Next Article in Journal
Predicting Residual Flexural Strength of Corroded Prestressed Concrete Beams: Comparison of Chinese Code, Eurocode and ACI Standard
Next Article in Special Issue
Impact of Night Ventilation on Indoor Thermal Environment of Residential Buildings under the Dual Carbon Target: A Case Study of Xi’an
Previous Article in Journal
Comparison of Alternatives for Multi-MW Wind Turbine Towers in Northern Patagonia, Argentina
Previous Article in Special Issue
Research on the Effect of Spray Ventilation Cooling Systems on Human Physiological and Psychological Indexes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Buildings
Volume 14
Issue 7
10.3390/buildings14072046
buildings-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Indoor Air Quality and Personnel Satisfaction in Different Functional Areas of Semi-Underground Buildings

by
Xiaoming Ma
1,* and
Lina Guo
2
1
School of Architecture, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology Huaqing College, Xi’an 710038, China
2
China Northwest Architecture Design and Research Institute Co., Ltd., Xi’an 710018, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings 2024, 14(7), 2046; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14072046
Submission received: 27 May 2024 / Revised: 29 June 2024 / Accepted: 1 July 2024 / Published: 4 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Existing Environment, Equipment, Materials and Technical Means for Buildings)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
With the increasing application of semi-underground buildings, it is of greater significance to understand indoor air quality and personnel satisfaction in different functional areas within such buildings. In this study, a semi-underground building in Xi’an was taken as an example to test and study the indoor air quality in different functional areas, and a questionnaire survey based on the satisfaction of indoor personnel was conducted at the same time. The comprehensive results showed that the places with the highest concentrations of PM2.5 exceeding the standard limit in the semi-underground building were the milk tea shops, hair salons, and driving schools, presenting 1.01 times, 1.15 times, and 1.08 times the standard limit, respectively. Hair salons were the sites with the highest pollution. The second most frequent pollutants were formaldehyde (HCHO) and total volatile organic compounds (TVOCs). In contrast to the wind speed parameters, the indoor concentrations of pollutants were higher than those outdoors. The upper limits of personnel satisfaction for particulate matter with a diameter less than 1.0 microns (PM1.0), particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and TVOCs were all higher than the standard limits. The upper limits of personnel satisfaction for PM10, HCHO, wind speed, carbon monoxide (CO), and carbon dioxide (CO2) were all below the standard limits. This provides data support and reference values for the widespread development and application of semi-underground buildings.

1. Introduction

With the establishment of and increase in diverse new cities worldwide [1], various types of buildings are changing rapidly, causing massive changes in people’s work and personal lives. With the continuous improvement of living standards and pursuits, people’s requirements for their living environments are also increasing considerably [2]. Relevant studies in the literature have shown that there are a variety of toxic and harmful pollutants in buildings [3,4,5], such as total volatile organic compounds (TVOCs); formaldehyde (HCHO); carbon monoxide (CO); particulate matter with a diameter of fewer than 10 microns (PM10), 2.5 microns (PM2.5), or 1.0 microns (PM1.0); and microorganisms. These pollutants bring different degrees of harm to people’s physical and mental health [6,7]. In recent years, the incidence rate of sick building syndrome (SBS) has been increasing especially rapidly [8], damaging the health of children and elderly individuals. Therefore, good indoor environments are always a topic of concern [9].
At present, a large number of experiments have been conducted on indoor environments [10,11,12,13], mainly focusing on the sources, effects, and distributions of indoor pollution sources [10]; the impact of ventilation forms on the distribution of indoor pollution sources [11]; the correlation between personnel movement and indoor pollutants [12]; and the differentiation of pollutant types in underground buildings and overground buildings [13]. However, the existing research has mainly focused on overground and underground buildings, and there has been a lack of research on semi-underground buildings. The characteristics of semi-underground buildings are a combination of those of overground and underground buildings, inheriting some of the advantages and disadvantages of both while also presenting differences [14]. Semi-underground buildings are gradually being promoted and used due to their unique architectural design and convenient access. At present, semi-underground buildings have been widely used as residential buildings [15], granaries [16], and stations [17], among other things. For this type of building, people are more concerned about issues of heat and humidity [18,19,20,21], and relevant research has been conducted through simulation and experimental methods. A schematic diagram of a semi-underground building examined in one such study is shown in Figure 1. There has been relatively little research on semi-underground buildings; in particular, there has been insufficient research on indoor environments comprising different functional areas.
In addition, the formulation of national indoor hygiene standards for pollutant concentration limits mainly considers the perspective of personnel health and rarely involves the subjective feelings of indoor personnel [22]. Human subjective consciousness can directly judge the quality of an indoor environment, more accurately reflecting the actual situation. Therefore, only by combining subjective and objective evaluation methods can the current situation and existing problems regarding indoor air quality be truly understood. However, there is currently a lack of research combining the two methods in semi-underground buildings, especially in the evaluation of different functional areas. Thus, such research is of great significance and guiding value given the increasing prevalence of semi-underground buildings.
People spend 90% of their time indoors [23]; therefore, the indoor environment is of utmost importance. Based on the practical situation described above, in this study, a research method combining experimental testing and a questionnaire survey is used to study the pollutant concentration and personnel satisfaction in different functional areas of semi-underground buildings. The relationships between pollutant standard limits and human satisfaction concentrations are also discussed. This study provides a data reference for the widespread development and application of semi-underground buildings in the future.

