Questionnaire testing, validating, and preliminary results

Abstract This paper demonstrates the effectiveness of the TwoStep cluster analysis and the development and first results of a new questionnaire for measuring comfort, health, and energy habits. The justification for the questionnaire is to consolidate questions of six specific domains about occupants' energy consumption patterns, from the behavioural and psychological perspectives into one instrument. The questionnaire was developed from a literature review, iterative conceptualization, and testing. The resulting instrument was administered to a sample of home occupants, comprising of bachelor students of Architecture of the Delft University of Technology. The objective of the study was to examine the effectiveness of the TwoStep cluster analysis to produce occupant profiles. 316 emails were sent out inviting participants to complete the questionnaire. With the TwoStep cluster analysis, it was possible to distinguish six different archetypes of occupants based on their behavioural characteristics. These were the Relaxed Optimists, Unconcerned Indifferents, Restrained Sensitives, Positive Absolutists, Incautious Negativistics, and Resigned Savers. The results provide promising evidence of the questionnaire's potential to distinguish different occupant energy-consumption profiles based on distinct psychosocial domains in a single and concise instrument, while also showing that the analysis method is appropriate for the type of variables gathered. The value of recognizing these profiles allows for a better understanding of occupants' differing energy consumption patterns in their homes and tailoring interventions to their specific needs

An overview of transparent and translucent 3D-printed façade prototypes and technologies

3D-printing has transformed traditional manufacturing by enabling the fabrication of individually designed complex systems. The building’s façade is one of the most challenging systems because it affects the control of the built indoor environment and allows to provide energy-saving. The objective of this research is to distinguish 3Dprinting technologies and applied materials in them that improve transparency in the façade to decrease artificial lighting consumption, to control solar energy, and to improve energy-savings. A literature study was performed, firstly, different 3Dprinting techniques and their materials for producing transparent outcomes were reviewed from academic databases. Then, transparent 3D-printed façade prototypes were identified. The outcomes indicated that most of the prototypes used the FDM 3D-printing technique and Polyethylene Terephthalate Glycol as a material. These prototypes didn’t consider the disadvantages of the FDM technique for the lighting transmission. Additionally, some prototypes have control over daylighting discomforts but some of them not. Prototypes tried to improve energy-saving which ranged from applying recyclable materials to controlling solar gain.publishedVersio

Using focus groups data to finalize the Archetypes

A previous study clustered home occupants into archetypes with a questionnaire. This study uses qualitative methods to strengthen those previously-found archetypes with data pertaining to the participants’ home experiences. Focus groups were carried out where generative activities were conducted involving the generation of collages. The first activity dealt with the expression of ‘meaning of energy use at home’ and the second one with the ‘ideal home experience’. Analyses were done with content and thematic analysis. Codes were drawn from the data and were assimilated through an affinity diagram. The diagram produced two categories: building themes and human themes, along with five sub-categories (home, financial, energy, psychological, and behavioural aspects). The outcome shows that each archetype expresses needs and meanings of an ideal home experience and energy use differently from each other. The results provide evidence that generative techniques can be used in energy research. In this case, to validate and substantiate the quantitative archetypes previously produced with a questionnaire. Interpretive knowledge in energy research allows for a better understanding of occupants’ differing behavioural patterns in regards to energy use and comfort. It allows customizing interventions to the archetypes’ specific needs to decrease energy consumption while maintaining comfort

Ten Questions Concerning Well-Being in the Built Environment

Well-being in the built environment is a topic that features frequently in building standards and certification schemes, in scholarly articles and in the general press. However, despite this surge in attention, there are still many questions on how to effectively design, measure, and nurture well-being in the built environment. Bringing together experts from academia and the building industry, this paper aims to demonstrate that the promotion of well-being requires a departure from conventional agendas. The ten questions and answers have been arranged to offer a range of perspectives on the principles and strategies that can better sustain the consideration of well-being in the design and operation of the built environment. Placing a specific focus on some of the key physical factors (e.g., light, temperature, sound, and air quality) of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) that strongly influence occupant perception of built spaces, attention is also given to the value of multi-sensory variability, to how to monitor and communicate well-being outcomes in support of organizational and operational strategies, and to future research needs and their translation into building practice and standards. Seen as a whole, a new framework emerges, accentuating the integration of diverse new competencies required to support the design and operation of built environments that respond to the multifaceted physical, physiological, and psychological needs of their occupants

Ventilation and thermal conditions in secondary schools in the Netherlands: Effects of COVID-19 pandemic control and prevention measures

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of ventilation was widely stressed and new protocols of ventilation were implemented in school buildings worldwide. In the Netherlands, schools were recommended to keep the windows and doors open, and after a national lockdown more stringent measures such as reduction of occupancy were introduced. In this study, the actual effects of such measures on ventilation and thermal conditions were investigated in 31 classrooms of 11 Dutch secondary schools, by monitoring the indoor and outdoor CO 2 concentration and air temperature, both before and after the lockdown. Ventilation rates were calculated using the steady-state method. Pre-lockdown, with an average occupancy of 17 students, in 42% of the classrooms the CO 2 concentration exceeded the upper limit of the Dutch national guidelines (800 ppm above outdoors), while 13% had a ventilation rate per person (VR p) lower than the minimum requirement (6 l/s/p). Post-lockdown, the indoor CO 2 concentration decreased significantly while for ventilation rates significant increase was only found in VR p, mainly caused by the decrease in occupancy (average 10 students). The total ventilation rate per classrooms, mainly induced by opening windows and doors, did not change significantly. Meanwhile, according to the Dutch national guidelines, thermal conditions in the classrooms were not satisfying, both pre- and post-lockdown. While opening windows and doors cannot achieve the required indoor environmental quality at all times, reducing occupancy might not be feasible for immediate implementation. Hence, more controllable and flexible ways for improving indoor air quality and thermal comfort in classrooms are needed

