The Impact of Large Mobile Air Purifiers on Aerosol Concentration in Classrooms and the Reduction of Airborne Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

  1. Finn F. Duill
  2. Florian Schulz
  3. Aman Jain
  4. Leve Krieger
  5. Berend van Wachem
  6. Frank Beyrau

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, an increased risk of infection by virus-containing aerosols indoors is assumed. Especially in schools, the duration of stay is long and the number of people in the rooms is large, increasing the risk of infection. This problem particularly affects schools without pre-installed ventilation systems that are equipped with filters and/or operate with fresh air. Here, the aerosol concentration is reduced by natural ventilation. In this context, we are investigating the effect of large mobile air purifiers (AP) with HEPA filters on particle concentration and their suitability for classroom use in a primary school in Germany. The three tested APs differ significantly in their air outlet characteristics. Measurements of the number of particles, the particle size distribution, and the CO2 concentration were carried out in the classroom with students (April/May 2021) and with an aerosol generator without students. In this regard, the use of APs leads to a substantial reduction of aerosol particles in the considered particle size range of 0.178–17.78 µm. At the same time, the three APs are found to have differences in their particle decay rate, noise level, and flow velocity. In addition to the measurements, the effect of various influencing parameters on the potential inhaled particle dose was investigated using a calculation model. The parameters considered include the duration of stay, particle concentration in exhaled air, respiratory flow rate, virus lifetime, ventilation interval, ventilation efficiency, AP volumetric flow, as well as room size. Based on the resulting effect diagrams, significant recommendations can be derived for reducing the risk of infection from virus-laden aerosols. Finally, the measurements were compared to computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling, as such tools can aid the optimal placement and configuration of APs and can be used to study the effect of the spread of aerosols from a source in the classroom.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.3390/ijerph182111523
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.23.21261041: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot 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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.07.23.21261041v1 on medRxiv