2. Methods

2.1. Survey Site

A semi-underground building in Xi’an was taken as an example in this study. The building includes different functional areas, such as milk tea shops, hair salons, driving schools, supermarkets, stationery stores, pharmacies, and bookstores. This study took milk tea shops, hair salons, driving schools, supermarkets, and stationery stores as the test objects and monitored the indoor pollutant concentrations. Additionally, a questionnaire survey was conducted to assess the satisfaction of personnel in the different functional areas with their indoor environment at different times of day (8:00–9:00 AM, 12:00–13:00 PM, 17:00–18:00 PM).

2.2. Testing Content

The concentrations of CO, carbon dioxide (CO2), TVOCs, HCHO, PM1.0, PM2.5, and PM10, the wind speed, and the temperature and humidity in different functional areas of the semi-underground building during different business hours were continuously monitored. Sampling points were arranged in areas with a high personnel density in the center of the testing site, and the sampling height was at the height of the crowd’s respiratory belt (1.2–1.5 m). The monitoring period was from 12 April to 13 April 2024. Continuous monitoring was applied during the testing times (8:00–9:00 a.m., 12:00–13:00 p.m., 17:00–18:00 p.m.). To ensure the accuracy of the test results, the same two groups were tested separately, and the average value was taken for calculation.

2.3. Testing Instruments

A GRIMM1.109 portable aerosol particle size spectrometer was used to test the mass concentration of particles. The measurement range of this device is 0.1 to 100,000 μg/m3, with a repeatability of 5%. The temperature, humidity, and CO2 levels were tested by using an IAQ-Calc7525 indoor air quality detector. For this device, the temperature range is 0 to 60 °C, with an error of ±0.6 °C; the relative humidity range is 5 to 95% RH, with an accuracy of ±3.0% RH; and the CO2 range is 0 to 5000 ppm, with an accuracy ±3.0% of the reading or ±50 ppm. An HD37AB1347 device was used to measure the wind speed and CO. Its speed range is 0.1~5 m/s, with an accuracy range of ±3%; its CO concentration range is 0 to 500 ppm, with an accuracy of ±3 ppm + 3% of the measured value. The formaldehyde (HCHO) level was tested by using a Branton BR-smart-126 air quality detector; its measurement range is 0 to 3.0 mg/m3, with a resolution of 0.01 mg/m3. A PGM-7600K volatile gas detector was used to test for TVOCs; its measurement range is 0.1 to 15,000 ppm, with an accuracy of 10% or ±2 ppm of the reading.

2.4. Evaluation Criteria

2.4.1. Pollutant Standards

The concentration limits for each pollutant are shown in Table 1, according to GB/T 18883-2022 “Standards for Indoor Air Quality” [24].

