Dylos monitor: What is it actually measuring? PM2.5, PM10 or PM0.5?

Experiment published on Saturday, May 3rd, 2014

The Dylos air quality monitor comes in several version: Standard and Pro: Quoted from Dylos's website, it says that " the DC1100 Pro has all the features of the standard DC1100 but with increased lower sensitivity - detecting particles down to 0.5 micron (0.5µ). The large particle size range is calibrated to 2.5 microns (2.5µ) and above".

Interestingly, the most common sizes in the Air Quality industry is 2.5 µ (refered as PM2.5) and 10 µ (refered PM10). In this case, does it really make sense for the Dylos pro to measure particules as small as 0.5 µ? Shouldn't instead measure 2.5µ and 10µ particules? Actually, maybe this 0.5 µ? claim is more a marketing argument rather than a technology argumenet, since, from the empirical data, what it measures is closer to 2.5 µ and 10 µ rather than 0.5 µ and 2.5 µ! Here is the explanation why:


--


On Thursday, April 10th 2014, in the morning, the Air in Beijing was very special: It is one of those rare days where the PM10 was the dominant pollutant, reaching up to 601 µm/m3 at noon time, which is equivalant to an AQI of 497 (at 24 hours exposure). At the same time, the trend for PM2.5 was going downward, i.e improving from 130 to 70 µm/m3 (equivalant to an AQI down from 189 to 158).


Usually (empirally verified), the dominent pollutant is the PM2.5 particules, and not PM10. Therefore, that special day, in order to ensure that this higher PM10 readings were not caused by defective equipment, we checked the Dylos readings to confirm the trend. This is what you can see from those two graphs. The zone highligted in orange is Thursday 10th, from midnight to noon. The graph on the right is plotting both BAM (in blue) PM2.5 readings (in µg/m3) and Dylos (in red) ≥0.5µ particule count, while the one on the left is for the BAM PM10 and Dylos ≥2.5µ.




Comparative analysis of Beijing Chaoyang Agricultural Exhibition Hall (朝阳农展馆) BAM monitoring stations and Beijing Sanlitun Dylos monitoring station (more info about the setup.)


If the Dylos monitoring claim to detect particules down to 2.5 µ for the large particule readings, then it should be expected that this large particules reading follow the PM2.5 trend. But this is not the case. Clearly, from the graph, the Dylos readings for large particules are following the PM10 trend while readings for small particule are following the PM2.5 trend. That clearly indicates that what the Dylos monitoring is detecting is closer to 2.5 µ and 10 µ rather than what they claim to be 0.5 µ and 2.5 µ.
Multidimensional correlation graph (credits: http://bl.ocks.org/mbostock/4063663.)


To further prove the point, the multidimensional correlation graph for all 4 readings is provided below. The color code used for the plot is orange for the Thursday morning readings, and blue for the other readings. The pairs "BAM PM10" and "Dylos >2.5" as well "BAM PM2.5" and "Dylos >0.5" is obviously showing a very good linear correlation, while the pair "BAM PM2.5" and "Dylos >2.5" is showing diversion, i.e. non linearity, especially for the given Thursday.


--



The conclusion for the above analysis is clear and straight forward: The claim from Dylos to detect particles down to 0.5 µ is more of a marketing argument than a technology fact. From the above data, there is no doubt that the Dylos monitor readings are closer to detect size of 2.5µ and 10µ rather than 0.5µ and 2.5µ. And, actually, this is even better like this, since those are the sizes that are used for Air Quality Standard!




The next important question is how to convert the Dylos readings into the AQI standard. This will be presented in our next experiment.


--

អំពីគុណភាពខ្យល់ និងការវាស់វែងការបំពុល៖

អំពីកម្រិតគុណភាពខ្យល់

-តម្លៃសន្ទស្សន៍គុណភាពខ្យល់ (AQI)Levels of Health Concern
0 - 50ល្អគុណភាពខ្យល់ត្រូវបានចាត់ទុកថាពេញចិត្តហើយការបំពុលបរិយាកាសបង្កឱ្យមានហានិភ័យតិចតួចឬគ្មាន
51 -100មធ្យមគុណភាពខ្យល់អាចទទួលយកបាន។ ទោះជាយ៉ាងណាក៏ដោយចំពោះការបំពុលមួយចំនួនវាអាចមានការព្រួយបារម្ភខាងសុខភាពក្នុងកម្រិតតិចតួចចំពោះមនុស្សតិចតួចដែលងាយទទួលរងការបំពុលខ្យល់។
101-150Unhealthy
for sensitive groups
សមាជិកនៃក្រុមរសើបអាចជួបប្រទះផលប៉ះពាល់សុខភាព។ សាធារណជន​ទូទៅ​មិន​ទំនង​ជា​រង​ផល​ប៉ះពាល់​ទេ។
151-200មិនល្អមនុស្សគ្រប់រូបអាចចាប់ផ្តើមមានផលប៉ះពាល់ដល់សុខភាព។ សមាជិកនៃក្រុមដែលប្រកាន់អក្សរតូចធំអាចមានផលប៉ះពាល់សុខភាពធ្ងន់ធ្ងរបន្ថែមទៀត
201-300មិនល្អខ្លាំងការព្រមានអំពីសុខភាពនៃស្ថានភាពគ្រាអាសន្ន។ ប្រជាជនទាំងមូលទំនងជារងផលប៉ះពាល់។
300+គ្រោះថ្នាក់ការប្រុងប្រយ័ត្នផ្នែកសុខភាព: មនុស្សគ្រប់រូបអាចមានផលប៉ះពាល់ធ្ងន់ធ្ងរលើសុខភាព

ដើម្បីដឹងបន្ថែមអំពីគុណភាពខ្យល់ និងការបំពុល សូមពិនិត្យមើល ប្រធានបទគុណភាពខ្យល់ wikipediaមគ្គុទ្ទេសក៍ airnow អំពីគុណភាពខ្យល់ និងសុខភាពរបស់អ្នក

សម្រាប់ដំបូន្មានសុខភាពដ៏មានប្រយោជន៍របស់វេជ្ជបណ្ឌិតទីក្រុងប៉េកាំង Richard Saint Cyr MD សូមពិនិត្យមើលប្លក់ www.myhealthbeijing.com


សេចក្តីជូនដំណឹងអំពីការប្រើប្រាស់: ទិន្នន័យគុណភាពខ្យល់ទាំងអស់មិនត្រូវបានគេប៉ាន់ស្មាននៅពេលបោះពុម្ភផ្សាយនោះទេហើយដោយសារតែការធានាគុណភាពនេះទិន្នន័យទាំងនេះអាចត្រូវបានកែប្រែដោយគ្មានការជូនដំណឹងគ្រប់ពេលវេលា។ គម្រោងសន្ទស្សន៍គុណភាពខ្យល់អាកាសពិភពលោកបានអនុវត្តនូវជំនាញនិងការថែទាំដែលសមស្របទាំងអស់ក្នុងការចងក្រងមាតិកានៃព័ត៌មាននេះហើយក្នុងករណីណាក៏ដោយក្រុមការងារគម្រោងសន្ទស្សន៍គុណភាពខ្យល់អាកាសពិភពលោកឬភ្នាក់ងាររបស់វាត្រូវទទួលខុសត្រូវលើកិច្ចសន្យាខូចខាតឬបើមិនដូច្នោះទេសម្រាប់ការបាត់បង់របួសឬខូចខាត ដែលកើតឡើងដោយផ្ទាល់ឬដោយប្រយោលពីការផ្គត់ផ្គង់ទិន្នន័យនេះ។



Settings


Language Settings:


Temperature unit:
Celcius