Re: Air Monitoring Summary - 34 months and 49,000 buildings

[Guest guest]

Lew,

I have personal experience using an AirAdvice monitor (model 5100).

It measures temperature, RH, CO, CO2, particulates and TVOCs. The

data collected is uploaded to the AirAdvice website via a phone jack

on the side which dials a 800 number. There is no display on the

device, the only way to access the data is when you upload it and log

on to your account.

You can print off raw graphs of the data or use one of their pre-

packaged reports.

My concern with the device relates to calibration. I'm not so

concerned about the temp and RH falling out of calibration as I am

the TVOCs and CO2.

's law is that if there's a problem in the building, you won't

be there to see the symptoms. " Well everything was fine when I took

my measurements. " By doing monitoring and not just point

measurements, you better understand how the building is performing.

You can measure some of the same parameters with less complex devices

(HOBO). The advantage of AirAdvice is the ability to access the data

remotely.

I have a new Gray Wolf IQ-610 with PID that I will compare with my

AirAdvice to see if the numbers come out similar.

Ian Cull, PE, CIEC

Indoor Sciences, Inc.

www.indoorsciences.com

>

> Everybody,

>

> I've been aware of this company (AirAdvice) for several years.

> Although I have not had personal experience with it's products,

it's

> product concept always seemed interesting. The company apparently

has

> a rather large installed base of monitoring equipment and

services,

> mostly sold, I gather, through AC installers. Now they have put

> together some national-level summaries from their monitoring

> database, which some may find as interesting as I do.

>

> Here's the link to see the national summary report (34 months, and

a

> little over 49,000 structures):

> http://airadvice.com/company_info/publications.html

>

> And a link to see a PDF of a sample report from an individual

location:

> http://airadvice.com/hvac/about_monitor/AirAdvice_SmartIAQ.pdf

>

> Does anybody have personal experience with the quality and

relevance

> of the measurements this system produces?

>

> Lew Harriman

>

> ----------------------------------

> Mason-Grant Consulting

> P.O. Box 6547

> Portsmouth, NH 03802

>

> LewHarriman@...

>

[Guest guest]

I saw their advertisement and decided to call them to ask questions

about their monitor. I left a

message on their voice mail over a week ago and I am still waiting for a return

call. One question I have is

regarding the field calibration of the unit. I have a CO2 data-logging unit that requires calibration

before each use; I would expect the same regarding their unit. Does anyone have any information about

their unit?

I saw the report about their national data. If they don’t field calibrate the unit before each use what

good is the data?

Bob

Air

Monitoring Summary - 34 months and 49,000 buildings

Everybody,

I've been

aware of this company (AirAdvice) for several years. Although I have not had

personal experience with it's products, it's product concept always seemed

interesting. The company apparently has a rather large installed base of

monitoring equipment and services, mostly sold, I gather, through AC

installers. Now they have put together some national-level summaries from their

monitoring database, which some may find as interesting as I do.

Here's the

link to see the national summary report (34 months, and a little over 49,000

structures):

http://airadvice.com/company_info/publications.html

And a link to

see a PDF of a sample report from an individual location:

http://airadvice.com/hvac/about_monitor/AirAdvice_SmartIAQ.pdf

Does anybody

have personal experience with the quality and relevance of the measurements

this system produces?

Lew

Harriman

----------------------------------

Mason-Grant

Consulting

P.O.

Box 6547

Portsmouth,

NH 03802

(603)

431-0635

LewHarrimanMasonGrant

-------------------------Confidentiality Notice--------------------------This electronic message transmission contains information from the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the content of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message and any attachment without reading or saving in any manner.

[Guest guest]

Calibration is a very critical issue with these devices. I have had

to legal cases where the data was clear bogus.

I recently did an IAQ survey comparing 4 instruments that were supposed

to be " Calibrated. " All side by side.

The worst data was from the CO2 sensor.

2 monitors read 10% low.

1 was 25% too high

1 was 50% too high.

Needless to say, use of all of these instruments could lead to the

wrong conclusion.

I was especially appalled by the monitor that read 50% too high. One

could be recommending significant changes to HVAC operation based on

erroneous data. Not good.

Years ago, it used to be that daily calibration was the norm.

Bob

[Guest guest]

Calibration is a very critical issue with these devices. I have had

to legal cases where the data was clear bogus.

