Indoor Environmental Quality is an important issue in educational buildings since it is directly related to students’ well-being and learning activities. Indoor Environmental Quality parameters have been assessed in three representative campus building typologies (old, new, and retrofitted), in Tehran, Iran, by measurements and questionnaire (n = 842) from July 2016 to April 2017. Results have been compared to the students’ overall satisfaction level and recommended standards. According to results, minimum attention to local standards with regard to Indoor Air Quality, acoustic, and lighting, especially in the old and retrofitted buildings, seems the main reason of low environmental quality in the studied cases. Fitting a multiple regression model to the questionnaire data, a mathematical model is developed to predict the overall comfort (Indoor Environmental Quality index). Studied buildings have been ranked based on the Indoor Environmental Quality index from high quality: I (building C) to out of the comfort range: IV (building A). Moreover, results reveal that the acceptable range of each Indoor Environmental Quality parameters, especially with regard to thermal and acoustic comfort, is broader in real condition in comparison with the standards. Finally, the buildings’ annual energy consumption is used to propose a Retrofit Potential Index in order to assess the impact of comfort parameters on energy consumption by integrated analyses.
ANSI/ASHRAE (2010) Standard 55 —thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy (ANSI approved).
2.
ASHRAE (2013) ASHRAE 62.1.
3.
ASHRAE/CIBSE/USGBC (2010) Performance Measurement Protocols for Commercial Buildings. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers.
4.
ASHRAE, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard (2013) Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
CaoBOuyangQZhuYet al. (2012) Development of a multivariate regression model for overall satisfaction in public buildings based on field studies in Beijing and Shanghai. Building and Environment47: 394–399.
7.
ChiangC-MLaiC-M (2002) A study on the comprehensive indicator of indoor environment assessment for occupants’ health in Taiwan. Building and Environment37(4): 387–392.
8.
CornaroCParaviciniACiminiA (2013) Monitoring indoor carbon dioxide concentration and effectiveness of natural trickle ventilation in a middle school in Rome. Indoor and Built Environment22(2): 445–455.
9.
DanielsR (2016) BB101: ventilation, thermal comfort and air quality in schools.
10.
DanielsR (2017) Guidelines on Ventilation, Thermal Comfort and Indoor Air Quality in Schools. London, UK: Department of Education. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications
11.
DascalakiEGSermpetzoglouVG (2011) Energy performance and indoor environmental quality in Hellenic schools. Energy and Buildings43(2–3): 718–727.
12.
DorizasPVAssimakopoulosM-NSantamourisM (2015) A holistic approach for the assessment of the indoor environmental quality, student productivity, and energy consumption in primary schools. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment187(5): 259.
13.
EkrenOKaradenizZHAtmacaIet al. (2017) Assessment and improvement of indoor environmental quality in a primary school. Science and Technology for the Built Environment23(2): 391–402.
14.
EN 12464-1: 2011 (2011) Light and lighting—lighting of workplaces, part 1: indoor work places.
15.
EN 15251 (2007) Indoor environmental input parameters for design and assessment of energy performance of buildings addressing indoor air quality, thermal environment, lighting and acoustics.
16.
FrontczakMWargockiP (2011) Literature survey on how different factors influence human comfort in indoor environments. Building and Environment46(4): 922–937.
17.
GaoJWargockiPWangY (2014) Ventilation system type, classroom environmental quality and pupils’ perceptions and symptoms. Building and Environment75: 46–57.
18.
GhitaSACatalinaT (2015) Energy efficiency versus indoor environmental quality in different Romanian countryside schools. Energy and Buildings92: 140–154.
19.
GramezABoubeniderF (2017) Acoustic comfort evaluation for a conference room: a case study. Applied Acoustics118: 39–49.
20.
Haverinen-ShaughnessyUShaughnessyRJColeECet al. (2015) An assessment of indoor environmental quality in schools and its association with health and performance. Building and Environment93(Pt 1): 35–40.
21.
HeinzerlingDSchiavonSWebsterTet al. (2013) Indoor environmental quality assessment models: a literature review and a proposed weighting and classification scheme. Building and Environment70: 210–222.
22.
HuangLZhuYOuyangQet al. (2012) A study on the effects of thermal, luminous, and acoustic environments on indoor environmental comfort in offices. Building and Environment49(1): 304–309.
23.
ISIRI 14254 (20120) Non-residential buildings —criteria for energy consumption and energy labeling instruction.
KrügerELZanninPHT (2004) Acoustic, thermal and luminous comfort in classrooms. Building and Environment39(9): 1055–1063.
