Science China Technological Sciences

, Volume 60, Issue 3, pp 355–362 | Cite as

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

  • YanLong Li
  • XinMing Jin
  • LiJun Yang
  • XiaoZe Du
  • YongPing Yang


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.


indoor and outdoor environment particle concentration mass concentration PM2.5 in-situ measurement 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chan C K, Yao X. Air pollution in mega cities in China. Atmos Environ, 2008, 42: 1–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pope 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: 591–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shimada Y, Matsuoka Y. Analysis of indoor PM2.5 exposure in Asian countries using time use survey. Sci Total Environ, 2011, 409: 5243–5252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martinelli N, Olivieri O, Girelli D. Air particulate matter and cardiovascular disease: A narrative review. Eur J Internal Med, 2013, 24: 295–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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: 965–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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: 278–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    World Health Organization. Air quality guidelines global update 2005. WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2006Google Scholar
  8. 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: 231–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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: 159–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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: 6575–6585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chan A T. Indoor-outdoor relationships of particulate matter and nitrogen oxides under different outdoor meteorological conditions. Atmos Environ, 2002, 36: 1543–1551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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: 1465–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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: 221–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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: 275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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: 41–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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: 221–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nelson P R, Sears S B, Heavner D L. Application of methods for evaluating air cleaner performance. Indoor Built Environ, 1993, 2: 111–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 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: 659–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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: 189–207Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shaughnessy R J, Sextro R G. What is an effective portable air cleaning device? A review. J Occup Environ Hygiene, 2006, 3: 169–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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: 44–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Novoselac A, Siegel J A. Impact of placement of portable air cleaning devices in multizone residential environments. Build Environ, 2009, 44: 2348–2356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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: 111–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rim D, Novoselac A. Ventilation effectiveness as an indicator of occupant exposure to particles from indoor sources. Build Environ, 2010, 45: 1214–1224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang T T, Wang S, Sun G, et al. Flow impact of an air conditioner to portable air cleaning. Build Environ, 2010, 45: 2047–2056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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: 3207–3225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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: 73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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: 468–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • YanLong Li
    • 1
  • XinMing Jin
    • 1
  • LiJun Yang
    • 1
  • XiaoZe Du
    • 1
  • YongPing Yang
    • 1
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Condition Monitoring and Control for Power Plant Equipments of Ministry of Education, School of Energy Power and Mechanical EngineeringNorth China Electric Power UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations