May Do Khong Khi

Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.
5194/amt-2018-301
Manuscript under review for journal Atmos. Meas. Tech.
Discussion started: 18 October 2018
c Author(s) 2018. CC BY 4.0 License.
Derivation of Flow Rate and Calibration Method for High-Volume

Air Samplers
Richard Hann1, Mark Hermanson2
1
Department of Cybernetics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, NO 7491, Norway
2
5 Hermanson & Associates LLC, Minneapolis, MN 55419, USA
Correspondence to: Richard Hann (richard.hann@ntnu.no)
Abstract. Sampling the atmosphere is different from other environmental matrices because measuring the volume of air
sampled requires a mechanical flow-through device to draw the sample and measure its flow rate. The device used must have
the capability of concentrating the analytes of interest onto a different substrate because the volumes of air needed are often
10 in the hundreds of cubic meters. The use of high-volume air samplers has grown since 1967, when recommended limits of a
larger number or organic contaminants in air were developed. The development of equations used for calculating the air flow
through the device over time have similarly been developed. However, the complete derivation of those equations has never
appeared in the scientific literature. Here a thorough derivation of those equations is provided with definitions of the
mechanical systems that are used in the process, along with the method of calibrating and calculating air flow.
15 1 Introduction
Collecting environmental samples of the atmosphere is inherently different from sampling soil, ice, snow, water, or organic
matter. With the non-atmospheric matrices, the chemical analytes of interest are specific to a typically small and known
volume or mass. The atmosphere is a matrix with a significantly lower density which raises the question of how to collect
and measure the large volume of air where the analytes are found.
20 The first mention in the scientific literature of high-volume air flow regulation was from a toxicological study by Drinker et
al. (1937). In this study, the amount of chlorinated biphenyl released to specific amounts of air had to be known to identify
the amount of substance toxic to the test organism. The air flow was measured by an orifice calibrator that enabled the
volume of air to be known over a certain time period. Although the orifice calibrator is mentioned in this report, the
calibration system, including the system of equations used for calculating flow, is not identified.
25 Following passage of the U. S. Clean Air Act in 1963, a some U. S. health experts formed a group known as the American
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGHI). In 1966, ACGHI developed recommended no-toxic effect
concentration limits in air of 78 different contaminants, many of them organic compounds (Danielson, 1967). The
development of this list led to a requirement to make an air sampler capable of handling large volumes of air because the
1
Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2018-301
toxic amounts on the ACGHI list were very low and would be found in low concentrations. Development of Hi-Vol samplers
began soon after with early designs using vacuum systems that generate large flow rates (Jutze & Foster 1967). After further
development, these systems were found to provide reproducible results (Clements et al., 1972) and eventually to be reliable
in severe weather (Salamova et al. 2014) and robust over many years when properly maintained (Salamova et al., 2016).
5 The early development of vacuum-assisted Hi-Vol samplers required a system for measuring the volume of air flow through
the sampler. While Hi-Vol manufacturers and the literature now provide equations used for this process (for example,
