Limits...
An analysis on the detection of biological contaminants aboard aircraft.

Hwang GM, DiCarlo AA, Lin GC - PLoS ONE (2011)

Bottom Line: The spread of infectious disease via commercial airliner travel is a significant and realistic threat.Breathing alone failed to generate sufficient bacterial particles for detection, and none of the scenarios generated sufficient viral particles for detection to be feasible.These results suggest that more sensitive sensors than the COTS devices currently available and/or sampling of individual passengers would be needed for the detection of bacteria and viruses in aircraft.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of the Office of Chief Engineer, The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Virginia, United States of America. gmhwang@mitre.org

ABSTRACT
The spread of infectious disease via commercial airliner travel is a significant and realistic threat. To shed some light on the feasibility of detecting airborne pathogens, a sensor integration study has been conducted and computational investigations of contaminant transport in an aircraft cabin have been performed. Our study took into consideration sensor sensitivity as well as the time-to-answer, size, weight and the power of best available commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) devices. We conducted computational fluid dynamics simulations to investigate three types of scenarios: (1) nominal breathing (up to 20 breaths per minute) and coughing (20 times per hour); (2) nominal breathing and sneezing (4 times per hour); and (3) nominal breathing only. Each scenario was implemented with one or seven infectious passengers expelling air and sneezes or coughs at the stated frequencies. Scenario 2 was implemented with two additional cases in which one infectious passenger expelled 20 and 50 sneezes per hour, respectively. All computations were based on 90 minutes of sampling using specifications from a COTS aerosol collector and biosensor. Only biosensors that could provide an answer in under 20 minutes without any manual preparation steps were included. The principal finding was that the steady-state bacteria concentrations in aircraft would be high enough to be detected in the case where seven infectious passengers are exhaling under scenarios 1 and 2 and where one infectious passenger is actively exhaling in scenario 2. Breathing alone failed to generate sufficient bacterial particles for detection, and none of the scenarios generated sufficient viral particles for detection to be feasible. These results suggest that more sensitive sensors than the COTS devices currently available and/or sampling of individual passengers would be needed for the detection of bacteria and viruses in aircraft.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

4” Mesh Velocity Contour.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3022008&req=5

pone-0014520-g003: 4” Mesh Velocity Contour.

Mentions: To verify that the temperature and velocity gradients computed by our CFD model are consistent with previous work by Chen et al. [17], we compared the velocity profiles from a 4” mesh and found good agreement. As shown in Figure 3, the airflow occurs primarily transverse to the main axis of the cabin. This is in part due to the absence of simulated passenger traffic in the aisle. Furthermore, the CFD aircraft cabin flow fields presented here are consistent with results presented by independent investigators [17] and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) [34].


An analysis on the detection of biological contaminants aboard aircraft.

Hwang GM, DiCarlo AA, Lin GC - PLoS ONE (2011)

4” Mesh Velocity Contour.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3022008&req=5

pone-0014520-g003: 4” Mesh Velocity Contour.
Mentions: To verify that the temperature and velocity gradients computed by our CFD model are consistent with previous work by Chen et al. [17], we compared the velocity profiles from a 4” mesh and found good agreement. As shown in Figure 3, the airflow occurs primarily transverse to the main axis of the cabin. This is in part due to the absence of simulated passenger traffic in the aisle. Furthermore, the CFD aircraft cabin flow fields presented here are consistent with results presented by independent investigators [17] and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) [34].

Bottom Line: The spread of infectious disease via commercial airliner travel is a significant and realistic threat.Breathing alone failed to generate sufficient bacterial particles for detection, and none of the scenarios generated sufficient viral particles for detection to be feasible.These results suggest that more sensitive sensors than the COTS devices currently available and/or sampling of individual passengers would be needed for the detection of bacteria and viruses in aircraft.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of the Office of Chief Engineer, The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Virginia, United States of America. gmhwang@mitre.org

ABSTRACT
The spread of infectious disease via commercial airliner travel is a significant and realistic threat. To shed some light on the feasibility of detecting airborne pathogens, a sensor integration study has been conducted and computational investigations of contaminant transport in an aircraft cabin have been performed. Our study took into consideration sensor sensitivity as well as the time-to-answer, size, weight and the power of best available commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) devices. We conducted computational fluid dynamics simulations to investigate three types of scenarios: (1) nominal breathing (up to 20 breaths per minute) and coughing (20 times per hour); (2) nominal breathing and sneezing (4 times per hour); and (3) nominal breathing only. Each scenario was implemented with one or seven infectious passengers expelling air and sneezes or coughs at the stated frequencies. Scenario 2 was implemented with two additional cases in which one infectious passenger expelled 20 and 50 sneezes per hour, respectively. All computations were based on 90 minutes of sampling using specifications from a COTS aerosol collector and biosensor. Only biosensors that could provide an answer in under 20 minutes without any manual preparation steps were included. The principal finding was that the steady-state bacteria concentrations in aircraft would be high enough to be detected in the case where seven infectious passengers are exhaling under scenarios 1 and 2 and where one infectious passenger is actively exhaling in scenario 2. Breathing alone failed to generate sufficient bacterial particles for detection, and none of the scenarios generated sufficient viral particles for detection to be feasible. These results suggest that more sensitive sensors than the COTS devices currently available and/or sampling of individual passengers would be needed for the detection of bacteria and viruses in aircraft.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus