Indoor air quality is a major concern in the modern environment. Amongst different indoor pollutants, submicron particulate matter (PM) is a significant health concern. Although several PM control technologies are available, they have different drawbacks. In this regard, ionisation has multiple advantages for its application in indoors. Therefore, the current study has integrated a charging module with an Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP) plate, forming a hybrid module. The performance of six ionisation devices, including four commercially available carbon brushes, a customised spiked static bar and a stainless steel discharge electrode, was evaluated with respect to the efficiency of PM capture from major indoor sources. Ionisers were ranked as best performing, low performing and poorly performing based on PM capture efficiency. Results from the study showed a V-shaped curve, with total efficiency ranging from 10.47% to 98.02% for sizes of 10 to 1000 nm. A trade-off between ion generation rate and orientation was found to affect PM capture in the tested ionisers. Due to the generation of ultrafine PM, total efficiency of ESP was reduced with PM sources like mosquito coils (75.68%) as well as mixed aerosols (86.46%). Additionally, the study compared ozone generation from the tested ionisation devices, thereby enabling their safer use in indoor environments.
AfshariAEkbergLForejtLMoJRahimiSSiegelJChenWWargockiPZuramiS, and ZhangJ. Electrostatic precipitators as an indoor air cleaner—a literature review. Sustainability2020; 12(21): 8774.
2.
ManisalidisIStavropoulouEStavropoulosA, and BezirtzoglouE. Environmental and health impacts of air pollution: a review. Front Public Health2020; 8(14): 1–13.
3.
BoedickerEKEmersonEWMcMeekingGRPatelSVanceME, and FarmerDK. Fates and spatial variations of accumulation mode particles in a multi zone indoor environment during the homechem campaign. Environ Sci Process Impacts2021; 23(7): 1029–1039.
4.
MorawskaLAgranovskiVRistovskiZ, and JamriskaM. Effect of face velocity and the nature of aerosol on the collection of submicrometer particles by electrostatic precipitator. Indoor Air2002; 12(2): 129–137.
5.
GawronskaH, and BakeraB. Phytoremediation of particulate matter from indoor air by Chlorophytum comosum L. plants. Air Qual Atmos Health2014; 8(3): 265–272.
6.
KumarAMalyanV, and SahuM. Air pollution control technologies for indoor particulate matter pollution: a review. Aerosol Sci Eng2023; 7(2): 261–282.
7.
OffermannFJSextroRGFiskWJGrimsrudDTNazaroffWWNeroAVRevzan KL, and YaterJ. Control of respirable particles in indoor air with portable air cleaners. Atmos Environ 19671985; 19(11): 1761–1771.
8.
KumarANawaleP, and SahuM. Design, development and performance evaluation of a miniature electrostatic precipitator in an indoor environment. J Electrost2025; 134: 104038.
9.
LiCWangHZengXLiXJinRChiYLiuQBaiLLiZ, and ThamKW. Strategies for enhancing performance sustainability of air filters: challenges and future directions. Sep Purif Technol2025; 376: 133912.
10.
AltunAF, and KilicM. Utilization of electrostatic precipitators for healthy indoor environments. E3S Web Conf2019; 111: 02020.
11.
KimYKimHKoS, and KwacL. Analysis of plasma ion distribution and dust collection efficiency of carbon brush air purifiers. Appl Sci2023; 13(4): 2101.
12.
Lee BUYermakovM, and GrinshpunSA. Removal of fine and ultrafine particles from indoor air environments by the unipolar ion emission. Atmos Environ2004; 38(29): 4815–4823.
13.
BlondeauPAbadieMODurandAKaluznyPParatSGinestetAPugnetDTourreillesC, and DuforestelT. Experimental characterization of the removal efficiency and energy effectiveness of central air cleaners. Energy Built Environ2021; 2(1): 1–12.
14.
ChenLLimT, and Jin KimY. Electrostatic precipitator for fine and ultrafine particle removal from indoor air environments. Sep Purif Technol2020; 247: 116964.
15.
GuptaNAgarwalASinghalR, and Sanjay KJ. A comparative assessment of the some commercially available portable bipolar air ionisers particulate pollutants (PM2.5, PM10) removal efficacies and potential byproduct ozone emission. Aerosol Sci Eng2023; 7(3): 315–324.
16.
Hernandez DiazDMartos FerreiraDHernandez AbadVVillar RiberaRTarresQ, and Rojas SolaJI. Indoor PM2.5 removal efficiency of two different non thermal plasma systems. J Environ Manage2021; 278: 111515.
17.
ZhuYWeiZYangXTaoSZhangY, and WenfengS. Comprehensive control of PM2.5 capture and ozone emission in two stage electrostatic precipitators. Sci Total Environ2023; 858: 159900.
18.
PranavM, and FaramarzF. Effects of ionization on the filtration of fine and ultrafine particles in indoor air. Indoor Air2023; 2023(1): 6359137.
19.
SahuVElumalaiSPGautamSSinghNK, and SinghP. Characterization of indoor settled dust and investigation of indoor air quality in different micro environments. Int J Environ Health Res2018; 28(4): 419–431.
20.
PushpawelaBJayaratneRNguyA, and MorawskaL. Efficiency of ionizers in removing airborne particles in indoor environments. J Electrost2017; 90: 79–84.
21.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-2023: Thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy. American society of heating, refrigerating and air conditioning engineers, Atlanta, Georgia, 2023.
22.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2025: Ventilation for indoor air quality. American society of heating, refrigerating and air conditioning engineers, Atlanta, Georgia, 2025.
23.
LeeCWVoTTTWeeYChiangYCChiMCChenMLHsuLFFangMLLeeKHGuoSEChengHC, and LeeIT. The adverse impact of incense smoke on human health: from mechanisms to implications. J Inflamm Res2021; 14: 5451–5472.
24.
LeeSC, and WangB. Characteristics of emissions of air pollutants from mosquito coils and candles burning in a large environmental chamber. Atmos Environ2006; 40(12): 2128–2138.
25.
KumarAANawalePSahuM, and MayyaYS. Theoretical and experimental studies on characterization and collection of particulate matter in single wire, single stage electrostatic precipitator with square crosssection. J Air Waste Manag Assoc2025; 75(5): 405–423.
26.
PokhrelRPGordonJFiddlerMN, and BililignS. Impact of combustion conditions on physical and morphological properties of biomass burning aerosol. Aerosol Sci Technol2020; 55(1): 80–91.
27.
YadavVKChoudharyNHeena KhanSKhayalARaviRKKumarPModiS, and GnanamoorthyG. Incense and incense sticks: types, components, origin and their religious beliefs and importance among different religions. J Bio Innov2020; 9(6): 1420–1439.
28.
KhandelwalNTiwariRSainiR, and TanejaA. Particulate and trace metal emission from mosquito coil and cigarette burning in environmental chamber. SN Appl Sci2019; 1(5): 41.
29.
StabileLFuocoFC, and BuonannoG. Characteristics of particles and black carbon emitted by combustion of incenses, candles and anti mosquito products. Build Environ2012; 56: 184–191.
30.
SeeSW, and BalasubramanianR. Characterization of fine particle emissions from incense burning. Build Environ2011; 46(5): 1074–1080.
31.
SuiZZhangYPengYNorrisPCaoY, and PanWP. Fine particulate matter emission and size distribution characteristics in an ultra-low emission power plant. Fuel2016; 185: 863–871.
32.
SultanZMNilssonG, and MageeRP. Removal of ultrafine particles in indoor air: performance of various portable air cleaner technologies. Hvacr Res2011; 17(4): 513–525.
33.
ParkDHKwakJKimYSLeeHLeeYKimYJHanB, and KimHJ. A study on the particle removal efficiency and durability according to the material of the ionizer of the fiber brush type electric precipitator. IEEE Trans Ind Appl2023; 59(1): 486–491.
34.
GlytsosTOndracekJDzumbovaLKopanakisI, and LazaridisM. Characterization of particulate matter concentrations during controlled indoor activities. Atmos Environ2010; 44(12): 1539–1549.
35.
JuswonoUWardoyoAWidodoCNoorJ, and SantosoD. Correlation between exposure to transfluthrin and the change in dielectric properties and deformed cells of mice. Pol J Environ Stud2020; 30(1): 663–670.
36.
ParkerGJOngCHMangesRBStapletonEMComellasAPPetersTM, and StoneEA. A novel method of collecting and chemically characterizing milligram quantities of indoor airborne particulate matter. Aerosol Air Qual Res2019; 19(11): 2387–2395.
37.
AlessandroEO, and GuerraVG. Influence of particle concentration and residence time on the efficiency of nanoparticulate collection by electrostatic precipitation. J Electrost2018; 96: 1–9.
38.
SchraufnagelDE. The health effects of ultrafine particles. Exp Mol Med2020; 52(3): 311–317.
39.
AlshawaARussellAR, and NizkorodovSA. Kinetic analysis of competition between aerosol particle removal and generation by ionization air purifiers. Environ Sci Technol2007; 41(7): 2498–2504.
40.
WeschlerCJ, and ShieldsHC. Indoor ozone/terpene reactions as a source of indoor particles. Atmos Environ1999; 33(15): 2301–2312.
41.
KimHJHanBChangGW, and KimYJ. Ozone emission and electrical characteristics of ionizers with different electrode materials, numbers and diameters. IEEE Trans Ind Appl2017; 53(1): 459–465.
42.
SungJHKimMKimYJHanBHongKJ, and KimHJ. Ultrafine particle cleaning performance of an ion spray electrostatic air cleaner emitting zero ozone with diffusion charging by carbon fiber. Build Environ2019; 166: 106422–106422.
43.
LinCWHuangSHKuoYMChangKNWuCS, and ChenCC. From electrostatic precipitation to nanoparticle generation. J Aerosol Sci2012; 51: 57–65.
