logo

SCIENCE CHINA Technological Sciences, Volume 60 , Issue 3 : 355-362(2017) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-016-0621-7

Indoor and outdoor particle concentration distributions of a typical meeting room during haze and clear-sky days

More info
  • ReceivedAug 21, 2016
  • AcceptedNov 24, 2016
  • PublishedJan 17, 2017

Abstract

Air quality has increasingly been a great concern all over the world, and the good command of indoor and outdoor air qualities is of benefit to the air pollution alleviation by various measures. In this work, the indoor and outdoor particle concentration distributions of a typical meeting room during the haze and clear-sky days were measured. The results show that the mass concentrations of the indoor and outdoor PM1, PM2.5, PM10 in heavy haze days are 114±1.8, 135.5±3.2, 161.7±12.8 μg/m3 and 146.4±8.4, 192.3±10.2, 431.4±34.8 μg/m3 respectively, corresponding to 39.3±1.5, 58.5±2.5, 127.9±10.5 μg/m3 and 54.5±4.0, 77.8±6.0, 173.4±21.6 μg/m3 in clear-sky days. Both in the haze and clear-sky days, the number distribution of particles reaches its peak value at the diameter of 0.25 μm, but the particle number concentration in the haze day is two times greater than the clear-sky day. The indoor particle concentration is not uniform with the peak value at the corner, which can be effectively alleviated by the air cleaner. The in-situ measurements of particle concentrations in a meeting room are helpful for the indoor air quality control.


Funded by

National Natural Science Foundation of China(51476055)


Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51476055).


References

[1] Chan C K, Yao X. Air pollution in mega cities in China. Atmos Environ, 2008, 42: 1-42 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[2] Pope III C A, Ezzati M, Dockery D W. Tradeoffs between income, air pollution and life expectancy: Brief report on the US experience, 1980–2000. Environ Res, 2015, 142: 591-593 CrossRef PubMed ADS Google Scholar

[3] Shimada Y, Matsuoka Y. Analysis of indoor PM2.5 exposure in Asian countries using time use survey. Sci Total Environ, 2011, 409: 5243-5252 CrossRef Google Scholar

[4] Martinelli N, Olivieri O, Girelli D. Air particulate matter and cardiovascular disease: A narrative review. Eur J Internal Med, 2013, 24: 295-302 CrossRef Google Scholar

[5] Lepeule J, Laden F, Dockery D, et al. Chronic exposure to fine particles and mortality: An extended follow-up of the Harvard six cities study from 1974 to 2009. Environ Health Per, 2012, 120: 965–970. Google Scholar

[6] Zhou M, He G, Liu Y, et al. The associations between ambient air pollution and adult respiratory mortality in 32 major Chinese cities, 2006–2010. Environ Res, 2015, 137: 278-286 CrossRef PubMed ADS Google Scholar

[7] World Health Organization. Air quality guidelines global update 2005. WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2006. Google Scholar

[8] Klepeis N E, Nelson W C, Ott W R, et al. The national human activity pattern survey (NHAPS): A resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol, 2001, 11: 231-252 CrossRef Google Scholar

[9] Chithra V S, Shiva Nagendra S M. Indoor air quality investigations in a naturally ventilated school building located close to an urban roadway in Chennai, India. Build Environ, 2012, 54: 159-167 CrossRef Google Scholar

[10] Martuzevicius D, Grinshpun S A, Lee T, et al. Traffic-related PM2.5 aerosol in residential houses located near major highways: Indoor versus outdoor concentrations. Atmos Environ, 2008, 42: 6575-6585 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[11] Chan A T. Indoor-outdoor relationships of particulate matter and nitrogen oxides under different outdoor meteorological conditions. Atmos Environ, 2002, 36: 1543-1551 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[12] Koponen I K, Asmi A, Keronen P, et al. Indoor air measurement campaign in Helsinki, Finland 1999—The effect of outdoor air pollution on indoor air. Atmos Environ, 2001, 35: 1465-1477 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[13] Yang F, Ye B, He K, et al. Characterization of atmospheric mineral components of PM2.5 in Beijing and Shanghai, China. Sci Total Environ, 2005, 343: 221-230 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[14] Chen C, Zhao B. Review of relationship between indoor and outdoor particles: I/O ratio, infiltration factor and penetration factor. Atmos Environ, 2011, 45: 275-288 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[15] Quang T N, He C, Morawska L, et al. Influence of ventilation and filtration on indoor particle concentrations in urban office buildings. Atmos Environ, 2013, 79: 41-52 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[16] Hänninen O, Hoek G, Mallone S, et al. Seasonal patterns of outdoor PM infiltration into indoor environments: Review and meta-analysis of available studies from different climatological zones in Europe. Air Qual Atmos Health, 2011, 4: 221-233 CrossRef Google Scholar

[17] Nelson P R, Sears S B, Heavner D L. Application of methods for evaluating air cleaner performance. Indoor Built Environ, 1993, 2: 111-117 CrossRef Google Scholar

[18] Ongwandee M, Kruewan A. Evaluation of portable household and in-car air cleaners for air cleaning potential and ozone-initiated pollutants. Indoor Built Environ, 2012, 22: 659–668. Google Scholar

[19] Jin X M, Yang L J, Du X Z, et al. Particle transport characteristics in indoor environment with an air cleaner. Indoor Built Environ, 2015, 31: 189–207. Google Scholar

[20] Shaughnessy R J, Sextro R G. What is an effective portable air cleaning device? A review. J Occup Environ Hygiene, 2006, 3: 169-181 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[21] Noh K C, Oh M D. Variation of clean air delivery rate and effective air cleaning ratio of room air cleaning devices. Build Environ, 2015, 84: 44-49 CrossRef Google Scholar

[22] Novoselac A, Siegel J A. Impact of placement of portable air cleaning devices in multizone residential environments. Build Environ, 2009, 44: 2348-2356 CrossRef Google Scholar

[23] Noh K C, Yook S J. Evaluation of clean air delivery rates and operating cost effectiveness for room air cleaner and ventilation system in a small lecture room. Energy Build, 2016, 119: 111-118 CrossRef Google Scholar

[24] Rim D, Novoselac A. Ventilation effectiveness as an indicator of occupant exposure to particles from indoor sources. Build Environ, 2010, 45: 1214-1224 CrossRef Google Scholar

[25] Zhang T T, Wang S, Sun G, et al. Flow impact of an air conditioner to portable air cleaning. Build Environ, 2010, 45: 2047-2056 CrossRef Google Scholar

[26] Elser M, Huang R J, Wolf R, et al. New insights into PM2.5 chemical composition and sources in two major cities in China during extreme haze events using aerosol mass spectrometry. Atmos Chem Phys, 2016, 16: 3207-3225 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[27] Chen A, Cao Q, Zhou J, et al. Indoor and outdoor particles in an air-conditioned building during and after the 2013 haze in Singapore. Build Environ, 2016, 99: 73-81 CrossRef Google Scholar

[28] Li Y L, Zhang D C, Jin X M, et al. Transportation characteristics of motor vehicle pollutants near Beijing typical expressway. Sci China Tech Sci, 2016, 59: 468-475 CrossRef Google Scholar

  • Figure 1

    (Color online) Test meeting room in the teaching building. (a) Meeting room location; (b) meeting room and measuring points.

  • Figure 2

    (Color online) Particle mass and number concentrations of the indoor and outdoor air in a heavy haze day based on 1-min-interval measurements. (a) Mass concentration of PM1; (b) mass concentration of PM2.5; (c) mass concentration of PM10; (d) number concentration of PM.

  • Figure 3

    (Color online) Particle mass and number concentrations of the indoor and outdoor air in a clear sky day based on 1-min-interval measurements. (a) Mass concentration of PM1; (b) mass concentration of PM2.5; (c) mass concentration of PM10; (d) number concentration of PM2.5.

  • Figure 4

    Number concentration distributions of the particles with the diameter range of 0.25–2.25 μm in outdoor air. (a) Heavy haze day; (b) clear sky day.

  • Figure 5

    (Color online) Average number and mass concentration distributions of particulate matter of PM1, PM2.5 and PM10 measured at six points in indoor air. (a) Number concentration; (b) mass concentration.

  • Figure 6

    (Color online) Variations of particle mass concentrations of PM1, PM2.5 and PM10 in indoor air with time based on 1-min-interval measurements (47 min ago with no air cleaner, 47 min later with air cleaner).

  • Figurer 7

    (Color online) Variation of particle number concentration in indoor air with time based on 1-min-interval measurements with and without air cleaner (47 min ago with no air cleaner, 47 min later with air cleaner).

  • Table 1   Mass concentration ratios of PM1 to PM10 and PM2.5 to PM10 for indoor and outdoor air in haze and clear sky days

    Weather condition

    Site

    mPM1/mPM10 (%)

    mPM2.5/mPM10 (%)

    Hazy day

    indoor

    70.5

    83.8

    outdoor

    33.9

    44.6

    Clear-sky day

    indoor

    30.7

    45.7

    outdoor

    31.4

    44.9

  • Table 2   Ranges and standard deviations for particle number and mass concentrations measured at six points in indoor air

    Site

    values

    mPM1 (μg/m3)

    mPM2.5 (μg/m3)

    mPM10 (μg/m3)

    n (particles/cm3)

    1

    maximum

    8.5

    30.8

    84.9

    8.58×104

    minimum

    7.6

    14.6

    37.3

    8.09×104

    mean

    8.0

    21.2

    53.9

    8.36×104

    std. deviation

    0.3

    4.5

    13.0

    1.22×103

    2

    maximum

    9.5

    16.4

    51.4

    1.08×105

    minimum

    8.0

    12.9

    31.0

    8.80×104

    mean

    8.6

    14.3

    38.2

    9.54×104

    std. deviation

    0.5

    0.8

    4.2

    6.34×103

    3

    maximum

    12.1

    18.2

    56.2

    1.39×105

    minimum

    9.5

    13.6

    31.4

    1.08×105

    mean

    10.7

    15.6

    39.8

    1.23×105

    std. deviation

    0.7

    1.1

    4.6

    8.85×103

    4

    maximum

    14.4

    21.0

    47.5

    1.70×105

    minimum

    12.2

    16.4

    31.5

    1.41×105

    mean

    13.4

    18.9

    37.8

    1.56×105

    std. deviation

    0.6

    1.0

    3.1

    7.81×103

    5

    maximum

    17.3

    24.4

    44.5

    2.04×105

    minimum

    14.2

    19.4

    29.9

    1.67×105

    mean

    16.2

    22.6

    38.7

    1.91×105

    std. deviation

    0.8

    1.2

    2.5

    9.38×103

    6

    maximum

    22.6

    31.8

    62.9

    2.74×105

    minimum

    17.2

    23.3

    39.6

    2.04×105

    mean

    19.9

    27.3

    52.1

    2.40×105

    std. deviation

    1.6

    2.3

    5.9

    2.07×104

  • Table 3   Ratios of indoor average number concentration ni to outdoor one no for six measuring points while the windows are closed

    Site

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    Outdoor

    n

    (particles/cm3)

    8.36×104

    9.54×104

    1.23×105

    1.56×105

    1.91×105

    2.40×105

    9.60×104

    ni/no

    0.87

    0.99

    1.28

    1.62

    1.99

    2.50

Copyright 2020 Science China Press Co., Ltd. 《中国科学》杂志社有限责任公司 版权所有

京ICP备17057255号       京公网安备11010102003388号