Blasting is an integral part of large-scale open cut mining that often occurs in close proximity to population centers and often results in the emission of particulate material and gases potentially hazardous to health. Current air quality monitoring methods rely on limited numbers of fixed sampling locations to validate a complex fluid environment and collect sufficient data to confirm model effectiveness. This paper describes the development of a methodology to address the need of a more precise approach that is capable of characterizing blasting plumes in near-real time. The integration of the system required the modification and integration of an opto-electrical dust sensor, SHARP GP2Y10, into a small fixed-wing and multi-rotor copter, resulting in the collection of data streamed during flight. The paper also describes the calibration of the optical sensor with an industry grade dust-monitoring device, Dusttrak 8520, demonstrating a high correlation between them, with correlation coefficients (R²) greater than 0.9. The laboratory and field tests demonstrate the feasibility of coupling the sensor with the UAVs. However, further work must be done in the areas of sensor selection and calibration as well as flight planning.

Throughout the process of coal extraction from surface mines, gases and particles are emitted in the form of fugitive emissions by activities such as hauling, blasting and transportation. As these emissions are diffuse in nature, estimations based upon emission factors and dispersion/advection equations need to be measured directly from the atmosphere. This paper expands upon previous research undertaken to develop a relative methodology to monitor PM₁₀ dust particles produced by mining activities making use of small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). A module sensor using a laser particle counter (OPC-N2 from Alphasense, Great Notley, Essex, UK) was tested. An aerodynamic flow experiment was undertaken to determine the position and length of a sampling probe of the sensing module. Flight tests were conducted in order to demonstrate that the sensor provided data which could be used to calculate the emission rate of a source. Emission rates are a critical variable for further predictive dispersion estimates. First, data collected by the airborne module was verified using a 5.0 m tower in which a TSI DRX 8533 (reference dust monitoring device, TSI, Shoreview, MN, USA) and a duplicate of the module sensor were installed. Second, concentration values collected by the monitoring module attached to the UAV (airborne module) obtaining a percentage error of 1.1%. Finally, emission rates from the source were calculated, with airborne data, obtaining errors as low as 1.2%. These errors are low and indicate that the readings collected with the airborne module are comparable to the TSI DRX and could be used to obtain specific emission factors from fugitive emissions for industrial activities.

The author wishes to change Figure 1 and Figure 3 from his paper published in Sensors [1], doi:10.3390/s150819667, website: http://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/15/8/19667 for Figures 1 and 2 presented in this ‘Correction’.