Holopainen R, Asikainen V, Tuomainen M, Björkroth M, Pasanen P, Seppänen O
Laboratory of Heating, ventilating and Air Conditioning, Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo, Finland.
Indoor Air. 2003 Sep;13(3):212-22. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0668.2003.00179.x.
Two kinds of air duct cleaning methods, mechanical brushing with different brushes and compressed air cleaning, were compared in the laboratory and in newly built buildings. The ducts were contaminated either with test dust or with dust originated from a construction site. The amount of dust on the duct surface was measured with the vacuum test method and estimated visually before and after the cleaning. In addition, the cleaning times of the different techniques were compared and the amount of residual oil in the ducts was measured in the laboratory test. The brushing methods were more efficient in metal ducts, and compressed air cleaning was more efficient in plastic ducts. After the duct cleaning the mean amount of residual dust on the surface of the ducts was <or=0.1 g/m2 in the laboratory test with ducts contaminated at construction site and <or=0.3 g/m2 after cleaning in the field. The decrease in the dust deposits on the surface ranged from 86 to 99% and from 75 to 94% in the ducts cleaned in the laboratory or in the building site, respectively. The oil residues and the dust stuck onto the oil were difficult to scrape off and remove, and none of the cleaning methods were capable of cleaning the oily duct surfaces efficiently enough. Thus new installations should consist only of oil-free ducts.
在实验室和新建建筑中，对两种空气管道清洁方法进行了比较，即使用不同刷子进行机械刷洗和压缩空气清洁。管道被试验粉尘或源自建筑工地的灰尘污染。清洁前后，采用真空测试法测量管道表面的灰尘量，并进行目视估计。此外，比较了不同技术的清洁时间，并在实验室测试中测量了管道中的残留油量。刷洗方法在金属管道中更有效，而压缩空气清洁在塑料管道中更有效。在实验室测试中，对于在建筑工地被污染的管道，清洁后管道表面的平均残留灰尘量≤0.1 g/m²，在现场清洁后≤0.3 g/m²。在实验室或建筑工地清洁的管道中，表面灰尘沉积量的减少分别为86%至99%和75%至94%。油残留物和粘在油上的灰尘很难刮掉和清除，而且没有一种清洁方法能够足够有效地清洁油腻的管道表面。因此，新安装的管道应仅由无油管道组成。