I recently did an IAQ survey comparing 4 instruments that were supposed

to be " Calibrated. " All side by side.

The worst data was from the CO2 sensor.

2 monitors read 10% low.

1 was 25% too high

1 was 50% too high.

Needless to say, use of all of these instruments could lead to the

wrong conclusion.

I was especially appalled by the monitor that read 50% too high. One

could be recommending significant changes to HVAC operation based on

erroneous data. Not good.

Years ago, it used to be that daily calibration was the norm.

Bob

[Guest guest]

I always field check my CO2 instruments with an outdoor reading. Depending on where the building is (how urban), I like to see the outdoor numbers between about 365 and 425.

The problem with calibrating these instruments is that there is only one adjustment screw. When you calibrate to about 1,000 ppm CO2 with bottled gas (which is where you want the instrument to be most accurate), the outdoor reading on the very low end of the measurement range can be way off. This can make using the difference between indoor and outdoor readings a joke.

Glad you brought it up Ian, Bob and . I'd like to know how others know their CO2 numbers are good at both the low end (350) and high end (1000) when there is only one adjustment screw for calibration.

Steve Temes

I recently did an IAQ survey comparing 4 instruments that were supposed

to be "Calibrated." All side by side.

The worst data was from the CO2 sensor.

2 monitors read 10% low.

1 was 25% too high

1 was 50% too high.

Needless to say, use of all of these instruments could lead to the

wrong conclusion.

I was especially appalled by the monitor that read 50% too high. One

could be recommending significant changes to HVAC operation based on

erroneous data. Not good.

Years ago, it used to be that daily calibration was the norm.

Bob

[Guest guest]

I always field check my CO2 instruments with an outdoor reading. Depending on where the building is (how urban), I like to see the outdoor numbers between about 365 and 425.

The problem with calibrating these instruments is that there is only one adjustment screw. When you calibrate to about 1,000 ppm CO2 with bottled gas (which is where you want the instrument to be most accurate), the outdoor reading on the very low end of the measurement range can be way off. This can make using the difference between indoor and outdoor readings a joke.

Glad you brought it up Ian, Bob and . I'd like to know how others know their CO2 numbers are good at both the low end (350) and high end (1000) when there is only one adjustment screw for calibration.

Steve Temes

I recently did an IAQ survey comparing 4 instruments that were supposed

to be "Calibrated." All side by side.

The worst data was from the CO2 sensor.

2 monitors read 10% low.

1 was 25% too high

1 was 50% too high.

Needless to say, use of all of these instruments could lead to the

wrong conclusion.

I was especially appalled by the monitor that read 50% too high. One

could be recommending significant changes to HVAC operation based on

erroneous data. Not good.

Years ago, it used to be that daily calibration was the norm.

Bob

[Guest guest]

>

> Calibration is a very critical issue with these devices. I have

had

> to legal cases where the data was clear bogus.

>

> I recently did an IAQ survey comparing 4 instruments that were

supposed

> to be " Calibrated. " All side by side.

>

> The worst data was from the CO2 sensor.

>

> 2 monitors read 10% low.

> 1 was 25% too high

> 1 was 50% too high.

>

> Needless to say, use of all of these instruments could lead to the

> wrong conclusion.

>

> I was especially appalled by the monitor that read 50% too high.

One

> could be recommending significant changes to HVAC operation based

on

> erroneous data. Not good.

>

> Years ago, it used to be that daily calibration was the norm.

>

> Bob

>

Bob

What is an appropriate level of accuracy for measuring CO2? My angle

is to look at CO2 levels from intermittent ventilation and in

existing systems using lower than recommended amounts of fresh air.

Murray Woodgate P.Eng.

Arista Engineering

Grand Cayman

[Guest guest]

>

> Calibration is a very critical issue with these devices. I have

had

> to legal cases where the data was clear bogus.

>

> I recently did an IAQ survey comparing 4 instruments that were

supposed

> to be " Calibrated. " All side by side.

>

> The worst data was from the CO2 sensor.

>

> 2 monitors read 10% low.

> 1 was 25% too high

> 1 was 50% too high.

>

> Needless to say, use of all of these instruments could lead to the

> wrong conclusion.

>

> I was especially appalled by the monitor that read 50% too high.

One

> could be recommending significant changes to HVAC operation based

on

> erroneous data. Not good.

