Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Ambient air filter efficiency in airtight, highly energy efficient dwellings – A simulation study to evaluate
benefits and associated energy costs
Gabriel Rojas, University of Innsbruck, Austria
Unit for Energy Efficient Buildings
October 16th, AIVC 2019
Performed in the framework of IEA EBC Annex 68
Seite 2
Motivation
What is the exposure contribution from outdoor originatedand from indoor originated particulate matter?
What filter quality is recommendable?
What impact has the use of a recirculating vs. extractingcooker hood?
In very airthight residential housing with MVHR (Passive Houses)…
Simulation study (CONTAM) accounting…filter efficiencyenvelope penetrationparticle depositionoutdoor air concentrationindoor sources
= 𝑓 (𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒)21 size bins
1
2
Seite 3
Model assumption – Reference apartment
Living room (LR)incl. kitchen (Ki)
30.2 m²
Child’s room (CR)
10.4 m²
Bedroom (BR)
12.9 m²
Entrance / hallway15.3 m²
Bath(BA)
7.2 m²
Balcony
N
adjacent apartment
adja
cent
apar
tmen
t
Ambient
Foto: Aerex Haustechniksysteme
Exhaust
Supply
Extract
Seite 4
Model assumption – Ambient air PM concentration
Derived from:Ruprecht, Jaenicke. 1993. “Tropospheric Aerosols.” Pp. 1–31 in
Aerosol-Cloud-Climate Interactions, edited by P. Hobbs. Academic Press
PM2.5
Low 8.4 µg/m³
Ref 42 µg/m³
High 84 µg/m³
3
4
Seite 5
Model assumption – Ambient air PM concentration
Ort I Name I Datum
Source: https://www.who.int/gho/phe/air_pollution_pm25_concentrations/en/
Seite 6
Model assumptions: filter, penetration, depositionFilter efficiency Envelope penetration
Particle deposition
Derived from: Riley et.al. (2002). “Indoor Particulate Matter of Outdoor Origin: Importance of Size-Dependent Removal Mechanisms.” Environmental Science and Technology 36(2):200–207.
Derived from: Shi, Bingbing. 2012. “Removal of Ultrafine Particles by Intermediate Air Filters in Ventilation Systems - Evaluation of Performance and Analysis of Applications Ventilation Systems.” Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden.
Derived from: Liu, De Ling and William W. Nazaroff. 2003. “Particle Penetration through Building Cracks.” Aerosol Science and Technology 37(7):565–73.
5
6
Seite 7
Model assumptions: Cooking source strength
bre
akfa
stlu
nch
din
ner
Seite 8
Results: Daily evolution
7
8
Seite 9
Results: Daily evolution
Night time
Seite 10
Results: Daily evolution
9
10
Seite 11
Results: Daily evolution
After frying burger
Seite 12
Results: Daily evolution
11
12
Seite 13
Results: Exposure reduction vs. electr. fan power
M5 M6 F7 F8 F9
MERV9/10 MERV11/12 MERV13 MERV14 MERV15
Seite 14
Results: Relative to extract air ventilation
13
14
Seite 15
Sensitivity on model assumptions
Ort I Name I Datum
Reference Low High
Bed- / child’s room door opening 8am – 10pm 4 x 10 min 0-24 hrs
Window opening (tilted): all 3.6 h/day 0 h/day 6.3 h/day
Kitchen area 3 x 20 min - 3 x 35 min
Living room area 3 x 10 min - 3 x 18 min
Bedroom 2 x 56 min - 2 x 98 min
Childs room 2 x 6 min - 2 x 11 min
Airtightness / n50 0.6 1/h 0.3 1/h 1.5 1/h
Deposition rate multiplier 1 0.33 3.0
Penetration factor for crack with
dimensions
W 0.25 mm x
L 9.4 cm
- W 0.25 mm x
L 4.3 cm
Seite 16
Results: Outdoor vs indoor source strength
15
16
Seite 17
Recommendations for airtight residential housingwith MVHR / Passive Houses
• F7 (ePM1-50% / MERV 13) can be considered a good general recommendation. However, higher quality (F9) are recommended for moderate or high polluted areas.
• Extracting cooker hoods are advisable for household where high cooking induced particle generation (e.g. frying) can be expected. However, in areas with high outdoor pollution, PM introduced with make-up air will be a (more) relevant source.-> Further product development is encouraged.
• Recirculating cooker hoods will not notably reduce total PM exposure.-> Further product development is encouraged.
Seite 18
Outlook / Further research
• Apply time-resolved recent ambient air data for simulation• Apply more diverse indoor generation models• Apply resuspension models• Eperimental validation
• Measure / apply (fractional) filter efficiency for filter class acc. to ISO 16890
• Account for potentially different health effects from outdoor originated vsindoor generated particles.
Thank you!
17
18
Seite 19
Model assumptions: PM deposition
Ort I Name I Datum
Source: Riley et.al. (2002). “Indoor Particulate Matter of Outdoor Origin: Importance of Size-Dependent Removal Mechanisms.” Environmental Science and Technology 36(2):200–207.
Footer
20
cooking
filterPM measurement
𝑅𝐸 = 1-∆𝐶𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝐹𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟
∆𝐶𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡
Ventilation chamber(100 m³/h)
Measurement method: cooking source strength
19
20
Seite 21
Deriving cooking source strength
Ort I Name I Datum
𝑚 = න0
𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘
𝐴𝐸𝑅 𝑉 𝑐 𝑑𝑡 + 𝑉 𝑐
100
101
102
103
104
0
0.5
1
1.5
2x 10
5
dN
/dlo
gD
p [#
/cm
³]
Particle diameter [nm]
Onion_Jan25-31_200C_100m3h_Broan
100
101
102
103
104
0
50
100
150
200
250
dM
/dlo
gD
p [µ
g/m
³]
Particle diameter [nm]
Onion_Jan25-31_200C_100m3h_BroanVerteilung der Partikelanzahl Verteilung der Partikelmasse
PM2.5 PM2.5
Filter Br1-2, gemessen mit SMPS 3936 (10-400nm) und OPS 3330 (0,3 -10µm), 3 Wiederholungen
Größenverteilung der Partikel: Zwiebel @ 200 C
UFP UFP
ohne Filter
gebr. Filter: 37%
neuer Filter: 54%25%
30%
60%
65%
21
22
23
101
102
103
104
0
5
10
15x 10
5
dN
/dlo
gD
p [#/c
m³]
Particle diameter [nm]10
110
210
310
40
200
400
600
dM
/dlo
gD
p [µ
g/m
³]Particle diameter [nm]
Burger-M1_Jan26-30_200C_100m3h_Br
UFPPM2.5
UFPPM2.5
Filter Br1-2, gemessen mit SMPS 3936 (10-400nm) und OPS 3330 (0,3 -10µm), 2-3 Wiederholungen
Verteilung der Partikelanzahl Verteilung der Partikelmasse
ohne Filter
gebr. Filter: 16%
neuer Filter: 25%
68%70%
4%21%
Seite 24
Results: Outdoor vs indoor source strength
Ort I Name I Datum
23
24