Fan Man, Fu Zheng, Wang Jia, Wang Zhaoying, Suo Hanxiao, Kong Xiangfei, Li Han
School of Energy and Environmental Engineering, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin, 300401, China.
Build Environ. 2022 Mar 15;212:108831. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.108831. Epub 2022 Jan 29.
In the era of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), inappropriate indoor ventilation may turn out to be the culprit of microbial contamination in enclosed spaces and deteriorate the environment. To collaboratively improve the thermal comfort, air quality and virus spread control effect, it was essential to have an overall understanding of different ventilation modes. Hence, this study reviewed the latest scientific literature on indoor ventilation modes and manuals of various countries, identified characteristics of different ventilation modes and evaluated effects in different application occasions, wherefore to further propose their main limitations and solutions in the epidemic era. For thermal comfort, various non-uniform ventilation modes could decrease the floor-to-ceiling temperature difference, draft rate or PPD by 60%, 80% or 33% respectively, or increase the PMV by 45%. Unsteady ventilation modes (including intermittent ventilation and pulsating ventilation) could lower PPD values by 12%-37.8%. While for air quality and virus spread control, non-uniform ventilation modes could lower the mean age of air or contaminants concentration by 28.3%-47% or 15%-47% respectively, increase the air change efficiency, contaminant removal effectiveness or protection efficiency by 6.6%-10.4%, 22.6% or 14%-50% respectively. Unsteady ventilation mode (pulsating ventilation) could reduce the peak pollutant concentration and exposure time to undesirable concentrations by 31% and 48% respectively. Non-uniform modes and unsteady modes presented better performance in thermal comfort, air quality and virus spread control, whereas relevant performance evaluation indexes were still imperfect and the application scenarios were also limited.
在2019冠状病毒病（COVID-19）时代，不适当的室内通风可能成为封闭空间微生物污染的罪魁祸首，并使环境恶化。为了协同提高热舒适性、空气质量和病毒传播控制效果，全面了解不同的通风模式至关重要。因此，本研究回顾了关于室内通风模式的最新科学文献以及各国手册，确定了不同通风模式的特点，并评估了其在不同应用场景中的效果，进而提出它们在疫情时代的主要局限性和解决方案。对于热舒适性，各种非均匀通风模式可分别将地板到天花板的温差、吹风率或预测不满意百分比（PPD）降低60%、80%或33%，或将预测平均投票数（PMV）提高45%。非稳态通风模式（包括间歇通风和脉动通风）可使PPD值降低12% - 37.8%。而对于空气质量和病毒传播控制，非均匀通风模式可分别将空气平均年龄或污染物浓度降低28.3% - 47%或15% - 47%，将换气效率、污染物去除效率或防护效率分别提高6.6% - 10.4%、22.6%或14% - 50%。非稳态通风模式（脉动通风）可分别将污染物峰值浓度和暴露于不良浓度的时间降低31%和48%。非均匀模式和非稳态模式在热舒适性、空气质量和病毒传播控制方面表现出更好的性能，然而相关性能评估指标仍不完善，应用场景也有限。
