4.7 Article

Assessing and controlling infection risk with Wells-Riley model and spatial flow impact factor (SFIF)

Journal

SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY
Volume 67, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.102719

Keywords

Infection risk distribution; Wells-Riley model; CFD; Spatial flow impact factor

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [52041602, 51976106]
  2. Special fund of Beijing Key Laboratory of Indoor AIr Quality Evaluation and Control [BZ0344KF20-03]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article presents a new approach to obtain the spatial distribution for the probability of infection by combining the SFIF method with the Wells-Riley model. This method can help control infection risk and optimize the use of space and equipment, contributing positively to the fight against epidemics.
The ongoing COVID-19 epidemic has spread worldwide since December 2019. Effective use of engineering controls can prevent its spread and thereby reduce its impact. As airborne transmission is an important mode of infectious respiratory disease transmission, mathematical models of airborne infection are needed to develop effective engineering control. We developed a new approach to obtain the spatial distribution for the probability of infection (PI) by combining the spatial flow impact factor (SFIF) method with the Wells-Riley model. Our method can be combined with the anti-problem approach, in order to determine the optimized arrangement of people and/or air purifiers in a confined space beyond the ability of previous methods. This method was validated by a CFD-integrated method, and an illustrative example is presented. We think our method can be helpful in controlling infection risk and making the best use of the space and equipment in built environments, which is important for preventing the spread of COVID-19 and other infectious respiratory diseases, and promoting the development of sustainable cities and society.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available