Comparing PM 2.5 , respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study
Heliyon, ISSN: 2405-8440, Vol: 9, Issue: 6, Page: e16127
2023
- 7Citations
- 21Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations7
- Citation Indexes7
- CrossRef6
- Captures21
- Readers21
- 21
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- 1
Most Recent News
Recent Findings from Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Highlight Research in Science and Technology (Comparing PM2.5, respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber ...)
2023 JUN 08 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at NewsRx Science Daily -- Current study results on science and technology have been
Article Description
Using an exposure chamber, we investigate the precision of the DustTrak DRX monitor by comparing its results to those obtained from taking traditional gravimetric samples of two stone minerals commonly used in asphalt and lactose powder. We also discuss the possibility of using real-time monitors such as DustTrak DRX for occupational exposure monitoring purposes. The results are based on 19 days of experiment, each day with measurements collected over 4 h. Compared to the gravimetric samples, the DustTrak DRX overestimated the PM 2.5 and respirable dust concentrations, while it underestimated the total dust concentration by a factor of nearly two. However, the ratios, being done for more than one material, between the DustTrak DRX and the gravimetric sample readings varied daily and across the different exposure materials. Real-time sensors have the potential to excel at identifying exposure sources, evaluating the measured control efficiency, visualizing variations in exposure to motivate workers, and contributing to the identification of measures to be implemented to reduce exposure. For total dust, a correction factor of at least two should be used to bring its readings up to those for the corresponding gravimetric samples. Also, if the DustTrak DRX is used in the initial profiling of occupational exposure, the exposure could be considered acceptable if the readings are well below the occupational exposure limit (OELs) after correction. If the DustTrak DRX readings, after correction, is close to, or above, the accepted exposure concentrations, more thorough approaches would be required to validate the exposure.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844023033340; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16127; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85159868341&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37274722; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2405844023033340; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16127
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know