Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 225
Appendix A
A COMPUTER MODEL
FOR ASSESSING AIRLINER CABIN AIR QUALITY
Full understanding of cabin air quality requires,
among other things, the monitoring of various pollutant
concentrations. That is difficult and costly, because
so many different pollutants require different monitoring
devices and protocols. It would not be cost-effective
to study all possible pollutants, although similarities
in the sources and sinks of some pollutants would
eliminate the necessity of monitoring all of them, and
some pollutants are likely to be present in such low
concentrations as to be unmeasurable and unimportant
with respect to health or welfare.
The prohibitive cost of an extensive monitoring
program suggests that we look for a different approach
to assessing cabin air quality. A model of cabin air
quality could serve adequately as an investigative
tool. An accurate, validated model could be used to
pinpoint potential problems and to study the sensitivity
of pollutant concentrations to various control measures.
The costs associated with control methods can be
estimated with a separate model. With the results of
modeling pointing the way, the attack on the problem
could be more focused.
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT
The model must account for the important aspects of
cabin air quality. It must be flexible enough to be
used for various types of pollutants with different
source profiles, temporal patterns, and health
implications. It must be accessible to persons
unfamiliar with mathematical or computer modeling. In
fact, the details of the model need not be known to the
user; only the outcome need be analyzed.
22S
OCR for page 226
226
The question to be answered is simply stated: Given
a few external characteristics, estimate the
concentration of a pollutant in the cabin. Several
physical characteristics are available to the modeler.
Aircraft volumes and air-movement systems are well
defined. Ventilation of the cabin is an energy-using
process, the engineering designs are well optimized, and
data are available. Information on air recirculation
and filtering is also available, as is information on
the source strengths of some of the pollutants, such as
carbon dioxide and water vapor from humans, tobacco
smoke, and ozone. Less is known about others, such as
volatile organic compounds emitted from materials,
insecticides, or cleaning agents.
Other input data for the model are not readily
available. These include information on air-mass
movements between compartments in the cabin, rates of
loss of reactive chemicals, and chemical deposition
rates. These qualities can be estimated, but an
effective model must include the ability to perform
sensitivity analyses for them. Ideally, it should be
possible to perform sensitivity analyses as the need
arises for all quantities on which little information is
available or for which design specifications are not met.
Once the potential input data are known, selection
of a model type can begin. The most appropriate type of
model for this application should be based on the general
mass-balance approach. All mechanisms for production and
loss of the pollutant are accounted for properly, and the
change in concentration per unit time is the difference
between the two:
dC/dt = P - LO,
where
C = concentration of pollutant,
t = time,
P = rate of production of pollutant, and
L = rate of loss of pollutant.
At equilibrium, dC/dt = 0--production rate equals loss
rate. Solving for the concentration gives:
C = P/L.
(1)
(2)
,i
OCR for page 227
227
Note that the ratio 1/L is a measure of the lifetime of
the exponential approach to equilibrium. Small rates of
loss imply a slow approach to equilibrium;,large rates
of loss suggest that equilibrium will be established
rapidly and will prevail.
Figure A-1 is a schematic of a single component of a
multibox model of an aircraft. The model consists of
essentially separate boxes, each containing its own ,
production and loss mechanisms. Production mechanisms
include pollutant presence in circulating air (Ri) and
local source (Si). Potential production mechanisms
from reactive chemistry can be added, although they are
probably unimportant. Loss mechanisms include leakage
(Li), main recirculating flow (Fi), and first-order
losses from deposition or other processes (Ki). An
assumed local equilibrium is established in each. A '
degree of communication is established between adjacent
boxes only because of the presence of small forward and
backward airflow terms (fi and bi). These terms act
an additional loss mechanisms for the box in question,
whereas terms from adjacent boxes act as production
mechanisms.
