Normal background levels of air and surface mould reserve in English residential building stock: a preliminary study towards benchmarks based on NAHA measurements.
Normal background levels of air and surface mould reserve in English residential building stock: a preliminary study towards benchmarks based on NAHA measurements.
复制标题
DOI：
10.14324/111.444/ucloe.000005
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
D'Ayala, Dina
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Aktas, Yasemin Didem;Reeslev, Morten;Altamirano, Hector;May, Neil;D'Ayala, Dina
本文报告了对英国140个住宅房间进行表面(外观清洁和肮脏/粉尘表面)和主动(侵略性或激活性)空气测试的结果，这些测试没有明显的水损害或霉菌生长，并对几个可见霉菌生长/水损害的房间进行了测试以供比较。其目的是在没有水损坏的室内建立正常的霉菌本底水平，以作为“正常”室内环境的基准，进而在需要进一步调查和可能的补救时进行基准测试。根据β-N-乙酰氨基己糖苷酶(EC 3.2.1.52；NaHA)的活性对空气和表面霉菌进行定量。得到的读数呈对数正态分布。从目视清洁表面获得的样品中，98%的样品等于或小于25个相对荧光单位(RFU)，这被认为是可以作为表面清洁/修复成功标准的范围的上限。在从视觉上肮脏/尘埃表面获得的样本中，约98%低于450RFU，这被建议用来定义异常高的霉菌水平的下限，即使在肮脏/尘土表面也是罕见的。同样，约98%的空气样本被发现含有1700个或以下的RFU。因此，在没有问题的室内环境中，1700 RFU以上的值被认为是不太可能的，可能表明可能存在导致霉菌生长的问题。值在1700以下的样本被进一步划分为三个拟议的亚类。最后，将获得的RFU值和建议的基准与之前在哥本哈根测试的17个非住宅室内环境的RFU值和建议的基准进行了比较，并发现它们都高度一致，这表明当地的气候制度和房间功能可能不像通常认为的那样对室内霉菌水平产生影响，或者英国和丹麦在这些因素方面的细微差异不足以导致这些国家建筑库存的典型室内霉菌水平发生重大变化。
This paper reports results obtained from a surface (both visually clean and dirty/dusty surfaces) and active (aggressive or activated) air testing scheme on 140 residential rooms in England, without visible water damage or mould growth, along with a few rooms with visible mould growth/water damage tested for comparison purposes. The aim was to establish normal background levels of mould in non-water-damaged interiors to benchmark a ‘normal’ indoor environment, and in turn when there is a need for further investigation, and, possibly, remediation. Air and surface mould was quantified based on the activity of β-N-acetylhexosaminidase (EC 3.2.1.52; NAHA). The obtained readings showed a log-normal distribution. Ninety-eight percent of the samples obtained from visually clean surfaces were equal to or less than 25 relative fluorescence units (RFU), which is suggested to be the higher bound for the range which can be used as a success criterion for surface cleaning/remediation. Of samples obtained from visually dirty/dusty surfaces, around 98% were below 450 RFU, which is suggested to define the lower-bound for abnormally high levels of mould, rare even on dirty/dusty surfaces. Similarly, around 98% of the air samples were found to have 1700 RFU or below. Values above 1700 RFU are therefore deemed unlikely in a non-problem indoor environment and can be indicative of a possible problem inducing mould growth. The samples with values below 1700 were further divided into three proposed sub-categories. Finally, the obtained RFU values and the suggested benchmarks were compared to those obtained from 17 non-residential indoor environments tested previously in Copenhagen, and the benchmarks that are currently used in Danish national standards, and they were both found to be highly congruent, suggesting that local climate regimes and room functions might not be as influential on indoor mould levels as commonly thought, or that the nuances between England and Denmark in terms of these factors are not strong enough to lead to sizable changes in the typical indoor mould levels in these countries’ building stocks.