Beschreibung:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Background</jats:title>
<jats:p>Modern health concerns related to air pollutant exposure in buildings have been exacerbated owing to several factors. Methods for assessing inhalation exposures indoors have been restricted to stationary air pollution measurements, typically assuming steady-state conditions.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Objective</jats:title>
<jats:p>We aimed to examine the feasibility of several proxy methods for estimating inhalation exposure to CO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub>, PM<jats:sub>2.5</jats:sub>, and PM<jats:sub>10</jats:sub> in simulated office environments.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Methods</jats:title>
<jats:p>In a controlled climate chamber mimicking four different office setups, human participants performed a set of scripted <jats:italic>sitting</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>standing</jats:italic> office activities. Three proxy sensing techniques were examined: stationary indoor air quality (IAQ) monitoring, individual monitoring of physiological status by wearable wristband, human presence detection by Passive Infrared (PIR) sensors. A ground-truth of occupancy was obtained from video recordings of network cameras. The results were compared with the concurrent IAQ measurements in the breathing zone of a reference participant by means of multiple linear regression (MLR) analysis with a combination of different input parameters.</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Results</jats:title>
<jats:p>Segregating data onto <jats:italic>sitting</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>standing</jats:italic> activities could lead to improved accuracy of exposure estimation model for CO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub> and PM by 9–60% during <jats:italic>sitting</jats:italic> activities, relative to <jats:italic>combined</jats:italic> activities. Stationary PM<jats:sub>2.5</jats:sub> and PM<jats:sub>10</jats:sub> monitors positioned at the ceiling-mounted ventilation exhaust in vicinity of the seated reference participant accurately estimated inhalation exposure (adjusted <jats:italic>R</jats:italic>² = 0.91 and <jats:italic>R</jats:italic>² = 0.87). Measurement at the front edge of the desk near abdomen showed a moderate accuracy (adjusted <jats:italic>R</jats:italic>² = 0.58) in estimating exposure to CO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub>. Combining different sensing techniques improved the CO<jats:sub>2</jats:sub> exposure detection by twofold, whereas the improvement for PM exposure detection was small (~10%).</jats:p>
</jats:sec><jats:sec>
<jats:title>Significance</jats:title>
<jats:p>This study contributes to broadening the knowledge of proxy methods for personal exposure estimation under dynamic occupancy profiles. The study recommendations on optimal monitor combination and placement could help stakeholders better understand spatial air pollutant gradients indoors which can ultimately improve control of IAQ.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>