Air Cleaning Drone Feasibility: Designing a Mobile Filtration Unit to Reduce Indoor Particulate Matter
2020
- 96Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage96
- Abstract Views96
Artifact Description
Normally, air is filtered using stationary filters. The feasibility of attaching a small air filtering unit to a drone was tested to see if air quality could be improved by reducing the amount of particulate matter in the air. A filtration device was constructed and attached to a drone. To create a more contained environment the drone cage used for testing was covered with plastic. Four tests were run in the drone cage: a test without the filter device or drone to see how the room air quality varied on its own, a test with the filter device on the ground running without the drone to see how the filter worked without the drone, a test with the filter device on the ground running while the drone was flying, and a test with the filter device on the drone while it was flying to see whether the filter worked better attached to the drone or unattached with the drone flying. The results indicated that the most particulate matter was removed from the air when the filter device was on the ground and the drone was flying in the cage. The second most effective test was when the filter was attached to the flying drone. From this it can be concluded that stationary filters can be efficient with strong airflow; however, if a drone were equipped with a proficient filter it may also be effective. This research shows that airflow is the key to decreasing indoor particulate matter.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know