Estimating airborne trichloramine levels in indoor swimming pools using the well-mixed box model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exposure to airborne disinfection by-products, especially trichloramine (TCA), could cause various occupational health effects in indoor swimming pools. However, TCA concentration measurements involve specialized analysis conducted in specific laboratories, which can result in significant costs and time constraints. As an alternative, modeling techniques for estimating exposures are promising in addressing these challenges. This study aims to predict airborne TCA concentrations in indoor swimming pools using a mathematical model, the well-mixed box model, found in the IHMOD tool, freely available on the American Industrial Hygiene Association website. The model’s predictions are compared with TCA concentrations measured during various bather load scenarios. The research involved conducting 2-hr successive workplace measurements over 16- to 18-hr periods in four indoor swimming pools in Quebec, Canada. TCA concentrations were estimated using the well-mixed box model, assuming a homogeneous mixing of air within the swimming pool environment. A novel approach was developed to estimate the TCA generation rate from swimming pool water, incorporating the number of swimmers in the model. Average measured concentrations of TCA were 0.24, 0.26, 0.14, and 0.34 mg/m3 for swimming pools 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The ratio of these measured average concentrations to their corresponding predicted values ranged from 0.51 to 1.30, 0.67 to 1.04, 0.57 to 1.14, and 0.68 to 1.49 for the respective swimming pools. In a worst-case scenario simulating the swimming pool at full capacity (maximum bathers allowed), TCA concentrations were estimated as 0.23, 0.36, 0.14, and 0.37 mg/m3 for swimming pools 1, 2, 3, and 4. Recalculated concentrations by adjusting the number of swimmers so as not to exceed the recommended occupational limit concentration of 0.35 mg/m3 gives a maximum number of swimmers of 63 and 335 instead of currently 80 and 424 for swimming pools 2 and 4, respectively. Similarly, for swimming pools 1 and 3, the maximum number of swimmers could be 173 and 398 (instead of the current 160 and 225, respectively). These results demonstrated that the model could be used to estimate and anticipate airborne TCA levels in indoor swimming pools across various scenarios.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".