Engineering Sustainability 2015 Pittsburgh, PA April 19-21, 2015 Extended Abstract COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS OBTAINED WITH SIMPLIFIED IEQ TOOLKIT AND ROBUST INSTRUMENT IN POE FIELD STUDIES Presenting Author: Jihyun Park Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics 1 Carnegie Mellon University, jihp@cmu.edu Co-Authors: Yue Lei 1 , Ye Song 1 , Ruben Moron Rojas 1 , Jung Min Han 1 , June Young Park 1 , Jie Zhao 1 Azizan Aziz 1 , Vivian Loftness 1 Abstract: Recently mobile Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) evaluation has gained increasing interest. Hundreds of mobile apps have been developed in the market which run on smartphones and tablet PCs to support simplified IEQ assessment. Simplified IEQ tools that combine simple measurement instruments with user surveys can provide a statistically significant insight into IEQ conditions at a fraction of the cost of complex field instrumentation, while still providing the first tier of evaluation critical to field evaluation of indoor environments. We pilot tested simplified IEQ toolkit with the comparison of the robust sensors. Six simplified thermal, air, visual and acoustic sensors were tested in the post occupancy evaluation in the office building in Pittsburgh, PA. For a comparison, National Environmental Assessment Toolkit (NEAT) developed by Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics (CBPD) at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) and Brüel & Kjær 2250 acoustic meter were utilized. The result showed that there’s no significant difference in CO 2, air temperature, and acoustic level. However, the relative humidity (%) and illuminance level (lx) measurements from the simplified IEQ assessment were not adequate in terms of sensor accuracy and consistency. Introduction and Background: IEQ evaluation is critical to defining retrofit actions for improving the indoor environment to enhance human health and performance. The National Environmental Assessment Toolkit (NEAT) developed by the Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics (CBPD) at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) has been used for IEQ evaluation to measure the indoor thermal quality, air quality, lighting, and acoustic performance in work environments [1]. Despite the inclusiveness and accuracy of measurements, the NEAT instruments are expensive, labor intensive, and require expertise to operate the sensors, log the measured data, and conduct data analysis. Simplified IEQ measurement tools on tablet PCs such as iPad and iPhone can help IEQ assessment become a critical phase in the design and commissioning of buildings, as the assessment can provide constant feedback at each stage of the design and construction process. Compared to NEAT, the simplified IEQ toolkits were developed to evaluate IEQ out of consideration for cost-effectiveness and robustness [2]. Approach / Experimental: Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) was conducted in an office building in Pittsburgh, PA using both robust and simplified IEQ sensors. Total IEQ conditions of twenty-one workstations were tested using both simplified and robust IEQ toolkits on the 28 th of February 2013 (Table 1). Figure 1 IEQ Spot measurements using NEAT cart and Simplified Toolkit Six simplified IEQ sensors with selected apps were tested in the field as shown in Table 1. In this paper, the results of 1) CO 2 concentration, 2) air temperature at 1.1 m, 3) relative humidity, and 4) background noise level data were analyzed. Lighting results were not including because the measured illuminance levels obtained in two different apps on iPad 3 were inconsistent such that comparison would be inadequate. Table 1 Sensor comparison (simplified vs. robust sensors and accuracy) Sensor Simplified Toolkit Robust Toolkit Manufacturer & Accuracy Manufacturer & Accuracy CO2 AQM [3] ±5 % Telaire [1] ±5 % Air Temperature AQM [3] ±1˚C National | LM35DZ [1] ±0.5˚C RH AQM [3] ±5% Honeywell | HIH-3602 [1] ±2 % Acoustics RTA [6] n/a Bruel Kaejer | 2250 [7] ±1 dB Illuminance1 Whitegoods [4] n/a Minolta T-10 [8] ±3 % Illuminance2 LuxMeter [5] n/a