4.7 Article

Factors affecting ozone removal rates in a simulated aircraft cabin environment

期刊

ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT
卷 40, 期 32, 页码 6122-6133

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.05.034

关键词

aircraft cabin air quality; indoor air chemistry; heterogeneous chemistry; human bioeffluents; skin oil; deposition velocities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ozone concentrations were measured concurrently inside a simulated aircraft cabin and in the airstream providing ventilation air to the cabin. Ozone decay rates were also measured after cessation of ozone injection into the supply airstream. By systematically varying the presence or absence of people, soiled T-shirts, aircraft seats and a used HEPA filter, we have been able in the course of 24 experiments to isolate the contributions of these and other factors to the removal of ozone from the cabin air. In the case of this simulated aircraft, people were responsible for almost 60% of the ozone removal occurring within the cabin and recirculation system; respiration can only have been responsible for about 4% of this removal. The aircraft seats removed about 25% of the ozone; the loaded HEPA filter, 7%; and the other surfaces, 10%. A T-shirt that had been slept in overnight removed roughly 70% as much ozone as a person, indicating the importance of skin oils in ozone removal. The presence of the used HEPA filter in the recirculated airstream reduced the perceived air quality. Over a 5-h period, the overall ozone removal rate by cabin surfaces decreased at similar to 3% h(-1). With people present, the measured ratio of ozone's concentration in the cabin versus that outside the cabin was 0.15-0.21, smaller than levels reported in the literature. The results reinforce the conclusion that the optimal way to reduce people's exposure to both ozone and ozone oxidation products is to efficiently remove ozone from the air supply system of an aircraft. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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