Cargando…
Assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for COVID-19
Currently, COVID-19 is a global pandemic that scientists and engineers around the world are aiming to understand further through rigorous testing and observation. This paper aims to provide safe distance recommendations among individuals and minimize the spread of COVID-19, as well as examine the ef...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AIP Publishing LLC
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8142834/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34040335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/5.0046429 |
_version_ | 1783696630997843968 |
---|---|
author | Chea, Branson Bolt, Andre Agelin-Chaab, Martin Dincer, Ibrahim |
author_facet | Chea, Branson Bolt, Andre Agelin-Chaab, Martin Dincer, Ibrahim |
author_sort | Chea, Branson |
collection | PubMed |
description | Currently, COVID-19 is a global pandemic that scientists and engineers around the world are aiming to understand further through rigorous testing and observation. This paper aims to provide safe distance recommendations among individuals and minimize the spread of COVID-19, as well as examine the efficacy of face coverings as a tool to slow the spread of respiratory droplets. These studies are conducted using computational fluid dynamics analyses, where the infected person breathes, coughs, and sneezes at various distances and environmental wind conditions and while wearing a face-covering (mask or face shield). In cases where there were no wind conditions, the breathing and coughing simulations display 1–2 m physical distancing to be effective. However, when sneezing was introduced, the physical distancing recommendation of 2 m was deemed not effective; instead, a distance of 2.8 m and greater was found to be more effective in reducing the exposure to respiratory droplets. The evaluation of environmental wind conditions necessitated an increase in physical distancing measures in all cases. The case where breathing was measured with a gentle breeze resulted in a physical distancing recommendation of 1.1 m, while coughing caused a change from the previous recommendation of 2 m to a distance of 4.5 m or greater. Sneezing in the presence of a gentle breeze was deemed to be the most impactful, with a recommendation for physical distancing of 5.8 m or more. It was determined that face coverings can potentially provide protection to an uninfected person in static air conditions. However, the uninfected person's protection can be compromised even in gentle wind conditions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8142834 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | AIP Publishing LLC |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81428342021-05-24 Assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for COVID-19 Chea, Branson Bolt, Andre Agelin-Chaab, Martin Dincer, Ibrahim Phys Fluids (1994) ARTICLES Currently, COVID-19 is a global pandemic that scientists and engineers around the world are aiming to understand further through rigorous testing and observation. This paper aims to provide safe distance recommendations among individuals and minimize the spread of COVID-19, as well as examine the efficacy of face coverings as a tool to slow the spread of respiratory droplets. These studies are conducted using computational fluid dynamics analyses, where the infected person breathes, coughs, and sneezes at various distances and environmental wind conditions and while wearing a face-covering (mask or face shield). In cases where there were no wind conditions, the breathing and coughing simulations display 1–2 m physical distancing to be effective. However, when sneezing was introduced, the physical distancing recommendation of 2 m was deemed not effective; instead, a distance of 2.8 m and greater was found to be more effective in reducing the exposure to respiratory droplets. The evaluation of environmental wind conditions necessitated an increase in physical distancing measures in all cases. The case where breathing was measured with a gentle breeze resulted in a physical distancing recommendation of 1.1 m, while coughing caused a change from the previous recommendation of 2 m to a distance of 4.5 m or greater. Sneezing in the presence of a gentle breeze was deemed to be the most impactful, with a recommendation for physical distancing of 5.8 m or more. It was determined that face coverings can potentially provide protection to an uninfected person in static air conditions. However, the uninfected person's protection can be compromised even in gentle wind conditions. AIP Publishing LLC 2021-05 2021-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8142834/ /pubmed/34040335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/5.0046429 Text en © 2021 Author(s) Published under license by AIP Publishing. 1070-6631/2021/33(5)/051903/14/$30.00 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/All article content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ). |
spellingShingle | ARTICLES Chea, Branson Bolt, Andre Agelin-Chaab, Martin Dincer, Ibrahim Assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for COVID-19 |
title | Assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for COVID-19 |
title_full | Assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for COVID-19 |
title_fullStr | Assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for COVID-19 |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for COVID-19 |
title_short | Assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for COVID-19 |
title_sort | assessment of effectiveness of optimum physical distancing phenomena for covid-19 |
topic | ARTICLES |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8142834/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34040335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/5.0046429 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cheabranson assessmentofeffectivenessofoptimumphysicaldistancingphenomenaforcovid19 AT boltandre assessmentofeffectivenessofoptimumphysicaldistancingphenomenaforcovid19 AT agelinchaabmartin assessmentofeffectivenessofoptimumphysicaldistancingphenomenaforcovid19 AT dinceribrahim assessmentofeffectivenessofoptimumphysicaldistancingphenomenaforcovid19 |