Live data from Hacker News

Training my sense of CO2 ppm

interconnected.org

31–40 of 98 posts

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#31

I think the elephant in the room is calibration of the CO2 detector. When I looked into this a few years ago, I couldn't find any accuracy guaranties for CO2 meters marketed for households / greenhouses. The closest thing I could find were laboratories that could test CO2 meters in chambers with known CO2 concentrations. But IIRC the pricing for those labs was prohibitively expensive. - There were literally no guaran…

If I understand correctly, they’re calibrated at the factory, which is probably in China, which might have vastly differing CO2 levels depending on whether the winds blowing up or downstream of any heavy industry or metropolitan centre?

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#32

I think the elephant in the room is calibration of the CO2 detector. When I looked into this a few years ago, I couldn't find any accuracy guaranties for CO2 meters marketed for households / greenhouses. The closest thing I could find were laboratories that could test CO2 meters in chambers with known CO2 concentrations. But IIRC the pricing for those labs was prohibitively expensive. - There were literally no guaran…

Well, if you take it outside, and it says a bit over 400ppm, it’s at least roughly right at that point on its sensor’s curve.

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#33

I think the elephant in the room is calibration of the CO2 detector. When I looked into this a few years ago, I couldn't find any accuracy guaranties for CO2 meters marketed for households / greenhouses. The closest thing I could find were laboratories that could test CO2 meters in chambers with known CO2 concentrations. But IIRC the pricing for those labs was prohibitively expensive. - There were literally no guaran…

If you don't care about errors of a few percent you should be able to make your own calibration chamber.

You just need an airtight container of a known volume, a source of CO2 and a maybe a fan. Put your CO2 detector inside the box, with fresh air, your CO2 source and the fan, and see if the result matches. You may need to do some calculations.

For your source of CO2, you have a few options: combustion of a known quantity of fuel, soda bottle, dry ice, acid + sodium bicarbonate,... If you want to remove CO2, you can use calcium oxyde (quicklime).

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#34
post #31

I think the elephant in the room is calibration of the CO2 detector. When I looked into this a few years ago, I couldn't find any accuracy guaranties for CO2 meters marketed for households / greenhouses. The closest thing I could find were laboratories that could test CO2 meters in chambers with known CO2 concentrations. But IIRC the pricing for those labs was prohibitively expensive. - There were literally no guaran…

If I understand correctly, they’re calibrated at the factory, which is probably in China, which might have vastly differing CO2 levels depending on whether the winds blowing up or downstream of any heavy industry or metropolitan centre?

Not an expert, but I looked into this a bit a while back to see if one could reasonably tell emissions via differences in atmospheric CO2 concentration, iirc the conclusion was that CO2 concentrations don’t vary much outside, air mixes pretty well, pretty quickly.

Even seasonal fluctuation is just a few percent.

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#35
> I’m looking forward to the day when I can walk into a room and say, huh, feels like 800 in here...

I've been this way for well over a year now. Almost two years ago I picked up an air monitor from Awair (yes, this was a pandemic related purchase because I was working so much from home) and I frequently checked what the CO2 was. Nowadays, as it starts hitting ~750ppm, without looking at the monitor I can tell it feels "stuffy" and I open a window.

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#36

I think the elephant in the room is calibration of the CO2 detector. When I looked into this a few years ago, I couldn't find any accuracy guaranties for CO2 meters marketed for households / greenhouses. The closest thing I could find were laboratories that could test CO2 meters in chambers with known CO2 concentrations. But IIRC the pricing for those labs was prohibitively expensive. - There were literally no guaran…

The Aranet 4 claims it can measure up to 5000 ppm with +-3% accuracy. But you'd have to take their word for it, I guess. For $250 I'm hoping it's not a crap sensor.

The usual convention is that the accuracy refers to full-scale measurements. I.e., your device has an error of +-3%*5000ppm = +-150ppm. At ~400ppm you are about 37% off.

Human exhaust breath contains about 5000ppm CO2, so this device is decent for measuring humans. It's less decent to measure atmospheric CO2.

Edit: looking at the datasheet, the device claims +-30ppm and 3% of reading, which I interpret as "whichever is greater". Thus, the device would be +-30ppm up to 1000ppm, and 3% of the reading above 1000ppm.

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#37

I think the elephant in the room is calibration of the CO2 detector. When I looked into this a few years ago, I couldn't find any accuracy guaranties for CO2 meters marketed for households / greenhouses. The closest thing I could find were laboratories that could test CO2 meters in chambers with known CO2 concentrations. But IIRC the pricing for those labs was prohibitively expensive. - There were literally no guaran…

The auto-calibration systems on cheaper consumer sensors also cause issues if they rarely see air that has low CO2 levels. Because these sensors can't measure absolute CO2 levels, only relative CO2 levels, they provide an absolute figure by looking for the lowest CO2 concentration they've seen over a period of time, usually around a 72 hour rolling window.

This works acceptably if the sensor is frequently exposed to outdoor air, but in a residential environment that's not always guaranteed, particularly in winter when it's not uncommon to keep windows closed to retain heat. In these situations the sensor will consider the lowest level to be around ~400ppm, even if it's actually much higher. This, of course, scales all other readings, so a sensor might read between 400-800ppm, leading you to believe everything is fine, when the actual indoor range is 800-1600ppm.

Because the auto-calibration happens over a period of time, it can be quite difficult to determine that your sensor is misreading, and the only way to fix it is to expose it to fresh air to reset the baseline.

The best solution I found to this is a dual-NDIR sensor which measures two different light frequencies, one which is absorbed by CO2 and one that isn't. This allows the sensor to know the absolute CO2 concentration, rather than the relative CO2 concentration, and avoids the need for auto-calibration. (I believe for absolute accuracy it still needs calibration for altitude, but for consumer use this makes such a small difference to be irrelevant).

Unfortunately, when I last looked, I couldn't find any consumer-grade sensors which used dual-NDIR sensors, only more expensive and less aesthetic commercial sensors. In the end I built my own using a CDM7160 sensor connected via I2C to a ESP8266, which reports over MQTT.

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#39

I think the elephant in the room is calibration of the CO2 detector. When I looked into this a few years ago, I couldn't find any accuracy guaranties for CO2 meters marketed for households / greenhouses. The closest thing I could find were laboratories that could test CO2 meters in chambers with known CO2 concentrations. But IIRC the pricing for those labs was prohibitively expensive. - There were literally no guaran…

I have a few CO2 meters from very different sources (professional exetech, consumer product, electronics component) and they have always reported levels within 10% of each other.

For my purposes I don’t really care about accuracy under 50ppm, higher precision for trends is useful but as long as the measures value is accurate to within 50ppm I’m just fine for effects on a human. If I was doing research to publish an actual calibrated meter for 10x the price would be warranted but having three separate measurements agree gives me the trust I need.

Re: Training my sense of CO2 ppm

#40
post #12

I've had an Awair monitor for a few years and enjoy keeping a fairly close eye on the numbers, but from what I've experienced so far I'm convinced sure I'd be able to train myself to discern CO2 levels. If anything it has mostly just encouraged me to open the windows, even just for a bit, whenever possible, and to always use the kitchen exhaust fan with our gas stove (and motivated me to buy an induction range in the…

Especially if you do things like stirfry or anything which puts char on your food, particulate from the cooking food will be way more than from the cooking gas so induction won’t make a large difference.

Ventilation and good hepa filtration will make a much bigger difference.

Post reply on HN