47 research outputs found
Personal Control Over Heating, Cooling and Ventilation:results of a workshop at Clima 2013 conference
The potential of the adaptive thermal comfort concept in longterm actively conditioned buildings for improved energy performance and user wellbeing
Technological progress in conditioning practice combined with prevailing thermal comfort criteria, created stable, tightly controlled indoor temperature bands. Research shows indoor temperatures to be increasing in the heating period, leading to higher building energy use than planned. Field studies provide proof that occupants not in control of their indoor climate are more dissatisfied and report problems in wellbeing. Widening temperature bands could be an effective measure leading to energy conservation, increasing satisfaction and, as shown recently, helping to mitigate health problems related to our way of life. The adaptive approach to thermal comfort postulates that people\u27s thermal comfort perception adapts to the indoor and outdoor climatic conditions they normally experience. However, according to standards, the adaptive model is applicable only to passively conditioned (free-running) buildings, even though the adaptive principles may well apply also to actively conditioned buildings. Our review found studies demonstrating positive health effects and energy conservation potential in permanently or seasonally conditioned buildings. On this basis, the potential of the adaptive approach and translations into concrete design or operation solutions for actively conditioned buildings are discussed in this paper. We conclude that the adaptive concept offers a potential for indoor climate control in actively conditioned buildings in the temperate and cold climates
The ambivalence of personal control over indoor climate - how much personal control is adequate?
Literature sets personal control over indoor environmental conditions in relation to the gap between predicted and actual energy use, the gap between predicted and observed user satisfaction, and health aspects. A focus on building energy performance often leads to the proposal of more automated and less occupant control of the indoor environment. However, a high degree of personal control is desirable because research shows that a low degree (or no) personal control highly correlates with indoor environmental dissatisfaction and sick building syndrome symptoms. These two tendencies seem contradictory and optimisation almost impossible. Based on current efficiency classes describing the effect of room automation systems on building energy use during operation, fundamental thoughts related to thermophysiology and control, recent laboratory experiments, important lessons learnt from post-occupancy studies, and documented conceptual frameworks on the level of control perceived, we discuss the ambivalence of personal control and how much personal control is adequate. Often-proposed solutions ranging from fully automated controls, over manual controls to dummy controls are discussed according to their effect on a) building energy use during operation and b) occupants perceived control. The discussion points to the importance of adequate personal control. In order to meet the goals for nearly zero energy buildings and for a human-centric design, there is the need to establish design procedures for adequate personal control as part of the design process
What about children? Implications from their subjective perception and the risk of overheating in schools
Adaptive thermal comfort in primary school classrooms: Creating and validating PMV-based comfort charts
Recommended from our members
Transmission of SARS?CoV?2 by inhalation of respiratory aerosol in the Skagit Valley Chorale superspreading event
During the 2020 COVID‐19 pandemic, an outbreak occurred following attendance of a symptomatic index case at a weekly rehearsal on 10 March of the Skagit Valley Chorale (SVC). After that rehearsal, 53 members of the SVC among 61 in attendance were confirmed or strongly suspected to have contracted COVID‐19 and two died. Transmission by the aerosol route is likely; it appears unlikely that either fomite or ballistic droplet transmission could explain a substantial fraction of the cases. It is vital to identify features of cases such as this to better understand the factors that promote superspreading events. Based on a conditional assumption that transmission during this outbreak was dominated by inhalation of respiratory aerosol generated by one index case, we use the available evidence to infer the emission rate of aerosol infectious quanta. We explore how the risk of infection would vary with several influential factors: ventilation rate, duration of event, and deposition onto surfaces. The results indicate a best‐estimate emission rate of 970 ± 390 quanta/h. Infection risk would be reduced by a factor of two by increasing the aerosol loss rate to 5 h−1 and shortening the event duration from 2.5 to 1 h
COVID-19 and Airborne Transmission: Science Rejected, Lives Lost. Can Society Do Better?
This is an account that should be heard of an important struggle: the struggle of a large group of experts who came together at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to warn the world about the risk of airborne transmission and the consequences of ignoring it. We alerted the World Health Organization about the potential significance of the airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and the urgent need to control it, but our concerns were dismissed. Here we describe how this happened and the consequences. We hope that by reporting this story we can raise awareness of the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the need to be open to new evidence, and to prevent it from happening again. Acknowledgement of an issue, and the emergence of new evidence related to it, is the first necessary step towards finding effective mitigation solutions
How can airborne transmission of COVID-19 indoors be minimised?
During the rapid rise in COVID-19 illnesses and deaths globally, and notwithstanding recommended precautions, questions are voiced about routes of transmission for this pandemic disease. Inhaling small airborne droplets is probable as a third route of infection, in addition to more widely recognized transmission via larger respiratory droplets and direct contact with infected people or contaminated surfaces. While uncertainties remain regarding the relative contributions of the different transmission pathways, we argue that existing evidence is sufficiently strong to warrant engineering controls targeting airborne transmission as part of an overall strategy to limit infection risk indoors. Appropriate building engineering controls include sufficient and effective ventilation, possibly enhanced by particle filtration and air disinfection, avoiding air recirculation and avoiding overcrowding. Often, such measures can be easily implemented and without much cost, but if only they are recognised as significant in contributing to infection control goals. We believe that the use of engineering controls in public buildings, including hospitals, shops, offices, schools, kindergartens, libraries, restaurants, cruise ships, elevators, conference rooms or public transport, in parallel with effective application of other controls (including isolation and quarantine, social distancing and hand hygiene), would be an additional important measure globally to reduce the likelihood of transmission and thereby protect healthcare workers, patients and the general public
COVID-19 and Airborne Transmission: Science Rejected, Lives Lost. Can Society Do Better?
This is an account that should be heard of an important struggle: the struggle of a large group of experts who came together at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to warn the world about the risk of airborne transmission and the consequences of ignoring it. We alerted the World Health Organization about the potential significance of the airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and the urgent need to control it, but our concerns were dismissed. Here we describe how this happened and the consequences. We hope that by reporting this story we can raise awareness of the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and the need to be open to new evidence, and to prevent it from happening again. Acknowledgement of an issue, and the emergence of new evidence related to it, is the first necessary step towards finding effective mitigation solutions