2.4.2. Subjective Questionnaire

A subjective survey was conducted in the form of a questionnaire, with reference to the relevant literature [25], and the voting scale method was used to characterize the comfort of the indoor environment in the semi-underground building based on the respondents’ satisfaction. The subjective evaluation was divided into 7 levels, and Table 2 shows the voting scale of personnel satisfaction with the indoor air quality in this study.
When the voting value is S = 0, it is considered a critical point, indicating that satisfaction with the indoor air quality is moderate [26]. When S > 0, it indicates that the respondents are satisfied with the air quality; the larger the value of S, the more satisfied they feel. On the contrary, when S < 0, it indicates that the respondents are dissatisfied with the air quality; the smaller the value of S, the less satisfied they feel.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Average Concentration Distributions of Indoor Pollutants

The average concentration distributions of the major pollutants in a semi-underground building with different functions are shown in Table 3.
From Table 3, it can be seen that in the semi-underground building, with the exception of some pollutant indicators exceeding the standard in the milk tea shops, hair salons, and driving schools, the indoor environment meets the requirements throughout the different functional areas. This is because the advantages brought by the structural characteristics of the semi-underground building allow for sufficient air circulation with the surface environment. Half of the building is on the ground, while the other half of it is underground, enabling full air circulation with the surface environment. As a result, the frequency of fresh and polluted air exchange within the building is accelerated, thereby reducing the accumulation of pollutants [14]. The places in the building where the concentration of PM2.5 exceeded the standard limit were the milk tea shops, hair salons, and driving schools, with values 1.01 times, 1.15 times, and 1.08 times the standard limit values [24], respectively. Hair salons were the sites with the highest pollution. This is because the customers’ fallen hair trimmings and dandruff were not cleaned up in a timely manner, causing them to flow in the air and contribute to the relatively high concentration of particulate matter. In addition, the frequent flow of personnel in hair salons accelerates the secondary suspension of fine particulate matter from the ground, resulting in an overall high concentration of fine particulate matter. This result is consistent with the conclusions in the literature [27], verifying the correctness of our results. The overall order observed with regard to the pollutant concentrations was hair salons > driving schools > milk tea shops > outdoors > supermarkets > stationery stores. The relatively high outdoor concentration is due to the influence of the external environment [28], which leads to a sharp increase in vehicles and fluctuations in the particle concentration when sand transport vehicles pass by. Similarly, the concentrations of HCHO and/or TVOCs in milk tea shops and hair salons reached or surpassed the standard limits. This is because the heating equipment, food packaging, and plastic products in milk tea shops contain a large amount of HCHO and TVOCs [29]. Meanwhile, due to the use of various adhesives for perms, curling, and other hair treatments, hair salons emit large amounts of HCHO under heating and hair-drying equipment [26,30], resulting in higher pollution concentrations. Due to the low emissions of pollution sources and low flow rates, there was no phenomenon of concentrations exceeding the standard in other functional areas, which once again proves the good ventilation effect of semi-underground buildings. This provides a reference for pollution prevention and control and ventilation optimization in subsequent semi-underground buildings.
Overall, the concentration of PM2.5 exceeded the standard by the most, followed by HCHO and TVOCs. The hair salons had the highest concentration, exceeding the standard, followed by the milk tea shops. This also indicates that there are still differences in ventilation between different functional areas in this semi-underground building. In future semi-underground buildings, the ventilation systems in different functional areas should be optimized.

3.2. Distributions of Pollutant Concentrations at Different Times

The concentration distributions of major indoor pollutants in different locations at different times are shown in Figure 2.
As shown in Figure 2, the pollutants exhibited different trends at different times. The mass concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, and PM1.0 reached their maximum at noon when the concentrations in the hair salons were highest. The corresponding mass concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, and PM1.0 were 91.8 μg/m3, 78.8 μg/m3, and 37.1 μg/m3, respectively. This is because, in semi-underground buildings, there is relatively less movement of people in the morning and evening, with more people present at noon, resulting in a relatively high concentration of indoor particulate matter [31]. In addition, outdoor particulate matter levels are relatively high in the morning due to the lower temperature and the presence of an inversion layer [32], which is not conducive to the diffusion of particulate matter. At noon, the inversion layer is destroyed, and the concentration is relatively low. At night, due to factors such as reduced personnel and relatively calm surroundings, the concentration is relatively lower. This result is consistent with conclusions in the literature [33], which also proves that the particulate matter concentration is greatly influenced by personnel. TVOCs showed the highest concentration in the morning, mainly in milk tea shops and hair salons. This is because of poor ventilation at night, resulting in the highest concentration occurring in the morning. The HCHO concentration was the highest in milk tea shops, followed by hair salons, but the highest concentrations occurred in the evening. This is because business is relatively good in the evening and there are more customers buying hot drinks. Therefore, milk tea shops generate a large amount of HCHO at this time due to the extensive use of heating equipment, food packaging, and plastic products. The indoor wind speed, CO, and CO2 were all within the normal range without significant fluctuations. Fluctuations in the CO2 concentration were mainly related to personnel flow, but they met the requirements of regulatory restrictions during the testing period.

