Literature DB >> 28893392

Computational modeling and validation of human nasal airflow under various breathing conditions.

Chengyu Li1, Jianbo Jiang1, Haibo Dong2, Kai Zhao3.   

Abstract

The human nose serves vital physiological functions, including warming, filtration, humidification, and olfaction. These functions are based on transport phenomena that depend on nasal airflow patterns and turbulence. Accurate prediction of these airflow properties requires careful selection of computational fluid dynamics models and rigorous validation. The validation studies in the past have been limited by poor representations of the complex nasal geometry, lack of detailed airflow comparisons, and restricted ranges of flow rate. The objective of this study is to validate various numerical methods based on an anatomically accurate nasal model against published experimentally measured data under breathing flow rates from 180 to 1100ml/s. The numerical results of velocity profiles and turbulence intensities were obtained using the laminar model, four widely used Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) turbulence models (i.e., k-ε, standard k-ω, Shear Stress Transport k-ω, and Reynolds Stress Model), large eddy simulation (LES) model, and direct numerical simulation (DNS). It was found that, despite certain irregularity in the flow field, the laminar model achieved good agreement with experimental results under restful breathing condition (180ml/s) and performed better than the RANS models. As the breathing flow rate increased, the RANS models achieved more accurate predictions but still performed worse than LES and DNS. As expected, LES and DNS can provide accurate predictions of the nasal airflow under all flow conditions but have an approximately 100-fold higher computational cost. Among all the RANS models tested, the standard k-ω model agrees most closely with the experimental values in terms of velocity profile and turbulence intensity.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Computational fluid dynamics (CFD); Medical image-based modeling; Nasal airflow

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28893392      PMCID: PMC5694356          DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.08.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  26 in total

1.  Vortex visualization in ultra low Reynolds number insect flight.

Authors:  Christopher Koehler; Thomas Wischgoll; Haibo Dong; Zachary Gaston
Journal:  IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.579

2.  Characteristics of the turbulent laryngeal jet and its effect on airflow in the human intra-thoracic airways.

Authors:  Ching-Long Lin; Merryn H Tawhai; Geoffrey McLennan; Eric A Hoffman
Journal:  Respir Physiol Neurobiol       Date:  2007-02-14       Impact factor: 1.931

3.  Steady and oscillatory transnasal pressure-flow relationships in healthy adults.

Authors:  K J Sullivan; H K Chang
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  1991-09

Review 4.  Mechanics of airflow in the human nasal airways.

Authors:  D J Doorly; D J Taylor; R C Schroter
Journal:  Respir Physiol Neurobiol       Date:  2008-08-14       Impact factor: 1.931

5.  Numerical simulation of normal nasal cavity airflow in Chinese adult: a computational flow dynamics model.

Authors:  Jie Tan; Demin Han; Jie Wang; Ting Liu; Tong Wang; Hongrui Zang; Yunchuan Li; Xiangdong Wang
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2011-09-22       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Conductive olfactory losses in chronic rhinosinusitis? A computational fluid dynamics study of 29 patients.

Authors:  Kai Zhao; Jianbo Jiang; Edmund A Pribitkin; Pamela Dalton; David Rosen; Brian Lyman; Karen K Yee; Nancy E Rawson; Beverly J Cowart
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 3.858

7.  Velocity profiles measured for airflow through a large-scale model of the human nasal cavity.

Authors:  I Hahn; P W Scherer; M M Mozell
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  1993-11

8.  In vitro experiments and numerical simulations of airflow in realistic nasal airway geometry.

Authors:  Céline Croce; Redouane Fodil; Marc Durand; Gabriela Sbirlea-Apiou; Georges Caillibotte; Jean-François Papon; Jean-Robert Blondeau; André Coste; Daniel Isabey; Bruno Louis
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2006-05-05       Impact factor: 3.934

9.  On locating the obstruction in the upper airway via numerical simulation.

Authors:  Yong Wang; S Elghobashi
Journal:  Respir Physiol Neurobiol       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 1.931

10.  Numerical simulation of airflow in the human nose.

Authors:  Ivo Weinhold; Gunter Mlynski
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2003-12-03       Impact factor: 2.503

View more
  32 in total

1.  Normative ranges of nasal airflow variables in healthy adults.

Authors:  Azadeh A T Borojeni; Guilherme J M Garcia; Masoud Gh Moghaddam; Dennis O Frank-Ito; Julia S Kimbell; Purushottam W Laud; Lisa J Koenig; John S Rhee
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Virtual septoplasty: a method to predict surgical outcomes for patients with nasal airway obstruction.

Authors:  Masoud Gh Moghaddam; Guilherme J M Garcia; Dennis O Frank-Ito; Julia S Kimbell; John S Rhee
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2020-02-20       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Computational fluid dynamics after endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery-possible empty nose syndrome in the context of middle turbinate resection.

Authors:  Guillermo Maza; Chengyu Li; Jillian P Krebs; Bradley A Otto; Alexander A Farag; Ricardo L Carrau; Kai Zhao
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 3.858

4.  Investigation of the abnormal nasal aerodynamics and trigeminal functions among empty nose syndrome patients.

Authors:  Chengyu Li; Alexander A Farag; Guillermo Maza; Sam McGhee; Michael A Ciccone; Bhakthi Deshpande; Edmund A Pribitkin; Bradley A Otto; Kai Zhao
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 3.858

5.  Asymptomatic vs symptomatic septal perforations: a computational fluid dynamics examination.

Authors:  Chengyu Li; Guillermo Maza; Alexander A Farag; Jillian P Krebs; Bhakthi Deshpande; Bradley A Otto; Kai Zhao
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 3.858

6.  Computational fluid dynamic analysis of aggressive turbinate reductions: is it a culprit of empty nose syndrome?

Authors:  Jennifer Malik; Chengyu Li; Guillermo Maza; Alexander A Farag; Jillian P Krebs; Sam McGhee; Gabriela Zappitelli; Bhakthi Deshpande; Bradley A Otto; Kai Zhao
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2019-05-11       Impact factor: 3.858

7.  Quantification of tissue-engineered trachea performance with computational fluid dynamics.

Authors:  Lauren Eichaker; Chengyu Li; Nakesha King; Victoria Pepper; Cameron Best; Ekene Onwuka; Eric Heuer; Kai Zhao; Jonathan Grischkan; Christopher Breuer; Jed Johnson; Tendy Chiang
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Modeling congenital nasal pyriform aperture stenosis using computational fluid dynamics.

Authors:  Tirth R Patel; Chengyu Li; Jillian Krebs; Kai Zhao; Prashant Malhotra
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 1.675

9.  Peak Sinus Pressures During Sneezing in Healthy Controls and Post-Skull Base Surgery Patients.

Authors:  Zhenxing Wu; John R Craig; Guillermo Maza; Chengyu Li; Bradley A Otto; Alexander A Farag; Ricardo L Carrau; Kai Zhao
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  The cotton test redistributes nasal airflow in patients with empty nose syndrome.

Authors:  Jennifer Malik; Andrew Thamboo; Sachi Dholakia; Nicole A Borchard; Sam McGhee; Chengyu Li; Kai Zhao; Jayakar V Nayak
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 3.858

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.