4.6 Article

Three-dimensional analysis of the effect of human movement on indoor airflow patterns

期刊

INDOOR AIR
卷 31, 期 2, 页码 587-601

出版社

WILEY-HINDAWI
DOI: 10.1111/ina.12735

关键词

3-D velocities; human movement; human-induced contamination; indoor airflow; infectious disease control; ultrasound sensor

资金

  1. Directorate for Engineering [2012827]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human activity has significant effects on indoor airflow patterns, especially in cleanrooms, pharmaceutical settings, and healthcare environments. Experiments showed that walking can impact airflow for up to 10 seconds, with straight line walking causing significant changes in velocity. Similar airflow patterns between different walking schemes suggest the potential for predicting flow patterns of random walks.
Human activity is known to leave significant effects on indoor airflow patterns. These patterns are carefully designed for many facilities such as cleanrooms, pharmaceutical settings, and healthcare environments, where human-induced wakes contribute to the transport of contaminants. Therefore, the knowledge about these wakes as it relates to indoor air quality is critical. As a result, a series of experiments were conducted in a controlled chamber to study the three-dimensional effects of true human walking on airflow. Experiments were designed to capture the effect of human walking under three different flow conditions, and for two different walking schemes. The results show that the effect of walking on the airflow is not negligible and can sustain up to 10 seconds after the moving body has passed. Walking on a straight line creates significant change in the velocity normal to the walking path and vertical to the plane of walking movement. These changes were detectable till 1.0 m away from the walking track. Also, the similarity between airflow patterns of walking once and twice illustrated a promising opportunity of predicting the flow patterns of random walk from a set of base cases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据