>

> Years ago, it used to be that daily calibration was the norm.

>

> Bob

>

Bob

What is an appropriate level of accuracy for measuring CO2? My angle

is to look at CO2 levels from intermittent ventilation and in

existing systems using lower than recommended amounts of fresh air.

Murray Woodgate P.Eng.

Arista Engineering

Grand Cayman

[Guest guest]

Calibration is a very critical issue with these devices. I have had

to legal cases where the data was clear bogus.

I recently did an IAQ survey comparing 4 instruments that were supposed

to be " Calibrated. "

The worst data was from the CO2 sensor.

2 monitors read 10% low.

1 was 25% too high

1 was 50% too high.

Needless to say, use of all of these instruments could lead to the

wrong conclusion.

I was especially appalled by the monitor that read 50% too high. th

[Guest guest]

Calibration is a very critical issue with these devices. I have had

to legal cases where the data was clear bogus.

I recently did an IAQ survey comparing 4 instruments that were supposed

to be " Calibrated. "

The worst data was from the CO2 sensor.

2 monitors read 10% low.

1 was 25% too high

1 was 50% too high.

Needless to say, use of all of these instruments could lead to the

wrong conclusion.

I was especially appalled by the monitor that read 50% too high. th

[Guest guest]

I've spoken about the AirAdvice Report at

http://airadvice.com/company_info/images/AirAdviceSOIAReport07.pdf

with its author, Lucas Klesch, lklesch@...

He provided me with the " thresholds " for each parameter

(below) that were used to calculate the total number of IAQ

problems of each type. These are the levels at which

AirAdvice tells its customers that " action is recommended

for sensitive groups " (they also have a list of

higher/longer exposure thresholds at which the company says

action is needed for anyone)

Most of the thresholds are quite conservative. The only one

I don't like is for CO. AirAdvice reports a problem only

if the 8hour avg CO is over 5ppm. I'd prefer if they also

reported any level over 9 or at least 35ppm, no matter how

brief.

I have not yet used the device myself but (CO threshold

aside) I like all that I've read about it.

--Albert Donnay, MHS

AirAdvice thresholds that trigger report of " action

recommended to sensitive groups " (or in this report, " IAQ

problems " )

======================================================

Particle Allergens

measures .7-10 microns range,

over 10ug/m3

Chemical Pollutants

(measures total VOCs, calibrated to isobutylene even though

not found in indoor air, since it is midrange of C4 to C12)

over 500 ug/m3

Carbon Dioxide

over 750ppm 24-hour avg

(CA school std is 800pppm)

Temperature

anything above or below ASHRAE normal range of 68 to 75F for

one hour or more in winter, or 72 to 78 in summer

Humidity

anything outside range of 30-55% for one hour or more

Carbon Monoxide

AirAdvice over 5ppm avg over 8 hours

[Guest guest]

I like the idea AirAdvice has come up with but I have questions about the

calibration of the unit.

Specifically, how are the CO2 and VOC metering portion of the meter

calibrated? Could you please

provide me with this information?

Thanks

Bob MS, CIH, CIEC

-----Original

Message-----

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]On Behalf Of adonnay@...

Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:37

AM

To: iequality

Cc: lklesch@...;

ADONNAY@...

Subject: Re: Air

Monitoring Summary - 34 months and 49,000 buildings

I've spoken

about the AirAdvice Report at

http://airadvice.com/company_info/images/AirAdviceSOIAReport07.pdf

with its author, Lucas Klesch, lkleschairadvice

He provided me with the " thresholds " for each parameter

(below) that were used to calculate the total number of IAQ

problems of each type. These are the levels at which

AirAdvice tells its customers that " action is recommended

for sensitive groups " (they also have a list of

higher/longer exposure thresholds at which the company says

action is needed for anyone)

Most of the thresholds are quite conservative. The only one

I don't like is for CO. AirAdvice reports a problem only

if the 8hour avg CO is over 5ppm. I'd prefer if they also

reported any level over 9 or at least 35ppm, no matter how

brief.

I have not yet used the device myself but (CO threshold

aside) I like all that I've read about it.

