199 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31521992)
1. Development of a calibration chamber to evaluate the performance of low-cost particulate matter sensors.
Sayahi T; Kaufman D; Becnel T; Kaur K; Butterfield AE; Collingwood S; Zhang Y; Gaillardon PE; Kelly KE
Environ Pollut; 2019 Dec; 255(Pt 1):113131. PubMed ID: 31521992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Ambient and laboratory evaluation of a low-cost particulate matter sensor.
Kelly KE; Whitaker J; Petty A; Widmer C; Dybwad A; Sleeth D; Martin R; Butterfield A
Environ Pollut; 2017 Feb; 221():491-500. PubMed ID: 28012666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessment and statistical modeling of the relationship between remotely sensed aerosol optical depth and PM2.5 in the eastern United States.
Paciorek CJ; Liu Y;
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2012 May; (167):5-83; discussion 85-91. PubMed ID: 22838153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Long-term field evaluation of the Plantower PMS low-cost particulate matter sensors.
Sayahi T; Butterfield A; Kelly KE
Environ Pollut; 2019 Feb; 245():932-940. PubMed ID: 30682749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Assessing the value of complex refractive index and particle density for calibration of low-cost particle matter sensor for size-resolved particle count and PM2.5 measurements.
Huang CH; He J; Austin E; Seto E; Novosselov I
PLoS One; 2021; 16(11):e0259745. PubMed ID: 34762676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Low-cost monitoring of atmospheric PM-development and testing.
Báthory C; Dobó Z; Garami A; Palotás Á; Tóth P
J Environ Manage; 2022 Feb; 304():114158. PubMed ID: 34922187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A feasible experimental framework for field calibration of portable light-scattering aerosol monitors: Case of TSI DustTrak.
Li Z; Che W; Lau AKH; Fung JCH; Lin C; Lu X
Environ Pollut; 2019 Dec; 255(Pt 1):113136. PubMed ID: 31522000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. On-field test and data calibration of a low-cost sensor for fine particles exposure assessment.
Jiang Y; Zhu X; Chen C; Ge Y; Wang W; Zhao Z; Cai J; Kan H
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2021 Mar; 211():111958. PubMed ID: 33503545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Development and Performance Evaluation of a Supermicron Particle Generation System for Aerosol Instrument Calibration].
Chen XT; Jiang JK; Deng JG; Duan L; Hao JM
Huan Jing Ke Xue; 2016 Mar; 37(3):789-94. PubMed ID: 27337867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors: Model development for a multi-city epidemiological study.
Zusman M; Schumacher CS; Gassett AJ; Spalt EW; Austin E; Larson TV; Carvlin G; Seto E; Kaufman JD; Sheppard L
Environ Int; 2020 Jan; 134():105329. PubMed ID: 31783241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Summary of PM
Long RW; Urbanski SP; Lincoln E; Colón M; Kaushik S; Krug JD; Vanderpool RW; Landis MS
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2023 Apr; 73(4):295-312. PubMed ID: 36716322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Analysing the performance of low-cost air quality sensors, their drivers, relative benefits and calibration in cities-a case study in Sheffield.
Munir S; Mayfield M; Coca D; Jubb SA; Osammor O
Environ Monit Assess; 2019 Jan; 191(2):94. PubMed ID: 30671683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Field Evaluation and Calibration of Low-Cost Air Pollution Sensors for Environmental Exposure Research.
Huang J; Kwan MP; Cai J; Song W; Yu C; Kan Z; Yim SH
Sensors (Basel); 2022 Mar; 22(6):. PubMed ID: 35336552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Performance evaluation of ozone and particulate matter sensors.
DeWitt HL; Crow WL; Flowers B
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2020 Mar; 70(3):292-306. PubMed ID: 31961265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Calibration methodology of low-cost sensors for high-quality monitoring of fine particulate matter.
Aix ML; Schmitz S; Bicout DJ
Sci Total Environ; 2023 Sep; 889():164063. PubMed ID: 37201842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Laboratory Evaluation of Low-Cost Optical Particle Counters for Environmental and Occupational Exposures.
Sousan S; Regmi S; Park YM
Sensors (Basel); 2021 Jun; 21(12):. PubMed ID: 34204182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Development and application of an aerosol screening model for size-resolved urban aerosols.
Stanier CO; Lee SR;
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2014 Jun; (179):3-79. PubMed ID: 25145039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Field evaluation of nanofilm detectors for measuring acidic particles in indoor and outdoor air.
Cohen BS; Heikkinen MS; Hazi Y; Gao H; Peters P; Lippmann M
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2004 Sep; (121):1-35; discussion 37-46. PubMed ID: 15553489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Two step calibration method for ozone low-cost sensor: Field experiences with the UrbanSense DCUs.
Sá JP; Chojer H; Branco PTBS; Alvim-Ferraz MCM; Martins FG; Sousa SIV
J Environ Manage; 2023 Feb; 328():116910. PubMed ID: 36495826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Field and Laboratory Evaluations of the Low-Cost Plantower Particulate Matter Sensor.
Levy Zamora M; Xiong F; Gentner D; Kerkez B; Kohrman-Glaser J; Koehler K
Environ Sci Technol; 2019 Jan; 53(2):838-849. PubMed ID: 30563344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
