Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Indoor Air. 2022 Jun;32(6):e13064. doi: 10.1111/ina.13064.
The exhalation of aerosols during musical performances or rehearsals posed a risk of airborne virus transmission in the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous research studied aerosol plumes by only focusing on one risk factor, either the source strength or convective transport capability. Furthermore, the source strength was characterized by the aerosol concentration and ignored the airflow rate needed for risk analysis in actual musical performances. This study characterizes aerosol plumes that account for both the source strength and convective transport capability by conducting experiments with 18 human subjects. The source strength was characterized by the source aerosol emission rate, defined as the source aerosol concentration multiplied by the source airflow rate (brass 383 particle/s, singing 408 particle/s, and woodwind 480 particle/s). The convective transport capability was characterized by the plume influence distance, defined as the sum of the horizontal jet length and horizontal instrument length (brass 0.6 m, singing 0.6 m and woodwind 0.8 m). Results indicate that woodwind instruments produced the highest risk with approximately 20% higher source aerosol emission rates and 30% higher plume influence distances compared with the average of the same risk indicators for singing and brass instruments. Interestingly, the clarinet performance produced moderate source aerosol concentrations at the instrument's bell, but had the highest source aerosol emission rates due to high source airflow rates. Flute performance generated plumes with the lowest source aerosol emission rates but the highest plume influence distances due to the highest source airflow rate. Notably, these comprehensive results show that the source airflow is a critical component of the risk of airborne disease transmission. The effectiveness of masking and bell covering in reducing aerosol transmission is due to the mitigation of both source aerosol concentrations and plume influence distances. This study also found a musician who generated approximately five times more source aerosol concentrations than those of the other musicians who played the same instrument. Despite voice and brass instruments producing measurably lower average risk, it is possible to have an individual musician produce aerosol plumes with high source strength, resulting in enhanced transmission risk; however, our sample size was too small to make generalizable conclusions regarding the broad musician population.
在 COVID-19 大流行期间,音乐表演或排练过程中气溶胶的排放存在空气传播病毒的风险。先前的研究仅关注一个风险因素,即源强度或对流传输能力,来研究气溶胶羽流。此外,源强度的特征是气溶胶浓度,而忽略了实际音乐表演中进行风险分析所需的气流速率。本研究通过对 18 名人类受试者进行实验,用气溶胶排放率来描述同时考虑源强度和对流传输能力的气溶胶羽流,气溶胶排放率定义为源气溶胶浓度与源气流速率的乘积(铜管乐器 383 个颗粒/s,唱歌 408 个颗粒/s,木管乐器 480 个颗粒/s)。对流传输能力的特征是羽流影响距离,定义为水平射流长度与水平仪器长度之和(铜管乐器 0.6 m,唱歌 0.6 m,木管乐器 0.8 m)。结果表明,与铜管乐器和唱歌的相同风险指标的平均值相比,木管乐器产生的风险最高,源气溶胶排放率约高 20%,羽流影响距离约高 30%。有趣的是,单簧管在乐器喇叭口处产生的源气溶胶浓度适中,但由于气流速率高,源气溶胶排放率最高。长笛的源气溶胶排放率最低,但由于气流速率最高,羽流影响距离最大。值得注意的是,这些综合结果表明,气流是空气传播疾病传播风险的关键组成部分。掩蔽和喇叭罩覆盖在降低气溶胶传播方面的有效性是由于源气溶胶浓度和羽流影响距离的降低。本研究还发现了一位音乐家,他产生的源气溶胶浓度比演奏相同乐器的其他音乐家高出约五倍。尽管人声和铜管乐器产生的平均风险较低,但可能会有单个音乐家产生高强度的气溶胶羽流,从而增加传播风险;然而,我们的样本量太小,无法对广大音乐家群体做出可推广的结论。