VOL 39 I NO 2  June 2016

the australian

HOSPITAL
S U
engineer
P P O R T I N G H E A L T H F A C I L I T I E S M A N A G E M E N T

Keukenhoff in Spring time Brett Petherbridge, IHEA President,

promoting the 2018 IFHE Congress
in Australia

Darryl Pitcher, IFHE Vice-President

introducing the Australian Ambassador

The IHEA Delegation

attending the IFHE Congress

Fire safety: preparing staff

Complexities of waste management

Legionella contamination

PP 100010900
 TECHNICAL PAPERS

Considerations for Kitchen

Exhaust Design and
Specification in Hospital
Environments
JONATHAN BUNGE (M.ENG CHEMICAL), SHANNON ROGER (B.ED)
AND DR ALLAN HECKENBERG (PHD) I AIREPURE AUSTRALIA 2016

Considering the vast number of hospital and commercial kitchens in Australia, one would
expect that exhaust treatment solutions for these applications would be routine. However,
whilst the aims of good kitchen design and the effective treatment and exhaust of cooking
fumes, are easy to express – the diverse range of sites and environments, create a
remarkably complex situation.

D
ifferent cuisine types produce varying amounts
of moisture, grease, smoke and odour and the
resulting cooking fumes comprise a combination of
solid particles, liquid droplets and vapour/gaseous phase
contaminants. Various kitchen exhaust treatment technologies
are available to choose from – each with pros and cons
affecting the cost versus performance scale.
This article seeks to set out the broad aims and parameters
of commercial kitchen exhaust design within hospital
environments to ensure exhausted cooking fume matter
complies with relevant standards to reduce fire risk and
will appease sensitive receptors to the exhaust odours.
Effective treatment of kitchen exhaust requires air temperature
in the duct to be under 50°C and at low contaminant
concentrations; which are both functions of adequate dilution
air from the hood.
AS1668.2 prescribes a minimum exhaust airflow rate
through kitchen hoods depending on the size of the hood,
the type of hood and the appliances under the hood (process
cooking type).
Excerpt of AS1668.2: 3.4.2.2 Hood Type Nomenclature2

RELEVANT STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES

Within Australia, there are standards that govern kitchen
ventilation including council and state regulations, local,
state and federal fire codes and most significantly AS/NZS
1668.11 and AS 1668.22 – all of which are referred to by
the BCA (Building Code of Australia).

MINIMUM EXHAUST AIRFLOWS

Kitchen exhaust hoods have three (3) major functions; the
Note the hood type 7 (proprietary hoods) are calculated
first and most obvious one is to ensure all of the cooking
using alternate proven and tested standards. They will
fumes generated by cooking processes are captured by the
generally have a flow rate of 30-40% less than AS1668.2
hood. The second and third is to ensure enough dilution air
suggests for a regular hood, as vendors maintain that the jet
is captured by the hood to reduce the temperature of the
flow technology enables the capture of contaminants with a
exhaust air and the contaminant concentration of the
lower amount of air. However the reduction of dilution air
exhaust air.
which will affect temperature and contaminate concentration

THE AUSTRALIAN HOSPITAL ENGINEER I JUNE 2016 45

 TECHNICAL PAPERS
may decrease the efficiency of downstream
treatment systems.
Whilst it is recommended to use the kitchen hood exhaust
airflow rate specified by AS 1668.2 as a minimum,
designing for a higher airflow rate than required will
provide your system more chance of success and
decrease the possibility of such issues arising in the future.
DETERMINING EXHAUST
TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
The Australian Standards 1668.2 has clear guidelines to
determine if treatment is needed, and the extent of treatment
(if required). Some key elements are:
• Horizontal exhaust generally needs treatment, and must
be treated above 1000L/s.
• Vertical exhausts are less likely to demand treatment.
• The better the efficiency of the treatment system, the closer
“sensitive odour receptors” may be. These receptors include
air intakes, boundaries or natural ventilation devices.
(Table 1)
Minimum Separation Distances from Discharges to Intakes, Boundary or Natural Ventilation Device3
Airflow rate within
the minimum Distance (m)
distance (L/s)
<200
<400
<600
<800
<1000
≥1000
Additionally, in any treatment system, an odour control
stage relies on particles being removed – before the odour
control section. It is difficult to quantify odour removal, but the
starting point is always to remove particles and measure the
success of particle removal at the 0.3 micron level.
It should be remembered that even when the standards have
been followed, additional treatment may be enforced by
local councils if odour complaints are received. This applies
to both horizontal and vertical exhaust systems, and can
become very costly for the system owner to rectify.
KITCHEN EXHAUST
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
Whilst the end goal for any kitchen exhaust system is to
ensure that no smoke, grease or odour is exhausted into
sensitive locations, the type of treatment system selected is
dependent on the contamination level and the airflow rate.
46 THE AUSTRALIAN HOSPITAL ENGINEER I JUNE 2016
A combination of kitchen exhaust treatment technologies
is often employed to achieve the most cost effective, high
performing results. These technologies target particulates (P)
and/or odour (O) and include hood filters (P), ultra violet
light (UV-C) (PO), ozone (O), electrostatic precipitators (ESP)
(P), multi-staged filter packs (P), activated carbon (O), wet
scrubbers (PO) and dilution/dispersion (O). Wet scrubbers
are tailored for solid fuel applications – this is not relevant
to hospitals and therefore will not be covered in this article.
PARTICULATE (OIL, GREASE AND SMOKE)
CONTROL
Diagram of recommended kitchen exhaust treatment systems by flow rate and contaminant level
Minimum
Kitchens operating within hospital environments often have
1 lower flow rates and lower contaminant levels than most
2 commercial kitchens, making the multi-staged filter pack a
viable and cost effective selection for particulate filtration.
3
This system can easily be paired up with other technologies
4 such as a high efficiency hood filters and UV to increase
5 effectiveness and reduce maintenance costs.
6
Kitchens operating with high particulate contaminations levels
should consider using ESP’s, which are effective at treating
large volumes of highly contaminated air with relatively low
operating costs. This is typically due to a maintenance regime
consisting of cleaning instead of replacement.
Technologies such as high efficiency hood filters and UV-C
may be effective in reducing particulate loads on other
treatment systems but are not seen as a complete solution
and come with some risks that must be controlled. Many UV
systems introduce Ozone into the system, which has been
found to be injurious to health at levels consistently above
50 ppb.4
ODOUR CONTROL
Ideally, a kitchen exhaust treatment system should be
designed to remove particulates (such as grease, oil and
smoke) to a high level before removing the odour. Effective
odour removal technologies such as activated carbon
will provide greater performance and endurance when
protected from grease, oil and smoke particulates. These
contaminations will overload, impede and reduce the

