Click on “Download PDF” for the PDF version or on the title for the HTML version.

If you are not an ASABE member or if your employer has not arranged for access to the full-text, Click here for options.

This paper compares results of using - dynamic triangular forced-choice olfactometry (DTFCO), Mask Scentometers, Nasal Rangers, and an odor intensity reference scale (OIRS) intensity ratings - to assess odors in a controlled-environment chamber in the Iowa State University Air Dispersion Laboratory. The methods were used to assess thirteen odor levels in the chamber where swine manure mixed with water was used to vary the odor levels. Dynamic triangular forced-choice olfactometry did not correlate well to the other ambient odor assessment methods. Predicting D/T using intensity ratings degraded Ro2 with the other methods in all cases. Average Intensity-predicted D/T, the Mask Scentometer and the Nasal Ranger correlated well with each other, had strong Ro2 (greater than 0.85), had regression slopes nearest one, and the session means were not found to be significantly different (a=0.05). Using the geometric means of the device D/T settings, (D/T)G, improved Ro2 between the other methods and the Nasal Ranger and Mask Scentometer. Average Intensity-predicted D/T values were three to four times higher than Nasal Ranger assessment ((D/T)G and D/T, respectively), and a Nasal Ranger (D/T)G was roughly five times higher than Mask Scentometer (D/T)G.