Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10953/1361
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHernández Díaz, David-
dc.contributor.authorMartos Ferreira, David-
dc.contributor.authorHernández Abad, Vicente-
dc.contributor.authorVillar Ribera, Ricardo-
dc.contributor.authorTarrés, Quim-
dc.contributor.authorRojas Sola, José Ignacio-
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-21T12:37:16Z-
dc.date.available2023-12-21T12:37:16Z-
dc.date.issued2021-01-15-
dc.identifier.citationHernández-Díaz, D.; Martos-Ferreira, D.; Hernández-Abad, V.; Villar-Ribera, R.; Tarrés, Q.; Rojas-Sola, JI. Indoor PM2.5 removal efficiency of two different Non-Thermal Plasma systems. J. Environ. Manage. 2021; 278(Part 1): 111515. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111515es_ES
dc.identifier.issn0301-4797es_ES
dc.identifier.otherhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111515es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301479720314407es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10953/1361-
dc.description.abstractThe use of non-thermal plasma (NTP) generators in air processing systems and their duct networks to improve indoor air quality (IAQ) has grown considerably in recent years. This paper reviews the advantages and disadvantages of NTP generators for IAQ improvement in biological, chemical and particulate pollutant terms. Also, it assesses and compares the ability of a multipin corona discharge (MPCD) and a dielectric barrier discharge (DBD) generator to reduce the concentration of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in recycled, unfiltered air in a refrigeration chamber. The MPCD generator was found to have a higher PM2.5 removal efficiency; also, it was faster in removing pollutants, used less energy, and produced much less ozone. The fact that the MPCD generator performed better was seemingly the result of its increased ion production mainly. NTP generators, however, cannot match air filtration media purifiers in this respect as the latter are much more effective in removing particles. Besides, NTP-based air purifying technology continues to be subject to a major drawback, namely: the formation of ozone as a by-product. In any case, the ozone generation was uncorrelated to ion emission when using different technologies.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipDepartment of Engineering Graphics and Design of the Polytechnic University of Catalonia.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherAcademic Press LTD - Elsevier Science LTDes_ES
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Environmental Managementes_ES
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/*
dc.subjectNon-thermal plasma (NTP)es_ES
dc.subjectCorona dischargees_ES
dc.subjectDielectric barrier discharge (DBD)es_ES
dc.subjectFine particulate matter (PM2.5)es_ES
dc.subjectOzone (O3)es_ES
dc.subjectIndoor air quality (IAQ)es_ES
dc.titleIndoor PM2.5 removal efficiency of two different non-thermal plasma systemses_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersiones_ES
Appears in Collections:DIGDP-Artículos

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
JEMA-D-20-05770R1 - versión aceptada.pdf885,29 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright