. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jul 13.

Published in final edited form as: Anal Methods. 2013 Apr 24;2013(5):2954–2963. doi: 10.1039/C3AY40083B

Table 3. Comparison of EC readings from NIOSH method 5040 and Airtec in the presence of dust and DPM.

Dust	Size selector on Airtec	Flow rate	NIOSH 5040 EC (μg m⁻³)	Airtec EC (μg m⁻³)	Bias%
Metal	None	1.7	251.20	525.76	−109
Metal	Impactor	0.85	251.20	230.03	8
Metal	Impactor	1.7	251.20	229.87	8
Limestone	None	1.7	621.52	808.72	−30
Limestone	Impactor	0.85	621.52	591.64	5
Limestone	Impactor	1.7	621.52	603.81	3