Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Research Paper

Computational modeling of particle transport and distribution emitted

from a Laserjet printer in a ventilated room with different ventilation
configurations
Mehrzad Ansaripour, Morteza Abdolzadeh ⇑, Saleh Sargazizadeh
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Graduate University of Advanced Technology, Kerman, Iran

h i g h l i g h t s

The distribution of emitted particles form a laserjet printer was studied in the breathing zone.

Effects of different ventilation configurations on the breathing zone concentration were investigated.

Mixing ventilation system has a low mean particle concentration in the breathing zone.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the present research, computational modeling of particle transport and distribution emitted from a
Received 3 February 2016 Laserjet printer was carried out in a ventilated room. A seated manikin was integrated into the study
Revised 25 April 2016 room and the manikin was evaluated in two cases: heated and unheated. Effects of different ventilation
Accepted 25 April 2016
configurations of the room on the particle distribution were studied, including three displacement
Available online 26 April 2016
ventilation systems and a mixing ventilation system. The printer was located on different sides of the
manikin and the particle concentrations in the breathing zone of the manikin due to the printer’s parti-
Keywords:
cles were evaluated in all the ventilation configurations. The averaged particle concentration in the
Printer
Ventilation
breathing zone of the manikin was calculated and validated with the experimental and numerical data
Heated manikin available in the literature. The results of the present study showed that in case of the heated manikin,
Transport the particle concentration due to the printer pollutants is significant in the breathing zone of the manikin.
Particle The results also showed that when the printer is located on the front side of the manikin, the particle con-
Distribution centration in the breathing zone is quite high in most of the used ventilation configurations. Furthermore,
it was found that the mixing ventilation system has a lower mean particle concentration in the breathing
zone compared to the most displacement ventilation systems.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Nowadays, many people are spending the majority of their day
times in indoor spaces and are highly affected by the emitting
particles released from copier machines and printers [1,2]. The
electronics and computer engineering systems have been exten-
sively used in the mankind life since their early development.
These systems emit particles in indoor places and are known as
an active source of particle generation as these systems, mostly
release volatile and semi-volatile particles while they are working.
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Mechanical Engineering, Graduate
University of Advanced Technology, End of Haft Bagh Highway, Kerman, Iran.
E-mail addresses: m.abdolzadeh@kgut.ac.ir, mo.abdolzadeh@gmail.com
(M. Abdolzadeh).
These particles have different patterns and effects on the breathing
zone of the human body based on the ventilation configurations
and the location of a printer in rooms. These matters are very
important to select the right ventilation systems and also the posi-
tion of the printer in the room. The past studies [3,4] have indi-
cated a tight relationship between the level of emitting pollutant
particles and the adverse health effects such as early death and
hospitalization (short term effects) plus lung cancer and cardiovas-
cular diseases (long term effects).
Indoor air quality (IAQ) is highly dependent on the number of
particles penetrating into the indoor places from outside or inside
spaces. In recent years, it has been indicated that the particles
emitted from printers affect the indoor air quality of offices [5,6].
General characteristics of printer’s emissions like particle concen-
tration and particle deposition rate can be experimentally