Rj
- 1
bj
Lj
hi/
l
Vi, Sit, Kj
FIGURE A-1 Schematic of single component of
multibox model of aircraft cabin air quality.
text for explanation of symbols.
i+1
OCR for page 228
228
The cabin itself is coupled to another system within
the aircraft, the air cleaning system. Figure A-2 is a
schematic of the aircraft as a whole. Note that the
cabin can be considered to be a single compartment (box
0), with polluted air leaving the cabin (F) and entering
the air cleaning system. There a portion of the
polluted air (E) is exhausted, and the remainder is
filtered, mixed with ambient makeup air (m), and
returned to the cabin (R) as the supply air.
Conservation of mass requires that F ~ L ~ E = m + R.
where L is the amount leaked from the cabin to the
atmosphere.
More complicated systems require more complicated
analysis. If all pollutants are generated in one place,
but other placer are of interest, more boxes are needed
to describe the system. As the system becomes more
~/ 1
Box OBo ( 1 30x 2
TRo~ {R1 R21 l
1
R
~ 1
m E
F3
_
L3
_
41 V3, S 3,K 3
b3
Box 3
-l
R3
FIGURE A-2 Schematic of aircraft with air cleaning
system. See text for explanation of symbols.
F
OCR for page 229
229
complex, more information is needed for the model. Data
on exchange of air from one box to another must be
obtained. Analysis of the results also becomes more
complex. Figure A-3 illustrates the detailed physical
model schematically. In thin case, four of the detailed
boxes are coupled within the cabin. Note that no
forward flow (fi) is allowed out of the foremost
compartment, nor is any backward flow (bi) allowed out
of the rearmost compartment. This physical model is
very general. Each compartment can have any volume
(Vi) deemed appropriate. Preferential flow can be
effected by manipulating the relative magnitudes Of fi
and bit Differential source strengths can also be
implemented. Additionally, control strategies and their
economic impacts can be investigated.
R
1 ~
Cabin
_ ~
Box O ~
Air Cleaning
System
80,`1 6
E m
k
Restriction: F + L + E = m + R
. .
!~
F
FIGURE A-3 Schematic of coupled components for multibox
model of aircraft cabin air quality. See text for
explanation of symbols.
OCR for page 230
230
MATHEMATICAL DEVELOPMENT
The determination of the concentrations in each of
the compartments in the model described above requires
the simultaneous solution of coupled, first-order linear
differential equations obtained from Equation 1. At
equilibrium, the solution is easily cast into the form
of a matrix equation. Because of the nature of the
physical model--i.e., interaction of adjacent boxes
only--the mathematical form in tractable. Solutions can
be obtained quickly and accurately for a large number of
interacting boxes.
To describe the system, start with an expansion of
Equation 1 for the ith box.
dt V, + Vj + Vj - Vj (me + /. + b. + Fj) + Ki
The restrictions on fi and hi apply. At equilibrium,
all dCi/dt vanish, and the matrix equation becomes (for
a four-compartment case):
Vo (I + fo + Fo) + Ko _ To
o
o
(3)
o
-vl v~(~1 +f1 +F1)+ K1 -A
cO
cl
c2
- v, v, (L3 ~ f3 + F3) ~ K3 1 Cs
o
o
- ~2 V2 (L2 + f2 + F2) + K2 - ~2
o
=
Vo (5° + ROCr)
(S1 + R1 Cr)
V3 (S2 + RACY)
Ve, (S3 + R3Cr)
(4)
where Cr represents the concentration of pollutant in
the recirculated air. This system has a tridiagonal
form and can be solved efficiently with LU factorization.
The coupled cabin and air cleaning system is solved
first, with an explicit solution of the two-by-two form.
OCR for page 231
231
OPERATING PROCEDURES
The cabin air quality simulation model Cabinair is
designed to be user-friendly and self-documenting. The
operator specifies whole aircraft parameters as listed
in Table A-1. Any of these parameters can be changed
through commands. It is important, however, that
consistency checks be made to ensure mass balance, etc.
A warning is displayed when, for example, total flow in
exceeds total flow out. Table A-1 lists a standard set
of parameters programed as default values. These are
appropriate for an L-1011 with four compartments and
tobacco smoke as the pollutant of interest.