USEPA, 1999), none of them includes any derivation of those calculations or discussion about why the variables in the
equations are used. The situation is typical of a textbook by Wight (1994) where the basic fluid dynamic principles required
for the calculations are outlined, but ultimately the equations are not derived comprehensively. As recently as 2013, ASTM
10 International (2013), in Method D6209-13for collection of Hi-Vol samples, leaves several blanks in sections covering flow
control, flow calibration, calibration orifice and rootsmeter (sections 9.1.2, 9.1.3, 9.1.4 and 9.1.5), all of which are critical to
proper calibration. In the calibration section of this method (12.1), there are references to these blanks in section 9.1.
The objective here is to derive the calculations required for measurement of air flow (and volume) and calibration of a Hi-
Vol air sampler that are missing from the scientific literature. These calculations are based on principles of fluid dynamics.
15 The results developed here provide the air sampling community with the missing derivation of equations that are based on
the physical features of a Hi-Vol system. The outcome will improve an air pollution investigator’s understanding of the
operational features of Hi-Vol samplers.
1.2 Measuring Concentration Flow Rate
The following presents an educational approach explaining the general physical equations required to derive the
20 concentration of airborne particulate and gas phase contaminants (e.g. pesticides, polychloroinated biphenyls,
polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and furans, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, flame retardants), with Hi-Vol air
samplers. Figure 1 shows a typical device with its main components. An inlet is shielding the internals from the
environment. Particles in the air are captured by a filter, which is permeable for the airflow but will retain most particulate
matter above a threshold size (depending on filter type). Gas phase contaminants are captured with tubes of polyurethane
25 foam (PUF) or other adsorbent substrates (e.g. resin). A flow meter, such as a venturi nozzle with an attached differential
pressure gauge, is required to determine the air flow velocity inside the device. The necessary suction pressure to force air
through the sampler is provided by a pump. A timer connected to the pump measures elapsed sampling time. Air flow rate
can be adjusted with a valve. The air that has passed through these filters vents back to the atmosphere via an outlet exhaust
pipe. The objective of this sampling is to determine a concentration 𝑪𝑪 of a mass of contaminants 𝒎𝒎 in a sampled volume of
30 air 𝑽𝑽.
2
𝑚𝑚
𝐶𝐶 = (1)
𝑉𝑉
The mass of captured particles can be obtained by weighing the filter before and after the sampling. The weight
difference ∆𝑚𝑚 will be equal to the mass of captured particles. There is a large sensitivity of the results to errors in weighing,
hence special care is advised when handling the filters. The filter should be dehumidified before and after the sampling since
5 the humidity may introduce a significant bias. When the mass of particles is known, they can be processed further to
determine the mass of contaminants m using various analytical techniques such as those used for various flame retardants by
Salamova et al. (2014). If contaminants in the gas phase are investigated, such as pesticides (Hermanson et al., 2007),
additional analytical methods must be used.
The second physical variable required is the volume of the sampled air 𝑉𝑉. This air volume cannot be measured directly.
10 However, it can be derived by determining the volume of air passing through the sampler per time (volume flow rate 𝑉𝑉̇ ),
multiplied with the sampling duration 𝑡𝑡.
𝑚𝑚
𝐶𝐶 = (2)
