ArticleNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Calibrations, Validations, and Checks of a Dual 23 nm and 10 nm Diffusion Charger-Based Portable Emissions Measurement System (PEMS).
Article in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Two Particle Number (PN) Counters with Different Test Protocols for the Periodic Technical Inspection (PTI) of Gasoline Vehicles.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The upcoming Euro 7 vehicle exhaust emissions regulation includes particle number (PN) limits for all vehicles, not only those with direct fuel injection. It also sets the lower detection particle size of the PN methodology to 10 nm from 23 nm. Recently, a commercial diffusion charger-based PEMS added the possibility of switching the lower size between 23 nm and 10 nm. In this study, we assessed the dual PEMS in the calibration laboratory using diffusion flame soot or spark discharge graphite particles following the regulated procedures. Furthermore, we compared the dual PEMS with a laboratory grade system (LABS) using soot, graphite, and vehicle exhaust particles. To put the results into perspective, we added comparisons (validations) of two additional 23 nm PEMSs with LABSs over a three-year period. The results showed that the differences of the 23 nm PEMSs remained the same (around 35% underestimation) over the years and were similar to the dual PEMS. This difference is still well within the permissible tolerance from the regulation (50%). We argued that the reason is the calibration material used by the manufacturer (spark discharge graphite). We demonstrated that calibrating with combustion soot could reduce the differences. The 10 nm PEMS gave similar results but with much smaller differences, indicating that the calibration material is of less importance for the Euro 7 step. The results showed that the measurement uncertainty has not increased but rather decreased for the specific PEMS switching from 23 nm to 10 nm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.