TABLE A-1
Parameters for Whole Aircraft with L-1011
Four-Zone Parameterization
Parameter
Volume
Recirculation
Leak rate
Net flow rate
Deposition
Source rate
Exhaust flow
Makeup flow
Outdoor concentration
Number of boxes
Value
450.0 m3
150.0 m3/min
10.0 m3/min
140.0 m3/min
0.0033/min
83.3300 mg/min
140.0 m3/min
150.0 m3/min
0.01000 mg/m3
SIMULATING AIRLINER AIR QUALITY
The Cabinair model was used to simulate the steady-
state concentrations of environmental tobacco smoke,
carbon dioxide, and water vapor in multiple zones of
three aircraft: B-727-200, B-767-20O9 and MD-80. Flow
parameters were developed from the technical ventilation
specifications of the aircraft. Figures A-4, A-5, and
A-6 show the outside-air supply, recirculation, and
controlled and uncontrolled leakage for these three
aircraft.
The B-727-200 (Figure A-4) has a straightforward
once-through ventilation system. The ECUs deliver 240
cfm, 350 cfm, and 2,235 cfm to the cockpit, first-
class section, and coach sections respectively. The
OCR for page 232
232
112
Exhaust from
Lavatories and Galley
/ Cockpit
130
Exhaust from
Lavatories and Galley
First Class
~ Cargo Bay I/ I.; ~,/;
~ I
240 F 1 350 F
350
Avionics
Cooling
{Exhaust)
2,2 35 F 1 050
Leakage 883
Exhaust
300
Cargo
Heat
(Exhaust)
FIGURE A-4 B-727-200 cabin airflow distribution, cfm.
All outside air. F. outside air. Uniform supply in
cabin. Exhaust uniform at floor level. Leakage assumed
uniform at 1,050 cfm. Arrows show direction of airflow.
Based on information from Boeing (personal communication,
1985) and Lorengo and Porter.3
outside air delivered to the passenger sections (first
class and coach) is assumed to be delivered uniformly
over the entire length of the cabin. Air is discharged
through both controlled and uncontrolled vents. The aft
exhaust valve is used to control pressure and discharges
883 cfm. Avionics, cargo, lavatory, and galley vents
(forward and aft) discharge a total of 892 cfm. There
is leakage of 1,050 cfm.
The B-767-200 (Figure A-5) has a more complex
ventilation system. The 2,388 cfm from the ECUs is
mixed with 2,388 cfm of filtered recirculation air from
the forward cabin and delivered to the cockpit and to
the overhead air vents in the cabin. The overboard
discharge manifold draws air from lavatories, galleys,
and the aft avionics compartments, which then mixes with
floor-level cabin exhaust and is discharged overboard.
The MD-80 ventilation system (Figure A-6) is
different from either of the other two. The cockpit is
supplied only with outside air. Recirculation air is
drawn from along the floor of both first-class and coach
sections of the passenger cabin and is mixed with outside
air. This mixed air is then delivered to the first-class
and coach sections
-
OCR for page 233
233
~ ,
tic
AX
~-
bc
o E
t)
rot
+1
IL
-.
___
G
^+1
r, ~
._ ~
._
c
&~ ..
E ~
o ~
_
..
-
~ o
o s
_ ~
.
_
E
1
W
o
_
of;
~-
· ........
-
-
C He
~X
..
o
J
1
X
to
c
m
E,o
-
A x
~ UJ
' /\ ~
c
o
-
~i
/
bus
-~=
~C
IL
~ X
'~.
, -
~ E ~ ~
r
~ 1
. 1
. ~
C)
Ul
..
.~ ,
~ ..
.............. ' ............
l
c
g
.G
C ~
8 ° s
1~
.., ~
~ &
._
`] -.
. / /
/
a'
r~
r~
LL
a'
r~
N
00
O
C)
O
·
d ~ ~
O O E]
C)
~ C)
d d
O
~ O
o d
~ o
_#
d c, oo
~ o
u3
·
a~
C~
o
,,,
e
-
.
_ ,0
O ~
. .
