Conference Editor

Jianshun Zhang; Edward Bogucz; Cliff Davidson; Elizabeth Krietmeyer

Keywords:

Thermal comfort, metabolic rate, qualitative and quantitative, elementary school, adaptive model

Location

Syracuse, NY

Event Website

http://ibpc2018.org/

Start Date

24-9-2018 1:30 PM

End Date

24-9-2018 3:00 PM

Description

We compare qualitative and quantitative measurements to assess an elementary school building’s thermal comfort. Quantitative measurements of the physical environment are useful but not sufficient, since different people respond differently in the same indoor environment. A qualitative survey of the school employees shows the thermal comfort level has a 3.73 out of 7 score and 40% of subjects rated it unsatisfactory, even though the temperature and humidity level are measured within the comfort range recommended by ASHERA 90.1 – 2004. This gap occurs because human metabolism is not taken into account in current design guidelines, even though there is a clear correlation between human metabolic level and perceived thermal comfort. The gap between design guidelines and occupants’ thermal comfort presents an opportunity to improve indoor environmental quality. School buildings are especially challenging because they have a mix of adult and child occupants with widely varying metabolic rates. Therefore, an elementary school was used as a case study to compare differences between quantitative and qualitative measurement. We conducted a series of simulations to compare the thermal comfort in relation to adult and children’s metabolism and their thermal responses. We demonstrate that the negligence of occupants’ metabolism can lead to inaccurate design guidelines for the physical environment’s thermal comfort. Our results could potentially improve design manuals to accommodate buildings with mixed occupants to maximize comfort levels.

Comments

If you are experiencing accessibility issues with this item, please contact the Accessibility and Inclusion Librarian through lib-accessibility@syr.edu with your name, SU NetID, the SURFACE link, title of record, and author & and reason for request.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.14305/ibpc.2018.ie-2.02

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License.

COinS
 
Sep 24th, 1:30 PM Sep 24th, 3:00 PM

Comparison between qualitative and quantitative measurement in assessing thermal comfort in an elementary school

Syracuse, NY

We compare qualitative and quantitative measurements to assess an elementary school building’s thermal comfort. Quantitative measurements of the physical environment are useful but not sufficient, since different people respond differently in the same indoor environment. A qualitative survey of the school employees shows the thermal comfort level has a 3.73 out of 7 score and 40% of subjects rated it unsatisfactory, even though the temperature and humidity level are measured within the comfort range recommended by ASHERA 90.1 – 2004. This gap occurs because human metabolism is not taken into account in current design guidelines, even though there is a clear correlation between human metabolic level and perceived thermal comfort. The gap between design guidelines and occupants’ thermal comfort presents an opportunity to improve indoor environmental quality. School buildings are especially challenging because they have a mix of adult and child occupants with widely varying metabolic rates. Therefore, an elementary school was used as a case study to compare differences between quantitative and qualitative measurement. We conducted a series of simulations to compare the thermal comfort in relation to adult and children’s metabolism and their thermal responses. We demonstrate that the negligence of occupants’ metabolism can lead to inaccurate design guidelines for the physical environment’s thermal comfort. Our results could potentially improve design manuals to accommodate buildings with mixed occupants to maximize comfort levels.

https://surface.syr.edu/ibpc/2018/IE2/2

 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.