4.7 Article

Indoor-outdoor air quality relationships in vehicle: effect of driving environment and ventilation modes

期刊

ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT
卷 37, 期 27, 页码 3795-3808

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00466-7

关键词

indoor-outdoor air quality relationship; vehicles; air-conditioning; nitrogen oxides; carbon monoxide

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide concentration were measured inside and outside of a light-goods-vehicle at different locations and driving conditions for a 6-month period. To investigate the exposure of the vehicle passenger to the specified outdoor pollutant, the indoor-outdoor air quality (IO) relationships under various driving conditions, namely traffic density, ventilation modes and type of roadway were studied. Four main types of driving environments were selected: highway, countryside, urban street and tunnel. The vehicle was driven under the three main types of ventilation conditions: air-conditioning with air-recirculation, air-conditioning with fresh air intake. and natural ventilation. It is found that the IO ratio is not specific only to the mode of ventilation but also depends on the driving environment. The IO value can vary drastically even using the same ventilation mode when the vehicle is travelling in a different environment. It is found that using fresh-air ventilation mode, the IO can change from approximately 0.5-3 as it commutes from a highway to the countryside. The results also indicate that indoor NO level increased as the traffic density increases. The fluctuation of indoor NO level of naturally ventilated vehicle followed the variation of outdoor NO concentration with the IO value varying from 0.5 to 5. The results also show that even in an air-conditioned van, the indoor NO and CO concentration is significantly affected by that outdoor. It suggests the use of different ventilation mode when commuting in different environment. (C) 2003 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