Hubbry Logo
OlfactometerOlfactometerMain
Open search
Olfactometer
Community hub
Olfactometer
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Olfactometer
Olfactometer
Olfactometer
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
An entomologist demonstrates the attraction of female yellow fever mosquitoes to his hand in an olfactometer

An olfactometer is an instrument used to detect and measure odor dilution. Olfactometers are used in conjunction with human subjects in laboratory settings, most often in market research, to quantify and qualify human olfaction.[1] Olfactometers are used to gauge the odor detection threshold of substances. To measure intensity, olfactometers introduce an odorous gas as a baseline against which other odors are compared.

Many scientists use the term "olfactometer" to refer to a device used to study insect behavior in presence of an olfactory stimulus. It consists of a tube with a bifurcation (with "T" or "Y" shape) where an insect walks and decides between two choices, usually clean air versus air carrying an odor. This is why this device is also called dual choice olfactometer.[2][3]

Alternatively, an olfactometer is a device used for producing aromas in a precise and controlled manner.[citation needed]

Flow-olfactometer

[edit]

Description

[edit]

According to Lindstrom et al, continuous flow olfactometers enable very fast onset and offset timing, thereby creating a nice, square-shaped stimulus presentation. In these designs, air flows continuously through or over the odor source and is then transported via tubing to the subject. Vacuum pressure plays an important role in a continuous flow olfactometer, where it is utilized both to switch between odorized air flow and control flow and to evacuate odors, often just below the subject’s nose.[4]

How a flow-olfactometer works

[edit]

A flow-olfactometer produces a constant heated and humidified flow of pure air. This air flow runs continuously to the subjects nose. For the length of the stimulus pulse the continuous air flow is replaced by a block of odorized air.

Dynamic dilution olfactometer

[edit]

The new generations of dynamic dilution olfactometers quantify odors using a panel[5] and can allow different complementary techniques: odor concentration and odor threshold determination, odor suprathreshold determination with comparison to a reference gas, hedonic scale assessment to determine the degree of appreciation, evaluation of the relative intensity of odors, and allow training and automatic evaluation of expert panels.

The most recognised olfactometry standard is currently the EN13725 standard. Analyses performed by olfactometers are often used in site diagnostics (multiple odor sources) performed with the goal of establishing odor management plans.

Field olfactometry

[edit]

Field olfactometry can be a useful tool in validating odor complaints, or determining odor levels for various locations.[6] Field olfactometers provide the same basic function of a laboratory olfactometer but are designed to be used by a single panelist to measure ambient odors. To be classified as a field olfactometer the device must be able to provide accurate and controlled dilution of the ambient air with odorless air and present the diluted sample to the panelist at controlled and positive air flow.[7]

The Nasal Ranger, developed by St. Croix Sensory, is a common brand of field olfactometer used in wastewater treatment plants, industrial facilities, and marijuana grow houses.[8]

Verifying odorant level in natural gas

[edit]

Natural gas odorant concentrations are required to be readily detectable at one-fifth of the lower flammable limit of the gas by state and federal regulation. Many gas companies utilize olfactometers to verify this standard. The ASTM has published a standard test method for this determination.[9]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Olfactometer

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
An olfactometer is a designed to deliver stimuli in a precise and controlled manner, enabling the of olfactory sensitivity, threshold detection, , and identification while minimizing variables such as airflow, concentration, duration, and contamination. It typically consists of components like carrier air systems, odorant delivery mechanisms (e.g., canisters or liquid bubblers), mass flow controllers for dilution, and computer interfaces for synchronization with physiological recordings or behavioral tasks. The development of olfactometers traces back to the late , with Dutch physiologist Hendrik Zwaardemaker credited as the inventor in 1888–1889, when he introduced the first device for clinical quantification of smell acuity through diluted odor presentation. Early olfactometry built on physiological studies from the 1840s by figures like , evolving into standardized tools by the early for assessing odor intensity and quality. Key advancements include the 1916 odor classification system by Hans Henning and post-World War II refinements for environmental and medical applications, culminating in modern digital systems like the Sniffin' Sticks (1996) for comprehensive olfactory testing. Olfactometers are categorized into types such as air-dilution models, which mix odorized air with clean diluents for variable concentrations, and simpler squeeze-bottle designs for basic threshold tests, alongside advanced solenoid-valve systems for integration. Their primary applications span research, including functional MRI studies of processing and behavioral assays in for tasks (e.g., detecting differences in carbon chain lengths with over 90% accuracy), as well as clinical diagnostics for disorders like , Alzheimer's, and post-traumatic . In , they support concentration measurements for pollution monitoring, adhering to standards like those from the .

