Assessment of ventilation rates inside educational buildings in Southwestern Europe: Analysis of implemented strategic measures
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemAutor
Aguilar Aguilera, Antonio Jesús; De la Hoz Torres, María Luisa; Martínez Aires, María Dolores; Ruiz Padillo, Diego PabloEditorial
Elsevier
Materia
Buildings Ventilation assessment Safety management Indoor environmental quality Well-being
Fecha
2022-02-17Referencia bibliográfica
Antonio J. Aguilar... [et al.]. Assessment of ventilation rates inside educational buildings in Southwestern Europe: Analysis of implemented strategic measures, Journal of Building Engineering, Volume 51, 2022, 104204, ISSN 2352-7102, [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104204]
Patrocinador
Spanish Government; Consejo General de la Arquitectura Tecnica (CGATE); Junta de Andalucia; European Commission B-TEP-362-UGR18; State Research Agency (SRA) of Spain; European Commission PID2019-108761RB-I00; Universidad de Granada/CBUAResumen
The pandemic caused by COVID-19 has highlighted the need to ensure good indoor air quality.
Public buildings (educational buildings in particular) have come under the spotlight because
students, teachers and staff spend long periods of the day indoors. This study presents a measurement
campaign for the assessment of ventilation rate (VR) and ventilation strategies in
educational buildings in Southwestern Europe, Portugal and Spain. A representative sample of the
teaching spaces of the Azur´em Campus (Guimar˜aes, Portugal) and the Fuentenueva Campus
(Granada, Spain) have been analyzed. Natural ventilation is the predominant ventilation strategy
in these spaces, being the most common strategy in educational buildings in Europe. VR was
estimated under different configurations, using the CO2 decay method. Subsequently, the CO2
concentration was estimated according to occupancy and the probability of infection risk was
calculated using the Wells-Riley equation. The obtained VR varied between 2.9 and 20.1 air
change per hour (ACH) for natural cross ventilation, 2.0 to 5.1 ACH for single-sided ventilation
and 1.8 to 3.5 for mechanically ventilated classrooms. Large differences in CO2 concentrations
were verified, depending on the analyzed ventilation strategy, ranging from 475 to 3903 ppm for
the different scenarios. However, the probability of risk was less than 1% in almost all of the
classrooms analyzed. The results obtained from the measurement campaign showed that the
selection of an appropriate ventilation strategy can provide sufficient air renewal and maintain a
low risk of infection. Ventilation strategies need to be reconsidered as a consequence of the health
emergency arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.