𝑉𝑉̇ ∙ 𝑡𝑡
The elapsed sampling time is quantified by using the timer described above. The flow rate is determined using the continuity
equation. Assuming steady flow conditions, the flow rate can be calculated with the flow velocity v through a given flow
15 cross section A.
𝑉𝑉̇ = 𝐴𝐴 ∙ 𝑣𝑣 (3)
The flow velocity is measured with a flow device such as a venturi nozzle or an orifice plate shown in Fig. 2 and 3. These
flow devices exhibit a particular geometry with a given inlet cross-section (1) and a constriction (2) shown in Fig. 2. The
areas of the cross-sections 𝐴𝐴1 and 𝐴𝐴2 are known and by assuming continuity, defined as identical volume flow rates 𝑉𝑉1̇ = 𝑉𝑉2̇ .
20 Bernoulli’s principle of energy conservation is applied to extract the flow velocities from this system. Bernoulli is stating
that for incompressible flow (such as in this example) the energy along a streamline is constant. However, it can appear in
𝜌𝜌
three different forms of energy: as static pressure 𝑝𝑝, as dynamic pressure 𝑣𝑣 2 and as hydrostatic pressure 𝜌𝜌 ∙ 𝑔𝑔 ∙ ℎ, with the
2
fluid density 𝜌𝜌, the standard gravity 𝑔𝑔 and the hydrostatic height ℎ.
𝜌𝜌 𝜌𝜌
𝑝𝑝1 + 𝑣𝑣1 2 = 𝑝𝑝2 + 𝑣𝑣2 2 and 𝐴𝐴1 ∙ 𝑣𝑣1 = 𝐴𝐴2 ∙ 𝑣𝑣2 (5)
2 2
∆𝑝𝑝 1 𝐴𝐴1 2
𝑣𝑣1 = � with ∆𝑝𝑝 = 𝑝𝑝2 − 𝑝𝑝1 and 𝑐𝑐1 = ∙ �1 − 2 � = constant (6)
𝑐𝑐1 ∙ 𝜌𝜌 2 𝐴𝐴2
3
The flow velocity 𝑣𝑣1 can be expressed by substituting 𝑣𝑣2 from the continuity equation into Bernoulli’s equation. From this,
the flow velocity results as a function of pressure difference between the two cross-sections, density, and a constant
dimensionless factor 𝑐𝑐1 . The value of this factor can be quantified if the geometry of the flow device is known. However, as
it will be shown below, it is not necessary to determine a numerical value for it. This is applicable for all constant factors that
5 will be introduced throughout the following.
To quantify the velocity 𝑣𝑣1 – which in turn will be used to calculate the volume flow rate 𝑉𝑉̇ and eventually the
concentration 𝐶𝐶 – two new variables have to be determined. The differential pressure ∆𝑝𝑝 can be measured easily with a wide
selection of manometers, ranging from digital instruments to simpler devices such as u-tube manometers. The air density 𝜌𝜌
cannot be observed directly and is derived using the ideal gas law, defined by ambient temperature 𝑇𝑇∞ , ambient pressure 𝑝𝑝∞
10 and the specific gas constant for air 𝑅𝑅.
𝑝𝑝∞
𝜌𝜌 = (7)
𝑅𝑅 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞
Ambient temperature is directly measured with a thermometer and ambient pressure with a barometer. Substituting density
with the ideal gas law, Eq. (3) and (6) can be summarized to the following.
∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞ 1
𝑣𝑣1 = � with 𝑐𝑐2 = ∙ 𝑐𝑐1 = constant (8)
𝑐𝑐2 ∙ 𝑝𝑝∞ 𝑅𝑅
∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞ 1
𝑉𝑉̇ = � with 𝑐𝑐3 = 2 ∙ 𝑐𝑐2 = constant (9)
𝑐𝑐3 ∙ 𝑝𝑝∞ 𝐴𝐴1
15 Note that the constants 𝑐𝑐2,3 are not dimensionless anymore. Eq. (9) shows that the volume flow rate is dependent only on the
ambient conditions and a pressure difference. Changes in temperature and pressure (i.e. air density) will affect the value of
the sampled air volume. This is an unfavorable characteristic for a measurement method because it implies that concentration
results must be reported along with the ambient conditions during sampling. To allow for easier comparison between
measurements, a standardized volume flow 𝑉𝑉0̇ is introduced. The ambient-condition-specific volume flow rate 𝑉𝑉̇ can be
20 converted to a standardized volume flow by applying the ideal gas law and the standard ambient conditions for temperature
(𝑇𝑇0 = 298.15 K) and pressure (𝑝𝑝0 = 1013.25 hPa).
𝜌𝜌 𝑝𝑝∞ 𝑇𝑇0 ∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞ 𝑝𝑝∞ 𝑇𝑇0 ∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ 𝑝𝑝∞ ∙ 𝑇𝑇0