Introduction

Definition and Purpose

An is a designed to detect and measure odor dilution, sensitivity, intensity, and concentration by delivering controlled stimuli to subjects or sensors. It enables precise presentation of odorants—volatile chemical compounds that stimulate the —while regulating variables such as airflow and dilution ratios to ensure reproducible results. This device plays a central role in olfactometry, the quantitative study of olfaction, which is the biological responsible for detecting airborne chemical molecules. The primary purpose of an olfactometer is to quantify olfactory thresholds—the minimum concentration at which an is detectable—and to investigate in s and other organisms. It standardizes assessments in , field, and environments, facilitating comparisons across studies and applications. By bridging sensory with applied sciences, such as and industrial control, olfactometers help evaluate how odors influence , , and ecological interactions. Olfactometers distinguish between human-based evaluations, which rely on trained panels of assessors to gauge subjective responses to , and instrumental variants that automate delivery for non-human subjects, such as in behavioral studies. In panels, the device presents diluted samples to multiple noses acting as sensors, providing a metric of perceived strength in odor units per cubic meter. Instrumental olfactometers, conversely, support automated systems for precise in entomological research, where they measure attraction or repulsion to specific odorants without intervention.

Historical Development

The olfactometer was invented in by Dutch physiologist Hendrik Zwaardemaker, who designed a simple tube-based device that allowed odorants to be drawn into the nostril through controlled inhalation, enabling the measurement of odor detection thresholds. Zwaardemaker refined his olfactometer through subsequent designs between and 1895, incorporating graduated scales for precise dilution and quantification of odor intensity, which laid the groundwork for systematic olfactory psychophysics. In the early , olfactometry advanced through pioneering experiments that expanded on Zwaardemaker's work, including efforts to classify into systematic categories based on perceptual qualities and chemical properties. Researchers at the developed initial methods for threshold determination and odor profiling, such as static dilution techniques, which facilitated broader olfactory experimentation in physiological and psychological studies. In the late , starting in the , olfactometry shifted from static methods—where odors were presented in enclosed vessels—to dynamic approaches that continuously diluted and delivered odorants via , improving reproducibility and control. This evolution included the introduction of panel-based assessments, where multiple human assessors evaluated odors collectively to reduce individual variability, and culminated in the with ASTM standards like E679, which formalized dynamic olfactometry protocols for threshold and intensity measurement. In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the adoption of the EN 13725 (revised 2022) standardized dynamic olfactometry across , specifying procedures for odor concentration determination using human panels and defining units like odor units per cubic meter. Portable field olfactometers emerged in the , such as the Nasal Ranger device, enabling on-site odor assessments without laboratory constraints. By the , integration with advanced further, with MRI-compatible olfactometers allowing odor delivery during functional brain imaging to study olfactory processing. Overall, progression to electronic and automated systems by the enhanced precision, incorporating digital controls for dilution and real-time data logging.