26.
LeeMCMuiKWWongLTet al. (2012) Student learning performance and indoor environmental quality (IEQ) in air-conditioned university teaching rooms. Building and Environment49: 238–244.
27.
LimGHHirningMBKeumalaNet al. (2017) Daylight performance and users’ visual appraisal for green building offices in Malaysia. Energy and Buildings141: 175–185.
28.
MadureiraJPacienciaIPereiraCet al. (2016) Indoor air quality in Portuguese schools: levels and sources of pollutants. Indoor Air26(4): 526–537.
29.
Management and Planning Organization (2006) Acoustical Guide Lines for Educational Buildings (no. 343). Tehran, Iran: Criteria Codification and Earthquake Risk Reduction Affairs Bureau.
30.
MarinoCNucaraAPietrafesaM (2012) Proposal of comfort classification indexes suitable for both single environments and whole buildings. Building and Environment57: 58–67.
31.
MohammadyanMAlizadeh-LarimiAEtemadinejadSet al. (2017) Particulate air pollution at schools: indoor-outdoor relationship and determinants of indoor concentrations. Aerosol and Air Quality Research17(3): 857–864.
32.
MumovicDPalmerJDaviesMet al. (2009) Winter indoor air quality, thermal comfort and acoustic performance of newly built secondary schools in England. Building and Environment44(7): 1466–1477.
33.
PellerinNCandasV (2003) Combined effects of temperature and noise on human discomfort. Physiology & Behavior78: 99–106.
34.
PereiraLDEdnaCGameiro da SilvaM (2015) Indoor air quality audit and evaluation on thermal comfort in a school in Portugal. Indoor and Built Environment24(2): 256–268. doi:10.1177/1420326x13508966.
35.
PereiraLDNetoLBernardoHet al. (2017) An integrated approach on energy consumption and indoor environmental quality performance in six Portuguese secondary schools. Energy Research & Social Science32: 23–43.
36.
PereiraLDRaimondoDCorgnatiSPet al. (2014) Assessment of indoor air quality and thermal comfort in Portuguese secondary classrooms: methodology and results. Building and Environment81: 69–80.
37.
QuangTNHeCKnibbsLDet al. (2014) Co-optimisation of indoor environmental quality and energy consumption within urban office buildings. Energy and Buildings85: 225–234.
38.
RahmaniarIPutraJCP (2017) Effect of acoustic and thermal comfort to support learning process in a University. Procedia Engineering170: 280–285.
39.
RamprasadVSubbaiyanG (2017) Perceived indoor environmental quality of classrooms and outcomes: a study of a higher education institution in India. Architectural Engineering and Design Management13(3): 202–222.
40.
RicciardiPBurattiC (2018) Environmental quality of university classrooms: subjective and objective evaluation of the thermal, acoustic, and lighting comfort conditions. Building and Environment127: 23–36.
41.
SadickA-MIssaMH (2017) Occupants’ indoor environmental quality satisfaction factors as measures of school teachers’ well-being. Building and Environment119: 99–109.
42.
SarbuIPacurarC (2015) Experimental and numerical research to assess indoor environment quality and schoolwork performance in university classrooms. Building and Environment93: 141–154.
43.
StaziFNaspiFUlpianiGet al. (2017) Indoor air quality and thermal comfort optimization in classrooms developing an automatic system for windows opening and closing. Energy and Buildings139: 732–746.
44.
ToyinboOShaughnessyRTurunenMet al. (2016) Building characteristics, indoor environmental quality, and mathematics achievement in Finnish elementary schools. Building and Environment104: 114–121.
45.
VilčekováSKapaloPMečiarováL’et al. (2017) Investigation of indoor environment quality in classroom—case study. Procedia Engineering190: 496–503.
46.
WargockiPDa SilvaNA (2015) Use of visual CO2 feedback as a retrofit solution for improving classroom air quality. Indoor Air25(1): 105–114.
47.
WargockiPWyonDP (2017) Ten questions concerning thermal and indoor air quality effects on the performance of office work and schoolwork. Building and Environment112: 359–366.
48.
WongLTMuiKWHuiPS (2008) A multivariate-logistic model for acceptance of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) in offices. Building and Environment43(1): 1–6.
49.
ZanninPHT (2009) Field measurements of acoustic quality in university classrooms. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research68: 1053–1057.
50.
ZomorodianZSTahsildoostMHafeziM (2016) Thermal comfort in educational buildings: a review article. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews59: 895–906.
