Advertisement

What Should the Minimum Ventilation Rate Be in a Demand-Controlled Ventilation Strategy?

  • Mads MysenEmail author
  • Sverre Holøs
  • Aileen Yang
  • Kari Thunshelle
  • Peter Schild
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Energy book series (SPE)

Abstract

Demand-Controlled Ventilation is emerging as a dominant ventilation strategy in non-residential buildings in Norway. The ventilation airflow rate is controlled between pre-set minimum (Vmin) and maximum (Vmax) values, based on the signal from room-sensors. The choice of Vmax is based on current knowledge about necessary airflow rate to reach an acceptable IAQ (indoor air quality) with maximum likely personal load and emission load from building materials. The choice of Vmin has an obvious impact on energy use, but there are few studies about its impact on IAQ. Vmin varies typically from 0.7 to above 2 (l/s)/m2 in Norway. In several buildings, Vmin is set to the upper range of this interval due to technical limitations of the specific equipment used. We have performed blind cross over intervention-studies with an untrained test panel to evaluate PAQ (perceived air quality) when entering 20 PAQ-rooms. All the rooms have low-emitting building materials, but extra pollution sources were introduced in some of the rooms for this study. Supplementary, intervention studies were performed in a dedicated test room to assess the impact of airflow rate on PAQ, performance and well-being during the first 20 min of occupation. We found that increasing Vmin has a significant positive impact on PAQ in rooms with extra pollution sources. This effect was not consistently present in the low-emitting rooms. Airflow rates did not noticeably affect PAQ, performance and well-being during the first 20 min of occupation. This indicates that Vmin above 1 (l/s)/m2 has limited benefit to IAQ in low emitting rooms.

Keywords

Demand-controlled ventilation Indoor air quality Performance test Low-emitting materials Pollution level Ventilation strategy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study is funded by the Research Council of Norway EnergiX program under Grant 255375/E20 together with the industry partners Undervisningsbygg Oslo KF, GK Inneklima AS, DNB Næringseiendom AS, Erichsen & Horgen AS, Hjellnes Consult AS, Multiconsult AS, Interfil AS, Camfil Norge AS, Swegon AS, Belimo Automasjon Norge AS, NEAS AS and the foundation Norsk VVS Energi- og Miljøteknisk Forenings Stiftelse for forskning.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Formal consent was given by the volunteers who participated in this study. Permission was given by the school where this study was conducted. We did not collect any identifiable or sensitive information that would require ethical approval. The research has been conducted in compliance with the ethical standards at OsloMet—Oslo Metropolitan University (formerly Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Science) and Norwegian Law.

References

  1. 1.
    M. Mysen, S. Berntsen, P. Nafstad, P.G. Schild, Occupancy density and benefits of demand-controlled ventilation in Norwegian primary schools. Energy and Buildings 37, 1234–1240 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Halvarsson, Occupancy pattern in office buildings—Consequences for HVAC system design and operation. Doctoral Thesis, at NTNU, 2012:37 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Mysen, P.G. Schild, A. Cablé, in Demand-controlled ventilation—requirements and commissioning. SINTEF Research 24 Guidebook published by SINTEF. ISBN: 978-82-536-1414-4 (63pp) (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    O. Seppänen, N. Brelih, G. Goeders, A. Litiu, Existing buildings, building codes, ventilation standards and ventilation in Europe [HEALTHVENT WP5 final report] (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P.O. Fanger, Introduction of the olf and the decipol units to quantify air pollution perceived by humans indoors and outdoors. Energy Build. 12, 1–6 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. Anderson, The MM-Questionaires—A Tool when Solving Indoor Climate Problems (Örebro Medical Center Hospital, Sweden, 1993)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    K.I. Fostervold, J. Nersveen, Proportions of direct and indirect indoor lighting—The effect on health, well-being and cognitive performance of office workers. Light. Res. Technol. 40(3), 175–200 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SINTEF Building and InfrastructureTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.OsloMet—Oslo Metropolitan University (Formerly Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences)OsloNorway

Personalised recommendations