0
0
C~
1
`0 ~
1 0
o
U~
1
o
g
~Q
_
0
C)
C)
_ ~
CY
C)
o
· 0
d
o
CO
· ~
~ V
o o
~o
C~
o
OD
d
o
~ o
A3
s
~ a'
OCR for page 234
234
a,
=
E c
o to
it. ~
_ . _
, _
o X
_m
a,
-
-
C,
c
._
o
,
o
-
~ cat
U. IL -
on ~
.
too, ~
-
- C
~ T1''0
. _- ~
C)
-
o ~
._ Y
m
o.
Q.
4-
a) c
W' -' ii'
o ~
J
d
o
V
cs o
C)
C)
~U
-
-
-
:'
.O
* -
d
~s
o
· ~o
d
o ~
~ o
- .
~,
d
~s
· ~
o
e.
C)
o,
o
U~
C~
o
o C~
0
C)
-
~ 3
_ ~
d
o C
d
· o
C) ~
o _
0
3
. ~
o
o~
cs oo
~ 0
o .
d ~ d
o
~ O.=
C~ ~ C~
o o'
1 ~ O
oo
`8 ~
1 c.
¢
C~
_ ~
-
g
o
.
~4
s~
o
P~
OCR for page 235
235
With these data and standard configuration diagrams
available from Trans World Airlines (Figures A-7, A-8,
and A-9), a volume-weighted partitioning of the flows
was made. The volume of a given zone was assumed to be
directly proportional to the linear dimension of the
zone as a fraction of the total length of the aircraft.
Generally, after the initial partitioning, flow
imbalances remained. These imbalances were eliminated
by allowing forward or backward flow to or from adjacent
zones to compensate for an excess or deficiency of air
movement. Flows were thus balanced to within
approximately 1 m3/min over the entire aircraft.
The source strengths used in the simulations were
as follows. For respirable particles, cigarette smoke
is the prima An source. An active smoker produces
/ COCkDit \
Closet - ~
1 - CD
2- m ~
3- 12@ 0~
4- m m
Closet- ~ cm
6-pita ~E|FI
7_ I, 1 i 1 mutt
8 - ! ' ! 1 ~ ~ ,
a_ TV ~
10- ~ 1; 1 1;; !
11- mu! 1 I,;
12, ~ ~ ! 1 1 1 i '
:~ ~ 1 i ! [ ! ~ '
5- 1 i i 1 [ 1 i 1
6- [~1 C::
7~1lii ~1
8 -I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
19- ~ 1 1 i 1
20- ~ i i to
2 1 -|Trl
23- ~t ~ 1;;
24- =2 ~ I
25- ~1 1 i
26- 1~ 1 1 ' 1
GalleY- ~
r t Lavatory
Galley
Galley
-27
~ -28
Gstiev~ i I I ~29
Auxiliary ~I ! I 1 1~30
Service Bar ~:
Lavat
~ -
Zone
Rows Seats Crew
Flight Deck
First Class Lavatory and Galley
First Class Non-Smoking
First Class Smoking
Coach Non Smoking
Coach Transition
Coach Smoking
Coach Lavatory and Galley
13 8 1
4 4
519 81 2
20 21 12
22-30 41 1
FIGURE A-7 Standard B-727-200
interior arrangement. Numbers
of rows allotted for smoking
can be increased or reduced
according to demand for non-
smoking seats. Figure reprinted
with permission from Trans World
Airlines. 4
OCR for page 236
236
rpapirable particles at approximately 3 mg/min. On the
average ? a smoker smokes 2 cigarettes/in and takes 10
min/clgareete, thus smoking one-third of the time. The
scenarios investigated include an average state in which
one-third of the smokers are smoking or every smoker is
smoking at one-third the maximal rate. At a maximum, all
smokers are smoking simultaneously. For carbon dioxide,
a source strength of 0.5 L/min per person is used (a
source strength of 0.5 L/min per person is used to
approximate the proportions of active crewmembers and
sedentary passengers). 2 ASHRAE user 0.3 L/min.l The
figure of 0.5 L/min is equivalent to 760 mg/min per
person. A sedentary person, such as a passenger,
A
/ Cockpit \
Lavatory tall
6-
7-
8-
9_
1 0-
1 1 _
12 _
/
Galley
Lavato rv
s ,, .
