Evaluation of nine low-cost-sensor-based particulate matter monitors

Jiayu Li, Simar K. Mattewal, Sameer Patel, Pratim Biswas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations


Due to their affordability, compact size, and moderate accuracy, low-cost sensors have been studied extensively in recent years. Different manufacturers employ different calibration methodologies and provide users with calibration factors for their models. This study assessed the performance of nine low-cost PM monitors (AirVisual, Alphasense, APT, Awair, Dylos, Foobot, PurpleAir, Wynd, and Xiaomi) in a chamber containing a well-defined aerosol. A GRIMM and a SidePak were used as the reference instruments. The monitors were divided into two groups according to their working principle and data reporting format, and a linear correlation factor for the PM2.5 mass concentration measurement was calculated for each monitor. Additionally, the differences between the mass concentrations reported by the various monitors and those measured by the reference instruments were plotted against their average before and after user calibration to demonstrate the degree of improvement possible with calibration. Bin-specific calibration was also performed for monitors reporting size distributions to demonstrate coincidence errors that could bias the results. Since monitors designed for residential use often display the air quality index, typically illustrating it with a simplified, color-coded index, the color schemes of various monitors were evaluated against the U.S. EPA regulation to determine whether they could convey the overall air quality accurately and promptly. Although these residential monitors indicated the air quality moderately well, their differing color schemes made the evaluation difficult and potentially inaccurate. Altogether, the tested monitors offer low-cost sensors in packages that are convenient for use and ready for deployment without additional assembly. However, to improve the accuracy of the measurements, user-defined calibration for the target PM source is still recommended.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)254-270
Number of pages17
JournalAerosol and Air Quality Research
Issue number2
StatePublished - Feb 2020
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The work was partially supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (SusChEM: Ultrafine Particle Formation in Advanced Low Carbon Combustion Processes; CBET 1705864). Simar Kaur and Jiayu Li were supported by grants from the McDonnell Academy Global Energy and Environmental Partnership (MAGEEP).


  • Air quality index
  • Calibration and characterization
  • Low-cost PM monitors
  • Residential application

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation of nine low-cost-sensor-based particulate matter monitors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this