3.3. The Impact of Outdoor Air on Indoor Pollutant Concentrations

The impact of outdoor air on the concentration distributions of major indoor pollutants is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 shows that, excluding those for wind speed, all the outdoor measurement points were below the standard limit [24], and the indoor concentrations of pollutants were higher than those outside. The mass concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, and PM1.0 in the milk tea shops, hair salons, and driving schools were higher than those outdoors. Indoor activities were the source of this pollution. The difference in mass concentration between indoors and outdoors was between 0.33 and 9.67 μg/m3 for PM10, between 0.00 and 12.00 μg/m3 for PM2.5, and between 0.00 and 8.20 μg/m3 for PM1.0. The indoor concentrations in different functional areas for TVOCs, HCHO, CO, and CO2 were higher than the outdoor concentrations. Again, indoor activities were the source of this pollution. The difference in mass concentration between indoors and outdoors was 0.02–0.077 mg/m3 for HCHO, 0.08–0.47 mg/m3 for TVOCs, 0.42–0.83 mg/m3 for CO, and 0.036–0.045% for CO2. The wind speed outdoors was higher than that indoors, with a difference of 0.36–0.73 m/s. Therefore, it is still necessary to strengthen the construction of the indoor environment, especially regarding the form and equipment selection for indoor ventilation [34].