, I ,,
...._
m ~ m
~ Em, m
m , , , m
m m m
m Ill
Em, m
m m m
m LL] m
18-t
19 - ~1
20- m t111 m
21- m ~ m
22- m cm m
m m: m
27 - m 1 1 1 1 m
23- m mm m
33_ m mm m
335- m An, m
Lavatory- Em,, [E
Closet
Movie Screen
- 1
_ Movie Screen
~ 6
- 7
-8
_ 9
-10
-11
~12
1 4^ Closet
Lavatory
Movie Screen
- 18
-19
-20
-21
-22
-23
-24
-25
As_
-26
-27
-28
-29
-30
-3 1
-32
-33
-34
_35
-36
Lavatory
Galley
37'
Galley ~ Galley
\~L Galley
Zone
Rows Seats Crew
Flight Deck
First Class Lavatory and Galley
First Class Non-Smoking
First Class Smoking
Business Non-Smoking
Business Smoking
Business Lavatory and Galley
Coach Non-Smoking
Coach Transition
Coach Smoking
Coach Lavatory and Galley
1-2 12
3 6
6-10 30
~ 1-14 16
18-27
28-29
30-37
67
18
48
l
1
1
FIGURE A-8 Standard B-767-200
interior arrangement. Numbers of
rows allotted for smoking can be
increased or reduced according to
demand for nonsmoking seats.
Figure reprinted with permission
from Trans World Airlines.4
OCR for page 237
237
produces water vapor at 700 mg/min, whereas an active
person, such as a crew member, produces 2,000 mg/min.
Ambient concentrations of particles, carbon dioxide,
and water are 0.010 ~g/m3, 330 ppm, and 1.5 g/kg of air,
respectively. Changing these values (by filtration) will
alter the results only slightly for respirable particles,
but might have larger effects for carbon dioxide and
water vapor.
Data in Tables A-1 through A-3 are for aircraft in
the standard configuration, including normal
recirculation and full occupancy with all packs running.
Table A-4 presents data on the MD-80 aircraft, assuming,
for comparative purposes, no recirculation. Table A-5
presents data on the B-767-200 aircraft with no
recirculation, and Table A-6 presents data on the
B-767-200 aircraft, assuming standard operating
conditions, but only 60% occupancy.
L L - Galley
Navahos ~ r
Closets 3 ~
1- 1~ ~1
23_ m m Zone Rows Seats Crew
_ _ Flight Deck - - 2
6- m cat First Class Lavatory and Galley - - -
. ~ ~ First Class Non-Smoking 1-2 8 1
3 _ ~ First Class Smoking 3 4
9 ~ Cow Coach Non-Smoking 5-22 85 2
To G ~ ~ 1 Coach Transition 23 24 10
', Q 1 . - ! Coach Smoking 25 33 35 1
72 m ~ cO h Lavatory and Galley
,4 Q ~ ~ I ac
15 ~ If
'6 ~ ~
77 m Hi
18_ m
^9 ~ f i ! I
20 m all
21 am CD'
22- m AD
23- m coal
24- C t~T1 _
'~ m in
26- m cod FIGURE A-9 Standard MD-80
28- m G 29 interior arrangement. Numbers
Ga''ev ~ ~ 30 of rows allotted for smoking
Ga''ev ~ C3 32 can be increased or reduced
'-Kiev- ~ ~ 33 according to demand for non
LavaTorV - _ _ - Lavatory
~=i smoking seats. Figure
reprinted with permission from
tlB Trans World Airlines.4
OCR for page 238
238
Generally, when air is recirculated, the
concentrations of pollutants increase. As occupancy
decreases, the concentrations of pollutants decrease.
Although it is not exact, one can approximate both these
phenomena as linear; i.e., 50% recirculation will result
in doubling the pollutant concentrations, and 50X
occupancy will halve the concentrations.
