Bioaerosol concentrator performance: comparative tests with viable and with solid and liquid nonviable particles.
OBJECTIVE
Generally it is more economical to first characterize a concentrator system with nonbiological particles followed by more rigorous bioaerosol testing. This study compares sampling system performance for various particle types and sizes.


RESULTS
Performances of five concentrators were characterized with five nonviable and viable laboratory aerosols, although not every concentrator was tested with all aerosol types. For particle sizes less than c. 6 microm aerodynamic diameter, similar efficiencies are obtained for all test particles; however, for larger sizes there is a significant difference between liquid and dry particles.


CONCLUSIONS
Aluminium oxide particles provide results over a broad range of sizes with a single test, but the method is less reproducible than other methods. A combination of monodisperse polystyrene spheres and oleic acid droplets provides an accurate representation of the system performance, but ultimately biological particle tests are needed.


CONCLUSIONS
Devices are being developed for concentrating bioaerosol particles in the size range of 1-10 microm aerodynamic diameter and this study provides insight into data quality for different test methodologies. Also, the results show some current concentrators perform quite poorly.
Kesavan
J
J
Edgewood Chemical Biological Center, US ARMY ECBC-RT-TA E5951, U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command, Aberdeen, MD 21010, USA. jana.kesavan@us.army.mil
Bottiger
J R
JR
McFarland
A R
AR
D000336:Aerosols; D000392:Air Movements; D000397:Air Pollution / Q000032:analysis*; D001407:Bacillus / Q000302:isolation & purification; D004784:Environmental Monitoring / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D004867:Equipment Design; D006801:Humans; D008422:Materials Testing; D008854:Microscopy, Electron; D016273:Occupational Exposure; D010316:Particle Size
D000336:Aerosols