Search

Estimating exposure to contaminants emitted into workroom air is essential for worker protection. Although contaminant concentrations are often not spatially uniform within workrooms, many methods for estimating exposure do not adequately account for this variability. Here the impact of temperature differences within a room on spatial contaminant distribution was studied. Tracer gas (99.5% propylene) concentrations were monitored automatically at 144 sampling points with a photoionization detector. One wall was chosen to represent a building's external wall and was heated or cooled to simulate summer or winter conditions. Experiments were preformed at two flow rates (5.5 and 3.3 m3 min−1) and six thermal conditions (isothermal, three summer conditions and two winter conditions). For 5.5 m3 min−1 and all thermal conditions, the coefficient of variation (CV) ranged from 0.34 to 0.45 and the normalized average concentrations were similar. For 3.3 m3 min−1, winter conditions produced greater spatial variability of concentration (CV = 0.72 and 1.10) than isothermal or summer conditions (CV range = 0.29–0.34). Tests simulating winter conditions suggest that the resulting stable temperature structure inhibited the dilution of the tracer and enhanced its segregation in the lower portion of the room, especially for the lower flow rate (3.3 m3 min−1). Therefore, not explicitly addressing thermal effect in exposure modeling may impact the estimated accuracy and precision when used for rooms that are non-isothermal and not well mixed. These findings also have implications for air monitoring. Dispersion patterns for different thermal conditions were found to be substantially different, even when the mean concentrations were nearly the same. Thus, monitoring data from a single season should not be taken as representative of the entire year, when summer and winter conditions create temperature gradients in a room. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is potentially a valuable tool for simulating the dispersion of air contaminants in workrooms. However, CFD-estimated airflow and contaminant concentration patterns have not always shown good agreement with experimental results. Thus, understanding the factors affecting the accuracy of such simulations is critical for their successful application in occupational hygiene. The purposes of this study were to validate CFD approaches for simulating the dispersion of gases and vapors in an enclosed space at two air flow rates and to demonstrate the impact of one important determinant of simulation accuracy. The concentration of a tracer gas, isobutylene, was measured at 117 points in a rectangular chamber [1 (L) × 0.3 (H) × 0.7 m (W)] using a photoionization analyzer. Chamber air flow rates were scaled using geometric and kinematic similarity criteria to represent a full-sized room at two Reynolds numbers (Re = 5 × 102 and 5 × 103). Also, CFD simulations were conducted to estimate tracer gas concentrations throughout the chamber. The simulation results for two treatments of air inlet velocity (profiled inlet velocity measured in traverses across the air inlet and the assumption that air velocity is uniform across the inlet) were compared with experimental observations. The CFD-simulated 3-dimensional distribution of tracer gas concentration using the profiled inlet velocity showed better agreement qualitatively and quantitatively with measured chamber concentration, while the concentration estimated using the uniform inlet velocity showed poor agreement for both comparisons. For estimating room air contaminant concentrations when inlet velocities can be determined, this study suggests that using the inlet velocity distribution to define inlet boundary conditions for CFD simulations can provide more reliable estimates. When the inlet velocity distribution is not known, for instance for prospective design of dilution ventilation systems, the trials of several velocity profiles with different source, air inlet and air outlet locations may be useful for determining the most efficient workroom layout. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]