Modeling of cooking-emitted particle dispersion and deposition in a residential flat: A real room application

Determination of Size-Dependent Source Emission Rate of Cooking-Generated Aerosol Particles at the Oil-Heating Stage in an Experimental Kitchen

“…Distribution of PM 10 emission rate derived as Fig. 9 can be used as the initial and boundary condition for indoor particle dynamics as studied in (Chen et al, 2000;Lai and Chen, 2007;Lai and Ho, 2008). Such distribution also helps to quantify the size-dependent inhalation intake factors due to cooking in the residential kitchen or flat.…”

“…In regard to indoor air quality and individual exposure due to cooking-generated particles, it is more concerned about the spatial-temporal distribution of 'microscopic' particle indoors. Particle source characteristics of cooking activities become one major factor for the well-mixing model (Chen et al, 2000) and computational fluid dynamics (Lai and Chen, 2007) to achieve the spatial-temporal information.…”

“…Some studies (Lai and Chen, 2007;Lai and Ho, 2008) assumed the non-dimensional emission rate or single particle diameter for the simulation of spatial distribution of cookingemitted particles. Such assumed source was insufficient to obtain the actual exposure concentration.…”

Toward Quantitative CFD Prediction of Contaminant Particle Deposition against Surfaces in Large Forced-Ventilation Food Plants

“…The Eulerian method has the advantage of being relatively straightforward because the mean particle concentration is calculated directly by solving an advection-diffusion conservation equation in a turbulent flow on the same grid, and because computational time is significantly reduced as there is no individual particle tracking required, in contrast with Lagrangian modeling approaches (Dupont et al 2006;Lai and Chen 2007a). However, Gouesbet and Berlemont (1999) affirmed that Eulerian models have difficulty in accounting for complex phenomena such as vaporization and combustion, particle-wall and particleparticle interactions, or cases involving big particulate Reynolds numbers.…”

“…However, Gouesbet and Berlemont (1999) affirmed that Eulerian models have difficulty in accounting for complex phenomena such as vaporization and combustion, particle-wall and particleparticle interactions, or cases involving big particulate Reynolds numbers. Nevertheless, many authors have adopted the Eulerian formulation through the drift-flux model for predicting airborne particle dispersal in very different geometrical configurations, often associated with empirical or semi-empirical equations for determining particle deposition flux towards surfaces (Holmberg and Li 1998;Dupont et al 2006;Lai and Chen 2007a;Li et al 2006;Zhao et al 2004). The strong increase in computer capacity over recent decades has made Lagrangian models more popular, and in turn they have been successfully applied for predicting airborne particle transport as well as particle flux rates onto adjacent smooth or rough surfaces (Reynolds, 1999), turbulent flows in ventilated rooms and ventilation ducts (Abadie and Limam 2007;Bouilly et al 2005;Lu et al 1996;Zhang et al 2008), and others.…”