--Albert Donnay, MHS

AirAdvice thresholds that trigger report of " action

recommended to sensitive groups " (or in this report, " IAQ

problems " )

======================================================

Particle Allergens

measures .7-10 microns range,

over 10ug/m3

Chemical Pollutants

(measures total VOCs, calibrated to isobutylene even though

not found in indoor air, since it is midrange of C4 to C12)

over 500 ug/m3

Carbon Dioxide

over 750ppm 24-hour avg

(CA school std is 800pppm)

Temperature

anything above or below ASHRAE normal range of 68 to 75F for

one hour or more in winter, or 72 to 78 in summer

Humidity

anything outside range of 30-55% for one hour or more

Carbon Monoxide

AirAdvice over 5ppm avg over 8 hours

-------------------------Confidentiality Notice--------------------------This electronic message transmission contains information from the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the content of this information is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message and any attachment without reading or saving in any manner.

[Guest guest]

I think you are mistaken and will find the actual CO readings are

plotted on a continues time graph. While the graph will show 4ppm as

an acceptable limit it will not only plot the actuals but calculate

the highest hourly average and highest daily average when the survey

is greater than one day.

This past January I attended an hour presentation by the sales

manager for Airadvice. Then they were not selling their instruments

but leasing them three in a package as a sales tool for HVAC dealers

and indoor air professionals.

The use was to install the monitor for three or more days connected

to a telephone line where sometime after midnight the device would

upload the days readings for a report to be downloaded at the

convenience of the professional. The reason three monitors are

leased as a package was so the three could be installed at three

different locations within a building and a comparative picture

presented for the different areas. For residential surveys the

professional would have three units to be surveying three different

homes at once allowing a minimum of a three days of readings.

If a telephone line is not available the monitor will retain the

data in memory where it may be uploaded by the professional after

the monitor is retrieved.

The monitors if I remember correctly are not able to be calibrated

in the field but must be returned to the factory in Portland, Oregon

for recalibration. I believe they promise a four day turn around

with Fed-Ex.

What impressed me was the graphical presentation of the measured

levels of particulates and also VOC's over a period of several days.

The report introduces the subject of particulates with the

statement: " Particle allergens are generally a cause for concern

when daily average levels are above 10 ug/m3 " . Then the actual

readings are shown plotted with the 10ug/m3 level superimposed. A

further discussion of particulates goes on to say: " At levels

above 35 ug/m3, they can harm normally healthy adults by causing

emphysema and diminished lung capacity " .

With that reference the graph invariably will show the home had many

hours of particulate contamination in excess of the 35 ug/m3

suggested danger point and the HVAC dealer or IAQ professional is

set up to present a program to rectify the problems.

A similar reference is given with the VOC report as well as the

other reports however it seems the particulate and VOC reports have

the greatest impact.

Just my two cents..... from last January's seminar.

Ken Gibala

=============================

>

> I've spoken about the AirAdvice Report at

> http://airadvice.com/company_info/images/AirAdviceSOIAReport07.pdf

> with its author, Lucas Klesch, lklesch@...

>

> He provided me with the " thresholds " for each parameter

> (below) that were used to calculate the total number of IAQ

> problems of each type. These are the levels at which

> AirAdvice tells its customers that " action is recommended

> for sensitive groups " (they also have a list of

> higher/longer exposure thresholds at which the company says

> action is needed for anyone)

>

> Most of the thresholds are quite conservative. The only one

> I don't like is for CO. AirAdvice reports a problem only

> if the 8hour avg CO is over 5ppm. I'd prefer if they also

> reported any level over 9 or at least 35ppm, no matter how

> brief.

>

> I have not yet used the device myself but (CO threshold

> aside) I like all that I've read about it.

>

> --Albert Donnay, MHS

>

>

> AirAdvice thresholds that trigger report of " action

> recommended to sensitive groups " (or in this report, " IAQ

> problems " )

> ======================================================

> Particle Allergens

> measures .7-10 microns range,

> over 10ug/m3

>

> Chemical Pollutants

> (measures total VOCs, calibrated to isobutylene even though

> not found in indoor air, since it is midrange of C4 to C12)

> over 500 ug/m3

>

> Carbon Dioxide

> over 750ppm 24-hour avg

> (CA school std is 800pppm)

>

> Temperature

> anything above or below ASHRAE normal range of 68 to 75F for

> one hour or more in winter, or 72 to 78 in summer

>

> Humidity

> anything outside range of 30-55% for one hour or more

>

> Carbon Monoxide

> AirAdvice over 5ppm avg over 8 hours

>