Evaluation of a four-zone indoor exposure model for predicting TCPP concentrations in a low-energy test house

Numerous chemicals have been detected in indoor environments that have potential impacts on occupant health and comfort. However, due to limited resources, it's infeasible to assess indoor exposure of each chemical for all indoor conditions through measurements alone. Hence, indoor exposure models have been developed to predict time-varied exposure for a wide range of sources and chemicals under different conditions. The Indoor Environmental Concentrations in Buildings with Conditioned and Unconditioned Zones (IECCU) model was developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. This study evaluated the predictive ability of the IECCU by comparing airborne tris(1-chloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TCPP) concentrations measured from 2013 to 2018 in a test house to modeled predictions. Inputs to IECCU included building and environment (i.e., air zone configuration and geometry, interzonal airflow rates and air temperature in each zone), parameters for both source (spray polyurethane foam (SPF)) and sinks (gypsum and wallboard), and simulation conditions. Simulations were conducted using three sets of inputs. Simulation 1 and 2 differed in using quantified versus design inputs for temperatures and airflow rates. Simulation 1 and 3 differed in the configured air zones in the IECCU model. Given the best available inputs (Simulation 1), IECCU predicted basement concentrations that were generally higher but within a factor of three of the measurements. The basement prediction/measurement ratios for all three simulations ranged from 0.5 to 8.3 and the average was 2.9, while the predicted concentrations in the living zone were generally lower but still within an order of magnitude of the measurements. The prediction accuracy decreased with time. For Simulation 1, predicted basement concentrations were on average 1.4 times higher than measurements in 2013 and 2014. However, the ratio increased to 4.7 in 2018. The design inputs of Simulation 2 resulted in greater discrepancy between measurements and predictions than the measured inputs of Simulation 1. In addition, Simulation 2 did not capture diurnal variation as well as Simulation 1. Comparisons of Simulation 1 and 2 demonstrate the importance of using accurate temperature and airflow model inputs for more accurately predicting concentrations. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis indicated that to improve the accuracy of IECCU predictions for TCPP emission from SPF, efforts are needed to accurately measure the mass transfer parameters for SPF, especially the SPF/air partition coefficient and the initial TCPP concentration in SPF.