 87 sensors (5.7%) were outliers for at least one IAQ indicator. Despite the need for further long-term validation, this study highlights the importance of performing an experimental evaluation of low-cost IAQ monitors before field deployment.
|
| Subject | |
| Genre | |
| Type | |
| Language |
eng
|
| Date Available |
2024-10-11
|
| Provider |
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
|
| Rights |
CC BY 4.0
|
| DOI |
10.14288/1.0445554
|
| URI | |
| Affiliation | |
| Citation |
Buildings 14 (9): 2965 (2024)
|
| Publisher DOI |
10.3390/buildings14092965
|
| Peer Review Status |
Reviewed
|
| Scholarly Level |
Faculty; Researcher
|
| Rights URI | |
| Aggregated Source Repository |
DSpace
|
Item Media
Item Citations and Data
Rights
CC BY 4.0