ArticleHeliyon2023
The effect of airtightness required in building energy conservation regulations on indoor and outdoor originated pollutants.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The contradiction of indoor air quality (IAQ) and energy conservation by isolating the indoor environment from the outdoor through airtightness is one of the challenges of the building sector. The key issue is, what are the optimum airtightness limits that can ensure IAQ in naturally ventilated buildings, taking into account the paradoxical effect of house leakages on the infiltration of outdoor pollutants and accumulation of indoor-generated pollutants? For this purpose, the effect of different levels of airtightness required in energy-compliant, low-energy, and very low-energy buildings on the concentration of two pollutants with outdoor and indoor origin, PM2.5 and formaldehyde, respectively, were studied. This study used a multizone model, CONTAM(W), which was validated using measured data to study the distribution of selected pollutants in a typical relatively old dwelling, to investigate the situation in Iran. Subsequently, we conducted simulations based on different combinations of scenarios for airtightness, user behavior, source strength, and meteorological parameters. The results showed that increasing the airtightness from the baseline scenario (ACH50 = 11.11/h) to 3, 1.5, and 0.75 in closed window conditions reduced the PM2.5 by 15%, 38%, and 58%, respectively, and elevated formaldehyde by 23%, 77%, and 169%, correspondingly. Under normal outdoor PM2.5 pollution, indoor formaldehyde levels exceeded the permissible limit only in closed window conditions, and IAQ remained acceptable in other scenarios. However, there is no indication that IAQ can be ensured by any degree of airtightness under severe outdoor air pollution, demanding specific solutions, such as those proposed in this work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.