Adirondack
ArboristSite Operative
Does anyone know of a fairly inexpensive meter that will read smoke particular?
Thanks
Thanks
Recommended Meter to measure smoke particular?
- Thread starter Adirondack
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Maybe this from the EPA will help you, its not as simple as purchasing a particulate tester. We're talking about full blown science here, not like a home depot moisture meter.
http://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei17/session4/houck.pdf
There have been a number of particulate sampling methods used to measure particulate
emissions from cordwood heaters. They include, EPA Method 5, EPA Method 5G, EPA Method 5H, EPA Modified Method 5 (Method 23), Oregon Method 7, the VPI method, the AWES method, the ESS method, an ASTM method, the SRI dilution tunnel, the Condar sampler, the SASS method, and a variety of novel research methods. Because most residential wood combustion particles are formed by condensed organic compounds, which are trapped with different efficiencies by each particulate sampling method, the methods can produce considerably different particulate emission results. Equations have been developed to relate the data for the more common measurement techniques14-16, but, with the exception for some specific sets of conditions, they have not shown a particularly good correlation. This lack of correlation adds uncertainty to compilations such as presented here and in AP-42. The most common method to present particulate data is in the form of 5H equivalents. The 5H method collects particles onto a heated filter, onto a backup filter and in a series of impingers immersed in ice water. In contrast, Method 5G, the other method specified by the NSPS, is based on a dilution tunnel approach that collects particles from a cooled and diluted plume onto a filter. It is generally agreed that a dilution tunnel approach collects particles in a more realistic fashion and more closely simulates the formation of particles once emissions from chimneys mix and cool in the ambient air than a method such as Method 5H based on the old industrial stack sampling Method 512,17,18. Because both vapor and particulate emissions from cordwood heaters are predominately made up of organic compounds with varying vapor pressures, lower dilution tunnel temperatures shift the partitioning between vapor and particulate phases toward the particulate phase producing a larger emission factor. While Method 5G is a dilution tunnel, its flow rate is set relatively low (140 dscf/min [4 dscm/min]) and the collection filter temperature is allowed to reach 32 º C (90 º F). Consequently, particulate emissions determined by the method would be smaller than if tunnel temperatures more closely approximated typical heating season temperatures. Conversely, Method 5H passes emissions directly through ice water which can trap and chemically transform polar vapor phase, low molecular weight carboxylic acids, alcohols, and aldehydes which would not normally form particles in the atmosphere, and therefore it is generally believe that Method 5H over predicts emission factors. (Carboxylic acids, alcohols, and aldehydes, in aggregate, typically have an emission factor in the few grams per kilogram dry wood range19-23.) The relationship between 5H and 5G is not linear and the magnitude of values derived from 5H is greater than that from 5G (Table 2) and as previously noted it is believed that the use of 5H equivalent values published in AP-42 for use in emission inventory calculations over predicts the impact from certified stoves.
More testing info.
http://www3.epa.gov/ttnemc01/promgate/m-28.pdf
http://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/conference/ei17/session4/houck.pdf
There have been a number of particulate sampling methods used to measure particulate
emissions from cordwood heaters. They include, EPA Method 5, EPA Method 5G, EPA Method 5H, EPA Modified Method 5 (Method 23), Oregon Method 7, the VPI method, the AWES method, the ESS method, an ASTM method, the SRI dilution tunnel, the Condar sampler, the SASS method, and a variety of novel research methods. Because most residential wood combustion particles are formed by condensed organic compounds, which are trapped with different efficiencies by each particulate sampling method, the methods can produce considerably different particulate emission results. Equations have been developed to relate the data for the more common measurement techniques14-16, but, with the exception for some specific sets of conditions, they have not shown a particularly good correlation. This lack of correlation adds uncertainty to compilations such as presented here and in AP-42. The most common method to present particulate data is in the form of 5H equivalents. The 5H method collects particles onto a heated filter, onto a backup filter and in a series of impingers immersed in ice water. In contrast, Method 5G, the other method specified by the NSPS, is based on a dilution tunnel approach that collects particles from a cooled and diluted plume onto a filter. It is generally agreed that a dilution tunnel approach collects particles in a more realistic fashion and more closely simulates the formation of particles once emissions from chimneys mix and cool in the ambient air than a method such as Method 5H based on the old industrial stack sampling Method 512,17,18. Because both vapor and particulate emissions from cordwood heaters are predominately made up of organic compounds with varying vapor pressures, lower dilution tunnel temperatures shift the partitioning between vapor and particulate phases toward the particulate phase producing a larger emission factor. While Method 5G is a dilution tunnel, its flow rate is set relatively low (140 dscf/min [4 dscm/min]) and the collection filter temperature is allowed to reach 32 º C (90 º F). Consequently, particulate emissions determined by the method would be smaller than if tunnel temperatures more closely approximated typical heating season temperatures. Conversely, Method 5H passes emissions directly through ice water which can trap and chemically transform polar vapor phase, low molecular weight carboxylic acids, alcohols, and aldehydes which would not normally form particles in the atmosphere, and therefore it is generally believe that Method 5H over predicts emission factors. (Carboxylic acids, alcohols, and aldehydes, in aggregate, typically have an emission factor in the few grams per kilogram dry wood range19-23.) The relationship between 5H and 5G is not linear and the magnitude of values derived from 5H is greater than that from 5G (Table 2) and as previously noted it is believed that the use of 5H equivalent values published in AP-42 for use in emission inventory calculations over predicts the impact from certified stoves.
More testing info.
http://www3.epa.gov/ttnemc01/promgate/m-28.pdf
This paper appears to be independent of the EPA and they focused test method precision. It has a good summary of each test method.
http://www.familiesforcleanair.org/...est-Method-Variability-Paper-06.Oct_.10-2.pdf
http://www.familiesforcleanair.org/...est-Method-Variability-Paper-06.Oct_.10-2.pdf
