This research demonstrates improved indoor air quality in dormitory buildings in Xuzhou using natural ventilation methods, suggesting innovative design strategies.
As the core space for students’ daily living and learning, the quality of the indoor wind environment and air quality in dormitory buildings is particularly critical. However, existing studies often neglect natural ventilation optimization under local climatic conditions and the multidimensional evaluation of health benefits, leaving notable gaps in dormitory design. Under the Healthy China Initiative, the indoor wind environment in university dormitories directly impacts students’ health and learning efficiency. This study selects dormitory buildings in Xuzhou as the research object and employs ANSYS FLUENT 2020 software for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations, combined with orthogonal experimental design methods, to systematically investigate and optimize the indoor wind environment with a focus on healthy ventilation standards. The evaluation focused on three key metrics—comfortable wind speed ratio, air age, and CO2 concentration—considering the effects of building orientation, corridor width, and window geometry, and identifying the optimal parameter combination. After optimization based on the orthogonal experimental design, the proportion of comfortable wind speed zones increased to 44.6%, the mean air age decreased to 258 s, and CO2 concentration stabilized at 613 ppm. These results demonstrate that the proposed optimization framework can effectively enhance indoor air renewal and pollutant removal, thereby improving both air quality and the health-related performance of dormitory spaces. The novelty of this study lies in integrating regional climate conditions with a coordinated CFD–orthogonal design approach. This enables precise optimization of dormitory ventilation performance and provides locally tailored, actionable evidence for advancing healthy campus design.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Duan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: