| Literature DB >> 35754761 |
Giovanni Barone1, Annamaria Buonomano1,2, Cesare Forzano1, Giovanni Francesco Giuzio1, Adolfo Palombo1.
Abstract
In the last years, the Covid-19 outbreak raised great awareness about ventilation system performance in confined spaces. Specifically, the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system design and operating parameters, such as air change per hour, air recirculation ratio, filtration device performance, and vents location, play a crucial role in reducing the spread of viruses, moulds, bacteria, and general pollutants. Concerning the transport sector, due to the impracticability of social distancing, and the relatively loose requirements of ventilation standards, the SARS-COV-19 outbreak brought a reduction of payload (up to 50%) for different carriers. Specifically, this has been particularly severe for the railway sector, where train coaches are typically characterized by relatively elevated occupancy and high recirculation ratios. In this framework, to improve the Indoor Air Quality and reduce the Covid-19 contagion risk in railway carriages, the present paper investigates the energy, economic and environmental feasibility of diverse ventilation strategies. To do so, a novel dynamic simulation tool for the complete dynamic performance investigation of trains was developed in an OpenStudio environment. To assess the Covid-19 contagion risk connected to the investigated scenarios, the Wells-Riley model has been adopted. To prove the proposed approach's capabilities and show the Covid-19 infection risk reduction potentially achievable by varying the adopted ventilation strategies, a suitable case study related to an existing medium-distance train operating in South/Central Italy is presented. The conducted numerical simulations return interesting results providing also useful design criteria.Entities:
Keywords: Covid-19; Dynamic simulation; Energy efficiency; HVAC system; Train
Year: 2022 PMID: 35754761 PMCID: PMC9212767 DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.124466
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Energy (Oxf) ISSN: 0360-5442 Impact factor: 8.857
Fig. 14Environmental impact in terms of CO2 emission for all the considered case studies.
Fig. 1Workflow of the adopted method.
Fig. 2HVAC system layout.
Fig. 3Train 3D model.
Investigated train main data.
| Length | ||
| Width | 2.80 | m |
| Height | 4.30 | m |
| Floor area | 87.48 | m2 |
| Volume | 169.75 | m3 |
| Lower floor height | 0.38 | m |
| Intermediate floor height | 1.20 | m |
| Upper floor height | 2.35 | m |
Coach envelope main data.
| Carriage envelope component | Solar fraction [−] | |
|---|---|---|
| Wall | 0.87 | – |
| Roof | 0.87 | – |
| Floor | 1.8 | – |
| Windows | 1.3 | <0.3 |
Cooling system features.
| Cooling Stage | Partial load ratio | Total Cooling Power | Sensible Cooling Power | EIR = 1/COP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [%] | [kW] | [kW] | [−] | |
| I | 41 | 25.20 | 18.14 | 0.867 |
| II | 59 | 36.00 | 25.92 | 0.700 |
| III | 82 | 50.40 | 36.28 | 0.539 |
| IV | 100 | 61.20 | 44.06 | 0.488 |
Heating system features.
| Heating Stage | Partial load ratio | Heating Power |
|---|---|---|
| [%] | [Kw] | |
| I | 33 | 18.81 |
| II | 66 | 37.62 |
| III | 100 | 57.00 |
Fig. 4Variable setpoint.
Heating and Cooling stage activation thresholds.
| Stage | Heating temperature offset | Cooling temperature offset | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stage 1 | 1.5 | 0.5 | ||
| Stage 2 | 2.0 | 1.0 | ||
| Stage 3 | 2.5 | 1.5 | ||
| Stage 4 | – | – | 2.0 | |
Ventilation system feature.
| Occupancy | Passengers | Fresh air flow rate (per person) | Fresh air total flow rate (total) | Total flow rate | ACH | ARR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [−] | [m3/h pp] | [m3/h] | [Vol/h] | [%] | ||||
| Maximum | 154 | 20 | 3080 | 8800 | 18 | 65 | ||
| Minimum | 62 (or less) | 1240 | 7 | 85 | ||||
Fig. 5Train itinerary.
Fig. 6Occupancy schedule.
Heat recovery features.
| Parameter | Value | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Plate spacing | 2.13 | mm |
| Plate length | 549 | mm |
| Plate height | 549 | mm |
| Plate thickness | 0.13 | mm |
| Casing outside length | 567 | mm |
| Casing outside height | 567 | mm |
| Nominal pressure drops | 200 | Pa |
| Nominal efficiency | 0.6 | – |
Recap of proposed ventilation strategies.
| Investigated system | Total flow rate | Recirculated air | Outdoor air | ACH | Heat Recovery |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [m3/h] | [m3/h per person] | [−] | [−] | ||
| RS | 8800 | 7560 | 20 | 7/18 | No |
| PS1 | 8800 | 0 | 57 | 51 | No |
| PS1.1 | 8800 | 0 | 57 | 51 | Yes |
| PS2 | 5390 | 0 | 35 | 31 | No |
| PS2.1 | 5390 | 0 | 35 | 31 | Yes |
Breathing rate and quanta emission rate for diverse activities.
| IR | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Activity | [m3/h] | ||
| Sitting (s) | 0.49 | 14.3 | 16.5 |
| Standing (st) | 0.54 | 15.8 | 18.2 |
Fig. 7CO2 concentration time histories for all the investigated systems.
Covid-19 contagion risk probability (1 infectious passenger).
| Investigated system | ACH | No mask | Surgical mask | N95 mask |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Probability of infection | ||||
| [%] | ||||
| RS | 2.38 | 0.84 | 0.02 | |
| PS2/PS1.2 | 1.42 (−40%) | 0.50 (−40%) | 0.01 (−50%) | |
| PS1/PS1.1 | 0.88 (−63%) | 0.31 (−63%) | 0.01 (−50%) | |
Covid-19 contagion risk probability (5 infectious passengers).
| Investigated system | ACH | No mask | Surgical mask | N95 mask |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Probability of infection | ||||
| [%] | ||||
| RS | 11.35 | 4.13 | 0.12 | |
| PS2/PS1.2 | 6.91 (−39%) | 2.48 (−39%) | 0.07 (−42%) | |
| PS1/PS1.1 | 4.32 (−62%) | 1.53 (−63%) | 0.04 (−66%) | |
Fig. 8RS temperature time histories for a typical winter (left) and a typical summer (right) days.
Fig. 9PS1 and PS1.1 temperature time histories for a typical winter (left) and a typical summer (right) days.
Fig. 10PS2 and PS2.1 temperature time histories for a typical winter (left) and a typical summer (right) days.
Fig. 11Thermal energy demand for space heating and space cooling for all the considered case studies.
Fig. 12Yearly electricity demand for all the considered case studies.
Fig. 13Proposed vs. reference systems OPEX increases.
Overall electric energy demand for all the investigated case studies.
| RS | PS1 | PS1.1 | PS2 | PS2.1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [MWhel/y] | |||||
| Fan | 8.2 | 8.2 | 9.2 | 6.6 | 7.6 |
| Space heating and cooling | 33.1 | 86.6 | 44.9 | 65.8 | 34.9 |
| Total | 41.3 | 94.8 | 54.1 | 72.4 | 42.5 |
Investigated scenarios economic results.
| System | CAPEX | OPEX | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ce = 0.06 €/kWhel | Ce = 0.16 €/kWhel | ||
| [k€] | [k€/y] | ||
| RS | – | 2.5 | 6.6 |
| PS1 | – | 5.7 | 15.2 |
| PS1.1 | 2.4 | 3.2 | 8.7 |
| PS2 | – | 4.3 | 11.6 |
| PS2.1 | 2.4 | 2.6 | 6.8 |