Evaluation of air cleaning technologies existing in the Danish market: Experiments in a duct and in a test room

Abstract

Five portable air cleaning technologies including one new technology were evaluated to find their effectiveness in removing ultrafine particles. Measurements were carried out both in a duct and in a test room. The results showed that the technologies that use/create ozone to clean air can increase the ozone level significantly in the room. Moreover, they can cause generation of ultrafine particles and consequently increase ultrafine particle concentration in the room. The study suggests using a mechanical filter with low pressure drop as a recommended air cleaning technology in order to remove ultrafine particles efficiently from the indoor environment.

Particle transport characteristics in indoor environment with an air cleaner

“…In order to reduce indoor particle concentration, more and more air cleaners have been used and many researchers have investigated their performances. 4–6 According to a review article by Nazaroff, 7 the indoor particle transport is influenced by many factors including the particle category, clean air delivery rate (CADR), room geometry, roughness of room surfaces and thermal plume generated by human bodies or other devices. There exist many experimental or numerical investigations on these issues, 8–10 but most studies on the removal ability of air cleaners usually assumed that the air mixing in indoor environment is perfect and contaminant concentration is uniformly distributed, which means the location of the air cleaner has no effect on its particle removal efficiency.…”

Particle transport characteristics in indoor environment with an air cleaner: The effect of nonuniform particle distributions

“…Indoor air quality is closely related to human health since most people spend nearly 90% of lifetime in the indoor environment (Klepeis et al 2001). Both gaseous contaminants and fine particles in the indoor air can pose a threat to human health (Ardkapan et al 2014;Cao and Meyers 2015). The severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) exploded in 2003 was a typical epidemic disease that infects human by the tiny droplets or particles carrying various virus and bacteria (Chen et al 2010).…”

“…), which are the source and sink of particles, respectively. Quite a few studies have been carried out to evaluate the performance of the air cleaner (Nelson et al 1993; Ongwandee and Kruewan 2013;Ardkapan et al 2014;Zhang et al 2010;Kang et al 2008;Chen et al 2010;Jin et al 2015;Qian et al 2010). The investigations indicate that the position of the air cleaner is a key parameter, which influences the airflow patterns and leads to different removal efficiencies (Zhang et al 2010).…”

Electrostatic Precipitators as an Indoor Air Cleaner—A Literature Review

“…The authors reported that ESPs were able to achieve more than 50% efficiency for UFPs (ultrafine particles). Ardkapan et al [70] evaluated five portable air cleaning technologies, including an ESP with an airflow rate of 300 m 3 /h in order to determine the effectiveness of the cleaners in removing UFPs. Measurements were carried out in a test chamber.…”