Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ppd42ns: convert pcs/0.01cf to μg/m3 to aqi #409

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

chihchun
Copy link
Contributor

The current implementation does not use the correction factors based
on the presence of humidity and rain.

The current implementation does not use the correction factors based
on the presence of humidity and rain.
@Propanu
Copy link
Contributor

Propanu commented May 12, 2016

Hi, can you please amend your commit and sign it (you can use something like git commit --amend -s --no-edit, and simply force push it to your fork again after). Also, I wouldn't mind at all if you wanted to add your name to the authors list. Thanks!

@Propanu
Copy link
Contributor

Propanu commented Jul 22, 2016

@chihchun I won't be able to merge these changes until you sign-off your commit.

@SunHaoli
Copy link

@chihchun Hi, Rex. You commented that humidity is required to calculate accurate PM value, but I can't find any research or material about this. Would you please share some information about that? Thanks.

@SunHaoli
Copy link

@chihchun And Why do you define the radius of PM particle 0.44 um instead of 1.25 um?
And what material did you based on to determine the density of pm particles?

@coold8d
Copy link

coold8d commented Nov 24, 2016

Hi all,
I am looking for something like this conversion for my ppd42ns.
I know it's just an estimation, but has anyone tested with this code yet?

Conversion to mass concentration was perform under strong assumption:
• All particles are spherical, with a density of 1.65E12 μg/m3 [,]
• The radius of a particle in the channel <2.5 μm is 0.44 μm [
,
]
• The radius of a particle in the channel > 2.5 is 2.60 μm [
,***]

@Lucianovici
Copy link

Hi guys,

Any progress on this? I just stumble upon this PR trying to find a way to convert pcs/0.01cf to ug/m3.

There are some experiments that are encouraging to NOT use ppd42ns for AQI calculation.

"calculating the AQI from a Shinyei sensor could prove to be very arbitrary"
http://aqicn.org/sensor/shinyei/

Any thoughts?

@Propanu
Copy link
Contributor

Propanu commented Jan 3, 2017

Hi, the original poster never signed-off on this code hence why it wasn't merged. Also, the accuracy of the conversions hasn't been tested.

However, if this functionality is useful we can do a code review and add it. Personally, I would even split the AQI calculation and include it as part of the UPM utilities class since the similar HKA5 sensor module also returns ug/m3.

@Lucianovici
Copy link

It could be that the sensor from dfrobot is more accurate. Thanks for the tips @Propanu

An interesting (and maybe cheaper) alternative here: https://www.hackster.io/edwios/air-quality-monitor-3f422f

@malikabhi05
Copy link
Contributor

malikabhi05 commented May 12, 2017

Since the author @chihchun didn't respond to the thread and add a signoff to his commit, the code from this commit was added to UPM as a part of another commit (7a60cd5), @chihchun was added as a contributor in all the files affected. The pcs2ugm3 function was added to the ppd42ns.c file and the AQI calculation function-"upm_ugm3_to_aqi" was added to the upm utilities. This PR was based on the this paper.

The functions were tested and seemed to work fine, in case any changes are required they can be requested/made to the individual functions moving forward. I will keep the PR open for a few more days before closing, if anyone on this thread has any concerns then please leave a comment.

@malikabhi05
Copy link
Contributor

Implemented. Closing this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants