Tag: COVID-19

Cutting Coronavirus Risk in Cars
Even in a pandemic, it’s sometimes necessary to share a car with someone outside one’s bubble. When that’s the case, it’s important to know how to limit risks of coronavirus exposure. For this study, researchers used computational fluid dynamics to simulate flow around and inside a Prius-like four-door sedan with a driver and a single passenger located in the rear passenger-side seat. Assuming the air conditioner was on and the car was moving at 50 miles per hour, the researchers found that the baseline flow of air inside the car moves from the back of the cabin toward the front. With the windows closed, the simulation suggested that 8-10% of the aerosol particles exhaled by one passenger could reach the other.
Opening the car’s windows increases the ventilation and reduces exposure risk. The best configuration the researchers found opened two windows: the front passenger-side window and the rear driver-side window. By opening the window opposite each person, the airflow in the car creates a sort of curtain between the two that reduces aerosol exposure to only 0.2-2% of what’s exhaled by the other occupant. (Image credit: rideshare – V. Xok, CFD – V. Mathai et al.; research credit: V. Mathai et al.; via NYTimes; submitted by Kam-Yung Soh)
February 4, 2021
The Best of FYFD 2020
2020 was certainly a strange year, and I confess that I mostly want to congratulate all of us for making it through and then look forward to a better, happier, healthier 2021. But for tradition and posterity’s sake, here were your top FYFD posts of 2020:
There’s a good mix of topics here! A little bit of biophysics, some research, some phenomena, and some good, old-fashioned fluid dynamics.
If you enjoy FYFD, please remember that it’s primarily reader-supported. You can help support the site by becoming a patron, making a one-time donation, buying some merch, or simply by sharing on social media. Happy New Year!
(Image credits: catfish – Abyss Dive Center, owl – J. Usherwood et al., masks – It’s Okay to Be Smart, droplet – C. Kalelkar and H. Sai, boundary layer – J. Lienhard, bubble – A. Patsyk et al., boiling – S. Mould, ice – D. Spitzer, defects – The Lutetium Project, tadpoles – K. Schwenk and J. Phillips)
January 1, 2021
Why Masks Cut COVID-19 Transmission So Well
Face masks are an important tool for curtailing disease transmission, and this video explains how even imperfect masks do a much better job of protecting people than you may think. Strictly speaking, this video is not fluid dynamical — fluid dynamics plays more of a role in the details of what makes a mask effective — but the video is so good and so timely that I just have to share it. Given it a watch and then go explore the interactive essay to get an even better handle on mask mathematics. (Image and video credit: Minute Physics; see also The Multiplicative Power of Masks)
December 3, 2020
Droplets From Speaking
Illnesses like COVID-19 can spread through droplets and aerosols produced by coughing, sneezing, or even speaking. New research looks at how regular speech patterns produce a spray of droplets. Researchers found that pronouncing many consonants causes a sheet of saliva to form between the speaker’s lips. That sheet stretches into filaments that then break into a spray of droplets.
Strong, plosive consonants like /p/ and /b/ create the most droplets (Images 2 and 3), but even milder consonants like /m/ create some (Image 1). Interestingly, the researchers found that wearing lip balm drastically decreased droplet production by altering the saliva sheet formation. Even so, there’s no substitute for wearing a properly fitted mask! (Image credits: masks – K. Grabowska, droplets – M. Abkarian and H. Stone; research credit: M. Abkarian and H. Stone; via APS Physics)
October 28, 2020
How N95 Masks Work
You might imagine N95 masks as essentially a strainer intended to catch small particles, but as Minute Physics shows in this video, what these masks do is actually much more clever. A dense, strainer-like mask with tiny openings to block microscopic particles would be very tough to breathe through. Instead, N95 masks take advantage of one of the characteristics of tiny things: they’re very sticky. Thanks to van der Waals forces particles that touch a fiber will stick there.
By creating an array of fibers between the particle and a person’s mouth, N95 masks do an excellent job of catching both large particles and tiny ones. They have a harder time with medium-sized particles because airflow around the fibers helps these particles avoid them.
But, luckily, N95 masks have a solution for that problem, too. The fibers of the mask have an electric charge, which helps them attract particles of all sizes and capture them. Of course, as with all masks, they’ll work when worn as intended. (Video and image credit: Minute Physics)
July 20, 2020
How Well Do Masks Work?
Many mixed messages have been spread about the efficacy of masks in preventing transmission of COVID-19. Nevertheless, there is good evidence that they help, as discussed in this video from It’s Okay to Be Smart. Much of the video shows schlieren imaging of a (healthy) individual engaging in regular activities – like talking, breathing, and coughing — with and without a cloth mask.
Now, it’s important to note that what you see in these images is airflow, not the droplets that can carry the virus. However, research has shown that these airflows play a significant role in transporting droplets. It follows that disrupting those airflows can disrupt transmission of diseases passed via droplet. This is one of the key reasons to wear a mask.
Notice how far jets and plumes of air fly from a maskless person’s mouth and nose. We cannot even observe how far momentum carries that air because the area visualized in this schlieren set-up is smaller than the full distance the air moves! But wearing a mask breaks up that flow structure. It reduces the air’s momentum, and it forces any air that does escape to move in smaller, less efficient structures. Even without considering any filtering effects or the fact that masks catch large droplets coming out of the wearer’s mouth, it’s clear that mask-wearing keeps others nearby safer. (Video and image credit: It’s Okay to Be Smart; references)
July 9, 2020
How COVID-19 Affects the Lungs
One of the best known COVID-19 symptoms of this pandemic is difficulty breathing, and while you’ve likely heard a lot about ventilators used to help patients get oxygen, you may not know much about the processes that cause the breathing problems. This video from Deep Look provides a solid overview of the infection route and how lung damage occurs during infection. Perhaps unsurprisingly — this is FYFD, after all — fluid dynamics plays a major role in this process, both under normal conditions and when air sacs in the lungs get damaged by the body’s immune system responding to the virus. (Image and video credit: Deep Look)
May 7, 2020
COVID-19 and Outdoor Exercise
By now you’ve probably come across some blog posts and news articles about a new pre-print study looking at the aerodynamics of running and the potential exposure to exhaled droplets. And you may also have seen articles questioning the accuracy and validity of such simulations. I’ve had several readers submit questions about this, so I dug into both the research and the criticisms, and here are my thoughts:
Is this study scientifically valid?
I’ve seen a number of complaints that since this paper hasn’t been peer-reviewed, we shouldn’t trust anything about it. That seems like an unreasonable overreaction to me considering how many studies receive press attention prior to their actual peer-reviewed publication. This is not a random CFD simulation produced by someone who just downloaded a copy of ANSYS Fluent. This work comes from a well-established group of engineers specializing in sports aerodynamics, and long-time readers will no doubt recognize some of their previous publications. Over the past decade, Blocken and his colleagues have become well-known for detailed experimental and simulation work that indicates larger aerodynamic effects in slipstreams than what we generally recognize.
In this paper, they lay out previous (biological) studies related to SARS and droplet exhalation; they use those papers and several wind tunnel studies to validate computational models of droplet evaporation and runner aerodynamics; and then they use those inputs to simulate how a cloud of exhaled droplets from one runner affects someone running alongside, behind, or in a staggered position relative to the first runner.
In other words, their work includes all the components one would expect of a scientific study, and it makes scientifically justifiable assumptions with regard to its methods. (That’s not, mind you, to say that no one can disagree with some of those choices, but that’s true of plenty of peer-reviewed work as well.) All in all, yes, this is a scientifically valid study, even if it has not yet undergone formal peer-review*.
Can simulations actually tell us anything about virus transmission?
One complaint I’ve seen from both biologists and engineers is that simulations like these don’t actually capture the full physics and biology involved in virus transmission. While I agree with that general sentiment, I would point out two important facts:
1) Blocken et al. acknowledge that this is not a virology study and confine their scientific results to looking at what happens physically to droplets when two people are moving relative to one another. Whether those droplets can transmit disease or not is a question left to biological researchers.
2) Most medical and biological research also does not account for the physics of droplet transmission and transport. For the past century, this research has focused almost exclusively on droplet sizes, with the assumption that large droplets fall quickly and small droplets persist a little longer. To my knowledge, some of the only work done on the actual physics of the turbulent cloud produced by coughing or sneezing comes from Lydia Bourouiba’s lab at MIT. And, to me, one of the fundamental conclusions from her work is that droplets (especially small ones) can persist a lot longer and farther than previously assumed. Can those droplets facilitate transmission of COVID-19? The general consensus I’ve seen expressed by medical experts is no, but, to my knowledge, that is based on opinion and assumption, not on an actual scientific study.
The bottom line
In my opinion, there’s a big disconnect right now between the medical/biological community and the engineering community. To truly capture the physics and biology of COVID-19 transmission requires the expertise and cooperation of both. Right now both sides are making potentially dangerous assertions.
Honestly, based on what I know about aerodynamics, I am personally skeptical as to whether 6 ft of physical separation is truly enough; whether it is or not seems to depend on how transmissible the novel coronavirus is through small droplets, which, again, to my knowledge, is unestablished.
Should we leave more distance than 6ft between us when exercising outdoors? Absolutely. Aerodynamically, it makes perfect sense that following in someone’s slipstream would put you inside their droplet cloud, which needs time and space to disperse. Personally, I’ve sidestepped the question entirely by doing all my cycling indoors while quarantined.
tl;dr: There are a lot of open questions right now about COVID-19 transmission and what qualifies as safe distancing, but it’s smarter to err on the side of more distancing. Don’t hang close to others when running or cycling outdoors.
(Image and research credit: B. Blocken et al.; submitted by Corky W. and Wendy H.)
*I will add that, with my training, I have and do occasionally peer-review studies such as this one, and I read the full paper with the same sort of critical eye I would turn to a paper I was asked to review.
April 14, 2020