687
Views
4
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Technical Papers

A wind tunnel test of newly developed personal bioaerosol samplers

, , &
Pages 828-837 | Published online: 26 Jun 2012

Figures & data

Figure 1. The newly developed personal bioaerosol sampler PAS-4.

Figure 1. The newly developed personal bioaerosol sampler PAS-4.

Figure 2. The newly developed personal bioaerosol sampler PAS-5.

Figure 2. The newly developed personal bioaerosol sampler PAS-5.

Figure 3. Schematic of the LRRI large wind tunnel facility.

Figure 3. Schematic of the LRRI large wind tunnel facility.

Figure 4. The experimental setup of the test personal bioaerosol samplers mounted on an adult manikin in the test chamber of the wind tunnel (manikin 90° to the wind).

Figure 4. The experimental setup of the test personal bioaerosol samplers mounted on an adult manikin in the test chamber of the wind tunnel (manikin 90° to the wind).

Figure 5. The aspiration efficiency as a function of the aerodynamic diameter of the test aerosols in different sampling orientations with the sampler inlet facing (a) 0° against the wind, (b) 90° to the wind, and (c) 180° to the wind.

Figure 5. The aspiration efficiency as a function of the aerodynamic diameter of the test aerosols in different sampling orientations with the sampler inlet facing (a) 0° against the wind, (b) 90° to the wind, and (c) 180° to the wind.

Figure 6. The orientation-averaged aspiration efficiency as a function of the aerodynamic diameter for the two test personal bioaerosol samplers (PAS-4 and PAS-5) and the reference sampler (IOM): (a) U = 0.5 m/sec, and (b) U = 2.0 m/sec. Error bar represents the standard deviation of the mean.

Figure 6. The orientation-averaged aspiration efficiency as a function of the aerodynamic diameter for the two test personal bioaerosol samplers (PAS-4 and PAS-5) and the reference sampler (IOM): (a) U = 0.5 m/sec, and (b) U = 2.0 m/sec. Error bar represents the standard deviation of the mean.

Figure 7. The orientation-averaged collection efficiency of the two test bioaerosol samplers at different wind speeds: (a) PAS-4 and (b) PAS-5. Error bar represents the standard deviation of the mean.

Figure 7. The orientation-averaged collection efficiency of the two test bioaerosol samplers at different wind speeds: (a) PAS-4 and (b) PAS-5. Error bar represents the standard deviation of the mean.

Figure 8. The orientation-averaged capture efficiency, wall loss, and filter collection of the test personal bioaerosol samplers at different wind speeds: (a) PAS-4 and (b) PAS-5. (Errors represent the standard deviation of the mean.)

Figure 8. The orientation-averaged capture efficiency, wall loss, and filter collection of the test personal bioaerosol samplers at different wind speeds: (a) PAS-4 and (b) PAS-5. (Errors represent the standard deviation of the mean.)

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.