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.04.137
1359-4311/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933
Nomenclature
Ain inlet register area (m2)
C particle concentration (kg/m3)
C0 inlet particle concentration (kg/m3)
Cc Cunningham coefficient
Cva volume averaged concentration (kg/m3)
Cpa plane averaged particle number concentration (kg/m3)
d Particle diameter (lm)
Gi Gaussian random number with zero-mean
g gravitational acceleration (m/s2)
k turbulent kinetic energy (m2/s2)
nj the stochastic phenomenon of the Brownian diffusion
n number of particles that move across the plane having
an area of A
N number of injected particles
p the air pressure (pa)
Rep Reynolds number based on velocity of particles relative
to air
S ratio of particle density to fluid density
ti the particle residence time (s)
Tf fluid absolute temperature (K)
T the sampling time (s)
T1 ambient temperature (K)
tp relaxation time (s)
u, v, w velocity components (m/s)
measured in an experimental enclosed box. However, this determi-
nation of particle transportation and distribution is quite hard to
achieve. This issue essences using computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) as a useful tool to help understanding of the emitted pollu-
tant particle behavior better. So far, many studies have been exper-
imentally carried out in order to clarify the printer emission
characteristics. For instance, Lee et al. investigated the emissions
rate of pollutants from different types of office equipment. They
showed that the emissions of ozone and VOC in laser printers are
significantly higher than that of ink-jet printers [7]. Kagi et al.
monitored the air contamination released from a laser printer/
ink-jet printer in a room. Their results confirmed an increase of
the ozone concentration and ultrafine particle numbers in the
printing processes [8]. He conducted an experiment and measured
particle number concentrations and PM2.5 emissions from printers
in a large open-plan office. They revealed that the particles gener-
ated by printers can significantly affect the levels of sub-
micrometer particle number concentration in the office [9]. Hugo
et al. reviewed available information on emission rates and also
ambient concentrations of various pollutants which were related
to office equipment use. The evaluated office equipments were
computers (desktops and notebooks), printers (laser, ink-jet and
all-in-one machines), and photocopier machines. They identified
the toxicological substances significant in order to prepare a guide
for evaluating their potential importance with respect to human
exposures [5]. Morawska et al. carried out an experimental
research which determined the particle composition, particle
formation mechanism, and emission rate of Laserjet printers. They
indicated that the emission rates of ultrafine particles of the
printers are directly due to the Fuser temperature. They also
showed that the particles are volatile and have a secondary nature,
being formed in the air from volatile organic compounds
originating from both the paper and hot toner [6]. Byeon and
Kim investigated particle emissions for commercial color laser
printers working under different printing speeds in an experimental
chamber. They showed that the average particle number concentra-
tion is inversely proportional to the printing speed [10].
921
vP the particle velocity at the inlet register (s)
V measurement volume (m3)
xi particle position (m)
v 02F squared airflow fluctuation velocity normal to the wall
(m2/s2)
Greek symbols
qf fluid density (kg/m3)
e Turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate
l fluid viscosity (kg/m s)
k mean free path of the air molecules (lm)
tt air flow turbulent viscosity (m2/s)
Subscript
m mean
w wall
in inlet
p particle phase
f fluid
Superscript
+ dimensionless
 Reynolds averaging
A series of studies have focused on particle transport and distri-
bution when a manikin was present in a room. For instance, Spitzer
[11] and Spitzer et al. [12] carried out some experiments to study
the effect of particle motion on the breathing zone of a seated
breathing manikin. They revealed that the particle’s motion signif-
icantly affects the particle concentration of the breathing zone.
Melikov and Kaczmarczyk [13] investigated the importance of
the breathing zone of a thermal manikin when the indoor particles
are inhaled. Rim and Novolselka investigated the airflow in the
vicinity of a human body. They considered the effects of respiration
on the breathing zone concentration of particulate and gaseous
pollutants, and inhalation exposure in relation to source position
and overall airflow patterns. They indicated that the overall airflow
pattern influences the inhaled particle concentrations. They also
revealed that highly mixed airflow in the space creates relatively
uniform concentration patterns in the vicinity of the occupant.
However, they also showed that the occupant thermal plume
makes non-uniform concentration patterns [14]. Zukowska et al.
studied several effects such as thermal insulation, the design of
clothing and the chair, the blocking effect of tables on the thermal
plume generated above a seated thermal manikin in a chamber
[15]. Salmanzadeh et al. studied the buoyancy driven thermal
plume near a sitting heated manikin. They showed that a high con-
centration of suspended particles in the breathing zone is seen due
to the thermal plume flow created by the temperature gradient
adjacent to the body [16]. Li et al. investigated effect of thermal
manikin position on the characteristics of particle transport
and inhalation. They revealed that the manikin orientation has a
significant impact on the characteristics of particle transport and
inhalation. They showed that for an occupant standing with its
back towards the horizontal airflow, a little change in the leg
posture can lead to an obvious variation in the source location of
inhaled particles [17].
In the present study, particle transport and distribution emitted
from a Laserjet printer in a ventilated room, which is scarce in the
past studies, were computationally simulated using computational
fluid dynamics. Combined Eulerian and Langragian methods were
922 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933

applied to simulate the airflow field and the printer particle motion head. The particle phase was assumed dilute. In the present CFD
in the room. The printer was considered as the sole source of par- analysis, the room was studied with four different ventilation
ticle generation inside the room. A seated manikin was integrated configurations, including three displacement ventilation systems
into the study room and in order to take into account the thermal as well as a mixing ventilation system shown in Figs. 1 and 2
plume generated in the vicinity of the manikin body, it was and given in Table 1.
evaluated in two cases: heated and unheated. Different ventilation
configurations for the room were studied, including three displace- 3. Governing equations and numerical methods
ment systems and a mixing ventilation system. The printer was
located on different sides of the heated manikin and then the 3.1. Fluid flow phase
particle concentration was evaluated in the breathing zone of the
manikin in all the ventilation configurations. The fluid flow and The airflow in the cubicle was simulated using the v2–f turbu-
particle motion simulations were validated by Sorenson and his lence equations [20,21] as well as the energy equation. The model
co-worker study [18] and Mar’s study [19], respectively. This study formulation has the following general form:
provides useful information on a printer emission distribution in a
 

ventilated room with a seated manikin inside alongside with @/ @/ @ @/
q þ qu
j  C/;eff ¼ S/ ð1Þ
influence of printer location on the particle concentration in the @t @xj @xj @xj
breathing zone of the heated manikin to find the best location of
the printer in the room. where / represents the independent flow variables, C/;eff the effec-
tive diffusion coefficient, S/ the source term, q the flow density and
the bars denote the Reynolds averaging. In Table 2 the mathemati-
2. System description
cal form of each transport equation of the v2–f model are summa-
rized. p is the air pressure, lt the turbulent viscosity, S the rate of
Fig. 1 shows the schematic of the ventilated room used in this
strain, f a part of the v02 source term and Tl the turbulent time scale.
research. A cubicle with dimensions of 1.8  2.2  2.2 m was
The appropriate boundary conditions of turbulence variables
chosen and a seated female manikin was placed at the middle of
near the walls are as follows:
the cubicle. It should be mentioned that the manikin geometry
was borrowed from the database (http://www.ie.dtu.dk/manikin) k
addressed in Sorenson and Voigt study [18]. A Laserjet printer k ¼ v 02 ¼ 0; e ¼ 2t ð2Þ
y2p
was used in this study and it was located 0.4 m away from the
manikin and 0.75 m from the ground. To evaluate particle concen- yp is the distance from the cell center to the wall.
tration in the breathing zone, an area of 0.07  0.07 m2 was In this study, commercial CFD software, FLUENT (version 6.2),
selected in the front of manikin face and the mean concentration was used to predict the turbulent airflow. The v2–f model used in
of passed particles across this area was calculated. The emission this study is based on Davidson et al. [21] study Turbulent inten-
of printer particles was considered as a surface injecting source sity, temperature, and velocity were considered 30%, 20 °C, and
and released from an area of 0.09  0.09 m2 above the printer 0.2 m/s, respectively, in the inlet registers. The manikin body’s

Fig. 1. Sketch of the system studied in the present study.

 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933 923

Fig. 2. Different ventilation configurations used in the present study.

Table 1 Table 3
Configurations of different ventilation systems used in this study. Particle characteristics released from the printer.

Mixing ventilation Displacement ventilation system N0 (Particle/s) dp (lm) qp (kg/m3) Vp (m/s)

system
System I System II System III
Inlet and outlet 4 Inlet and Inlet and outlet 2
outlet 3
temperature and the temperature of cubicle walls were taken 31 °C
and 19.75 °C, respectively. The pressure outlet boundary condition
was given in the outlet registers of the cubicle. The manikin was
considered in two cases: heated and unheated. The buoyancy
movement due to the generated thermal plume was taken into
account in the particle distribution calculation. This has been
carried out taking the manikin as a constant temperature body
which its temperature is higher than the surrounding air. Note,
the impact of buoyant air movement was transferred to the
particle phase by calculating the air velocity in the vicinity of the
manikin and applying it on the particles. An unstructured grid
(tetrahedral cell topology) was applied for surrounding air of the
manikin. To resolve the boundary layer around the manikin, fine
meshes were created at the surface of the manikin with an initial
height of 0:2 mm, and a growth rate of 1.13. The energy equation
was not solved in the unheated case as the flow was isotherm. It
should be pointed out, these boundary conditions are the same
in all the ventilation systems considered in this study. The unstruc-
tured mesh and the finite volume method as well as the SIMPLE
algorithm were used to solve the governing equations. Grid
9
510 0.05 2000 0.2
System IV
Inlet and outlet 1
dependency analysis of the computational domain was carried
out and a computational mesh containing about 1.13  106 cells
showed a sufficient accuracy for continuing the analysis, Table 4.
3.2. Particle phase
So far, several experiments for determination of printer particle
characteristics such as rate of emitting particles, particle diameter,
particle density, and particle temperature have been carried out in
the past studies [6,10]. The particle characteristics released from
the printer are given in Table 3. The emission of particles into
the cubicle was considered with a time interval of 3 min for the
printing process. A concentration of 5  109 particles-cm3 was
considered as the emission source of the cubicle released from
the printer [10]. It was reported that when the printing is getting
started an average particle size of 50 nm (50 prints/min) comes
out of the printing process. It also should be pointed out that due
to the temperature difference between the hot air generated in
the printer and the surrounding air, the emitted particles move
upward from the printer head. To take into account this fact, it
was assumed that the particles are emitted into the air with an
initial velocity of 0.2 m/s. It should be stated that this velocity

Table 2
Coefficients and source terms in Eq. (1).

Name of conservation equation Independent Effective diffusion Source term S/


flow variable / coefficient C/;eff

Continuity 1 0 0
   
X-Component of momentum U tt þ t  q1 @p @
@x þ @x tt @u @ @v
@x þ @y tt @x þ @z ðtt @z Þ
@ @w

     
Y-Component of momentum V tt þ t  q1 @p @
tt @x þ @y@ tt @@yv þ @z@ tt @w
@u
@y þ @x @z
     
Z-Component of momentum W tt þ t tt @@yv þ @x@ tt @u
 q1 @p @y þ @z tt @z
@ @ @w
@z  bgðT f  T 1 Þ þ @y
Energy Tf kf þ tt=rT 0
Turbulent kinetic energy (k) K tt =rk;t þ t Gk  e
Turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate (e) E tt =re;t þ t ðC 0e1 Gk  C e2 eÞ=T l
Wall normal turbulence fluctuation to kinetic energy (uÞ ðv02 =kÞ tt =ru þ t 2 @k @ u
a t þ tt =rk;t Þ @x
ð p þ Su
k j @xj

