• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.183-191
• /
• 2005

This study is designed to compare the performance of established samplers (personal air sampler and MiniVOL portable air sampler) commonly used in the air environment or work environment with that of the sampler made by remodeling the air bubble generator for aquarium fishes. Sampling method used in this study is the filter collection method for PM10 and total suspended particles (TSP), the liquid collection method for sulfur dioxide ($SO_2$) and nitrogen dioxide ($NO_2$), and the solid collection method for toluene, respectively. There is not a significant difference in the average concentration of TSP between the Gilian personal air sampler (1st, $0.316{\pm}0.095$; 2nd $0.191{\pm}0.090$; 3rd, $0.185{\pm}0.073mg/m^3$) and the remodeled sampler (1st, $0.317{\pm}0.106$, 2nd $0.201{\pm}0.050$; 3rd $0.189{\pm}0.081mg/m^3$). There are also not significant differences in the average concentration of PM10 among the Gilian personal air sampler ($0.058{\pm}0.006mg/m^3$), the remodeled sampler ($0.052{\pm}0.008mg/m^3$) and the MiniVOL portable air sampler ($0.054{\pm}0.007mg/m^3$). The average concentration of the SO2 by the established sampler and the remodeled one is $3.79{\pm}0.21ppb$ and $3.45{\pm}0.15ppb$, respectively. In addition, there are not sigmficant differences in the average concentration of the NO2 between the Gilian personal air sampler (1st, $0.325{\pm}0.068$; 2nd $0.341{\pm}0.206$; 3rd, $2.971{\pm}0.078{\mu}g/m^3$) and the remodeled sampler (1st, $0.300{\pm}0.062$; 2nd $0.332{\pm}0.144$, 3rd, $2.968{\pm}0.085{\mu}g/m^3$). There are not significant differences in the average concentration of toluene between the Gilian personal air sampler (1st, $0.499{\pm}0.072$; 2nd $0.598{\pm}0.112$; 3rd $2.284{\pm}0.077{\mu}g/m^3$) and the remodeled sampler (1st, $0.463{\pm}0.133$; 2nd $0.603{\pm}0.082$; 3rd $2.353{\pm}0.115{\mu}g/m^3$). From these results, we can conclude that the performance of the remodeled sampler is not different from that of established samplers. There is possibility that the remodeled sampler can be used as a alternative device for Gilian personal air sampler in area and personal air sampling.

• Journal of Korean Society for Atmospheric Environment
• /
• 제24권E1호
• /
• pp.24-31
• /
• 2008

In this study, a new PM (particulate matter) sampler was developed and fabricated to collect fine particles in the atmosphere, and laboratory and field tests were carried out to evaluate the performance of the sampler. The PM sampler, which was based on impingers, employed an aerosol condensation system as a PM magnifier to improve its collection efficiencies. Sodium chloride, ammonium sulfate and ammonium nitrate aerosols were used as test particles, because these components are rich in ambient aerosols. As a result, it was found that the collection efficiency of the novel PM sampler was very high. Thus, it is believed that the PM sampler is an effective device for sampling fine particles. In addition, it was demonstrated that this work could contribute to the collection or removal of fine particles and be applied to the semicontinuous sampling of ambient aerosols for chemical composition analysis.

• 한국환경과학회지
• /
• 제14권1호
• /
• pp.91-96
• /
• 2005

Several samplers using gravimetric methods such as high-volume air sampler, MiniVol portable sampler, personal environmental monitor(PEM) and cyclone were applied to determine the concentrations of fine particles in atmospheric condition. Comparative evaluation between high-volume air sampler and Minivol portable sampler for $PM_{10}$, and between Minivol portable sampler and PEM was undertaken from June, 2003 to January 2004. Simultaneously, meteorological conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, relative humidity and temperature was measured to check the factors affecting the concentrations of fine particles. In addition, particle concen­trations by cyclone with an aerodynamic diameter of $4{\mu}m$ were measured. Correlation coefficient between high­volume air sampler and portable air sampler for $PM_{10}$ was 0.79 (p<0.001). However, the mean concentration for $PM_{10}$ by high-volume air sampler was significantly higher than that by Minivol portable sampler (p=0.018). Correlation coefficient between Minivol portable sampler and PEM for $PM_{2.5}$ as 0.74 (p<0.001), and the measured mean concentrations for $PM_{2.5}$ did not show significant difference. Difference of the measured con­centrations of fine particle might be explained by wind speed and humidity among meteorological conditions. Particle concentration differences by measurement samplers were proportional to the wind speed, but inversely proportional to the relative humidity, though it was not a significant correlation.

