4.6 Article

Laboratory study to determine the critical moisture level for mould growth on building materials

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2012.05.014

Keywords

Mold; Critical moisture level; Building material; Relative humidity; Mold resistance

Funding

  1. Swedish Research Council Formas

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The susceptibility of building materials to mould growth varies. Some are tolerant to high relative humidity in the ambient air without mould growth occurring, while others are less tolerant, and mould can grow in relative humidity as low as 75%. Within a building, constructions are exposed to different temperatures and relative humidities. To minimise the risk of microbial growth, building materials should be chosen that are tolerant to the expected conditions. In this study, the critical moisture levels for ten building materials with a range of expected critical moisture levels (wood-based materials, gypsum boards and inorganic boards) were evaluated. Samples of the building materials were inoculated with spores from six species of mould fungi (Eurotium herbariorum, Aspergillus versicolor, Penicillium chrysogenum, Aureobasidium pullulans, Cladosporium sphaerospermum, Stachybotrys chartarum) and incubated in test cabinets at specified temperature (10 degrees C and 22 degrees C) and relative humidity conditions (75-95%); growth of mould was analysed weekly for at least 12 weeks. One of the conclusions is that two similar building materials or products may have considerably different resistance to mould growth, and so the results from one type of building material cannot be applied to the other. Also, in order to compare results from different tests, it is important to use the same test method. It is also important to state the temperature at which the critical moisture level applies and how long the material is exposed to the temperature and relative humidity conditions during the test. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available