Operating Principles

General Mechanisms

Olfactometers operate by delivering controlled concentrations of odorants to subjects through precisely regulated air streams, typically mixing odorized air with clean, odor-free air to achieve desired dilution levels. This process often employs , inert tubing, or dilution chambers to blend the components without , ensuring reproducible exposure conditions. The system generates a consistent that carries the diluted odorant to the subject's nasal passages, allowing for controlled presentation of stimuli with rapid onset and offset to minimize sensory . Key components of an olfactometer include the odor source, such as a sample canister or vapor generator; an air flow system providing continuous, humidified clean air at rates around 8 L/min to maintain physiological sniffing conditions; dilution mechanisms like mass flow controllers or valves for accurate mixing; and delivery nozzles or nasal masks that direct the stimulus precisely. Materials such as Teflon or are used throughout to prevent adsorption of ants, ensuring reliability. These elements work together to produce stable, quantifiable presentations without introducing variables like fluctuations or changes that could affect perception. Sensory detection in olfactometry relies on human olfactory thresholds, defined as the lowest concentration at which an is detectable by 50% of a trained panel. This involves concepts such as odor units (ou), which quantify odor strength in dimensionless terms based on perceived intensity, and dilution-to-threshold (DT) ratios, representing the factor by which an odor must be diluted to reach the detection threshold. Panelists assess samples in a controlled manner, often using forced-choice methods to identify the odorous sample among blanks, with thresholds calculated as the of individual responses. The physical principles governing olfactometer function center on gas diffusion, vapor pressure of odorants, and airflow dynamics to achieve uniform exposure. Odorants volatilize into the air stream based on their vapor pressure, diffusing evenly when mixed with carrier gas to prevent localized concentrations. Airflow is managed to avoid saturation effects, where high concentrations overwhelm receptors, or adaptation, where prolonged exposure diminishes sensitivity; typical flows ensure laminar conditions for consistent delivery. A basic dilution equation is given by: Dilution factor=total air flowodorant flow\text{Dilution factor} = \frac{\text{total air flow}}{\text{odorant flow}} where flows are measured in liters per minute (L/min), yielding the ratio that determines concentration.

Measurement Standards and Thresholds

Olfactory thresholds represent fundamental metrics in olfactometry, distinguishing between detection and recognition levels. The detection threshold is defined as the lowest concentration of an odorant at which it is noticed by 50% of assessors, serving as an for the minimum perceptible stimulus. In contrast, the recognition threshold occurs at the concentration where the odor's quality or identity can be reliably discerned by 50% of assessors. Absolute thresholds encompass both detection and recognition as the baseline limits of olfactory sensitivity, while difference thresholds measure the smallest incremental change in odor concentration that can be discriminated, often relevant for comparative assessments. Panel-based evaluation forms the core of standardized olfactometric testing, relying on trained assessors to minimize subjective . Protocols typically require 4 to 8 trained panelists per , selected for their consistent performance against reference odors like n-butanol to ensure reliability. A forced-choice method is employed, where assessors evaluate 3 or 4 samples simultaneously—typically one odorous and the rest blanks—and must identify the odorous sample, reducing guessing and expectation errors compared to yes/no formats. This ascending concentration series presentation starts at low dilutions and progresses until the detection threshold is reached, with responses statistically analyzed for 50% correct identification. Key international standards govern these measurements to ensure comparability. The EN 13725 (originally published in 2003 and revised in 2022) outlines dynamic olfactometry procedures, defining concentration in European odor units per cubic meter (ou/m³) as the dilution factor required to reach the detection threshold of 1 ou/m³. In the United States, ASTM E679 specifies a forced-choice ascending concentration series for determining and taste thresholds, emphasizing statistical limits for panel responses. For gas odorants, ASTM D6273 provides methods to assess intensity, including threshold detection and readily detectable levels using olfactory evaluation. These standards prioritize controlled conditions, such as clean air dilution and panel screening, to quantify potency. Beyond concentration, hedonic tone and intensity scales evaluate subjective odor qualities. Hedonic tone assesses pleasantness on scales ranging from -4 (extremely unpleasant) to +4 (extremely pleasant), capturing emotional responses independent of intensity. Intensity is often rated on a 0-6 category scale, where 0 indicates no odor and 6 denotes overwhelming strength, allowing correlation with concentration for annoyance prediction. Odor concentration is calculated as 2n−12^{n-1} ou/m³, where nn is the dilution step at which 50% detection occurs in binary dilution series, reflecting the geometric progression of thresholds in dynamic olfactometry. Several error sources can influence measurement accuracy, necessitating rigorous controls. Inter-individual variability arises from physiological differences in olfactory sensitivity, with thresholds varying by factors like age, health, and among panelists. Olfactory occurs when prolonged exposure desensitizes receptors, inflating thresholds and requiring short presentation intervals. Environmental factors, such as and , also affect thresholds—higher can elevate detection levels by altering mucosal conditions—thus standards mandate controlled ranges (e.g., 50% relative humidity and 23°C) to mitigate these influences.

