开展了一项研究项目，以调查改善办公楼室内空气质量的建筑材料和技术，评估采用这些特殊施工技术建造的办公楼的室内空气质量，并将其与其他两座类似办公楼的空气质量进行比较，并比较现有的室内空气污染物测量技术。为了实现这些目标，使用三个主要参数（1）通风效率，（2）人体健康和舒适系数，以及（3）污染物浓度，对三个不同的、经过特别挑选的办公楼的室内空气质量进行了评估。这项研究于1987年春季在佐治亚州亚特兰大市的大都会区进行。 研究发现，在进行本研究时，1号楼的室内空气质量优于2号楼和3号楼测得的污染物浓度（生物气溶胶除外）。“禁烟政策”的优势在污染物水平、乘客舒适度和健康感知方面都得到了显著体现。目前尚不确定1号楼独特的建筑特征和设计是否带来了优越的室内空气质量。2号楼的通风系统无效，导致室内空气质量不足。观察到的污染物浓度和乘客投诉都证明了这一点。三号楼的挥发性有机化合物和尼古丁浓度最高。

A resesarch project was undertaken to investigate construction materials and techniques for the improvement of indoor air quality within office buildings, to evaluate the indoor air quality in an office building built with these special construction techniques and to compare its air quality with two other similar office buildings, and to compare available indoor air contaminant measurement techniques. In order to accomplish these objectives, the indoor air quality of three different, specially selected office buildings was evaluated using three main parameters: (1) ventilation effectiveness, (2) human health and comfort factors, and (3) contaminant concentrations. This study was conducted in the Atlanta, GA, metro area during the spring season of 1987. It was found that the indoor air quality in Building 1 was superior to that in Buildings 2 and 3 in measured contaminant concentrations other than bioaerosols, at the time of this study. The "no smoking policy" advantages were dramatically displayed in both pollutant levels and in occupant comfort and health perceptions. It is uncertain at this time whether or not the unique construction features and designs resulted in the superior indoor air quality in Building 1. The ventilation system in Building 2 was not effective resulting in inadequate indoor air quality. This is demonstrated both by observed contaminant concentrations and occupant complaints. Building 3 had the highest volatile organic compound and nicotine concentrations of the three buildings.