ArticlePloS one2024
Optimal human respiratory simulation for exhaled gas based on CFD method.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human breathing is crucial for studying indoor environments and human health. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is a key tool for simulating human respiration. To enhance the accuracy of CFD simulations and reduce computation time, a new simulation strategy for human respiration is proposed in this paper. The effects of steady versus unsteady boundary conditions on simulation results were examined. For the unsteady boundary, sinusoidal exhalation velocities and non-inhalation gas were assumed, while the steady boundary involved constant velocities during both exhalation and inhalation phases. The jet center trajectory under different boundary conditions was analyzed and compared with experimental data. Additionally, variations in pollutant dispersion near the mouth under the two boundary conditions were discussed. Furthermore, the paper compared the calculation accuracy, calculation time and memory occupied by a single turbulence model or switching flow character models in human respiration simulation. Differences in exhaled gas vorticity and jet penetration depth across different flow models were identified. Finally, combined with the non-iterative algorithm, the optimal strategy of human respiration simulation was proposed. Results show that under the comprehensive consideration of calculation accuracy, calculation time and memory occupancy, using sinusoidal expiratory boundary conditions combined with the PISO algorithm, with the RNG k-ε model during expiratory phase, and switching into the laminar flow during inspiratory phase, is the optimal strategy of simulating human breathing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.