• 대한환경공학회지
• /
• 제31권2호
• /
• pp.153-160
• /
• 2009

PM10(공기역학 직경${\leq}$10 ${\mu}m$) 시료채취기는 사람이 부유 먼지에 잠재적으로 노출되는 정도를 정량화하고 정부의 규제에 대응하기 위한 목적으로 사용된다. 본 연구는 동일한 PM10 분리한계 직경을 가지지만 다른 기울기를 가지는 미국 환경청의 PM10 시료채취 기준과 미국산업위생전문가협의회/유럽표준위원회/국제표준기구의 흉곽성 PM10 시료채취 기준을 이론과 실험을 통해 비교 평가하고자 수행되었다. 이를 위해 미국 환경청의 기준을 따르는 4개의 PM10 시료채취기와 흉곽성 PM10 기준과 일치하는 1개의 RespiCon 시료채취기를 비교 평가 수단으로 사용하였으며, 1개의 DustTrak 측정기를 PM10의 실시간 질량농도를 확인하기 위하여 사용하였다. 6개 시료채취기를 다양한 크기 분포를 가지는 비산재를 이용하여 입자 발생 챔버안에서 실험하였다. 이론적 질량농도는 측정된 비산재의 입자크기 분포 특성(기하평균 = 6.6 ${\mu}m$, 기하표준편차= 1.9)을 각 시료채취 기준에 적용하여 계산하였다. 챔버 실험을 통하여 측정된 질량농도 결과는 흉곽성 PM10 시료채취 기준을 가지는 RespiCon 시료채취기가 미국 환경청의 PM10 기준을 가지는 PM10 시료채취기보다 상대적으로 작은 질량농도를 측정함으로써 이론적 질량농도와 일치하였다. 전체적 챔버 실험 결과는 PM10 시료채취기를 기준 시료채취기로 사용하였을 때, (1) RespiCon 시료채취기는 PM10 시료채취기로 포집된 PM10 먼지 질량농도에 비해 평균 60% 정도 낮게 측정한 것을 의미하는 정규화계수 1.6으로 나타났으며 (2) PM10 유입구를 사용한 DustTrak 실시간 채취기는 2.1의 보정계수를 가지는 것으로 분석되었다.

• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제18권3호
• /
• pp.177-184
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to compare the performance characteristics of Andersen and total suspended particulate (TSP) samplers in terms of particle size distribution (PSD) and mass sampling efficiency. In the present study, two Andersen and four TSP samplers were selected and tested to quantitatively estimate human exposure to fly ash representing industrial particulate matter (PM) in a carefully controlled chamber. The PSD characteristics, a mass median aerodynamic diameter and a geometric standard deviation, were found from the sampled PM of airborne samplers in the chamber. An Andersen sampler was compared with a TSP sampler quantified by a coulter counter multisizer, as a reference sampler, to describe the correlation of mass sampling efficiencies between two types of samplers. Overall results indicate that Andersen samplers overestimated small PM due to particle bounce phenomena between impaction stages. There was reasonably good correlation ($R^2$ = 0.89 and 0.91) between the mass sampling efficiencies of Andersen and TSP samplers during the two tests. However, the lower values of slope (0.71 and 0.72) in two tests showed that the Andersen sampler underestimated PM (> AD $10.1\;{\mu}m$) with sufficient inertia due to a relatively lower Andersen inlet velocity at 0.8 m/s comparing with the operating air velocity at 2.1 m/s in the sampling zone of a chamber.

• 한국환경과학회지
• /
• 제23권12호
• /
• pp.1963-1970
• /
• 2014

Ambient particulate matters($PM_{10}$ and $PM_{2.5}$) were investigated at GNTECH university in Jinju city. Samples were collected using a dichotomous sampler(series 240, Andersen Corp.) and a TEOM(Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance) monitor period from November 2012 to October 2013. For the dichotomous sampler measurements, daily 24-h integrated $PM_{2.5}$ and $PM_{10-2.5}$ ambient air samples were collected at a total flow rate of 16.7 L /min. For the TEOM monitor measurements, daily 1-h integrated $PM_{10}$ ambient air samples were collected at a flow rate of 16.7 L /min. The annual average concentrations of $PM_{10-2.5}$ and $PM_{2.5}$ by a dichotomous sampler were $10.0{\pm}6.1{\mu}g/m^3$ and $22.6{\pm}9.3{\mu}g/m^3$, respectively. And $PM_{10}$ concentration by dichotomous sampler were similar to TEOM monitor by $32.7{\pm}12.9{\mu}g/m^3$ and $31.7{\pm}11.3{\mu}g/m^3$, respectively. And good correlation ($R^2=0.964$) between the two methods was observed. The annual average of $PM_{2.5}/PM_{10}$ ratio was $0.70{\pm}0.12$.

• 한국대기환경학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국대기환경학회 2000년도 춘계학술대회 논문집
• /
• pp.129-133
• /
• 2000

환경대기중 입자상물질의 검사방법은 환경부고시 97-98호(97. 11. 5)에 의거 고용량공기포집법(high volume air sampler), 저용량공기포집법(low volume ai sampler), 광산란법 및 광투과법 그리고 $\beta$흡수법 등으로 되어 있다. 이중 고용량공기포집법, 저용량공기포집법, $\beta$흡수법등은 중량법의 범주에 드는 측정법으로 되어 있다. 이들 방법 중 먼지채취전후의 무게를 직접 칭량하여 분석하는 고용량공기포집법은 총부유먼지의 측정법으로, 저용량공기포집법은 $PM_{10}$의 분석에 이용되는 것이며 $PM_{10}$ 고용량공기포집기($PM_{10}$ high volume air sampler) 또는 $PM_{10}$ 분석에 이용될 수 있다. (중략)

• 한국대기환경학회지
• /
• 제16권5호
• /
• pp.453-467
• /
• 2000

The aim of this research is to collect and characterize fine particles (FPM:$\leq$2.5${\mu}{\textrm}{m}$) and coarse particles (CPM: 2.5~10${\mu}{\textrm}{m}$) using a low volume air sampler provided by the IAEA, at urban (Taejon) and rural area(Wonju) for a period of about two years(April 1996 to May 1998) and to promote a use of nuclear analytical techniques for air pollution studies. For the collection of airborne particulate matter (PM(sub)10), the Gent stacked filter unit sampler and polycarbonate membrane filters were employed. The concentration of trace elements in collected APM samples were determined byu instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis. For validation of the analytical data, internal quality control were implemented by using both the comparison of the analytical results of standard reference materials(NIST SRM 1648) and interlaboratory comparison for proficiency test (NAT-3). The standard uncertainty was less than 15% and Z-score of two samples were within $\pm$1. The monitoring of (PM(sub)10) mass concentration and elemental concentrations were carried out weekly. The average mass concentration of (PM(sub)10) in urban and rural areas were 59.2$\pm$36.5$\mu\textrm{g}$/㎥ and 41.4$\pm$23.7$\mu\textrm{g}$/㎥, respectively. To investigate the emission source, the enrichment factors were calculated for the fine and coarse particle fractions at two sites, respectively and these values were classified for anthropogenic and soil origin elements.

• 환경기술인
• /
• 통권158호
• /
• pp.12-15
• /
• 1999

• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제4권2호
• /
• pp.208-223
• /
• 1994

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of diffusive(or passive) sampler in measuring airbone organic solvents. Diffusive samplers are generally simple in construction and do not require power for operation. The efficiency of the diffusive samplers has not sufficiently been investigated in Korea. Three types of samplers were studied in this study. The sampling and analytical results by passive samplers were compared with results by charcoal tube method recommended by NIOSH(National Institute for Occupational Safty and Health). The following characteristics are identified and studied as critical to the performance passive monitors; recovery, reverse diffusion, storage stability, accuracy and precision, face velocity and humidity, n-Hexane, TCE(trichloroethylene) and toluene were used as test vapors. A dynamic vapor exposure system consisting of organic vapor generator and sampling chamber for evaluating diffusive samplers are made. The results of the study are summarized as follows. 1. NIOSH recommands that the overall accuracy of a sampling method in the range of 0.5 to 2.0 times the occupational health standard should be ${\pm}25$ percent for 95 percent confidence level. Among three types of diffusive samplers, sampler A has permeation membrane and samplers Band C have diffusive areas, samplers A and B met the criterion that overall accuracy for 95% confidence level of the samplers were within ${\pm}25$ percent of the reference value. Sampler C had overall accuracy ${\pm}9.6%$ and ${\pm}11.8%$ in hexane and TCE, respectively. The concentration of toluene was overestimated in sampler C with overall accuracy of ${\pm}43.9%$. 2. The desorption efficiencies of diffusive samplers were 96-107%. 3. There was no significant sampe loss during four weeks of storage both with and without refrigeration. 4. There was no significant reverse diffusion, when the samplers were exposure to clean air for 2 hours after sampling for 2 hours at the level of 2 TLY. 5. In case of 8 hours sampling, relative differences(RD) of concentrations between charcoal tube method and diffusive method were 15-39%, 13-46%, and 4-35% for sampler A, B and C, respectively. The performance was poor in 8 hours sampling for multiple substance monitors. 6. At high velocity(100 cm/sec), samplers B and C overestimated the concentrations of organic vapors, and sampler A with permeation membrance gave better results. 7. At 80% relative humidity, samplers showed no siginificant effect. Low humidity also did not affect the diffusive samplers.