TABLE A-2
Calculated Concentrations of Various Pollutants
on Simulated B-727-200 Aircraft
Relative
Environmental Tobacco Humidity
Smoke, m~/n~3CO2, (Water
Zonea AverageMaximumC Dam Valor), TO
Cockpit 0.0100.010 517 7.8
First-class
lavatory
and galley 0.0100.010 435 5.5
First-class
nonsmoking 0.0100.010 919 8.7
First-class
smoking 1.3023.886 1,178 10.8
Coach nonsmoking 0.0580.154 1,284 10.9
Coach transition 0.0180.034 1,373 11.6
Coach smoking 2.2436.708 1,367 11.6
Coach lavatory
and galley 0.2990.876 484 4.4
Whole aircraftd 0.5601.661 1,139 10.1
Volume averagede 0.5701.691 1,154 10.1
Supply air 0.0100.010 330 3.7
e
a Zones are examples of standard configuration zones;
100% occupancy assumed; no recirculation. Supply air
concentration is ambient concentration. CO2 and
water vapor concentrations assume temperature of 20°C.
b One-third of cigarette smokers smoking at any time
(2 cigarettes/in).
c All cigarette smokers on plane smoking at same time.
d Average concentration derived from arithmetic average
of zonal concentrations.
Derived from zonal concentrations weighted by volume.
OCR for page 239
239
TABLE A-3
Calculated Concentrations of Various Pollutants on
Simulated B-767-200 Aircraft
Zonea
Environmental Tobacco
Smoke, m~/m3 co2,
Average MaximumC
Relative
Humidity
(Water
pom Vapor,, %
Cockpit 0.297 0.872770 7.2
First-class
lavatory
and galley O.295 0.865770 6.7
First-class
nonsmoking 0.293 0.8601,240 10.3
First-class
smoking 1.196 3.5691,469 12.0
Business-class
nonsmoking O.471 1.3951,535 11.5
Business-class
smoking 1.998 5.9761,590 11.8
Business-class
lavatory and
galley 0.314 0.9231,140 8.2
Coach nonsmoking 0.293 0.8611,483 11.4
Coach transition 0.293 0.8611,773 13.7
Coach smoking 2.380 7.1221,662 12.8
Coach lavatory
and galley 0.660 1.9611,610 6.6
Whole aircraftd O.798 2.3751,354 10.5
Volume averagede 0.827 2.4611,389 10.7
Supply air 0.300 0.881707 6.2
a Zones are examples of standard configuration zones;
100X occupancy assumed; 50% of return air recirculated.
CO2 and water vapor concentrations assume temperature
of 20°C.
b One-third of cigarette smokers smoking at any time
(2 cigarettes/in).
C All cigarette smokers on plane smoking at same time.
d Average concentration derived from arithmetic average
of tonal concentrations.
e Derived from zonal concentrations weighted by volume
.
OCR for page 240
240
TABLE A-4
Calculated Concentrations of Various Pollutants on
Simulated MD-80 Aircraft
Relative
Environmental Tobacco Humidity
Smoke, ma/m3 C02, (Water
Zonea Average MaximumC Dpm Vapor), %
Cockpit 0.126 1.214 638 7.6
First-class
lavatory
and galley 0.125 0.784 599 6.3
First-class
nonsmoking 0.125 0.577 965 9.2
First-class
smoking 0.688 2.209 867 10.1
Coach nonsmoking 0.206 0.634 1,522 12.6
Coach transition 0.638 1.912 1,585 12.7
Coach smoking 2.237 6.710 1,452 11.9
Coach lavatory
and galley 0.124 0.370 540 4.5
Whole aircraftd O.631 1.968 1,329 11.2
Volume averagede O.593 1.850 1,270 10.8
Supply air 0.127 0.380 519 5.1
a Zones are examples of standard configuration zones;
100X occupancy assumed; 21X of return air recirculated.
CO2 and water vapor concentrations assume temperature
of 20°C.
b One-third of cigarette smokers smoking at any time
(2 cigarettes/in).
c All cigarette smokers on plane smoking at same time.
d Average concentration derived from arithmetic average
of zonal concentrations.
e Derived from zonal concentrations weighted by volume.