Types of Olfactometers

Flow Olfactometers

Flow olfactometers are laboratory instruments designed to deliver odor stimuli through a continuous stream of air, enabling precise temporal control in olfactory experiments. These devices maintain a steady airflow that passes over an odor source before being transported via tubing to the subject, often incorporating solenoid valves or vacuum systems to switch rapidly between odorized and clean air streams. This setup ensures minimal mechanical or thermal artifacts during stimulus presentation. In operation, flow olfactometers provide a constant background of filtered, heated, and air, typically at 35–37°C and relative above 50%, to mimic physiological conditions and prevent nasal drying. pulses are introduced with rapid onset and offset times, often achieving rise times around 160 ms, allowing for square-wave stimulus profiles suitable for electrophysiological recordings. They are frequently employed in dual-choice configurations, such as Y-tube olfactometers for , where equal airflow rates—adjusted based on size, often in the range of 1–5 L/min total—direct stimuli into separate arms for behavioral choice assays. Key advantages of flow olfactometers include their ability to minimize olfactory adaptation through quick stimulus switching and stable concentration delivery, with only minor drops (e.g., 5.9%) over extended use, making them ideal for behavioral and studies. These devices excel in timing-critical applications, such as event-related potential measurements in humans or assays in insects. However, limitations include their primary suitability for controlled laboratory settings, where quantitative dilution for environmental odor standards receives less emphasis, and potential issues like backflow contamination if valves are not calibrated properly. Higher flow rates beyond 5 L/min can cause nasal irritation in subjects. Modern flow olfactometers draw inspiration from early designs like Hendrik Zwaardemaker's 1888 two-tube system, which used airflow to transport without direct contact, evolving into computer-controlled versions for applications such as precise odor pulse timing in olfactory studies. In research, Y-tube variants have been widely used to assess preferences, for example, in evaluating responses to volatiles.

Dynamic Dilution Olfactometers

Dynamic dilution olfactometers are laboratory instruments designed as multi-port systems that split streams of clean, odor-free air into controlled flows, dynamically mixing these with an odorous sample to generate precise stepwise dilutions, often in binary ratios such as 1:2 increments up to approximately 15,000:1. These devices employ low-adsorbency materials like , Teflon, and glass to prevent sample contamination or alteration, with neutral air flushing between presentations to maintain integrity. Automated mass flow controllers regulate the mixing ratios, enabling simultaneous delivery to multiple panelists through sniff ports, typically four to six, in compliance with standards like EN 13725. In operation, these olfactometers present diluted samples to a trained panel using forced-choice methods, such as three-alternative forced choice, where panelists identify the odorous port among blanks. The detection threshold (DT) is determined as the dilution ratio at which 50% of panel responses indicate detection, calculated via the of the last negative and first positive responses. Results are quantified in odor units per cubic meter (ou/m³), calibrated against n-butanol as a reference, providing a measure of concentration for regulatory purposes under EN 13725. The key process begins with sample collection in inert Tedlar or Nalophan bags using a depression pump, ensuring analysis within 30 hours to preserve integrity as per EN 13725 protocols. Automated dilution steps then create a series from high ratios (e.g., 15,000:1) down to 1:1, with panel assessments extending to intensity on scales like 0-5, hedonic tone (pleasantness), and character description for comprehensive profiling. Each sample evaluation typically requires 20-30 minutes per panelist, involving ascending presentations to minimize adaptation. These olfactometers offer advantages in reproducibility, making them essential for in , as standardized procedures yield consistent results across labs. They effectively handle complex mixtures by mimicking human , supporting applications in emission quantification without needing compound identification. Limitations include the necessity for a controlled environment free of external odors, which restricts on-site use and increases setup costs. Panel sessions are time-intensive, often limited to three hours total with costs around $350 per sample, and results can vary due to inter-individual sensitivity differences despite training.

