Infection-prevention performance of local exhaust ventilation under three different underfloor air distribution systems during a face-to-face conversation

Yoshihara, Jun; Yamanaka, Toshio; Choi, Narae et al.

Building and Environment, 2024, 265, 111911

Number of Access:67（2025-05-22 12:55 Counts）

Identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11094/98322

Link to primary information 

File Format Terms of use Size Views Date.Available Description information
BuildEnviron_265_111911 pdf None 13.4 MB 32 2024.10.24  
Creative Commons : Attribution

Item Information

Output File Export EndNote Basic Export Mendeley

Title
Infection-prevention performance of local exhaust ventilation under three different underfloor air distribution systems during a face-to-face conversation
Creator
CreatorName
Yoshihara, Jun
NRID
1000080182575 1000080182575
researchmap permalink
read0014081 read0014081
CreatorName
Yamanaka, Toshio
NRID
1000010826481 1000010826481
CreatorName
Choi, Narae
NRID
1000090580952 1000090580952
ORCID
0000-0003-4956-1274 0000-0003-4956-1274
researchmap permalink
tkoba_0151426 tkoba_0151426
Scopus Author ID
55724294200 55724294200
CreatorName
Kobayashi, Tomohiro
NRID
1000060880656 1000060880656
researchmap permalink
kobayashi-noriaki kobayashi-noriaki
CreatorName
Kobayashi, Noriaki
CreatorName
Fujiwara, Aoi
Subject
Airborne transmission
Consulting (examination) room
Floor-supply displacement ventilation (FSDV)
Local exhaust ventilation (LEV)
SARS-CoV-2
Wells-Riley model
Description
Yoshihara J., Yamanaka T., Choi N., et al. Infection-prevention performance of local exhaust ventilation under three different underfloor air distribution systems during a face-to-face conversation. Building and Environment 265, 111911 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2024.111911.
Abstract
This study proposes using a local exhaust ventilation system (LEV) to prevent airborne infections, especially for short-range conversations. We compared the performance of a hood in three different underfloor air distribution systems (UFAD): floor-supply displacement ventilation (FSDV), horizontal flow-type floor diffuser (HFD), and swirling flow-type floor diffuser (SFD). Two situations were considered: Case A, a consulting room, and Case B, a restaurant or meeting room. The difference in infection risk assessment between using CO2 and artificial saliva particles as tracers of exhaled breath was also discussed. Results indicate that the distribution of exhaled air and infection risk for doctors decreased in the order FSDV < HFD < SFD. Although the effect of introducing hoods was confirmed to a certain degree for the three ventilation methods in Case A, the effect of the hoods on the quanta concentration of the facing person was small in Case B. Comparing airborne infection risks between gas and particles, particle-based airborne infection was smaller in the FSDV due to the more significant impact of particle adhesion and falling. As a limitation, the ventilation rate in the experiment was 1000 m3/h (50 ACH). Therefore, the air supply method had a more significant impact on the results than the hood method. A practical implication of this experiment is that even under high ventilation volumes (50 ACH), the FSDV can reduce the horizontal distribution of the patient's exhaled air and prevent airborne infection. These results should be adapted to smaller spaces such as examination rooms and meeting rooms.
Publisher
Elsevier Ltd
Source Title
Building and Environment
Volume (Issue)
265
Page
111911
Date of Issued
2024-11-01
Language
English
Handle URL
https://hdl.handle.net/11094/98322
PISSN
03601323
Relation.isIdenticalTo
DOI (Publisher Version)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2024.111911
Access Rights
open access
CopyRight
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
oaire:version
Version of Record
Category
学術雑誌論文 Journal Article