𝑉𝑉0̇ = 𝑉𝑉̇ ∙ = 𝑉𝑉̇ ∙ ∙ =� ∙ ∙ =�
𝜌𝜌0 𝑇𝑇∞ 𝑝𝑝0 𝑐𝑐3 ∙ 𝑝𝑝∞ 𝑇𝑇∞ 𝑝𝑝0 𝑐𝑐4 ∙ 𝑝𝑝0 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞
(10)
𝑝𝑝0
with 𝑐𝑐4 = � ∙ 𝑐𝑐3 = constant
𝑇𝑇0
4
To underline that this equation is stating standardized volume flow, the pressure and temperature variables are presented as
𝑝𝑝∞ 𝑇𝑇0
normalized, dimensionless terms, i.e. and . Finally, we can include all the above derivations into Eq. (1).
𝑝𝑝0 𝑇𝑇∞
𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚
𝐶𝐶 = = = 𝑓𝑓(∆𝑚𝑚, 𝑡𝑡, ∆𝑝𝑝, 𝑇𝑇∞ , 𝑝𝑝∞ )
𝑉𝑉 ∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ 𝑝𝑝∞ ∙ 𝑇𝑇0 (11)
� ∙ 𝑡𝑡
𝑐𝑐4 ∙ 𝑝𝑝0 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞
5 Equation (11) presents all variables required to be physically measured, necessary to derive the contaminant concentration:
contaminant mass, sampling time, differential pressure at the flow device, ambient temperature, and ambient pressure.
1.2 Calibration Method
The necessity to calibrate the volume flow rate is given by the fact that Eq. (11) contains the unknown constant 𝑐𝑐4 . In
10 addition, second-order effects e.g. internal pressure loss, imperfect flow conditions and flow obstructions are not represented,
although all relevant physical variables are included. If a linear impact of these missing effects is assumed, a linear
correlation can account for them. The same linear approach can also eliminate the unknown constant 𝑐𝑐4 , since it has a linear
(slope) influence on Eq. (10). The underlying idea is to use a temporary calibration device to quantify the true, exact flow
rate through the system at several pump pressures and to correlate with Eq. (10). The linear correlation between the true flow
15 ̇
rate 𝑉𝑉True with the unknown flow rate 𝑉𝑉0̇ can be expressed by introducing a calibration slope (𝑎𝑎Calibration ) and calibration
intercept (𝑏𝑏Calibration ).
1 1 𝑝𝑝∞ ∙ 𝑇𝑇0
̇
𝑉𝑉True = �𝑉𝑉0̇ − 𝑏𝑏Calibration � = ��∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ − 𝑏𝑏Calibration � (12)
𝑎𝑎Calibration 𝑎𝑎Calibration 𝑝𝑝0 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞
The aim of the calibration process is to determine the numeric value of the calibration slope and intercept. First, the true flow
through the air sampler is determined by using a temporary calibration device, e.g. an orifice plate (Fig. 3). The true flow is
20 evaluated at several flow rates (adjusted by regulating the pump speed or the flow valve). Second, the true flow rates are
correlated to the differential pressure readings with the aforementioned linear approach in Eq. (12). The method is visualized
in Fig. 4.
The calibration process will be described for the example of a Tisch Environmental Inc. TE-PUF Poly-Urethane Foam High
Volume Air Sampler (Tisch, 2015). This sampling unit is using a venturi nozzle as a flow device and a Magnehelic®
25 differential pressure gage. For the calibration, an orifice calibrator is mounted on the sampler. The calibrator consists
essentially of a cylindrical can with an orifice plate and a pressure tap (Fig. 3). Despite its simple construction, it is a highly
accurate and robust device (Wight, 1994).
5
̇
The orifice calibrator aims to measure the true volume flow through the device 𝑉𝑉Orifice . This flow rate can be derived by
using the same principles and as in Eq. (3)–(10). The only difference is that the differential pressure ∆𝑝𝑝 will be measured by
using a u-tube manometer (slack tube). One end of the manometer (3 in Fig. 3) is attached to the pressure tap on the
calibration device (𝑝𝑝3 = 𝑝𝑝2 ) while the other end (4 in Fig. 3) is opened to ambient conditions (𝑝𝑝4 = 𝑝𝑝∞ ). Again, Bernoulli’s
5 principle, Eq. (4), is applied to derive the pressure difference. Note, the slack tube is filled with water (𝜌𝜌water ≈ 1000 kg/
m³), hence the hydrostatic pressure term in Bernoulli cannot be neglected anymore. As the system in the water-filled tube is
static (flow velocities are zero), the dynamic pressure term vanishes.
𝑝𝑝3 + 𝜌𝜌H2O ∙ 𝑔𝑔 ∙ ℎ3 = 𝑝𝑝4 + 𝜌𝜌H2O ∙ 𝑔𝑔 ∙ ℎ4 (13)
∆𝑝𝑝H2O = 𝜌𝜌H2O ∙ 𝑔𝑔 ∙ ∆ℎH2O with ∆ℎH2O = ℎ4 − ℎ3 (14)
∆ℎ𝐻𝐻2𝑂𝑂 ∙ 𝑝𝑝∞ ∙ 𝑇𝑇0 1