Field Olfactometers

Field olfactometers are portable, handheld devices engineered for direct on-site evaluation of ambient odors, enabling assessments without the need for sample collection and laboratory transport. These instruments typically feature adjustable dilution valves and internal mixing chambers that blend odorous ambient air with odor-free air purified through filters. A representative example is the Nasal Ranger, a lightweight tool approximately 14 inches long, designed to generate precise dilution ratios by drawing in ambient air via a sample and combining it with filtered clean air from replaceable cartridges. In operation, a single trained assessor positions the device upwind at the odor source, such as industrial plumes or sites, and sequentially sniffs diluted samples to identify the lowest concentration where the becomes imperceptible. Dilution ratios such as 2:1, 4:1, 7:1, 15:1, 30:1, and 60:1, with higher ranges available in some models, with the assessor recording the dilution-to-threshold (D/T) value at detection, often using a concealed dial to minimize ; this process relies on the individual's olfactory sensitivity rather than a panel of evaluators. These devices offer key advantages, including real-time quantification of strength to validate complaints and portable deployment for monitoring dynamic sources like or industrial emissions, where they express results in field odor units (ou_f) equivalent to D/T ratios. However, limitations include high subjectivity tied to the operator's personal factors such as or , reduced precision compared to controlled olfactometry, and susceptibility to environmental interferences like , direction, or airborne contaminants that can alter air mixing. Field olfactometers like the Nasal Ranger align with U.S. EPA-recommended approaches for investigations, supporting regulatory compliance in ambient air quality assessments, while service providers such as Olfatec utilize similar portable models for on-site unit evaluations.

Applications

Environmental and Industrial Monitoring

Olfactometers play a crucial role in by quantifying emissions from sources such as landfills, plants, and agricultural operations, enabling the assessment of potential impacts on surrounding communities. Dynamic olfactometry, standardized under EN 13725, measures concentrations in European units (ouE/m³) and facilitates the calculation of emission rates, often expressed as ouE/m²/s for area sources like composting pads or ouE/s for point sources like stacks. These measurements support compliance with regulations, including the European Union's Industrial Emissions Directive (2010/75/), which requires best available techniques for preventing and controlling from industrial installations. In industrial settings, olfactometers are employed to monitor effluents from sectors like and chemical manufacturing, where volatile organic compounds contribute to nuisance. For instance, in plants, dynamic olfactometry identifies emission hotspots, aiding in the design and evaluation of abatement systems such as biofilters or . Site diagnostics using olfactometry integrate with to predict plume behavior and off-site concentrations, helping operators optimize control measures and ensure regulatory adherence. Sampling protocols involve collecting air from emission stacks for point sources or at site boundaries for diffuse emissions, followed by laboratory analysis via dynamic olfactometry. Combining field olfactometry for rapid on-site assessments with laboratory methods enhances nuisance evaluations, particularly for intermittent odors, by correlating perceived intensity with quantitative data. A notable case study from the Edmonton Waste Management Centre's co-composting facility demonstrates olfactometer-guided controls: field olfactometry identified high odor strengths from biosolids lagoons and composting areas, leading to targeted abatement like improved aeration and covering, which reduced detectable odors and community complaints over monitoring periods from 1997 to 2003. Historical developments post-1990s, including the adoption of EN 13725 in 2003, shifted practices toward standardized, reproducible measurements, replacing earlier subjective methods and enabling better integration into emission inventories. Challenges in these applications include the variability of odor plumes due to meteorological factors, which complicates accurate sampling and modeling, as well as establishing enforceable legal thresholds—such as ambient limits of 1–3 ouE/m³ commonly referenced in European and North American guidelines to minimize .

