Joey Fox Profile picture
May 12 7 tweets 3 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
ASHRAE Control of Infectious Aerosols - Equivalent Outdoor Air Rates

The new standard is out and can be found here. osr.ashrae.org/default.aspx

Here's a quick review of the rates that are recommended.

1/5
The recommended equivalent outdoor air rates can be found in Table 5-1 on page 4. They are overall very high. For reference, WHO recommends 10 litres per second (lps)/person and OSPE and Lancet recommend 13.5 lps/person.

2/5 Image
Using standard densities from 62.1 at full occupancy, I've converted these rates into air changes per hour and what CO2 level you would expect to have if outdoor air was the only tool used (it won't be, but this is just for reference).
3/5 Image
>8 ACH for classrooms. Compared to standard indoor air quality in 62.1 for educational facilities, the rate is about 3x higher. I think once and for all, we can agree that ASHRAE minimums for IAQ are woefully inadequate for infection control. We now have a better goal.
4/5
I'll have upcoming threads discussing more aspects of this standard, but I think this is the main thing people have been looking for.

For those who want to know, here are the assumptions in doing the CO2 and ACH calculations.

5/5 Image
Should have been more clear. This isn’t the final standard but the initial public review. Things can change before final release.
Apologies. There was a typo when copying the values for healthcare equivalent CO2 levels. Here's the updated chart.
If anyone knows typical occupant density in healthcare resident room and common treatment area, I can estimate ACH at full occupancy. I don't know those values. Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Joey Fox

Joey Fox Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @joeyfox85

May 12
ASHRAE just developed a standard to mitigate airborne diseases. Once it's published, I'll do some threads explaining it. For now, I'll give a brief history behind this. 🧵

1/7
ASHRAE has had a standard for indoor air quality for many years (called 62.1). One major problem is that it never took into account airborne diseases. Andrew Persily explained why in last month's ASHRAE magazine.

2/7 Despite what we have been h...
Then an airborne pandemic hit us and we had no standards. ASHRAE setup the Epidemic Task Force. It gave advice on best practices for buildings and how to improve ventilation and filtration, but did not establish any standard.

3/7
Read 7 tweets
May 11
I've written a post about air distribution. It seems like a technical and minor aspect of air quality, but it's extremely important. So much of the misinformation and bad decisions during the pandemic relate to misunderstanding air distribution.
1/15
itsairborne.com/air-distributi…
Air distribution refers to how air mixes and is supplied throughout the space. You can get clean air into a room, but you only care about what people are breathing in. When that clean air bypasses people and gets exhausted, it's a useless waste of energy.
2/15 Image
The goal in the vast majority of ventilation systems is to have the air properly mixed. It ensures the clean air dilutes all the pollutants and there are no spaces with higher pollutant concentration. A proper design with diffusers can achieve this.
3/15 Image
Read 15 tweets
May 4
There's been a bureaucratic failure by Health Canada to protect Canadians from air pollution and it also hurt a lot of people throughout COVID. We should have had better filters in the air handling units, but didn't. Here's how the screw up occurred. 🧵
ASHRAE 62.1 primarily deals with outdoor airflow rates, but there's a section on filters. If national guideline on PM2.5 (fine particulate matter) is exceeded, MERV 11 or greater is required.

It's not as good as MERV 13, but still a good start. So what's the national guideline? Image
There is no national guideline. They give guidance for residential settings. "As low as possible".

Because there is no threshold for health effects, they refuse to set one. That's wrong.

canada.ca/en/health-cana… Indoor levels of PM2.5 shou...
Read 7 tweets
Apr 30
The UK Department for Education has a new document for use of CO2 monitors. It sets the cutoffs as:
<800 ppm - close windows
800-1500 ppm - consider opening windows
>1500 ppm - open windows and doors

Are these appropriate levels? What should it be? 🧵
From an air quality/engineering perspective, CO2 is generally harmless does not tell you directly about other pollutants in the space. It only tells you the outdoor airflow per person. The goal is to verify the building is achieving the desired outdoor airflow per person.
So what should this value be? We need to distinguish between general indoor air quality (IAQ) and airborne pathogens. General IAQ does not account for airborne pathogens. Outdoor airflow is primarily about general IAQ but also works on airborne pathogens.
Read 10 tweets
Apr 24
What would I do if I was a dentist?

Can you make it low risk to be sitting in front of unmasked faces every day?

Believe it or not, you can. It takes 6 steps. 🧵
Step 1 - N95 Respirator + eye protection

This was obvious. Dentists usually wear a mask and some form of eye protection anyways. Wearing a better mask is low hanging fruit. If you want to learn more about masking, see these documents.
Step 2 - Barriers between rooms

Many dentists did this during the pandemic, but barriers between rooms can limit long range transmission. They can be detrimental within a room, but they work here.
Read 13 tweets
Apr 21
People have been asking if Beacon far-UV is effective. The cost right now is really low. The answer is I don't have enough info to make a definitive statement but it likely is effective and can have some very good uses. 🧵

The best data we have was just a proof of concept experiment. I believe it used 15 W Ushio lamps, but they didn't publicize that since the goal was just proof of concept. 1 lamp gave 33-66 air changes per hour in a typical room in your home.
nature.com/articles/s4159…
I don't know how it would scale down to a 12 W lamp for effectiveness, but as I said, it likely would be effective. I'll be more confident once we have a better idea for dosing.

I think this could be really good for personal far-UV.
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(