邱兵, 白国银, 朱东山, 李丽丽, 范锦辉, 刘铁兵. 我国飞机客舱空气质量监测的抽样分析[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2014, 4(2): 143-146.
    引用本文: 邱兵, 白国银, 朱东山, 李丽丽, 范锦辉, 刘铁兵. 我国飞机客舱空气质量监测的抽样分析[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2014, 4(2): 143-146.
    Qiu Bing, Bai Guoyin, Zhu Dongshan, Li Lili, Fan Jinhui, Liu Tiebing. Analysis on Quality of Air in Aircraft Cabins[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2014, 4(2): 143-146.
    Citation: Qiu Bing, Bai Guoyin, Zhu Dongshan, Li Lili, Fan Jinhui, Liu Tiebing. Analysis on Quality of Air in Aircraft Cabins[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2014, 4(2): 143-146.

    我国飞机客舱空气质量监测的抽样分析

    Analysis on Quality of Air in Aircraft Cabins

    • 摘要:
      目的 对国内飞机客舱空气质量进行抽样监测评估。
      方法 抽样监测不同机型飞机(共26架次)客舱温度、相对湿度、风速、气压、照度、噪声、一氧化碳、二氧化碳、挥发性有机物、空气细菌总数等参数, 对在平飞过程中各项参数的分布情况进行统计学分析。
      结果 飞机客舱温度、相对湿度、气压、风速、噪声、照度、一氧化碳、二氧化碳、挥发性有机物、空气细菌总数均值分别是22℃、9.3%、75 kPa、0.07 m/s、77.2 dB(A)、296 lx、0.91 mg/m3、1 687 mg/m3、0.49 mg/m3、25个/皿, 各飞机机型(大型、中型、小型)之间相对湿度、噪声差异有统计学意义, 各机型之间的温度、气压、风速、照度、一氧化碳、二氧化碳、挥发性有机物、空气细菌总数各参数差异无统计学意义。飞机前舱、后舱间气压、噪声、一氧化碳、二氧化碳各参数有统计学差异(P > 0.05);飞机前舱、中舱、后舱的温度、相对湿度、风速、照度、挥发性有机物、空气细菌总数无统计学差异(P > 0.05)。
      结论 我国抽样飞机客舱的各项空气质量总体良好, 但客舱相对湿度普遍比室内偏低, 导致飞机旅客和机组人员感觉空气干燥, 尤其对长航线旅客的影响还需进一步研究。客舱气压比标准大气压低, 但符合适航要求。建议制定适合我国的飞机客舱空气质量评价标准和监测规范。

       

      Abstract:
      Objectives To monitor and evaluate the quality of air in aircraft cabins.
      Methods The parameters of air quality in aircraft cabins at level flight condition, including temperature, humidity, wind speed, air pressure, illumination level, noise, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, volatile organic matters and total air bacterial counts in 26 samples were tested and the data were analyzed statistically.
      Results The average temperature, relative humidity, air pressure, wind speed, noise, illumination level, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, volatile organic matters and total air bacterial counts in cabins were 22℃, 9.3%, 75 kP, 0.07 m/s, 77.2 dB(A), 296 lx, 0.91 mg/m3, 1 687 mg/m3, 0.49 mg/m3 and 25 counts/dish, respectively. The humidity and noise in three types of aircraft (large, medium and small) were significantly different (P < 0.05) statistically. There were no significant difference statistically on temperature, pressure, wind speed, illumination, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, volatile organic matters and total air bacterial counts among the three types of aircraft (large, medium and small; P > 0.05). There were a significant difference statistically on air pressure, noise, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide between the front and back cabins (P < 0.05), but no significant difference statistically on temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, illumination level, volatile organic matters and total air bacterial counts among front, middle and back cabins (P > 0.05).
      Conclusions The quality of air in aircraft cabins was well generally, but the relative humidity in cabins was lower than the standards for indoor air, which could lead passengers and air crews to feel dry and less comfortable. In addition, the air pressure in cabins was lower than the atmospheric pressure, but it was in compliance with airworthiness requirement. It is necessary to develop standards suitable for monitoring and assessing cabin air quality in our country.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回