OCR for page 241
241
TABLE A-5
Calculated Concentrations of Varions Pollutants on
Simulated B-767-200 Aircraft with No Recirculation
Relative
Environmental Tobacco Humidity
Smoke, ma/m3 CO2, (Water
Zonea Average MaximumC Dam Vapor), X
Cockpit 0.010 0.010 393 4.9
Firnt-class
lavatory
and galley O.010 0.010 393 4.6
First-class
nonsmoking O.010 0.010 863 8.3
First-class
smoking 0.914 2.721 1,091 10.1
Business-class
nonsmoking 0.190 0.549 1,157 9.6
Busines~-class
smoking 1.717 5.131 1,212 9.9
Business-class
lavatory
and galley 0.315 0.075 762 6.3
Coach nonsmoking 0.010 0.010 1,105 9.4
Coach transition 0;010 0.010 1,394 11.7
Coach smoking 2.097 6.271 1,283 10.8
Coach lavatory
and galley 0.376 1.110 518 4.6
Whole aircraftd O.515 1.525 976 8.5
Volume averagede 0.544 1.611 1,011 8.7
Supply air 0.010 0.010 330 3.7
a Zones are examples of standard configuration zones;
100% occupancy assumed. CO2 and water vapor
concentrations assume temperature of 20°C.
b One-third of cigarette smokers smoking at any time
(2 cigarettes/in).
c All cigarette smokers on plane smoking at same time.
d Average concentration derived from arithmetic average
of zonal concentrations.
e Derived from zonal concentrations weighted by volume.
OCR for page 242
242
TABLE A-6
Calculated Concentrations of Various Pollutants
on Simulated B-767-200 Aircraft
with 60% Occupancy and 50% Recirculation
-
,Zonea
Environmental Tobacco
Smoke, m~/m3 co2,
Average MaximumC
Relative
Humidity
(Water
plum Vapor), TO
Cockpit 0.182 0.527 521 5.5
First-class
lavatory
and galley O.181 0.523 483 5.1
First-class
nonsmoking O.180 0.520 681 7.2
First-class
smoking 0.722 2.145 777 8.3
Business-class
nonsmoking 0.287 0.841 747 7.9
Business-class
smoking 1.203 3.589 760 8.1
Business-class
lavatory
and galley 0.192 0.558 563 6.0
Coach nonsmoking 0.180 0.520 747 7.9
Coach transition 0.180 0.520 877 9.3
Coach smoking 1.432 4.277 827 8.8
Coach lavatory
and galley 0.400 1.180 473 5.0
Whole aircraftd 0.483 1.525 693 7.5
Volume averagede O.500 1.429 706 7.5
Supply air 0.184 0.533 474 5.0
a Zones are examples of standard configuration zones.
CO2 and water vapor concentrations assume temperature
of 20°C.
b One-third of cigarette smokers smoking at any time
(2 cigarettes/in).
c All cigarette smokers on plane smoking at same time.
d Average concentration derived from arithmetic average
of zonal concentrations.
e Derived from zonal concentrations weighted by volume.
OCR for page 243
243
REFERENCES
1. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and
Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. ASHRAE Standard:
Ventilation for Acceptable Air Quality. ASHRAE
62-1981. Atlanta, Gal: American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers, Inc., 1981.
2. Balvanz, J., S. C. Bowman, A. Fobelets, T. Lee, K.
Papamichael, and R. Yoder. Examination of the
Cabin Environment of Commercial Aircraft. Ames,
Iowa: Iowa State University, 1982.
3. Lorengo, D. E., and A. Porter. Aircraft
Ventilation Systems Study: Final Report.
DTFA-03-84-CO-0084. Atlantic City, N.J.: U.S.
Federal Aviation Administration Technical Center,
1985. (draft)
4. Trans World Airlines. TWA Aircraft Seating
Guide. New York, N.Y.: Trans World Airlines,
1984.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
coach transition
