{"id":451044,"date":"2024-10-20T09:15:39","date_gmt":"2024-10-20T09:15:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/uncategorized\/bsi-pas-40232023\/"},"modified":"2024-10-26T17:15:26","modified_gmt":"2024-10-26T17:15:26","slug":"bsi-pas-40232023","status":"publish","type":"product","link":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/publishers\/bsi\/bsi-pas-40232023\/","title":{"rendered":"BSI PAS 4023:2023"},"content":{"rendered":"
PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5<\/td>\n | Foreword <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
7<\/td>\n | Introduction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
9<\/td>\n | 1 Scope <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
10<\/td>\n | 2 Normative references <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
11<\/td>\n | 3 Terms, definitions and symbols 3.1 Terms and definitions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
13<\/td>\n | 3.2 Symbols <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
14<\/td>\n | 4 Performing a measurement campaign \u200cFigure\u00a01 \u2013 Steps to performing a measurement campaign <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
15<\/td>\n | 4.1 Design of the measurement campaign 4.2 Selection of sensor systems <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
17<\/td>\n | 4.3 Deployment and maintenance <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
18<\/td>\n | Figure\u00a02 \u2013 Sensor system deployment <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
19<\/td>\n | Figure\u00a03 \u2013 Sensor system deployed in an area of free air circulation and reduced risk of vandalism <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
20<\/td>\n | Figure\u00a04 \u2013 Poor deployment location with a wall too close to the sensor system Figure\u00a05 \u2013 Poor location with plants too close to the sensor system <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
23<\/td>\n | 4.4 Quality assurance <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
24<\/td>\n | Figure\u00a06 \u2013 Common measurement artefacts and areas for consideration <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
25<\/td>\n | Figure\u00a07 \u2013 Example of co-location calibration studies where low-cost sensor systems are monitoring alongside reference instruments at AQ monitoring stations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
29<\/td>\n | 4.5 Data screening <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
30<\/td>\n | Annexes Annex A (informative) \nPossible monitoring scenarios Figure\u00a0A.1 \u2013 Possible monitoring scenarios <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
31<\/td>\n | Annex B (informative) \nExamples of network calibrations B.1 Breathe London Pilot Study methodology <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
32<\/td>\n | B.2 Breathe London ongoing methodology Figure\u00a0B.1 \u2013 Separation of emission sources <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
33<\/td>\n | Figure\u00a0B.2 \u2013 Evolution of the Breathe London monitoring network <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
34<\/td>\n | B.3 Methodology deployed for Cheltenham Borough \nCouncil Study Figure\u00a0B.3 \u2013 Sensor-system network deployment in Cheltenham <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
36<\/td>\n | Annex C (informative) \nCase studies on improving the comparability of sensor systems C.1 The importance of inter-device comparability <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
37<\/td>\n | Figure\u00a0C.1 \u2013 Inter-device comparability <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
38<\/td>\n | C.2 Benefits of co-location calibrations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
39<\/td>\n | Figure\u00a0C.2 \u2013 Data from a low-cost NO2 sensor compared with co-located reference measurements under different calibration algorithms and two time-periods <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
40<\/td>\n | Annex D (informative) \nSensor technologies and performance issues D.1 Sensor technologies <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
43<\/td>\n | D.2 Performance issues <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
44<\/td>\n | Bibliography <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Selection, deployment and quality control of low-cost air quality sensor systems in outdoor ambient air \u2013 Code of practice<\/b><\/p>\n |