determination of size fractions and concentrations of airborne.pptVIP

下载本文档

2
0
约2.53万字
约 36页
2016-03-05 发布于广东
举报
版权申诉

determination of size fractions and concentrations of airborne.ppt

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

determination of size fractions and concentrations of airborne

* This graph shows the results of PM2.5 measurements collected from each sampling Unit during each of the 4 sampling events. Unit 3, which was located closest to the sorting operation and ADC pile typically measured the greatest concentrations of PM2.5, followed by Units 1 and 2 If these results were valid for determination of compliance with NAAQS standards, then Unit 2 would have exceeded the 35 micrograms per cubic meter of air during sampling event 3 and Unit 3 during evens 1 and 4 * Most high tech of the three sites * * This graph shows the results of PM10 measurements collected from each sampling Unit during each of the 4 sampling events. Unit 2 was located indoors in the receiving building Unit 3 was located just outside of the receiving building Other 3 at facility boundary perimeters Unit 5 was located alongside of a gravel road If these results were valid for determination of compliance with NAAQS standards, then Unit 2 would have exceeded the 150 micrograms per cubic meter of air during each event and Unit 3 during event 3 and Unit 5 during events 1 and 2 * This graph shows the results of PM2.5 measurements collected from each sampling Unit during each of the 4 sampling events. If these results were valid for determination of compliance with NAAQS standards, then Unit 2 would have exceeded the 35 micrograms per cubic meter of air during each sampling event and Unit 3 during events 1 and 2 I’ll mention a few general conclusions from this study: Difficult to directly compare sites because of: Operational differences- Sites A and C under roof, while B outside. Site C operated a misting system Record keeping-the facilities classified materials differently, made it difficult to compare impacts of material types. Sampling limitations-due to building designs-sampling devices distances. Perimeter distances also differed according to the size of the site. I had to consider where traffic was and where workers needed to have access. Difference betwee