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
L2 Da  a ¼ 1; Gk ¼ tt S2 ; S ¼ Sij Sij ; Su ¼ ð1  ap Þf w þ ap f h  Gk u=k.
   pffiffi
f h ¼  T1l C 1  1 þ Gek ðu  2=3Þ; f w ¼  uke T l ¼ max ke ; C T me .
 3=2 
L ¼ C L max k e ; C g te1=4 ; P k ¼ 2C l v02 TS2ij .
3=4

 qffiffiffi
tt ¼ C l ; ku T l ; C 0e1 ¼ 1:44 1 þ 0:04ð1  ap Þ u1 .
C e2 ¼ 1:83; C 1 ¼ 1:7; C 2 ¼ 1:2; C l ¼ 0:22; C L ¼ 0:161; C g ¼ 90; C T ¼ 6; rk;t ¼ 1; re;t ¼ 1:22; ru;t ¼ 1; p ¼ 3.
924 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933

Table 4
Checking the solution gride dependency.

Cell number 54,000 434,000 691,700 922,147 1,129,885* 1,357,557

Skin friction coefficient of the manikin body 0.000182 0.000383 0.000878 0.000959 0.00232 0.00227
Convective heat transfer coefficient in the vicinity of the manikin (W/m2 K) 1.14 1.82 2.67 2.62 2.44 2.38
Air Temperature, 5cm away from the manikin face (K) 293.88 294.17 294.33 294.38 294.57 294.54
*
The optimum mesh number.

 
was selected based on the maximum air velocity created above the
duj
p 1 þ 0:15Re0:687
d
  5:188v 1=2 d  
ij
printer head due to the released heat of the printer while is print- ¼ ujf  upj þ ujf  upj
ing and it was found doing a separate simulation of the air above
dt sp Sdðdlk dkl Þ
1=4

the printer. The released heat of the printer was assumed 40 W. 1

þ nj ðtÞ þ 1  g ð4Þ
s i
3.2.1. Mathematical modeling of particle motion and particle
concentration distribution where ujf ¼ ui þ u0j which ui is the mean flow velocity at the particle
The Lagrangian point of view was used to model particle trans- location, u0j is the flow fluctuation velocity, upj is the velocity of
port in the air. The following equations were used to simulate particles at the center of the particles, xi is the particle position, t
movement of spherical particles: is time, d is the particle diameter, S is the ratio of particle density
p
dxj to fluid density, and gi is the gravitational acceleration.
¼ upj ð3Þ
dt Re ¼ ju f  up jd=v is the particle Reynolds number based on the

Fig. 3. Velocity distribution (m/s) in the mid plane of the cubicle. (a) Unheated manikin. (b) Heated manikin in System (IV).
 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933 925

Velocity Velocity

Temperature Temperature
(a) (b)
Fig. 4. Vertical Velocity (m/s) and Temperature (°C) distributions around the manikin body (a) present study (b) Sorenson and Voigt [18] study.

!1=2
flow-particle slip velocity. The first term on the right-hand side of 216 vr T
Eq. (4) stands for the Stokes drag. Here, sp is the Stokes relaxation nj ðtÞ ¼ Gi  ð7Þ
p q f d5 S2 C c Dt
time and is as follows [22,23]:
2 The fourth term in Eq. (4) is particle gravitational force.
d SC c
sp ¼ ð5Þ To calculate the particle concentration in the room as well as
18v
the concentration in the breathing zone of the manikin due to
Cc is the Stokes–Cunningham correction factor which modifies the the printer particle generation, plane and volume averaged particle
drag force exerted to ultrafine particles due to slip and is: number concentrations are obtained. The method of Hardalupas

and Taylor [25] implemented by Zhu et al. [26] was used to calcu-
k 0:8 late the volume averaged concentration. Based on this method, the
Cc ¼ 1 þ 2:514 þ 0:55d=k ð6Þ
d e particle number concentration is as follows:
The second term on the right right-hand side of Eq. (4) presents Pn
i¼1 t i
the contribution of the Saffman lift force. The third term in Eq. (4), Cva ¼ ð8Þ
VT
nj(t), represents the stochastic phenomenon of the Brownian diffu-
sion. This force is modeled by a Gaussian random number with where n is the number of particles that move across the measure-
zero-mean, unit variance, Gi, as [24]: ment volume V, and ti is the particle residence time in the

-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1

y

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 5. Vertical velocity (m/s) distribution above the manikin head (a) experimental study [18] (b) numerical study [18] (c) present simulation.
926 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933

(a)
Present Study
Experiment [27]

(b)

Lai and Chen [27]

Empirical Equaon [27]
Present Study

(c)
Fig. 6. (a) Experimental chamber, (b) comparison of particle concentration in the mid-plane of chamber at different x-locations and (c) deposition fraction in the chamber vs.
different particle sizes with the experimental data [27].

measurement volume, and T is the sampling time. The plane averaged the calculated concentrations in the breathing zone. The normalized
particle number concentration, Cpa, is calculated as follows: volume averaged concentration is given as:
Pn
Pn   ti =V
1=v pi C þv a ¼  i¼1 t  ð10Þ
C pa ¼ i¼1 ð9Þ N=Ain v in
AT
The plane averaged concentration is as follows:
where n is the number of particles that move across the plane Pn  
i¼1 1=v i
p
A
having an area of A with a normal velocity vp. It should be stated C þpa ¼   ð11Þ
that the average concentration at the inlet was used to normalize N=Ain v tin
 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933 927

(a)

Manikin head
V(m/s)
V(m/s) V(m/s)

[19] [16]

(b) (c) (d)

Fig. 7. (a) The room and the manikin position used in the experimental study [28] and the computational study [19], vertical velocity distribution above the manikin head (b)
present study (Sorenson and Voigt’s Manikin) (c) experimental study (Mar’s Manikin) [19] (c) computational study (Mar’s Manikin) [16].

where N is number of injected particles and
velocity at the inlet register with an area of Ain.
Numerical Study[16]
Experiment [19]
Present study
vP is the particle The particle equation of motion was solved using the discrete
phase of FLUENT software. The concentration equations listed
above were solved using a homemade computer code written in
MATLAB. This code was later linked to the discrete phase model
of FLUENT to obtain the particle concentration in the breathing
zone.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Fluid flow analysis

Fig. 8. Comparison of normalized plane average concentrations of the manikin
breathing zone, between the present simulation and the numerical [16] and the
experimental studies [19].
In this section, first, the fluid flow inside the cubicle is evalu-
ated. The fluid flow was investigated in two cases: heated and
unheated manikins. Fig. 3(a) shows the velocity distribution inside
the cubicle when the manikin is unheated. In this case, the energy
equation is not solved. As shown in this figure, the fluid flow
entered from the inlet register is directly moving upward and the
maximum velocity location is away from the manikin. In case of
the heated manikin, the buoyancy force is added to the momentum
equation due to the temperature difference between the manikin
and the ambient air. In this case, shown in Fig. 3(b), the maximum
air velocity is seen above the manikin head and a secondary flow is
created over the head. To check the simulation results accuracy,
928 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933
Unheated
t=25s
t=75s
t=130s
Fig. 9. Particle dispersion in the cubicle at different time histories for the unheated and heated manikins in System IV.
the present study was compared with Sorenson and Voigt [18]
numerical and experimental results. It should be mentioned that
in their study the inlet was on the bottom side and the outlet
was from the cubicle ceiling. The flow velocity was 0.02 m/s and
its turbulent intensity was 30%. The temperatures of the walls
and the manikin were assumed equal. It should be mentioned that
the Sorenson geometry as well as the its boundary conditions were
simulated and then the results of the simulation were compared
with the measured data The comparisons of the velocity and tem-
perature around the manikin are shown in Fig. 4(a) and (b). As
shown in these figures, the present study predicts the velocity
and temperature with a sufficient accuracy compared to the Soren-
son et al. numerical results. Fig. 5 shows the comparison of the ver-
tical flow velocity above the manikin head with the numerical and
experimental results of Sorenson and his coworkers. As shown in
Heated
this figure, the present simulation predicts the vertical velocity
with a sufficient accuracy compared to the experimental data.
4.2. Particle trajectories and distribution
4.2.1. Validation of the particle model with no manikin
In this section, the particle phase is validated using an experi-
mental data which were measured in an experimental chamber
[27] The dimensions of the chamber were 0.4  0.4  0.8 m
(Fig. 6(a)) and the inlet velocity was 0.225 m/s. Particle diameter
and density were 10 lm and 1400 kg/m3, respectively, and the par-
ticles were released from the inlet register. Fig. 6(b) shows the
comparison of particle concentrations vs. the chamber height in
different x locations of the chamber. As shown in this figure, the
v2–f model along with the particle model predict the particle distri-
 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933
Fig. 10. Normal particle concentration in the breathing zone for heated and heated
manikins.
bution with a reasonable accuracy. Fig. 6(c) shows the comparison
of deposition fractions in the experimental chamber using the pre-
sent numerical model and the experimental data in the particle
range of 0.01–10 lm. These figures show that the accuracy of the
present numerical model is sufficient for pursuing the goal of pre-
sent simulation.
4.2.2. Validation of the particle model with the manikin
In this section, the particle concentration distribution in the
breathing zone of the manikin is compared with the computational
Fig. 11. Velocity distributions (m/s) in the mid plane of cubicle in Systems (a) III (b) II and (c) I.
929
and experimental studies [16,19] conducted in the past studies.
The inlet velocity was 0.2 m/s. Particle diameter and density were
1 lm and 2000 kg/m3, respectively, and the particles were released
from the inlet register. Fig. 7(a) shows the study room and the cor-
responding ventilation systems which were used in this study. It
should be mentioned that their ventilation system is the same as
System IV with the equal dimensions used in the present study.
As the manikin used in the present study is a female manikin
and in those studies is a male manikin, it is first required to com-
pare the velocity distributions of all the studies in order to check
out the likely difference of the flow characteristics around the
manikin. It should be stated that in that two studies [16,19] as well
as present study, the manikins were considered as heated mani-
kins and their body temperature was taken 32.2 °C. The air flow
characteristics at the inlet register in all the studies are the same
as information given in Section 3. Fig. 7(b)–(d) shows the velocity
magnitude above the manikin head computed in the present study
with female manikin and Salmanzadeh et al. study [16] and Mar
and Mar et al. studies [28,19] with the male manikin. As shown
in this figure, the velocity distribution above the manikin head is
close to the experimental study and this means that the difference
between the present study and those two studies [16,19] in term of
manikin gender is negligible as the present simulation predicts the
flow velocity with a reasonable accuracy. These figures also show
930 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933

Fig. 12. Normalized particle concentration of the breathing zone in all the ventilation systems – printer located in the front of the manikin.

1.4 System IV System III System II System I

Normalized Concentaron

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
BACK FRONT LEFT RIGHT

Fig. 14. Normalized particle concentration in the breathing zone for different
printer positions in all the ventilation systems (I, II, III, and IV).

system (IV) at different time histories of particle emission are

shown and compared in Fig. 9. As shown in this figure, the breath-
ing zone is less affected in case of the unheated manikin and this is
Fig. 13. Different printer locations around the manikin.
condition does not exist when the manikin is considered as a heat
generating body. In this case, the breathing zone is significantly
that the velocity distribution of the present study is more similar to
affected due to the emitted particles and this issue is more pro-
the experimental study compared to Slamanzedh et al. [16] study.
nounced at the higher time histories of emission. This figure also
Fig. 8 shows the average particle concentration in the plane of the
shows that the particle accumulations in the breathing zone of
breathing zone of the manikin located at different distances of the
the unheated case at the lower time histories are not significant,
manikin’s face. In all the studies, 10,000 particles with 1 lm diam-
but in the heated case, the breathing zone from the beginning of
eter were injected from the inlet register for 10 min in the steady
particle emission is in a bad condition. Comparison of normal par-
state condition. Fig. 8 shows that the present study predicts the
ticle concentrations in the breathing zone of the manikin for the
particle concentration with a reasonable accuracy compared to
two above mentioned cases with 180 s passed time, are shown in
the experimental study. However, there are still some differences
Fig. 10. As shown in this figure, the average particle concentration
between the present simulation and the experimental date at some
of the heated manikin is 6 times larger than the unheated one. It is
distances. These differences are due to: the experimental data
also revealed that the location of printer highly affects the quantity
which were measured while the manikin was breathing, which
of particle concentration in the breathing zone and needs more
was not taken into account in this study and also the likely minor
attention and consideration.
differences between the shape of the applied manikin in the pre-
sent study and Mar’s study. However, differences between the
4.2.4. Effect of different ventilation configurations on particle
measured and the simulated data for the first two points are less
concentration of the breathing zone
than 10% and it should be mentioned that Marr [19] reported his
4.2.4.1. Printer located in front of the manikin. In this section, the
measured data with 15% uncertainty.
three other ventilation configurations described in Section 2 are
evaluated when the printer is located in the front of the manikin.
4.2.3. Particle concentration distribution due to the printer emission The velocity distributions in the mid plane of the cubicle are shown
The particle concentration distributions due to the printer pol- in Fig. 11(a), (b), and (c) for systems III, II, and I, respectively. As
lutants for the heated and unheated manikins with the ventilation shown in these figures as well as Fig. 4, the maximum velocity in
 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933
Fig. 15. Velocity distributions (a) in the mid plane of cubicle in x direction (b) the plane in the right of the manikin (c) the plane in the left of the manikin.
the breathing zone among all the systems is seen in the system (IV)
(Fig. 4). This is due to the inlet air register which is located in the
front of manikin and creates the maximum air movement in the
breathing zone. This speed is decreased in systems III, II, and I,
respectively. System III also has a high air speed in the breathing
zone, but still lower than system IV as the air register in this sys-
tem does not directly blow the air through the breathing zone area.
System (I) has the lowest air movement in the breathing zone as
the inlet register is located in the back side of manikin close to
the ground and in this case the air movement in the breathing zone
is mostly due to the thermal heat plume generated around the
manikin body. The particle concentration distributions in the
breathing zone of all the configurations are shown in Fig. 12. As
it was expected from the flow analysis of all the systems and
shown in this figure, system IV and system I have the highest
and lowest particle concentrations, respectively, in the breathing
zone of the manikin. This matter is mostly due to the air speed
in the breathing zone. System IV has the maximum particle con-
centration in the breathing zone due to the air register location
which is the worst place for the inlet register among all the sys-
tems. System I show a good performance to remove the particle
released from the front of manikin without directing them toward
the breathing zone. This fact is due to the location of inlet air reg-
ister on the back side of the manikin which makes the air flow to
931
move above the manikin head and suck the particle from the prin-
ter head and deliver them to the outlet register.
4.2.4.2. Printer located on the other sides of the manikin. In this sec-
tion, the printer is located on the other sides of the manikin
(Fig. 13) and then the particle concentration of the breathing zone
in each ventilation configuration is obtained and compared with
one another in order to find the best printer location in the corre-
sponding configuration. The particle concentrations of the breath-
ing zone in all the configurations are shown in Fig. 14. As shown in
this figure, the system (IV) has the maximum and minimum con-
centrations among all the configurations when the printer is
located in the front and back sides of the manikin. This fact clearly
says that the printer should be located in the back side of the man-
ikin in System (IV) as in this case the released particles do not cross
the breathing zone and make this area safe from the particle pollu-
tion. This figure also shows that system (I) has the maximum par-
ticle concentration when the printer is located on the right, left,
and back sides of the manikin. The large particle concentration in
the back side of the manikin is due to the printer location which
directs the emitted particle into the air and they cross the breath-
ing zone in the way of approaching the outlet register. It is also
revealed that the right and left sides of the manikin also are not
good places for the printer as the released particles from these
932 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933
0.8
Mean normal concentraon
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
System I System IV System II
(a)
0.9
0.8
Normalized cincentraon
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
BACK RIGHT LEFT FRONT
(b)
Fig. 16. Mean normalized concentration of the breathing zone based on (a) the
ventilation configurations (b) the printer locations.
places, place the breathing zone at more risk compared to the back
side of the manikin. All these observations suggest that the best
place of the printer in System (I) is the front side of the manikin.
It should be pointed out that the symmetry condition of the fluid
flow due to the buoyancy effect created in the vicinity of manikin
leg is not held between the right and the left sides of the manikin
body as shown in Fig. 15. This fact has also been reported in the
past studies [15,29,30]. The unsymmetrical condition yields differ-
ent particle concentration quantities in systems (I), (II), and (IV).
However, the differences between the concentrations of the right
and left sides in the above mentioned systems are negligible.
Fig. 16(a) shows the mean normalized concentration in the breath-
ing zone averaged over all the printer locations for each configura-
tion. This figure states that the mixing ventilation system (system
II) is more suitable than the displacement systems in case of parti-
cle emission in the breathing zone. It is also shown that the max-
imum normal concentration among all the displacement
ventilation systems happens to system I. It is also revealed that
the best displacement system is System (III) as in this case the
manikin is rotated 90° with respect to the inlet register. Fig. 16
(b) shows the mean particle concentration which is the average
of particle concentration of all the systems for all the manikin
sides. As shown in this figure, the back and front sides of the man-
ikin have the lowest and highest particle concentrations in the
breathing zone, respectively. It means that the front side of the
manikin in all the systems except system (I) is the worst place
for the printer. The right and left sides of the manikin also have
high particle concentrations in the breathing zone and this also
shows that these places are not good places for the printer.
5. Conclusion
In this study, the pollutant particles emitted from a Laserjet
printer were computationally simulated in a ventilated room with
four ventilation configurations. A seated manikin was integrated
into the study room and it was evaluated in two cases: heated
and unheated. To find the best place of the printer with the lowest
particle concentration of the breathing zone in the study room, the
printer was located on different sides of the manikin and the
breathing zone particle concentrations of the heated manikin were
evaluated in all the ventilation configurations. The results of the
present simulation show that the printer’s particle emission highly
affects the enhancement of particle concentration in the breathing
zone of the heated manikin. It was also revealed that when the
printer is located in the back side of the heated manikin, the min-
System III imum particle concentration of the breathing zone is seen in all the
ventilation configurations which suggests the best area of the prin-
ter location. This trend of the concentration in the breathing zone
is completely opposite when the printer is located in front of the
manikin. Furthermore, It was also concluded that the mixing ven-
tilation system has a lower mean particle concentration in the
breathing zone compared to the displacement ventilation systems.
References
[1] R.D. Brook, S. Rajagopalan, C.A. Pope, et al., Particulate matter air pollution and
cardiovascular disease: an update to the scientific statement from the
American heart association, Circulation 121 (2010) 2331–2378.
[2] S.S. Lim, T. Vos, A.D. Flaxman, et al., A comparative risk assessment of burden of
disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21
regions, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease
Study 2010, Lancet 380 (2012) 2224–2260.
[3] C. Iribarren, I.S. Tekawa, S. Sidney, G.D. Friedman, Effect of cigar smoking on
the risk of cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and
cancer in men, New Engl. J. Med. 340 (1999) 1773–1780.
[4] J. Guo, T. Kauppinen, P. Kyyronen, P. Heikkila, M.L. Lindbohm, E. Pukkala, Risk
of esophageal, ovarian, testicular, kidney and bladder cancers and leukemia
among finnish workers exposed to diesel or gasoline engine exhaust, Int. J.
Cancer 111 (2004) 286–292.
[5] Hugo Destaillats Randy, L. Maddalena, Brett C. Singer, Alfred T. Hodgson,
Thomas E. McKone, Indoor pollutants emitted by office equipment: a review of
reported data and information needs, Atmos. Environ. 42 (7) (2008) 1371–
1388.
[6] L. Morawska, C. He, G. Johnson, R. Jayaratne, T. Salthammer, H. Wang, E. Uhde,
T. Bostrom, R. Modini, G. Ayoko, P. Mcgarry, M. Wensing, Laser Printers : A
Source of Nanoparticles in Indoor Office Environments. No December, 5–9,
2009.
[7] S.C. Lee, S. Lam, H.K. Fai, Characterization of VOCs, ozone, and PM 10 emissions
from office equipment in an environmental chamber, Build. Environ. 36 (2001)
837–842.
[8] N. Kagi, S. Fujii, Y. Horiba, N. Namiki, Y. Ohtani, H. Emi, H. Tamura, Y.S. Kim,
Indoor air quality for chemical and ultrafine particle contaminants from
printers, Build. Environ. 42 (5) (2007) 1949–1954.
[9] C. He, Office particle emission characteristics of office printers CONGRONG,
Environ. Sci. Technol. 6039–6045 (2007).
[10] J.H. Byeon, J.W. Kim, Particle emission from laser printers with different
printing speeds, Atmos. Environ. 54 (2012) 272–276.
[11] I.M. Spitzer, Experimental Aerosol Characterization in the Indoor Environment
Using Phase Doppler Anemometry Master’s Thesis, Syracuse University, 2006.
[12] I.M. Spitzer, D.M. Marr, M.N. Glauser, Impact of manikin motion on particle
transport in the breathing zone, J. Aerosol Sci. 41 (2010) 373–383.
[13] A. Melikov, J. Kaczmarczyk, Measurement and prediction of indoor air quality
using a breathing thermal manikin, Indoor Air 17 (1) (2007) 50–59.
[14] Donghyun Rim, Atila Novosela, Transport of particulate and gaseous pollutants
in the vicinity of a human body, Build. Environ. 44 (2009) 1840–1849.
[15] D. Zukowska, A. Melikov, Z. Popiolek, Impact of personal factors and furniture
arrangement on the thermal plume above a sitting occupant, Build. Environ.
49 (104–116) (2011) 2012.
[16] M. Salmanzadeh, G. Zahedi, G. Ahmadi, D.R. Marr, M. Glauser, Computational
modeling of effects of thermal plume adjacent to the body on the indoor
airflow and particle transport, J. Aerosol Sci. 53 (2012) 29–39.
[17] X. Li, K. Inthavong, Q. Ge, J. Tu, Numerical investigation of particle transport
and inhalation using standing thermal manikins, Build. Environ. 60 (2013)
116–125.
[18] D.N. Sørensen, L.K. Voigt, Modelling flow and heat transfer around a seated
human body by computational fluid dynamics, Build. Environ. 38 (6) (2003)
753–762.
[19] D. Marr, Velocity Measurements in Breathing Zone of a Moving Thermal
Manikin within the Indoor Environment Ph.D. Thesis, Syracuse University,
New York, 2007.
[20] F. Lien, G. Kalitzin, Computations of transonic flow with the V2-F turbulence
model, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 22 (2001) 53–61.
[21] L. Davidson, P.V. Nielsen, A. Sveningsson, Modification of the V2F model for
computing the flow in a 3D wall jet, Turbul. Heat Mass Transfer 4 (2003) 577–
584.
 M. Ansaripour et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 103 (2016) 920–933
[22] M. Abdolzadeh, M.A. Mehraian, A. Soltani, Numerical study to predict the
particle deposition under the influence of operating forces on a tilted surface
in the turbulent flow, Adv. Powder Technol. 22 (3) (2011) 405–415.
[23] M. Abdolzadeh, M.A. Mehraian, Combined effect of thermophoretic force and
other influencing parameters on the particle deposition rate on a tilted rough
surface, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 50 (6) (2011) 954–964.
[24] A. Li, G. Ahmadi, Dispersion and deposition of spherical particles from
point sources in turbulent channel flow, Aerosol Sci. Technol. 16 (1992)
209–226.
[25] Y. Hardalupas, A. Taylor, On the measurement of particle concentration near a
stagnation point, Exp. Fluids 8 (1) (1998) 113–118.
[26] J. Zhu, R. Rudoff, E. Bachalo, W. Bachalo, Number density and mass flux
measurements using the phase Doppler particle analyzer in reacting and non-
reacting swirling flows, in: AIAA, Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 1993.
933
[27] A.C.K. Lai, F.Z. Chen, Comparison of a new Eulerian model with a modified
Lagrangian approach for particle distribution and deposition indoors, Atmos.
Environ. 41 (25) (2007) 5249–5256.
[28] D. Marr, T. Khan, M. Glauser, H. Higuchi, J. Zhang, On particle image velocimetry
(PIV) measurements in the breathing zone of a thermal breathing manikin,
Trans. – Am. Soc. Heat. Refrig. Air Condition. Eng. 111 (2005) 299–305.
[29] R.H. Mohammed, Numerical investigation of displacement ventilation
effectiveness, Int. J. Mech. Aerosp. Ind. Mech. Eng. 8 (2) (2014) 260–265.
[30] T. Yang, P.C. Cropper, M.J. Cook, R. Yousaf, D. Fiala, L. Le, A new simulation
system to predict human-environment thermal interactions in naturally
ventilated buildings, in: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on
Building Simulation, Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development, De
Montfort University, Division of Building Physics (ftba), Universität Karlsruhe,
Englerstr, vol. 3, 2007, pp. 751–756.