3.4. The Relationship between Human Satisfaction and the Concentrations of Various Pollutants

A total of 378 valid questionnaires were obtained in this survey, and the distribution of the 378 subjects by gender is shown in Table 4.
From Table 4, it can be seen that the male-to-female ratio was nearly 1:2. Among the respondents, there was one person aged less than 16 years old and one person aged over 55 years old, accounting for 0.3% and 0.3% of the total, respectively. There were 40 people aged between 16 and 25 years old, accounting for 10.6%; 301 people aged between 26 and 35 years old, accounting for 79.6%; 29 people aged between 36 and 45 years old, accounting for 7.7%; and 6 people aged between 46 and 55 years old, accounting for 1.6%. Figure 4 shows the frequency distribution of the indoor personnel’s voting values in different areas of the semi-underground building.
From Figure 4, it can be seen that the proportion of respondents who rated the indoor air quality as “moderate” was the highest, at 37.83%. However, the proportion of people who were dissatisfied with the indoor air quality, i.e., S < 0, was 37.57%. The proportion of people who were satisfied with the indoor air quality, i.e., S > 0, was 24.60%. Among them, males to the indoor air quality as “moderate” was 10.58%. The proportion of people who were dissatisfied with the indoor air quality was 14.55%. The proportion of people who were satisfied with the indoor air quality was 9.26%, while females who categorized their satisfaction with indoor air quality as “moderate” was 27.25%. The proportion of people who were dissatisfied with the indoor air quality was 23.02%. The proportion of people who were satisfied with the indoor air quality was 15.34%. It can be seen that there is a significant difference in the satisfaction level of indoor air quality between males and females. Females have a higher proportion of evaluations, with a moderate difference of 16.67%, dissatisfaction difference of 8.47%, and satisfaction difference of 6.08%. This is mainly due to the physiological and psychological differences between males and females. Therefore, the evaluation of males and females should be studied separately in subsequent research, which is more practical.
This indicates that the proportion of dissatisfied personnel in this semi-underground building is still high. This is mainly due to the relatively poor ventilation conditions in the semi-underground building, with some ventilation doors and windows located near the surface, causing surface pollutants to pollute the indoor environment. In addition, due to design differences, its natural ventilation is influenced by surface doors and windows, which also results in a greater ventilation effect [14]. There is also cross-contamination of the environment between different functional areas because of the limited space inside the semi-underground building, which can sometimes become relatively crowded. Therefore, although the overall evaluation was moderate, the proportion of dissatisfaction is still the main factor to consider.
To further provide upper-limit concentration values associated with human satisfaction for various pollutants in the semi-underground building, the measured average concentration of each pollutant in the semi-underground building was plotted as the horizontal axis, and the average voting value S from the personnel was plotted as the vertical axis. For each harmful substance X, the relationship between the indoor personnel’s satisfaction with the air quality, SX, and the concentration of the pollutant, CX, was then obtained via fitting, as shown in Figure 5.
In Figure 5, the quadratic regression fitting results for the relationships between human satisfaction and the concentrations of various pollutants show a weak correlation for wind speed, CO, and CO2 (with correlation coefficients (R2) of 0.14, 0.44, and 0.23, respectively). PM1.0, PM2.5, PM10, HCHO, and TVOCs all showed strong correlations (correlation coefficients (R2) of 0.96, 0.82, 0.98, 0.98, and 0.94, respectively). Therefore, human satisfaction can be used to evaluate indoor pollutant concentration values. The pollutant concentration value corresponding to SX = 0 can then be taken as the upper-limit concentration value of human satisfaction for that particular pollutant.
When SPM1.0 = 0, the upper limit of satisfaction with the indoor PM1.0 concentration for males and females is about 45.99 μg/m3, 56.50 μg/m3. However, there is currently no concentration limit for PM1.0 indoors. Therefore, based on the relevant literature and indoor environmental testing results, the concentration limit results are significantly high. When SPM2.5 = 0, the upper limit of satisfaction with the indoor PM2.5 concentration for males and females is about 71.23 μg/m3, 68.00 μg/m3, which is slightly higher than the standard requirement of 0.50 mg/m3. When SPM10 = 0, the upper limit of satisfaction with the indoor PM10 concentration for males and females is about 65.97 μg/m3, 70.88 μg/m3, which is slightly lower than the standard requirement of 0.1 mg/m3. The reason for this may be that such particles are colorless and odorless [28] and cannot be recognized with the naked eye, resulting in differences in the upper limit of human satisfaction with particle concentrations. When SHCHO = 0, the upper-limit concentration of satisfaction with indoor HCHO for males and females is about 0.03 mg/m3, 0.03 mg/m3, which is slightly lower than the standard requirement of 0.08 mg/m3. When STVOC = 0, the upper limit of satisfaction with the indoor TVOC concentration for males and females is about 0.95 mg/m3, 0.68 mg/m3, which is slightly higher than the standard requirement of 0.60 mg/m3. When Swind speed is 0, the upper limit of satisfaction with the indoor wind speed for males and females is about 0.02 m/s, 0.03 m/s, which is consistent with the standard requirement of ≤0.03 m/s. When SCO = 0, the upper-limit concentration of satisfaction with indoor CO for males and females is about 0.63 mg/m3, 0.58 mg/m3, which is far below the standard requirement of 10 mg/m3. When SCO2 = 0, the upper limit of human satisfaction with the indoor CO2 concentration for males and females is about 0.09%, 0.09%, which is slightly lower than the standard requirement of 0.1%. This is because the personnel are in a semi-underground building, and due to the differences in the building itself and the personnel’s subjective evaluations, they have higher requirements for indoor air quality. This indirectly indicates that more attention should be paid to indoor air quality in semi-underground buildings due to their unique location.
In addition, it was found through the human satisfaction survey that the upper-limit concentration values of PM1.0, PM2.5, and TVOCs are all higher than the indoor hygiene standard concentration limits. The human satisfaction upper-limit concentrations of PM10, HCHO, wind speed, CO, and CO2 are all below the standard limits. Therefore, indoor pollutant hygiene standards should take into account two factors—personnel health and human satisfaction—to establish stricter standards.

4. Conclusions

This study examined indoor air quality and personnel satisfaction in different functional areas of a semi-underground building in Xi’an City. Preliminary conclusions were drawn as follows:
  • The places where the concentration of PM2.5 exceeded the standard limit were the milk tea shops, hair salons, and driving schools, presenting 1.01 times, 1.15 times, and 1.08 times the standard limit, respectively. Overall, the concentration of fine particulate matter showed the following trend: hair salons > driving schools > milk tea shops > outdoors > supermarkets > stationery stores. The next most prominent pollutants were HCHO and TVOCs.
  • Pollutants exhibited different trends at different times of the day. The mass concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, and PM1.0 reached their maximum at noon, while TVOCs showed their maximum concentration in the morning. The maximum concentration of HCHO occurred in the evening. The indoor wind speed, CO, and CO2 were all within the normal range.
  • Excluding those for wind speed, all the outdoor measurement points were below the standard limit, and the indoor concentrations of pollutants were higher than those outside.
  • The upper-limit concentration values of human satisfaction for PM1.0, PM2.5, and TVOCs were all higher than the standard limit values. The human satisfaction upper-limit values for PM10, HCHO, wind speed, CO, and CO2 were all below the standard limits. The results of this study, which examined the indoor air quality and personnel satisfaction in different functional areas of a semi-underground building, can contribute to the widespread development and application of such buildings.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, X.M.; methodology, X.M.; investigation, L.G.; data curation, L.G.; writing—original draft preparation, X.M. and L.G.; writing—review and editing, X.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in article.

Conflicts of Interest

Author Lina Guo is employed by the China Northwest Architecture Design and Research Institute Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Michel, B. Arts and culture in the city: Peripheral centrality, cultural vitality, and urban change in inner suburbs. Cities 2024, 150, 104983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zhang, X.; Sun, H.; Li, K.P.; Nie, X.X.; Fan, Y.S.; Wang, H.; Ma, J.Y. Comparison of the Application of Three Methods for the Determination of Outdoor PM2.5 Design Concentrations for Fresh Air Filtration Systems in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 16537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Kumar, P.; Singh, A.B.; Arora, T.; Singh, S.; Singh, R. Critical review on emerging health effects associated with the indoor air quality and its sustainable management. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 872, 162163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ma, C.; Guerra-Santin, O.; Mohammadi, M. Exploring the influence of indoor environment and spatial layout on changed behaviours of people with dementia in a nursing home. Build. Environ. 2024, 256, 111452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Vicente, E.D.; Calvo, A.I.; Sainnokhoi, T.A.; Kováts, N.; de la Campa, A.S.; de la Rosa, J.; Oduber, F.; Nunes, T.; Fraile, R.; Tomé, M.; et al. Indoor PM from residential coal combustion: Levels, chemical composition, and toxicity. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 918, 170598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Brook, R.D.; Motairek, I.; Rajagopalan, S.; Al-Kindi, S. Excess Global Blood Pressure Associated With Fine Particulate Matter Air Pollution Levels Exceeding World Health Organization Guidelines. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2023, 12, e029206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Jeon, J.; Chen, Y.; Kim, H. Influences of meteorology on emission sources and physicochemical properties of particulate matter in Seoul, Korea during the heating period. Atmos. Environ. 2023, 303, 119733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Niza, I.L.; de Souza, M.P.; da Luz, I.M.; Broday, E.E. Sick building syndrome and its impacts on health, well-being and productivity: A systematic literature review. Indoor Built. Environ. 2024, 33, 218–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Song, H.; Dong, Y.H.; Yang, J.Y.; Zhang, X.; Nie, X.X.; Fan, Y.X. Concentration Characteristics and Correlations with Other Pollutants of Atmospheric Particulate Matter As Affected by Relevant Policies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yang, D.L.; Zhang, Z.N.; Liu, H.; Yang, Z.Y.; Liu, M.M.; Zheng, Q.X.; Chen, W.; Xiang, P. Indoor air pollution and human ocular diseases: Associated contaminants and underlying pathological mechanisms. Chemosphere 2023, 311, 137037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Shaeri, J.; Mahdavinejad, M.; Vakilinejad, R.; Bazazzadeh, H.; Monfared, M. Effects of sea-breeze natural ventilation on thermal comfort in low-rise buildings with diverse atrium roof shapes in BWh regions. Case Stud. Therm. Eng. 2023, 41, 102638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wu, J.L.; Weng, W.G.; Fu, M.; Li, Y.Y. Numerical study of transient indoor airflow and virus-laden droplet dispersion: Impact of interactive human movement. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 869, 161750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Wen, Y.M.; Lau, S.K.; Leng, J.W.; Zhou, K.; Cao, S.J. Passive ventilation for sustainable underground environments from traditional underground buildings and modern multiscale spaces. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 2023, 134, 105002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zhydkova, T. Features of the Design of Civil Defense Structures in Catastrophic Flood Zones. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference Monitoring of Geological Processes and Ecological Condition of the Environment, Kyiv, Ukraine, 7 November 2023; European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2023; Volume 1, pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  15. Marino, F.P.R.; Lembo, F. Artificiality and Naturalness: Semi-underground Houses and Their Role in the Construction of a Sustainable Urban Landscape. J. Civ. Eng. Archit. 2022, 16, 331–343. [Google Scholar]
