ChrisConley
Mechanical
- May 13, 2002
- 975
ASHRAE recently* published an updated to their latest ventilation standard 62-2004.
One of the more significant changes was that they decreased the 'per person' ventilation and added a 'per area' component.
For those not familiar with the standard a typical example with a classroom would be from 15 cfm/person to 10 cfm/person with 0.12 cfm/ft2.
I quickly adapted to the new standard and started spreadsheets to calculated ventilation requirements for spaces using the new standard and immediately started running into people (reviewers, clients, other engineers) stating that my ventilation numbers looked too low and they should be increased.
I would show my calculations and reference the standard and still people would question the ventilation rates.
Now to the actual question, have people been using the new rates in their designs? If so, have they found any spaces being 'under-ventilated'? What is the general feel for the new standard out there?
*I say new and recently because with our industry inertia 2 years is pretty new.
One of the more significant changes was that they decreased the 'per person' ventilation and added a 'per area' component.
For those not familiar with the standard a typical example with a classroom would be from 15 cfm/person to 10 cfm/person with 0.12 cfm/ft2.
I quickly adapted to the new standard and started spreadsheets to calculated ventilation requirements for spaces using the new standard and immediately started running into people (reviewers, clients, other engineers) stating that my ventilation numbers looked too low and they should be increased.
I would show my calculations and reference the standard and still people would question the ventilation rates.
Now to the actual question, have people been using the new rates in their designs? If so, have they found any spaces being 'under-ventilated'? What is the general feel for the new standard out there?
*I say new and recently because with our industry inertia 2 years is pretty new.