Article

Simulating the effect of slab features on vapor intrusion of crack entry

School of Engineering, Brown University, Providence RI02912.
Building and Environment (Impact Factor: 2.7). 01/2013; 59:417-425. DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.09.007
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In vapor intrusion screening models, a most widely employed assumption in simulating the entry of contaminant into a building is that of a crack in the building foundation slab. Some modelers employed a perimeter crack hypothesis while others chose not to identify the crack type. However, few studies have systematically investigated the influence on vapor intrusion predictions of slab crack features, such as the shape and distribution of slab cracks and related to this overall building foundation footprint size. In this paper, predictions from a three-dimensional model of vapor intrusion are used to compare the contaminant mass flow rates into buildings with different foundation slab crack features. The simulations show that the contaminant mass flow rate into the building does not change much for different assumed slab crack shapes and locations, and the foundation footprint size does not play a significant role in determining contaminant mass flow rate through a unit area of crack. Moreover, the simulation helped reveal the distribution of subslab contaminant soil vapor concentration beneath the foundation, and the results suggest that in most cases involving no biodegradation, the variation in subslab concentration should not exceed an order of magnitude, and is often significantly less than this.

1 Bookmark
 · 
200 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Generic indoor air:subslab soil gas attenuation factors (SSAFs) are important for rapid screening of potential vapor intrusion risks in buildings that overlie soil and groundwater contaminated with volatile chemicals. Insufficiently conservative SSAFs can allow high-risk sites to be prematurely excluded from further investigation. Excessively conservative SSAFs can lead to costly, time-consuming, and often inconclusive actions at an inordinate number of low-risk sites. This paper reviews two of the most commonly used approaches to develop SSAFs: (1) comparison of paired, indoor air and subslab soil gas data in empirical databases and (2) comparison of estimated subslab vapor entry rates and indoor air exchange rates (IAERs). Potential error associated with databases includes interference from indoor and outdoor sources, reliance on data from basements, and seasonal variability. Heterogeneity in subsurface vapor plumes combined with uncertainty regarding vapor entry points calls into question the representativeness of limited subslab data and diminishes the technical defensibility of SSAFs extracted from databases. The use of reasonably conservative vapor entry rates and IAERs offers a more technically defensible approach for the development of generic SSAF values for screening. Consideration of seasonal variability in building leakage rates, air exchange rates, and interpolated vapor entry rates allows for the development of generic SSAFs at both local and regional scales. Limitations include applicability of the default IAERs and vapor entry rates to site-specific vapor intrusion investigations and uncertainty regarding applicability of generic SSAFs to assess potential short-term (e.g., intraday) variability of impacts to indoor air.
    Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation 12/2014; DOI:10.1111/gwmr.12086 · 1.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This case study presents measurements of radon and moisture infiltration from soil gases into the basement of an unoccupied research house in Madison, Wisconsin, over two full years. The basement floor and exterior walls were constructed with preservative-treated lumber and plywood. In addition to continuous radon monitoring, measurements included building air tightness, indoor–outdoor pressure difference, indoor and outdoor temperature and relative humidity, wood moisture content, and tracer gas decay. A single-zone air infiltration model was calibrated based on tracer gas measurements. Soil moisture infiltration was determined by mass conservation after accounting for all other moisture flows: humidification, air exchange, diffusion through the above-grade building envelope, sorption in hygroscopic materials, and moisture removal by air conditioning. A moisture balance methodology used in previous work was validated and improved here by including two time scales in the sorption modeling. Active soil depressurization was applied and shown to reduce both radon and soil moisture infiltration. The stack effect is shown to correlate well with soil moisture infiltration but does not fully explain radon entry.
    Building and Environment 02/2015; 85. DOI:10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.12.008 · 2.70 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The entry and the accumulation of soil gas pollutants (Radon, VOC's, …) into indoor environments can cause significant health risks. Some analytical and numerical models have been developed to quantify the soil gas indoor concentrations in order to assess their health risks. However, the different models include large uncertainties in understanding and assessing the indoor soil gas concentrations. Firstly, this study presents a general understanding of the behavior of these pollutants near building foundations. Secondly, it describes semi-empirical models developed to quantity the entry of these pollutants into buildings. These models consider the most encountered building substructures: supported slab, floating slab and crawl space. Particularly, these models consider the strong coupling of convection and diffusion phenomena near building foundations. The two-dimensional aspect of the phenomena is considered. The models have been evaluated by comparison with experimental data. These models can be easily integrated into building simulation tools in order to assess the soil gas concentration in indoor environments.
    Building and Environment 02/2015; 85:1-16. DOI:10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.11.013 · 2.70 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
142 Downloads
Available from
May 17, 2014