̇
𝑉𝑉Orifice =� with 𝑐𝑐5 = ∙ 𝑐𝑐4 = constant (15)
𝑐𝑐5 ∙ 𝑝𝑝0 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞ 𝜌𝜌H2O ∙ 𝑔𝑔
This equation for the volume flow rate through the orifice calibrator is very similar to Eq. (10). It contains an unknown
10 constant 𝑐𝑐5 and it does not account for second-order effects. To account for these unknowns, the same principle as for Eq.
(12) is applied: the flow rate is represented with a linear function and correlated to exact flow measurements.
1 1 𝑝𝑝∞ ∙ 𝑇𝑇0
̇
𝑉𝑉TrueOrifice = ̇
�𝑉𝑉Orifice − 𝑏𝑏Orifice � = ��∆ℎ𝐻𝐻2𝑂𝑂 ∙ − 𝑏𝑏Orifice � (16)
𝑎𝑎Orifice 𝑎𝑎Orifice 𝑝𝑝0 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞
The exact flow measurements are performed in a calibrated, laboratory environment, typically by the manufacturer of the
calibrator. The values for the slope 𝑎𝑎Orifice and intercept 𝑏𝑏Orifice can be thus found in the device calibration certification.
15 Note that the orifice calibrator needs to be calibrated regularly in order to maintain the calibration chain (laboratory –
calibration device – sampler).
The final step is to determine the calibration slope and intercept for the sampling unit in Eq. (12). For this, several
̇
observations 𝑛𝑛 of the flow rate through the calibrator device 𝑉𝑉TrueOrifice and the sampler flow rate 𝑉𝑉̇ are taken. For each
observation, readings of the differential pressure gage (Magnehelic®) and the slack tube are taken.
20 The slope and intercept can be graphically determined by using a linear trend line, by plotting the results of the calibration
̇
measurements in a graph shown in Fig. 4. The x-axis represents the flow rate for the orifice calibrator �𝑥𝑥 = 𝑉𝑉TrueOrifice � and
𝑝𝑝∞ ∙𝑇𝑇0
the y-axis the flow term (only variables, no constants) for the internal flow device �𝑦𝑦 = �∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ �. The slope and the
𝑝𝑝0 ∙𝑇𝑇∞
intercept of the resulting trend line are the sought-after calibration factors 𝑎𝑎Calibration and 𝑏𝑏Calibration in Eq. (12). Alternative
to the graphic solution, the following equations can be applied to numerically determine the slope and intercept.
25
6
̇
∑ 𝑉𝑉TrueOrifice ̇
∙ ∑ 𝑉𝑉True
̇
∑(𝑉𝑉TrueOrifice ̇
∙ 𝑉𝑉True )−
𝑎𝑎Calibration = 𝑛𝑛
2 (17)
2 ̇
�∑ 𝑉𝑉TrueOrifice �
̇
∑�𝑉𝑉TrueOrifice � −
𝑛𝑛
̇
∑ 𝑉𝑉True ̇
∑ 𝑉𝑉Orifice_
𝑏𝑏Calibration = − 𝑚𝑚Calibration ∙ (18)
𝑛𝑛 𝑛𝑛
The results should show a very strong correlation, because the flow through the orifice calibrator and the sampling device
should be identical. A very low coefficient of correlation, e.g. 𝑟𝑟 < 0.990 (Tisch, 2015), could be an indication that there is
an error in the system, such as a leak, which should be investigated before starting the measurements. The coefficient of
5 correlation can be calculated with Pearson’s equation or extracted from the graphical solution.
1.3 Conclusion
This paper provides a missing piece of information in the literature regarding air sampling in the environment, showing that
by its nature, air sampling is a more complex process than sampling other environmental matrices. We have shown the
variables and derivation of the equations and used for calculating the air flow rate through a Hi-Vol air sampler, and the
10 process used for calibration of that flow rate. This allows investigators to identify the mass of contaminant found in a volume
of air, once the analytical work has been completed. Furthermore, a detailed explanation of the process and equation allows
for a deeper understanding of the driving variables and can be used for error estimation purposes.
Author contribution
M.H. devised the idea for the paper, researched the literature, wrote the introduction part, and provided feedback on the
15 manuscript. R.H. developed the theoretical framework, derived the equations, wrote the paper, and prepared the figures.
Acknowledgements
This work was originally prepared as part of the air sampling curriculum for the course “AT-331 Arctic Environmental
Pollution – Atmospheric Distribution and Processes”, a master’s and PhD-level course offered at the University Center in
Svalbard (UNIS) from 2013 – 2017.
20
7
Notations
The following symbols are used in this paper:

