Oluwatobi Oke , Rodrigo Fernández-Verdejo , Adam Lowe , Laura Watson , Shanshan Chen , Stefan Flagner , Guy Plaqui , Andrew Persily
{"title":"Assessing the accuracy of predicted values of human CO2 generation rates for IAQ applications","authors":"Oluwatobi Oke , Rodrigo Fernández-Verdejo , Adam Lowe , Laura Watson , Shanshan Chen , Stefan Flagner , Guy Plaqui , Andrew Persily","doi":"10.1016/j.indenv.2025.100132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The fields of building ventilation and indoor air quality (IAQ) often use indoor CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations as indicators of ventilation and IAQ, though many of these applications involve technical misinterpretation. Many of these applications require estimates of CO<sub>2</sub> emission rates from building occupants (VCO<sub>2</sub>), which can be predicted from body mass, sex, age, and activity level. In many cases, these parameters are difficult to determine, necessitating assumptions about the occupants and their activities. The determination of these values can be particularly challenging during the building design phase when no occupants are present or in occupied spaces where characterizing occupants is often impractical. This study utilizes data from experiments conducted by four research laboratories employing whole-room indirect calorimeter measurements of VCO<sub>2</sub> to evaluate the accuracy of two estimation approaches, ASHRAE and Persily and de Jonge. The experiments involved healthy adults performing various activities, including sleeping, cycling, and sedentary tasks such as reading. This validation exercise of VCO<sub>2</sub> predictions was conducted using two types of input values, measured data from the experiments and data from the literature. The results indicate that the ASHRAE approach consistently underestimated VCO<sub>2</sub>, with absolute mean prediction errors ranging from 29 % to 58 %. The Persily and de Jonge approach exhibited lower prediction errors, particularly when measured inputs were used, with absolute mean differences ranging from 6 % to 21 %. These findings highlight the critical importance of accurate input data. When measured inputs are unavailable, literature-derived values should be used with an understanding of their uncertainty.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100665,"journal":{"name":"Indoor Environments","volume":"2 4","pages":"Article 100132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indoor Environments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S295036202500061X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The fields of building ventilation and indoor air quality (IAQ) often use indoor CO2 concentrations as indicators of ventilation and IAQ, though many of these applications involve technical misinterpretation. Many of these applications require estimates of CO2 emission rates from building occupants (VCO2), which can be predicted from body mass, sex, age, and activity level. In many cases, these parameters are difficult to determine, necessitating assumptions about the occupants and their activities. The determination of these values can be particularly challenging during the building design phase when no occupants are present or in occupied spaces where characterizing occupants is often impractical. This study utilizes data from experiments conducted by four research laboratories employing whole-room indirect calorimeter measurements of VCO2 to evaluate the accuracy of two estimation approaches, ASHRAE and Persily and de Jonge. The experiments involved healthy adults performing various activities, including sleeping, cycling, and sedentary tasks such as reading. This validation exercise of VCO2 predictions was conducted using two types of input values, measured data from the experiments and data from the literature. The results indicate that the ASHRAE approach consistently underestimated VCO2, with absolute mean prediction errors ranging from 29 % to 58 %. The Persily and de Jonge approach exhibited lower prediction errors, particularly when measured inputs were used, with absolute mean differences ranging from 6 % to 21 %. These findings highlight the critical importance of accurate input data. When measured inputs are unavailable, literature-derived values should be used with an understanding of their uncertainty.
建筑通风和室内空气质量(IAQ)领域经常使用室内二氧化碳浓度作为通风和室内空气质量的指标,尽管许多这些应用涉及技术上的误解。许多此类应用都需要估算建筑物居住者的二氧化碳排放率(VCO2),这可以通过体重、性别、年龄和活动水平来预测。在许多情况下,这些参数很难确定,因此需要对居住者及其活动进行假设。在建筑物设计阶段,当没有居住者存在或在已占用的空间中,这些值的确定可能特别具有挑战性,在这些空间中,表征居住者通常是不切实际的。本研究利用四个研究实验室进行的实验数据,采用全室间接量热计测量VCO2,以评估ASHRAE和Persily and de Jonge两种估计方法的准确性。这些实验让健康的成年人进行各种各样的活动,包括睡觉、骑自行车和久坐不动的活动,比如阅读。VCO2预测的验证工作使用两种类型的输入值进行,实验测量数据和文献数据。结果表明,ASHRAE方法始终低估了VCO2,绝对平均预测误差在29 %至58 %之间。Persily和de Jonge方法显示出较低的预测误差,特别是当使用测量输入时,其绝对平均差异范围为6 %至21 %。这些发现强调了准确输入数据的重要性。当测量输入不可用时,应在理解其不确定性的情况下使用文献衍生值。