efficiency of activated carbon, rendering its odour removal
properties as ineffective.
To ensure effective odour removal and to save on
unnecessary replacement costs, a treatment system that
incorporates adequate protection of activated carbon
filters or media from grease, oil and smoke particulates is
recommended. This protection may be in the form of pre-
filters, often referred to as “safety filters”. The grade of these
filters may vary from simple G4 to HEPAs depending on the
nature of the primary contamination.
Whilst activated carbon is the preferred method of odour
abatement, this is often paired with UV-C lamps and ozone
to reduce load. UV-C lamps reduce grease and odour
through a mechanism known as photolysis as well as
generating ozone along with other ozonolysis methods such
as corona discharge. Ozone should be used with care, as
it is harmful to human health and Safe Work Australia TWA
exposure standard limits are 0.1 ppm (0.2 mg/m35).
To meet AS 1668.2 requirements that no residual ozone
remains in the final exhaust air, one must provide control
systems that detect and alter ozone generation as the amount
required varies with cooking load. Alternatively, activated
carbon can be placed downstream to adsorb residual ozone.
UV-C and by extension ozone should only be seen as a
viable solution for odour control if one of these control
mechanism are in place and there is at least 2-5 seconds
of residence time in the duct work before exhaustion/carbon
filtration to allow sufficient oxidation to occur.
Excerpt of AS1668.2: 3.4.2.2 Cooking Process Type Nomenclature
MULTI-STAGED FILTER PACK
Multi-stage filter pack systems are ideal for kitchens with
a low to moderate contaminant loading, namely cooking
process types 1, 2, 3 and 7 according to AS1668.2.
These systems typically offer a low capital cost solution
with higher operating costs from the static and filter change
outs. Change out cycles can be reduced by pairing this
system with an efficient hood filter or appropriately
designed UV-C lamps prior to the filter pack.
TECHNICAL PAPERS
Typical Multi-Stage Filter Pack Configuration
These systems are typically designed with four (4) stages
of filtration consisting of three (3) sequential stages of
particulate filtration and one (1) final stage of odour control.
• Pre-filter – 45% of total of grease and smoke
contaminants are captured here; typically a sacrificial G4
filter, which has the shortest lifespan in the system and
requires replacement often.
• Bag filter – 45% of total of grease and smoke
contaminants are captured here; typically a F6-F8 capacity
filter with a medium lifespan.
• Final filter – remaining 10% of total of grease and smoke
contaminants are captured here; typically a H11 efficiency
mini pleat filter or HEPA 95% DOP at 0.3 micron rating
with a longer lifespan.
• Activated carbon – Protected by the particle filters,
activated carbon media or filters are in place to effectively
remove odour.
It is possible for these systems to handle kitchen exhaust with
a higher contaminant loading, however this will increase the
change out frequency required.
ESP’S
ESP’s are ideal for kitchens with a higher contaminant
loading, namely cooking process types 4, 5 and 6 according
to AS 1668.2.
ESP’s use electrostatic charges to ionise particles initially
before collection on plates of the opposition charge. If the
ESP is doing its job – there will be extensive contamination
trapped on the plates of the ESP. These plates must be
cleaned/regenerated periodically to remove grease
and smoke particles. An ESP is able to clean air of all
contaminant levels, however the required frequency of cell
cleaning directly relates to the contaminant load; a higher
contaminant load means more frequent washing of the cells
to maintain performance of the system.
Manual washes of ESP cells may need to take place
anywhere from daily to monthly depending on load; and
a short wash cycle will add significant maintenance costs,
THE AUSTRALIAN HOSPITAL ENGINEER I JUNE 2016 47
 TECHNICAL PAPERS

Kaire Unit: Multi-Staged Filtration Systems for the Treatment of Hospital Kitchen Exhaust
The Kaire Unit by Airepure is a multi-staged filtration system
designed to control the light to moderate kitchen exhaust
emissions* typified by hospital based commercial kitchens.
This system incorporates four stages of filtration to control light
to moderate smoke, grease and cooking odours.
The first three stages utilise industry standard filters to deliver
high performance particulate filtration at minimal cost: AIRFLOW
• Stage 1 : Pre filtration stage, utilising Airepure G4 Pure-V
pleated panel filter or Honeycomb grease filter
• Stage 2 : Intermediate filtration stage, utilising Airepure
AirePak F6-F8 multi-pocket filter
• Stage 3 : Final particulate filtration stage, utilising Airepure
H11 95% DOP AireFlow-V rigid mini pleat filter
Odour Final Intermediate Pre-
The final stage (four) uses tailored activated carbon to Control Filter Filter Filter
Purafil H11 F7 G4
remove cooking odours: PM18 AireFlow-V AirePak Pure-V

• Stage 4 : Custom odour control stage, utilising Purafil PM18/

* Cooking process types 1, 2, 3 & 7 as outlined in AS1668:2012. Note: Cooking
PK18 mediaPAK modules, Purafil PuraGrid filters or Airepure types 4-6 are suitable if a high efficiency hood filter (coil type) is used in conjunc-
Aireflow-CC activated carbon rigid mini pleat filters. tion with the Kaire Unit, or if the owner is prepared to change filters regularly.

Airepure Australia Servicing Health Service and Health Science Industries

Airepure Australia is a leading national air filtration company
providing unique, powerful and integrated air filtration
solutions, ranging from basic HVAC filtration and odour
control right through to high end HEPA/ULPA filtration and
airborne containment technologies.
Airepure have office, warehouse and technical support
facilities in all major cities, including Melbourne, Canberra,
Sydney, Brisbane, Townsville, Adelaide, Perth, and Hobart.
Our in-house engineering, estimation and service depart-
ments ensure we can support our clients through the entire
process from system design to installation as well as after sales
service and maintenance.
Airepure offer a range product for health service and health
science applications; including multi-staged filtration packs
and large-scale, self washing ESP systems for kitchen exhaust,
Focus UCV systems for operating theatres, HEPA filters and
terminal HEPA housings, air showers, pass through cabinets
and custom laminar air booths or ceilings, Flanders CSC
airborne containment air filtration systems, AS/NZS
2243.8:2014 compliant manifolded process fume exhaust
and odour dilution systems, Purafil gas-phase air filtration
systems for hazardous, corrosive, toxic or odourous gas,
general AHU filters and pre-filters.

ph:1300 886 353 www.airepure.com.au aire

australia
pure ®

48 THE AUSTRALIAN HOSPITAL ENGINEER I JUNE 2016


particularly if the treatment system is placed in a hard to
access location.
More capital intensive ESP systems will have programmed
wash systems to ensure the system is automatically
maintained for optimum performance, this ensures lower
operation costs over time. An automatic wash system for the
ESP can be programmed to run daily, weekly, fortnightly etc.
This can extend the frequency required for a manual clean
from 1-5 years depending on the contaminant load.
Typical Large Scale Self-Washing ESP System Configuration
Large scale, self-washing ESP systems may include the
following options:
• Pre-filter – typically a mesh filter to capture large
particles which may short circuit the ESP cell.
• ESP Cell – removes smoke and grease particulates, and
requires regular cleaning to maintain performance.
• Auto-wash function – typically a programmable
automatic wash and fan dry function that sprays the ESP
cell with a water and detergent mix to keep it running
effectively and extend manual cleaning intervals.
• Safety bag filter – typically a F6-8 bag filter used to
protect the odour removal function of the activated carbon
from poorly maintained ESPs.
• Activated carbon – for effective odour removal.
AIR VELOCITY
Kitchen exhaust systems are typically designed to operate at
1.8m/s (650L/s per 600 x 600mm area) to allow enough
residence time for the technologies to effectively remove the
smoke, grease, particulates and odours. Do not be tempted
to raise the air velocity above 1.8m/s to reduce the size of
the treatment system, as this will reduce the efficiency of the
system and directly increase energy and maintenance costs.
For example; a multi-staged filter pack system* running at
1.8m/s will clean the exhaust air more effectively and cost
up to $1.5K less in energy costs annually compared to a
system running at 2.5m/s. (*2,500L/s system, hospital hours
of operation).
SYSTEM EFFICIENCY
The particle size of 0.3 micron is typically selected as the
test point for rating filtration efficiency because particles
above and below this size are generally easier to capture –
and these are the most “elusive”. This principle applies
to all technologies (filters, ESPs, UV, ozone), so if you want
TECHNICAL PAPERS
to compare apples to apples, always compare system
efficiency at a particle size of 0.3 microns.
Most Penetrating Particle Size – Fractional Efficiency by Particle Size
The particle size of smoke (an easily visualised pollutant) ranges
between 0.3 to 1.0 microns. To ensure an adequate amount of
smoke particles are captured, you would require high efficiency
filtration at this particle size – 95% efficiency at 0.3 microns.
It seems surprising, but a system which is rated as 95%
efficient at 0.01 microns is actually inferior to a system
that is rated as 95% efficient at 0.3 microns. This is due
Brownian motion (diffusion) which describes the motion
of extremely small particles and how it differs from bulk
flow. It demonstrates why smaller 0.01 micron particles are
easier to trap than the 0.3 micron particles. In fact, particles
of 0.01 microns are as easy to catch as particles of 10
microns. The wise buyer and specifier will always judge
system performance with ratings at 0.3 micron – the most
challenging particles to capture.
Additionally, air velocity directly impacts system efficiency.
For example; an ESP operating at 3.5m/s air velocity would
only be 40% efficient at 0.3 microns – even though it rates
at 95% efficiency at 0.01 microns. This same ESP operating
at a lower velocity – 1.8m/s would rate at 95% efficiency at
0.3 microns – thus be comparatively effective. Therefore, look
for ratings at the hardest particle size (0.3 micron) and at a
sensible air flow velocity (around 1.8m/sec).
Despite operating at the desired velocity, the efficiency of
a system can be severely impacted by its location. If the
treatment system is placed directly after or before duct
bends with short transitions; the flow of air will not be evenly
distributed through the treatment system, rendering a portion
of the system useless. It is recommended to use industry
standard transition sizes and allow 2-4 duct diameters
of straight run either side of the treatment system.
SERVICE AND MAINTENANCE
Every effort to design a successful commercial kitchen exhaust
can be defeated by an inadequate service program. The
various filter sections, ducts and fans will become coated by
contamination over time. If these are not serviced, the chance
of fire and other issues is amplified considerably.
Ducts must be cleaned by regulations (AS/NZS
1668.1:2015), so in the building phase it is essential that
THE AUSTRALIAN HOSPITAL ENGINEER I JUNE 2016 49
 TECHNICAL PAPERS
duct cleaning ports are inserted in compliance with design
standards. It is also important that they be practically
accessed, which is often a tricky thing to achieve.
It is a requirement of AS1668.2 to maintain the performance
of a kitchen exhaust treatment system. There is significant
cost involved in the maintenance of any kitchen exhaust
system, and the users, facility managers and owners must be
made aware of these costs and resist the tendency to “short-
change” budgets in this area – as responsibilities to; safety,
public health and council compliance are important.
Similarly, regular maintenance of fans, electrical systems
and the hood filters is essential to have the system operational
at the intended flow rates over time.
In the design phase – attention should be given to some of
the potential cost savings that can be achieved for “long-
term-operation” with larger capital investments at the building
stage, e.g. auto-washing filter systems vs manually changed
filter systems.
FINAL THOUGHTS
Whilst there are many factors affecting the design,
implementation and maintenance of a successful kitchen
exhaust treatment system; there are guidelines and sound
recommendations available to assist with your compliance to
50 THE AUSTRALIAN HOSPITAL ENGINEER I JUNE 2016
relevant standards and local council regulations, as well as
your specific objectives for performance and cost.
Key considerations include:
• Use the kitchen hood exhaust airflow rate specified by AS
1668.2 as a minimum and design for a higher airflow rate
than required to provide your system with a greater chance
of success.
• An effective and efficient kitchen exhaust treatment system
should remove particles before odour.
• Kitchen exhaust systems are typically designed to operate
at 1.8m/s (650L/s per 600 x 600mm area). Operating
above this velocity will directly reduce efficiency and
increase energy and maintenance costs.
• Always judge particulate removal system performance with
ratings at 0.3 micron – the most challenging particles to
capture – and be wary of specifications of performance
at 0.01 microns.
• Every kitchen exhaust technology has its own pros and
cons affecting the cost versus performance scale – and this
should be investigated with due diligence.
• A singular kitchen exhaust treatment technology may
not provide a complete solution. Selective pairing of
compatible technologies may increase effectiveness and
reduce maintenance costs.
• Strict guidelines regarding UV-C and ozone technologies
are provided to ensure workplace safety for your staff
and patients.
• Always budget for maintenance – it is a requirement
of AS1668.2 and a functional kitchen exhaust.
Airepure Australia offer a range of products, services and consulting
expertise that can assist you with your compliance to AS/NZS 1668.1
and AS 1668.2, as well as ACHS, DHS VIC Guidelines (and equivalent
for QLD, WA and NSW), ISO/IEC 17025:2005 Requirements, AS/
NZS 2243.3:2010 and AS/NZS 2243.8:2014. Airepure is a leading
national air filtration company providing unique, powerful and integrated
air filtration solutions, ranging from basic HVAC filtration and odour
control right through to high end HEPA/ULPA filtration and airborne
containment technologies. Airepure recommends ELTA and Fantech Fans.
For more information, visit www.airepure.com.au or call 1300 886 353.
REFERENCES
1. Australia S. The use of ventilation and air conditioning in buildings.
Part 1: Fire and smoke control in buildings: SAI Global 2015
2. Australia S. The use of ventilation and air conditioning in buildings.
Part 2: Mechanical ventilation in buildings: SAI Global Limited 2012
3. Yeung L, To W. Size distributions of the aerosols emitted from
commercial cooking processes – indoor and built environment.
2008;17(3):220-9.
4. Stedman JR, Anderson HR, Atkinson RW, Maynard RL. Emergency
hospital admissions for respiratory disorders attributable to summer time
ozone episodes in Great Britain. Thorax. 1997 Nov;52(11):958-63.
5. Based on TWA (time weighted average) over 8 hour day, 5 days
per week.