ABSTRACT
Lognormal distribution is often used as a default model for regression analysis of particle size distribution (PSD) data; however, its goodness-of-fit to particle matter (PM) sampled from animal buildings and its comparison to other PSD models have not been well examined. This study aimed to evaluate and to compare the goodness-of-fit of six PSD models to total suspended particulate matter (TSP) samples collected from 15 animal buildings. Four particle size analyzers were used for PSD measurement. The models' goodness-of-fit was evaluated based on adjusted R2, Akaike's information criterion (AIC), and mean squared error (MSE) values. Results showed that the models' approximation of measured PSDs differed with particle size analyzer. The lognormal distribution model offered overall good approximations to measured PSD data, but was inferior to the gamma and Weibull distribution models when applied to PSD data derived from the Horiba and Malvern analyzers. Single-variable models including the exponential, Khrgian-Mazin, and Chen's empirical models provided relatively poor approximations and, thus, were not recommended for future investigations. A further examination on model-predicted PSD parameters revealed that even the best-fit model of the six could significantly misestimate mean diameter median diameter; and variance. However, compared with other models, the best-fit model still offered the relatively best estimates of mean and median diameters, whereas the best predicted variances were given by the gamma distribution model.