Gas Safety and Odorant Verification

Olfactometers play a critical role in gas safety by verifying the effectiveness of odorants added to , ensuring that leaks can be detected before reaching hazardous concentrations. is inherently odorless, so utilities inject sulfur-based odorants such as tertiary butyl mercaptan (TBM) or (THT) to impart a distinctive rotten-egg smell. The primary purpose of this verification is to confirm that the odorized gas remains detectable at one-fifth of the lower explosive limit (LEL), equivalent to approximately 1% gas in air (20% LEL), thereby preventing undetected leaks in pipelines, distribution systems, or residential settings that could lead to explosions or asphyxiation. The standard method for odorant verification follows ASTM D6273, which employs dynamic or flow olfactometers to assess odor intensity through controlled dilution of gas samples with clean air. In this process, gas is sampled from points where odorant mixing is complete, such as near the end of distribution lines, and blended with air to simulate low-concentration scenarios, targeting detectability around 5 ppmv for common odorants like THT. Trained panels of operators—typically non-smokers screened for olfactory sensitivity—conduct forced-choice sniff tests, presenting diluted mixtures in odor-free ports to determine the threshold detection level (faint odor) and readily detectable level (easily identifiable odor). These tests use triangle or yes/no protocols to minimize bias, with results quantifying odor strength to ensure compliance; for instance, the gas must produce an odor intensity rating of at least "easily detectable" (level 2 on a 0-5 scale) at the 1/5 LEL threshold. Utilities perform routine checks, often monthly, using portable olfactometers like the Bacharach Odorometer or DTEX systems, to maintain uniform odorant distribution and prevent fade due to adsorption in pipelines. This practice evolved from early 20th-century safety concerns, particularly following the 1937 in , which killed nearly 300 people due to unodorized gas accumulation and prompted state-level mandates. Federal regulations solidified in 1970 when the U.S. issued the first pipeline safety rules under 49 CFR Part 192, requiring odorization for all combustible gases in populated areas to reduce accident risks. The advantages of olfactometer-based verification include quantitative assurance of odorant efficacy—far superior to subjective sniff tests—ensuring consistent addition rates (e.g., 0.2-4 lb/MMSCF) and early , which has significantly lowered explosion incidents since implementation. Dynamic dilution techniques, as outlined in specialized olfactometer types, enable precise control over presentation concentrations during these safety assessments.

Medical and Olfactory Research

Olfactometers play a crucial role in clinical diagnostics by providing objective assessments of olfactory function, particularly for detecting and in ear, nose, and throat () clinics. These devices deliver controlled concentrations of odorants to measure detection thresholds and discrimination abilities, enabling precise evaluation of olfactory impairment. In conditions like post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction, olfactometers support the of smell loss, which affects up to 80% of severe cases and serves as an early indicator of neurological involvement. For neurodegenerative disorders such as , olfactory testing with olfactometers complements standardized batteries like the Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) to identify as a prodromal marker, with impaired olfaction predicting faster cognitive decline in older adults. Olfactory training devices, often incorporating olfactometer-like precise odor delivery, have demonstrated efficacy in rehabilitating following infection, with double-blind studies showing significant recovery after three months of twice-daily training. In olfactory research, olfactometers facilitate psychophysical experiments focused on discrimination tasks, where participants identify or differentiate scents under varying concentrations, and sensitivity detection to quantify perceptual thresholds. These setups allow researchers to explore olfaction's neural basis, including rapid measured within 50-200 milliseconds of onset, which aligns with physiological responses in the . Animal studies leverage flow olfactometers in behavioral paradigms, such as the Y-maze apparatus for like mosquitoes, to investigate olfactory-guided and learning; for instance, exhibits conditioned responses to host odors in Y-maze olfactometers, revealing memory retention up to 24 hours post-. In , systems like the RWD Olfactometer enable cognitive assessments by associating stimuli with rewards, supporting studies on olfactory and sensitivity in behavioral . Advanced olfactometer designs enhance applications, including MRI-compatible models that deliver odors via without magnetic interference, allowing synchronized fMRI imaging of odor-evoked brain activity. Multimodal variants with real-time computer control support up to eight odor channels for precise stimulus sequencing during . Since the early , open-source low-cost olfactometers have proliferated in laboratories, offering affordable options for multi-odor delivery and integration with behavioral assays. Key findings from such research highlight olfactometers' utility in aging studies, where they document a progressive decline in olfactory sensitivity after age 60, affecting over 50% of individuals aged 65-80 and correlating with broader sensory and cognitive impairments. Behavioral experiments using olfactometers also reveal effects, with temporary threshold shifts following prolonged exposure, underscoring the dynamic nature of olfactory . Portable self-administered olfactometers, such as multi-channel devices for home use, enable rapid threshold testing outside clinical settings, improving accessibility for ongoing monitoring of olfactory function.

