Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments.
Air distribution systems are essential for controlling indoor airborne cross-infection risks. However, there is no consensus on the most effective system. This study compares the effectiveness of common air distribution methods, including mixing ventilation (MV), displacement ventilation (DV), and s...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Published: |
Elsevier Ltd.
2023
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://eprints.utm.my/106336/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.107913 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Universiti Teknologi Malaysia |
id |
my.utm.106336 |
---|---|
record_format |
eprints |
spelling |
my.utm.1063362024-06-29T06:47:01Z http://eprints.utm.my/106336/ Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. Hatif, Ihab Hasan Mohamed Kamar, Haslinda Kamsah, Nazri Wong, Keng Yinn TJ Mechanical engineering and machinery Air distribution systems are essential for controlling indoor airborne cross-infection risks. However, there is no consensus on the most effective system. This study compares the effectiveness of common air distribution methods, including mixing ventilation (MV), displacement ventilation (DV), and stratum ventilation (SV), while considering specific influencing factors for each system. Factors such as inlet type for MV, airflow direction for SV, and relative body posture for DV were evaluated. Computational thermal manikins with actual breathing functions were simulated, and tracer gas (N2O) and particles of various sizes were used to simulate pathogen-laden droplet nuclei from an infected individual. The modified Wells-Riley model was employed to assess infection risk. Results indicate that no single air distribution system consistently outperforms others, with effectiveness depending on different conditions. Under the DV system, the highest infection risk (20.86 %) occurred when the infected person was seated, and the exposed person was standing, decreasing to 1.2 % when their positions were reversed. In SV system, the highest risk (17.58 %) was observed when the infected person with the same direction as the airflow, dropping to 1.01 % in the opposite direction. The study suggests using MV systems with adequate air volume when people's locations and relative positions are unclear. Elsevier Ltd. 2023-11-15 Article PeerReviewed Hatif, Ihab Hasan and Mohamed Kamar, Haslinda and Kamsah, Nazri and Wong, Keng Yinn (2023) Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. Journal of Building Engineering, 79 (107913). NA-NA. ISSN 2352-7102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.107913 DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.107913 |
institution |
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia |
building |
UTM Library |
collection |
Institutional Repository |
continent |
Asia |
country |
Malaysia |
content_provider |
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia |
content_source |
UTM Institutional Repository |
url_provider |
http://eprints.utm.my/ |
topic |
TJ Mechanical engineering and machinery |
spellingShingle |
TJ Mechanical engineering and machinery Hatif, Ihab Hasan Mohamed Kamar, Haslinda Kamsah, Nazri Wong, Keng Yinn Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. |
description |
Air distribution systems are essential for controlling indoor airborne cross-infection risks. However, there is no consensus on the most effective system. This study compares the effectiveness of common air distribution methods, including mixing ventilation (MV), displacement ventilation (DV), and stratum ventilation (SV), while considering specific influencing factors for each system. Factors such as inlet type for MV, airflow direction for SV, and relative body posture for DV were evaluated. Computational thermal manikins with actual breathing functions were simulated, and tracer gas (N2O) and particles of various sizes were used to simulate pathogen-laden droplet nuclei from an infected individual. The modified Wells-Riley model was employed to assess infection risk. Results indicate that no single air distribution system consistently outperforms others, with effectiveness depending on different conditions. Under the DV system, the highest infection risk (20.86 %) occurred when the infected person was seated, and the exposed person was standing, decreasing to 1.2 % when their positions were reversed. In SV system, the highest risk (17.58 %) was observed when the infected person with the same direction as the airflow, dropping to 1.01 % in the opposite direction. The study suggests using MV systems with adequate air volume when people's locations and relative positions are unclear. |
format |
Article |
author |
Hatif, Ihab Hasan Mohamed Kamar, Haslinda Kamsah, Nazri Wong, Keng Yinn |
author_facet |
Hatif, Ihab Hasan Mohamed Kamar, Haslinda Kamsah, Nazri Wong, Keng Yinn |
author_sort |
Hatif, Ihab Hasan |
title |
Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. |
title_short |
Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. |
title_full |
Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. |
title_fullStr |
Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. |
title_sort |
comparative evaluation of air distribution systems for controlling the airborne infection risk in indoor environments. |
publisher |
Elsevier Ltd. |
publishDate |
2023 |
url |
http://eprints.utm.my/106336/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.107913 |
_version_ |
1803334993743708160 |