kg 𝑛𝑛 = number of observations [−]
𝜌𝜌 = density � 3 �
m 𝑝𝑝 = pressure [Pa]
𝐴𝐴 = area [m2 ] J
𝑅𝑅 = specific gas constant � �
𝑎𝑎 = slope kg K
𝑏𝑏 = intercept 𝑟𝑟 = Pearsons correlation coefficient [−]
kg 𝑇𝑇 = temperature [°K]
𝐶𝐶 = concentration � �
m3
𝑡𝑡 = time [s]
𝑐𝑐 = constant
𝑉𝑉 = volume of air [m3 ]
m
𝑔𝑔 = standard gravity � 2 � m3
s 𝑉𝑉̇ = volume flow � �
ℎ = height [m] s
m
𝑚𝑚 = mass [kg] 𝑣𝑣 = velocity � �
s
References
5 ASTM International: Standard test method for determination of gaseous and particulate polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in
ambient air (collection on sorbent-backed filters with gas chromatographic/mass spectrometric analysis), D6209-13,
2013.
Clements, H. A., McMullen, T. B., Thompson, R. J., Akland, G. G.: Reproducibility of the HI-VOL sampling method under
field conditions, J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc., 22, 955-958, 1972.
10 Danielson, J. A.: Air Pollution engineering manual, AP-40, U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, U. S. Public
Health Service, 1967.
Drinker, C. K., Warren, M. F., Bennett, G. A.: The problem of possible systemic effects from certain chlorinated
hydrocarbons, J. Indust. Hyg. Toxicol., 19, 283-311, 1937.
Hermanson, M. H., Moss D. J., Monosmith C. L., Keeler G. J.: Spatial and temporal trends of gas and particle phase
15 atmospheric DDT and metabolites in Michigan: Evidence of long-term persistence and atmospheric emission in a high-
DDT-use fruit orchard, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 112, D04301, doi:10.1029/2006JD007346, 2007.
Jutze, G. A. , Foster, K. E.: Recommended standard method for atmospheric sampling of fine particulate matter by filter
media – high-volume sampler, J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc., 17, 17-25, 1967.
Salamova, A., Hermanson, M. H., Hites, R. A.: Organophosphate and halogenated flame retardants in atmospheric particles
20 from a European Arctic site, Environ. Sci. Technol., 48, 6133-6140, doi:10.1021/es500911d, 2014.
8
Salamova, A., Peverly, A. A., Venier, M. A., Hites, R. A.: Spatial and temporal trends of particle phase organophosphate
ester concentrations in the atmosphere of the Great Lakes, Environ. Sci. Technol., 50, 13249-13255,
doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b04789, 2016.
Tisch Environmental: TE-1000 PUF Poly-Urethane Foam High Volume Air Sampler, Operations Manual, https://tisch-
5 env.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TE-1000-PUF-Manual.pdf, 2015.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency: Compendium of methods for the determination of toxic organic compounds in
ambient air, 2nd edition, Compendium method TO-4A, EPA/625/R-96/010b, 1999.
Wight, G. D: Fundamentals of Air Sampling, CRC press, 1994.
Figures
10
Fig. 1. Main components of a typical high-volume air sampler
15
Fig. 2. Venturi nozzle
9
Fig. 3. Orifice plate calibrator
5 Fig. 4. Calibration using a linear correlation with intercept and slope
10

May Do Khong Khi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

May Do Khong Khi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

May Do Khong Khi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.

Derivation of Flow Rate and Calibration Method for High-Volume

1.2 Measuring Concentration Flow Rate

𝜌𝜌 𝑝𝑝∞ 𝑇𝑇0 ∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ 𝑇𝑇∞ 𝑝𝑝∞ 𝑇𝑇0 ∆𝑝𝑝 ∙ 𝑝𝑝∞ ∙ 𝑇𝑇0

1.2 Calibration Method

∆𝑝𝑝H2O = 𝜌𝜌H2O ∙ 𝑔𝑔 ∙ ∆ℎH2O with ∆ℎH2O = ℎ4 − ℎ3 (14)

∆ℎ𝐻𝐻2𝑂𝑂 ∙ 𝑝𝑝∞ ∙ 𝑇𝑇0 1

The following symbols are used in this paper:

Fig. 1. Main components of a typical high-volume air sampler

Fig. 3. Orifice plate calibrator

5 Fig. 4. Calibration using a linear correlation with intercept and slope

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.