References

  1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/olfactometer
  2. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-laryngology-and-otology/article/brief-history-of-olfaction-and-olfactometry/8BDD5D4C770382CC232AF1F1DD424CEA
  3. https://standards.iteh.ai/catalog/standards/cen/67f31e88-f81d-4e78-bbf6-ce1dcb766eeb/en-13725-2022
  4. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/olfactometer
  5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK542239/
  6. https://www.wur.nl/en/show/olfactometer.htm
  7. https://silsoeodours.com/olfactometry/
  8. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-08/documents/odorguide1992.pdf
  9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3231359/
  10. https://www.environodour.com.au/odour-literature/faqs/109-faq-3
  11. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eea.13351
  12. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354719181_A_historical_review_of_olfactometry_The_invention_of_the_olfactometer_by_Hendrik_Zwaardemaker_in_1888_and_pioneering_work_in_olfactometry_at_the_turn_of_the_20th_century
  13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5650935_A_brief_history_of_olfaction_and_olfactometry
  14. https://www.iowadnr.gov/media/2318/download?inline
  15. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165027015004495
  16. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/olfactometer
  17. https://unisciencepub.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/State-of-the-art-olfactometers-Different-types.pdf
  18. https://www.fivesenses.com/Documents/Library/29%20%20Olfactomatics%20Applied%20Math.pdf
  19. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/odor-detection-threshold
  20. https://scentroid.com/wikiodour/en13725/
  21. https://www.astm.org/e0679-19.html
  22. https://www.astm.org/d6273-20.html
  23. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-9-point-hedonic-scale-for-odors_tbl1_335698960
  24. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10473289.2006.10464474
  25. https://academic.oup.com/chemse/article/33/2/163/380723
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4917677/
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2967213/
  28. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/10/5622
  29. https://www.fivesenses.com/equipment/nasalranger/nasalranger/
  30. https://www.fivesenses.com/media/Brandt%20et%20al-2011_ProtocolsForReliableFieldOlfactometry_ApplEngAG.pdf
  31. https://olfa-tec.com/field-services/
  32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0269749124002392
  33. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/12/2/206
  34. https://www.raveboscrubber.com/odor-nuisance
  35. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1352231009008917
  36. https://www.biocycle.net/the-art-and-science-of-odor-modeling/
  37. https://www.epa.ie/publications/compliance--enforcement/air/air-guidance-notes/AG5-2021.pdf
  38. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7163
  39. https://www.fivesenses.com/Documents/Library/46%20Measuring%20Composting%20Odors%20for%20Decision%20Making.pdf
  40. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412020319450
  41. https://olores.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=369:an-overview-of-odour-regulation-throughout-north-america2&catid=80:content&Itemid=422&lang=en
  42. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-192/subpart-L/section-192.625
  43. https://asgmt.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/101_.pdf
  44. https://www.nysearch.org/tech_briefs/TechBrief-OdorDetectionThresholdStudy.pdf
  45. https://kelid1.ir/FilesUp/ASTM_STANDARS_971222/D6273.pdf
  46. https://www.mybacharach.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/0023-9125.pdf
  47. https://www.gasodorizer.com/gas-odorization-history/
  48. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/11/22/6628
  49. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12070-021-02507-x
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5768805/
  51. https://www.neurology.org/doi/10.1212/WNL.0000000000006919
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9843729/
  53. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8012732/
  54. https://academic.oup.com/chemse/article/35/8/717/334350
  55. https://journals.biologists.com/jeb/article/217/13/2321/12243/Olfactory-learning-and-memory-in-the-disease
  56. https://www.rwdstco.com/product-item/rwd-olfactometer/
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1602106/
  58. https://pure.johnshopkins.edu/en/publications/a-multimodal-mr-compatible-olfactometer-with-real-time-controllin/
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12549773/
  60. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00020/full
  61. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7854600/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.