| 摘要: |
| 为了解北京市既有住区建筑的室内
环境品质和老年住户居住舒适性现状，2018
年3—7月在清河某1990年代初期建成的小
区开展调研，对5户住户的主要房间进行了长
期连续的室内温湿度监测，并每月入户进行
声环境、光环境以及空气品质测试。被调研
住户均为老年人，平均年龄69岁。入户测试同
时，通过问卷与访谈的形式，收集了老年住户
对于室内环境的主观评价。研究表明：一、调
研期间住户主要房间供暖季的室内温度基本
高于20℃，而春、夏季的室内热湿状态多数
位于ASHRAE舒适区外；二、在供暖季和春
季，受访老年住户的PMV高于TSV，在5%水
平上呈显著性差异；三、受访老年住户对自然
通风效果满意度较高，对声环境的满意程度
受室外施工影响，底层住户对房间自然采光的满意度低。 |
| 关键词: 既有住区 建筑环境 老年住户 舒适性评价 |
| DOI：10.13791/j.cnki.hsfwest.20190512 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金重点项目（51638003）、
清华大学大学生研究训练计划资助项目
（1811T0008） |
|
| Studies on Building Environment and Residential Comfort Evaluation of Elderly Residents in an ExistingResidential District in Beijing |
|
WANG Zihan,CAO Bin,LIN Borong,ZHU Yingxin
|
| Abstract: |
| This study aimed to understand the indoor environment quality and residential
comfort of elderly residents in existing residential district in Beijing. A continuous investigation
was carried out in a community built in the early 1990s in Qinghe. Five elderly households
participated in the investigation. The study lasted from March 2018 to July 2018, covering
heating season, summer and transition season. During the whole investigation period, the air
temperature and relative humidity in the main rooms (bedrooms and living rooms) of each family
were measured and recorded continuously. Investigators visited the households once a month.
During the monthly visit, the elderly respondents were asked to finish questionnaires, at the
same time, the global temperature and air velocity were measured near them. The questionnaires
include instantaneous evaluation on thermal sensation and thermal comfort as well as short-term
(within a month) satisfaction evaluation on living environment in their homes. In addition, the
indoor acoustical environment, luminous environment and air quality of each household were
also measured during the monthly visit. In heating season, despite of the cold climate outside,
indoor temperature of each room was above 20℃ in general. The indoor temperature in spring
fl uctuated with the outdoor temperature, and the temperature difference among the households
was relatively large. In summer, the indoor temperature was mainly in the range of 25~30℃.
During the whole investigation period, the relative humidity of households on the ground fl oor
was significantly higher than the households on the floor above (P<0.05). In this study, the
correlation between indoor and outdoor climate was observed. The hourly moisture content
of indoor and outdoor air showed obvious linear relationship (R2=0.830 8). In heating season,
due to the central heating, the daily average indoor temperature was not greatly affected by the
outdoor temperature conditions, and was within the range of 21~23℃ on the whole. In spring
and summer, people were more inclined to open the window, this led to a closer connection
between indoor and outdoor climate, a signifi cant increase of daily average indoor temperature
as the growth of outdoor temperature was observed. The indoor air state points were dawn in
the psychrometric chart compared with the ASHRAE-55 recommended comfort zone. In the
heating season, the majority of data points were located in the comfort zone due to the fulltime
central heating system. However, a great number of points fell out of the comfort zone in
spring and summer, for the buildings were in nature ventilation mode most of the time. PMV
was calculated according to Fanger’s PMV-model. Paired-samples T test was conducted between
PMV and TSV of the elderly respondents in heating season, spring and summer. There were significant differences (P<0.05) between PMV and TSV in heating season and spring. PMV was generally below zero in these two seasons, while
TSV were higher than neutral in heating season and close to neutral in spring. Although the objective measurement results of indoor air temperature
and relative humidity showed that majority of air state points were located outside the ASHRAE comfort zone, the actual evaluation on thermal
comfort and thermal acceptability of the respondents were rather tolerant. When TSV was -1 and +1, most of the respondents still felt comfortable,
and comfortable votes even occurred when TSV was +3. As for thermal acceptability, during the four-month investigation, only 4% of the samples
considered the thermal environment a little unacceptable, the rest were all acceptable, among which 31% were completely acceptable and 65% were
just acceptable. Current national standards stipulate the outdoor and indoor noise level of residential buildings. The outdoor noise level measured
outside the window hole of master bedrooms was under the upper limit, while the indoor noise level of some rooms exceeded the limit. Only a part
of rooms on the floor above met the illuminance standard of natural lighting. There were differences in level of PM2.5 and CO2 concentrations
among different households, which were mainly caused by living habits (smoking, window opening).In terms of residential satisfaction evaluation,
the households’ satisfaction with the effect of natural ventilation was generally high. The satisfaction with natural lighting of residents on the ground
floor was low. Great difference of satisfaction in acoustical environment was found among different monthly visits, the main noise source leading to
discontent was outdoor construction.. |
| Key words: Existing Residential District Building Environment Elderly Residents Comfort Evaluation |