Dismantling myths on the airborne transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2)

The Covid-19 pandemic has caused untold disruption and enhanced mortality rates around the world. Understanding the mechanisms for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is key to preventing further spread but there is confusion over the meaning of “airborne” whenever transmission is discussed. Scientific ambivalence originates from evidence published many years ago, which has generated mythological beliefs that obscure current thinking. This article gathers together and explores some of the most commonly held dogmas on airborne transmission in order to stimulate revision of the science in the light of current evidence. Six ‘myths’ are presented, explained, and ultimately refuted on the basis of recently published papers and expert opinion from previous work related to similar viruses. There is little doubt that SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted via a range of airborne particle sizes subject to all the usual ventilation parameters and human behaviour. Experts from specialties encompassing aerosol studies, ventilation, engineering, physics, virology and clinical medicine have joined together to present this review, in order to consolidate the evidence for airborne transmission mechanisms and offer justification for modern strategies for prevention and control of Covid-19 in healthcare and community

What were the historical reasons for the resistance to recognizing airborne transmission during the COVID‐19 pandemic?

The question of whether SARS‐CoV‐2 is mainly transmitted by droplets or aerosols has been highly controversial. We sought to explain this controversy through a historical analysis of transmission research in other diseases. For most of human history, the dominant paradigm was that many diseases were carried by the air, often over long distances and in a phantasmagorical way. This miasmatic paradigm was challenged in the mid to late 19th century with the rise of germ theory, and as diseases such as cholera, puerperal fever, and malaria were found to actually transmit in other ways. Motivated by his views on the importance of contact/droplet infection, and the resistance he encountered from the remaining influence of miasma theory, prominent public health official Charles Chapin in 1910 helped initiate a successful paradigm shift, deeming airborne transmission most unlikely. This new paradigm became dominant. However, the lack of understanding of aerosols led to systematic errors in the interpretation of research evidence on transmission pathways. For the next five decades, airborne transmission was considered of negligible or minor importance for all major respiratory diseases, until a demonstration of airborne transmission of tuberculosis (which had been mistakenly thought to be transmitted by droplets) in 1962. The contact/droplet paradigm remained dominant, and only a few diseases were widely accepted as airborne before COVID‐19: those that were clearly transmitted to people not in the same room. The acceleration of interdisciplinary research inspired by the COVID‐19 pandemic has shown that airborne transmission is a major mode of transmission for this disease, and is likely to be significant for many respiratory infectious diseases

COVID-19 and Airborne Transmission: Science Rejected, Lives Lost. Can Society Do Better?

This is an account that should be heard of an important struggle: the struggle of a large group of experts who came together at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to warn the world about the risk of airborne transmission and the consequences of ignoring it. We alerted the World Health Organization about the potential significance of the airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and the urgent need to control it, but our concerns were dismissed. Here we describe how this happened and the consequences. We hope that by reporting this story we can raise awareness of the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the need to be open to new evidence, and to prevent it from happening again. Acknowledgement of an issue, and the emergence of new evidence related to it, is the first necessary step towards finding effective mitigation solutions

How can airborne transmission of COVID-19 indoors be minimised?

During the rapid rise in COVID-19 illnesses and deaths globally, and notwithstanding recommended precautions, questions are voiced about routes of transmission for this pandemic disease. Inhaling small airborne droplets is probable as a third route of infection, in addition to more widely recognized transmission via larger respiratory droplets and direct contact with infected people or contaminated surfaces. While uncertainties remain regarding the relative contributions of the different transmission pathways, we argue that existing evidence is sufficiently strong to warrant engineering controls targeting airborne transmission as part of an overall strategy to limit infection risk indoors. Appropriate building engineering controls include sufficient and effective ventilation, possibly enhanced by particle filtration and air disinfection, avoiding air recirculation and avoiding overcrowding. Often, such measures can be easily implemented and without much cost, but if only they are recognised as significant in contributing to infection control goals. We believe that the use of engineering controls in public buildings, including hospitals, shops, offices, schools, kindergartens, libraries, restaurants, cruise ships, elevators, conference rooms or public transport, in parallel with effective application of other controls (including isolation and quarantine, social distancing and hand hygiene), would be an additional important measure globally to reduce the likelihood of transmission and thereby protect healthcare workers, patients and the general public

COVID-19 and Airborne Transmission: Science Rejected, Lives Lost. Can Society Do Better?

This is an account that should be heard of an important struggle: the struggle of a large group of experts who came together at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to warn the world about the risk of airborne transmission and the consequences of ignoring it. We alerted the World Health Organization about the potential significance of the airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and the urgent need to control it, but our concerns were dismissed. Here we describe how this happened and the consequences. We hope that by reporting this story we can raise awareness of the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the need to be open to new evidence, and to prevent it from happening again. Acknowledgement of an issue, and the emergence of new evidence related to it, is the first necessary step towards finding effective mitigation solutions