*4.2.2. Air temperature data*

**House A House B**

**Location Floor Area (m2) Volume (m3) Floor Area (m2) Volume (m3)**

Bedroom 1 1st Floor 11.89 28.41 12.02 28.74 Bedroom 2 1st Floor 11.89 28.41 12.02 28.74 Bedroom 3 1st Floor 7.33 17.52 7.28 17.41 Bedroom 4 2nd Floor 18.69 39.43 18.69 39.43

The MVHR system was serviced and its installation altered between SP1 and SP2.The stud‐ ies had prescribed occupancy patterns to achieve specific goals and were scripted to accu‐ rately represent the airtight dwellings' IAQ performance using the MVHR system. The occupants were asked to refrain from naturally ventilating the dwellings, by opening win‐ dows and doors, and not to alter temperature thermostats. However, during SP1 windows

**SP1 - House A No. of Openings Total Duration of Openings (min)**

Bedroom 1 4 225 (3hr 45min) Bedroom 2 7 1779 (29hr 39min) Bedroom 3 0 0 Bedroom 4 2 578 (9hr 38min) Total 13 2582 (43hr 2min) **SP1 - House B No. of Openings Total Duration of Openings (min)**

Bedroom 1 1 33 Bedroom 2 2 215 (3hr 35min) Bedroom 3 0 0 Bedroom 4 0 0

**Table 3.** Frequency of Window Opening, SP1, House A and B

on Ta, RH and CO2 levels within the specified rooms.

Total 3 248 (4hr 8min)

The consequence of this natural ventilation will have more of an impact on the data collect‐ ed in House A, simply due to the greater over all duration in which the windows were open, than in House B; 43 hours compared with 4 hours, respectively. Conclusions drawn from the particular data in both houses should acknowledge these variances in terms of their effect

During SP2 window opening was more tightly controlled and no natural ventilation was re‐ corded, however, an occupant in House B increased the radiator thermostats in the kitchen, liv‐ ing room, utility and attic bedroom from one to four, over a period of 18.75 hours on 06/12/11. This change may have affected the data collected for House B, in particular in Bedroom 4. Any

conclusions drawn from the particular data should take into account this variance.

were opened by the occupants in both House A and House B. (Table 3).

**Table 2.** Bedroom Information

148 Sustainable Energy - Recent Studies

The graphical output produced, as well as the statistics calculated, shows that Bedroom Ta fell out with the preferred parameters, defined as 18-200 C, during both studies. The houses failed to sustain a constant bedroom Ta, within the optimum 20 C range. The temperature re‐ lated IAQ was unsuitable for sleeping on occasions. (Table 4) Within the data, an apparent difference is visible between the SP1 and SP2 results. Although ranges are similar, SP2 bed‐ room Ta was lower than the previous study, resulting in a reduced overall Ta. House A and B appear to function very similarly to one another in the studies.


**Table 4.** Overall Bedroom Ta Statistics
