Aye, L and Fuller, R J (2005) An evaluation of a proposed ventilation system for melbourne's CH2 building. Construction Economics and Building, 5(2), pp. 47-57. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
The understanding of ventilation requirements in commercial buildings has been significantly revised in the last 10-15 years. A link between health, productivity and increased fresh air use has been established by some research and this understanding underpins the ventilation philosophy adopted for the CH2 building. The ventilation system design for CH2 that has been evaluated in this paper envisages a mechanically driven system during the day, using the displacement technique to distribute filtered air. All introduced air will be drawn from outside and no recycling of air will occur. Natural ventilation will be employed at night using the stack effect, enhanced by turbine ventilators. This paper critiques the proposed ventilation system in the light of international experience and the particular conditions of the building's location. The evidence suggests that natural ventilation sometimes may be inadequate to achieve the desired objectives. Minimization of indoor pollutants, adequate filtration and high levels of ventilation should, however, ensure satisfactory air quality during occupied hours.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | indoor air quality; office buildings; productivity; ventilation |
| Index terms: | critique, philosophy, office building, ventilation, pollutant, recycling, productivity, natural ventilation, minimization, evidence, commercial building, air quality, indoor air quality |
| Subjects: | environmental engineering, environmental health, philosophical studies, climate science, waste management, air quality, algorithms, construction type, evaluation and assessment methods, management |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Sustainability, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here