Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that reliable risk assessment of venues is still challenging and resulted in the indiscriminate closure of many venues worldwide. Therefore, this study used an experimental, numerical and analytical approach to investigate the airborne transmission risk potential of differently ventilated, sized and shaped venues. The data were used to assess the magnitude of effect of various mitigation measures and to develop recommendations. Here we show that, in general, positions in the near field of an emission source were at high risk, while the risk of infection from positions in the far field varied depending on the ventilation strategy. Occupancy, airflow rate, residence time, virus variants, activity level and face masks affected the individual and global infection risk in all venues. The global infection risk was lowest for the displacement ventilation case, making it the most effective ventilation strategy for keeping airborne transmission and the number of secondary cases low, compared to mixing or natural ventilation.