  16. Jin, L.B.; Zhu, D.D.; Li, C.; Wu, Q.; Wang, Y.H.; Zhang, W.B. Numerical Analysis of Temperature Field of Static Grain Storage in Semi-underground Double-storey Squat Silos. Sci. Technol. Cereals Oils Foods 2024, 32, 153. [Google Scholar]
  17. Ren, F.; Shi, C.L.; Li, J.; Che, H.L.; Xu, X. Study on natural smoke extraction model in semi-underground tram station fire. China Saf. Sci. J. 2021, 31, 156–161. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  18. Yuan, L.; Takada, S.; Nagano, Y.; Fukui, K. Quantification of moisture flux from the wall surface in contact with the ground in a semi-underground space based on measurements and hygrothermal analysis. J. Build Eng. 2023, 73, 106803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Hasegawa, F.; Yoshino, H.; Matsumoto, S. Optimum use of solar energy techniques in a semi-underground house: First-year measurement and computer analysis. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 1987, 2, 429–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yoshino, H.; Matsumoto, S.; Nagatomo, M.; Sakanishi, T. Five-year measurements of thermal performance for a semi-underground test house. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Tech. 1992, 7, 339–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chen, P.; Nie, L.F.; Kang, J.R.; Liu, H. Research on the Influence of Open Underground Space Entrance Forms on the Microclimate: A Case Study in Xuzhou, China. Buildings 2024, 14, 554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ouyang, S.D.; Shan, X.F.; Deng, Q.L.; Ren, Z.G.; Wu, W.Y.; Meng, T.W.; Wu, Y.G. The Evaluation National Green Building Index Based on a Survey of Personnel Satisfaction: The Case of Hubei Province, China. Buildings 2024, 14, 868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Amaripadath, D.; Rahif, R.; Velickovic, M.; Attia, S. A systematic review on role of humidity as an indoor thermal comfort parameter in humid climates. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 68, 106039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. GB/T 18883-2022; National Standard of the People’s Republic of China: Standards for Indoor Air Quality. State Administration for Market Regulation, Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China: Beijing, China, 2022.
  25. Song, W.J.; Calautit, J.K. Inclusive comfort: A review of techniques for monitoring thermal comfort among individuals with the inability to provide accurate subjective feedback. Build. Environ. 2024, 257, 111463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Tang, H.; Liu, X.; Geng, Y.; Lin, B.R.; Ding, Y. Assessing the perception of overall indoor environmental quality: Model validation and interpretation. Energy Build. 2022, 259, 111870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Tagesse, M.; Deti, M.; Dadi, D.; Nigussie, B.; Eshetu, T.T.; Tucho, G.T. Non-combustible source indoor air pollutants concentration in beauty salons and associated self-reported health problems among the beauty salon workers. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy 2021, 14, 1363–1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Tian, Y.L.; Li, X.Y.; Sun, H.T.; Xue, W.H.; Song, J.X. Characteristics of atmospheric pollution and the impacts of environmental management over a megacity, northwestern China. Urban Clim. 2022, 42, 101114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Jung, C.; Mahmoud, N.S.A.; Qassimi, N.A.; Elsamanoudy, G. Preliminary Study on the Emission Dynamics of TVOC and Formaldehyde in Homes with Eco-Friendly Materials: Beyond Green Building. Buildings 2023, 13, 2847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Gao, M.P.; Liu, W.W.; An, X.S.; Nie, L.; Du, Z.X.; Chen, P.J.; Liu, X.Y. Emission factors and emission inventory of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from hair products application in hair salons in Beijing through measurement. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 878, 162996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Zhang, X.; Fan, Y.S.; Yu, W.Q.; Wang, H.; Zhang, X.L. Variation of Particulate Matter and Its Correlation with Other Air Pollutants in Xi`an, China. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2021, 30, 3357–3364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Lagmiri, S.; Dahech, S. Temperature Inversion and Particulate Matter Concentration in the Low Troposphere of Cergy-Pontoise (Parisian Region). Atmosphere 2024, 15, 349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Azizi, S.; Dehghani, M.H.; Naddafi, K.; Nabizadeh, R.; Yunesian, M. Occurrence of organophosphorus esters in outdoor air fine particulate matter and comprehensive assessment of human exposure: A global systematic review. Environ. Pollut. 2023, 318, 120895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Wang, Y.X.; Zhang, X.; Jin, X.Y.; Liu, W.J. An in situ self-charging triboelectric air filter with high removal efficiency, ultra-low pressure drop, superior filtration stability, and robust service life. Nano Energy 2023, 105, 108021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Buildings 14 02046 g001
