A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Outdoor Versus Indoor Contributions to Indoor Particulate Matter (PM) Determined by Mass Balance Methods
This study compares an indoor-outdoor air-exchange mass balance model (IO model) with a chemical mass balance (CMB) model. The models were used to determine the contribution of outdoor sources and indoor resuspension activities to indoor particulate matter (PM) concentrations. Simultaneous indoor and outdoor measurements of PM concentration, chemical composition, and air-exchange rate were made for five consecutive days at a single-family residence using particle counters, neph-elometers, and filter samples of integrated PM with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 μm (PM2.5) and PM with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 5 μm (PM5). Chemical compositions were determined by inductively coupled plasma mass-spectrometry. During three high-activity days, prescribed activities, such as cleaning and walking, were conducted over a period of 4–6 hr. For the remaining two days, indoor activities were minimal. Indoor sources accounted for 60–89% of the PM2.5 and more than 90% of the PM5 for the high-activity days. For the minimal-activity days, indoor sources accounted for 27–47% of PM2.5 and 44–60% of the PM5. Good agreement was found between the two mass balance methods. Indoor PM2.5 originating outdoors averaged 53% of outdoor concentrations.
Outdoor Versus Indoor Contributions to Indoor Particulate Matter (PM) Determined by Mass Balance Methods
This study compares an indoor-outdoor air-exchange mass balance model (IO model) with a chemical mass balance (CMB) model. The models were used to determine the contribution of outdoor sources and indoor resuspension activities to indoor particulate matter (PM) concentrations. Simultaneous indoor and outdoor measurements of PM concentration, chemical composition, and air-exchange rate were made for five consecutive days at a single-family residence using particle counters, neph-elometers, and filter samples of integrated PM with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 μm (PM2.5) and PM with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 5 μm (PM5). Chemical compositions were determined by inductively coupled plasma mass-spectrometry. During three high-activity days, prescribed activities, such as cleaning and walking, were conducted over a period of 4–6 hr. For the remaining two days, indoor activities were minimal. Indoor sources accounted for 60–89% of the PM2.5 and more than 90% of the PM5 for the high-activity days. For the minimal-activity days, indoor sources accounted for 27–47% of PM2.5 and 44–60% of the PM5. Good agreement was found between the two mass balance methods. Indoor PM2.5 originating outdoors averaged 53% of outdoor concentrations.
Outdoor Versus Indoor Contributions to Indoor Particulate Matter (PM) Determined by Mass Balance Methods
Kopperud, Royal J. (author) / Ferro, Andrea R. (author) / Hildemann, Lynn M. (author)
Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association ; 54 ; 1188-1196
2004-09-01
9 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2004
Indoor/outdoor particulate matter number and mass concentration in modern offices
| British Library Online Contents | 2015
Indoor/outdoor particulate matter number and mass concentration in modern offices
| Online Contents | 2015
Indoor and Outdoor Particulate Matter Variability in Athens, Greece
| Online Contents | 2013