Airborne transmission of virus-laden aerosols inside a music classroom: Effects of portable purifiers and aerosol injection rates
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has shifted attention to the airborne transmission of exhaled droplet nuclei within indoor environments. The spread of aerosols through singing and musical instruments in music performances has necessitated precautionary methods such as masks and portable purifiers. This study investigates the effects of placing portable air purifiers at different locations inside a classroom and the effects of different aerosol injection rates (e.g., with and without masks, different musical instruments, and different injection modes). Aerosol deposition, airborne concentration, and removal are analyzed in this study. It was found that using purifiers could help in achieving ventilation rates close to the prescribed values by the World Health Organization, while also achieving aerosol removal times within the Center of Disease Control and Prevention recommended guidelines. This could help in deciding break periods between classroom sessions, which was around 25 min through this study. Moreover, proper placement of purifiers could offer significant advantages in reducing airborne aerosol numbers (offering several orders of magnitude higher aerosol removal when compared to nearly zero removal when having no purifiers), and improper placement of the purifiers could worsen the situation. This study suggests the purifier to be placed close to the injector to yield a benefit and away from the people to be protected. The injection rate was found to have an almost linear correlation with the average airborne aerosol suspension rate and deposition rate, which could be used to predict the trends for scenarios with other injection rates.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.19.20248374: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.19.20248374: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
-
-
-
-