Figure 1. Floor plans and section of a semi-underground building.
Figure 1. Floor plans and section of a semi-underground building.
Buildings 14 02046 g001
Buildings 14 02046 g002aBuildings 14 02046 g002b
Figure 2. Concentration distributions at different times.
Figure 2. Concentration distributions at different times.
Buildings 14 02046 g002aBuildings 14 02046 g002b
Buildings 14 02046 g003aBuildings 14 02046 g003b
Figure 3. The impact of outdoor air on indoor pollutant concentrations.
Figure 3. The impact of outdoor air on indoor pollutant concentrations.
Buildings 14 02046 g003aBuildings 14 02046 g003b
Buildings 14 02046 g004
Figure 4. Subjective voting on indoor air quality in a semi-underground building.
Figure 4. Subjective voting on indoor air quality in a semi-underground building.
Buildings 14 02046 g004
Buildings 14 02046 g005aBuildings 14 02046 g005bBuildings 14 02046 g005c
Figure 5. Relationships between air quality satisfaction and the concentrations of various pollutants.
Figure 5. Relationships between air quality satisfaction and the concentrations of various pollutants.
Buildings 14 02046 g005aBuildings 14 02046 g005bBuildings 14 02046 g005c
Table 1. Concentration limits for various pollutants.
Table 1. Concentration limits for various pollutants.
StandardIndexLimitNote
Standards for Indoor Air Quality
(GB/T 18883-2022)		Temperature (°C)22~28Summer
Relative humidity (%)40~80Summer
Wind speed (m/s)≤0.3Summer
CO (mg/m3)≤101 h
CO2 (%)≤0.101 h
TVOCs (mg/m3)≤0.608 h
HCHO (mg/m3)≤0.081 h
PM10 (mg/m3)≤0.1024 h
PM2.5 (mg/m3)≤0.0524 h
Table 2. Voting scale for personnel satisfaction with the indoor air quality.
Table 2. Voting scale for personnel satisfaction with the indoor air quality.
SatisfactionVery BadBadModerately BadModerateModerately GoodGoodVery Good
S−3−2−10+1+2+3
Table 3. Average concentrations of major pollutants in a semi-underground building.
Table 3. Average concentrations of major pollutants in a semi-underground building.
AverageMilk Tea ShopsHair SalonsDriving SchoolsSupermarketsStationery StoresOutdoors
PM1.0 (ug/m3)29.8932.9430.6526.3824.2228.41
PM2.5 (ug/m3)50.4057.2753.8049.4045.8046.47
PM10 (ug/m3)59.4065.4764.7354.2752.2057.73
HCHO (mg/m3)0.080.080.020.030.030.01
TVOCs (mg/m3)0.610.530.360.280.240.16
Wind speed (m/s)0.010.020.020.030.020.51
CO (mg/m3)0.420.580.420.420.420.13
CO2 (%)0.080.090.080.080.090.05
Temperature (°C)25.7426.6127.0727.1326.6126.81
Relative humidity (%)46.5746.8646.2746.0745.3336.19
Table 4. Gender distribution in different functional areas during the research period.
Table 4. Gender distribution in different functional areas during the research period.
Functional AreasMalesFemalesTotal
Milk tea shops348773
Hair salons454182
Driving schools172469
Supermarkets235876
Stationery stores113878
Total130248378
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ma, X.; Guo, L. Indoor Air Quality and Personnel Satisfaction in Different Functional Areas of Semi-Underground Buildings. Buildings 2024, 14, 2046. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14072046

AMA Style

Ma X, Guo L. Indoor Air Quality and Personnel Satisfaction in Different Functional Areas of Semi-Underground Buildings. Buildings. 2024; 14(7):2046. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14072046

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ma, Xiaoming, and Lina Guo. 2024. "Indoor Air Quality and Personnel Satisfaction in Different Functional Areas of Semi-Underground Buildings" Buildings 14, no. 7: 2046. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14072046

APA Style

Ma, X., & Guo, L. (2024). Indoor Air Quality and Personnel Satisfaction in Different Functional Areas of Semi-Underground Buildings. Buildings, 14(7), 2046. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14072046

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop