Evaluation of Improved Indoor Environmental Quality during Renovation by the new IV20 Tool

Abstract

Literature reveals several attempts to evaluate indoor environment (IE) using a single index or indicator. Variations in quality of included measurements and variations in weights between the included areas have challenged the models. The work presented in this paper defines the potential of having a comfortable and healthy IE. It filters out the uncertainty caused by the occupants by looking only at the physical frames given through the building. The occupants are instead included in the evaluation by questionnaires. The case presented shows how it is possible to identify possible IE improvements before a renovation and illustrates how this can be combined with the use of questionnaires.

Passive Buildings—Big Opportunities or Big Risks? Quantitative Risk Assessment for Passive Buildings Projects

“…When comparing the results obtained in the proposed approach with the many research papers concerning overheating in passive buildings, e.g., Refs. [23][24][25][26][28][29][30], it can be seen that the risk factors leading to overheating, such as design errors in the installations of the building (F17), connected, e.g., with overestimating design infiltration and the ventilation rate should be of particular attention and should not be neglected even if they were classified as risk factors of secondary importance (group B).…”

“…In addition, recommendations were given on how to make indoor PH climate systems more user-friendly. Many authors have taken the problem of PH overheating, among others [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. In [29], the subject of modeling and analyzing overheating risks in passive houses was taken.…”

Determining indoor environmental criteria weights through expert panels and surveys

“…Based on the combined performance of the four main areas, an overall IE label is awarded on a scale from A-G, which is well known from the Building Energy Performance Certificates. Thus, the advantages of awarding and communicating a single index for IE is combined with the advantages of several levels of nuanced assessment (Larsen et al, 2019).…”

“…Instead, each aspect should be assessed separately. This separation of aspects has many other advantages such as being able to better indicate remedial actions, compare alternatives and rate preferences which match the intentions of the IV20 assessment method (Larsen et al, 2019).…”

“…An essential step towards improving indoor environmental quality (IEQ) is to quantify, prioritize and rate overall IEQ; evaluations that require IE weights in order to compare different IE aspects (such as traffic noise vs direct sunlight). A holistic IEQ assessment tool called IV20 (Larsen, Rohde, Knudsen, Jønsson, & Jensen, 2019) is being developed as part of the REBUS partnership (REBUS partnership, n.d.) to provide such IEQ assessment of indoor air quality (IAQ), thermal, visual and acoustic IE.…”