See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/258291389

Thermal comfort: Research and practice

Article in Frontiers in Bioscience · January 2010

DOI: 10.2741/3645

CITATIONS READS
53 5,198

3 authors, including:

Joost van Hoof Jan Hensen

The Hague University of Applied Sciences Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
179 PUBLICATIONS 2,117 CITATIONS 637 PUBLICATIONS 5,930 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Smarter Utilization of thermal mass in high-performance buildings View project

Adaptive Facade Network View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Joost van Hoof on 27 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

[Frontiers in Bioscience 15, 765-788, January 1, 2010]

Thermal comfort: research and practice

Joost van Hoof1, Mitja Mazej2, Jan L.M. Hensen3

1
Hogeschool Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health Care, Research Centre for Innovation in Health Care,
Bolognalaan 101, 3584 CJ Utrecht, the Netherlands, 2University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Askerceva 6,
SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia, 3Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of Architecture, Building and Planning, Den
Dolech 2, 5612 AZ Eindhoven, the Netherlands

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Thermal comfort models
3.1. The PMV-model
3.1.1. The model and its application
3.1.2. Validity of the model
3.1.3. Semantics and thermoneutrality as an ideal
3.1.4. Application in non-air conditioned buildings and extensions
3.2. Adaptive thermal comfort and personal control
3.2.1. Adaptation and thermal comfort
3.2.2. Adaptive opportunities and personal control
4. Thermal comfort standards
4.1. Standards and the PMV-model
4.2. Local discomfort, transient conditions and long-term evaluation in standards
4.3. Adaptive thermal comfort in standards and the relation to the PMV-model
4.4. Interactions with other parameters
4.5. Health and comfort
5. Advances in computerization: modeling and performance
5.1. Computerization and simulation
5.2. Task performance, productivity and the thermal environment
5.3. Multi-segmental models of human physiology
5.4. Thermal manikins
6. Conclusion
7. Acknowledgement
8. References

1. ABSTRACT 2. INTRODUCTION

Thermal comfort -the state of mind, which Thermal comfort is an important aspect of the
expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment- is an building design process as modern man spends most of the
important aspect of the building design process as modern day indoors. Thermal comfort is defined as ‘the state of
man spends most of the day indoors. This paper reviews the mind, which expresses satisfaction with the thermal
developments in indoor thermal comfort research and environment’ (1); a definition quickly comprehended, but
practice since the second half of the 1990s, and groups hard to capture in physical parameters. There exist
these developments around two main themes; (i) thermal extensive modeling and standardization for thermal
comfort models and standards, and (ii) advances in comfort, which depend both on physical and physiological
computerization. Within the first theme, the PMV-model parameters, as well as on psychology. The thermal
(Predicted Mean Vote), created by Fanger in the late 1960s environment itself can be described as the characteristics of
is discussed in the light of the emergence of models of the environment that affect the heat exchange between the
adaptive thermal comfort. The adaptive models are based human body and the environment. Thermal comfort
on adaptive opportunities of occupants and are related to research and practice is not a static field, in contrary, ever
options of personal control of the indoor climate and since the emergence of air-conditioning in the built
psychology and performance. Both models have been environment the field has expanded. One of the highlights
considered in the latest round of thermal comfort standard in research was the development of the PMV-model
revisions. The second theme focuses on the ever increasing (Predicted Mean Vote) by Fanger in the late 1960s (2),
role played by computerization in thermal comfort research which is used for evaluating indoor thermal comfort and
and practice, including sophisticated multi-segmental forms the basis of present day thermal comfort standards.
modeling and building performance simulation, transient Other indices used are Gagge et al.’s (3) New Effective
thermal conditions and interactions, thermal manikins. Temperature (ET*) and Standard New Effective

765
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Temperature (SET*), as well as operative temperature. psychological and semantic aspects of thermal comfort, and
the impact good indoor environments have on productivity
Thermal comfort is a very interdisciplinary field and task performance in office settings. The need for
of study, as it involves many aspects of various scientific thermostats and options for personal control of the thermal
fields: building sciences, physiology, and psychology, to environment is clarified, also in relation to the adaptive
name a few. This adds up to the complexity of the matter. models of thermal comfort.
Advances in computer technology have led to an increased
and improved ability to evaluate and model complex The second theme focuses on the ever increasing
physical and physiological conditions. This not only meant role played by computerization in thermal comfort research
it became easier to solve the non-linear equations the PMV- and practice. The availability of improved building
model is based on, but also to carry out complex building performance simulation tools and modeling using
performance simulations of buildings that were in their design computers and sophisticated multi-segmental models of
phase in order to predict the comfort of future occupants. human physiology, and improved thermal manikins have
their distinct impact in the field. Advances in
This paper deals with developments in indoor computerization are linked to the development of
thermal comfort research and practice since the second half alternative higher resolution thermal indicators that apply
of the 1990s, and groups these developments around two sophisticated thermophysiological models (25). Enhanced
main themes; (i) thermal comfort models and standards, computer tools link thermal comfort needs to energy use,
and (ii) advances in computerization. and help designers and engineers to create ideal
environments for occupants. Such optimal environments do
Within the first theme, the most commonly used not only guarantee comfort but also contribute to work
thermal comfort index, Predicted Mean Vote, and the performance and productivity. Innovations in the field of
underlying PMV-model, are discussed in the light of the thermal manikins find their way in a wide range of settings,
emergence of models of adaptive thermal comfort. The and enable researchers to accurately study simulated human
PMV-model, which is the best known heat balance model, responses to the thermal environment without the use of
is often referred to as being a static model. The term actual subjects.
‘constancy hypothesis’ is also used in relation to heat
balance models. Even though the application range of 3. THERMAL COMFORT MODELS
SET* is much wider than that of PMV (4), and despite its
widespread use particularly in the United States, SET* is 3.1. The PMV-model
not treated further in this review. For a critical 3.1.1. The model and its application
discussion on ET* and SET* see Michida and Sakoi (4). The PMV-model by Fanger is a predictive model
A second hypothesis that is gaining popularity in terms for general, or whole-body, thermal comfort. The model
of practical applicability, occupant satisfaction and from was derived during the second half of the 1960s from
an environmental perspective is the adaptive hypothesis, laboratory studies and climate chamber research. With his
in which the perception of thermal comfort is related to work, Fanger wanted to present a method for use by
outdoor weather conditions. The adaptive hypothesis has heating and air-conditioning engineers to predict, for any
led to a number of closely-resembling models that have type of activity and clothing, all those combinations of the
been considered for inclusion in the latest round of thermal thermal factors in the environment for which the largest
comfort standard revisions. The adaptive models are based possible percentage of a given group of people experience
on adaptive opportunities of occupants and are related to thermal comfort (26). The PMV-model is often referred to
the availability of options of personal control of the indoor as a static or constancy model due to its construct. The
climate as well as psychology and performance. This paper human body produces heat, exchanges heat with the
provides an overview of the basis of the two types of environment, and loses heat by diffusion and evaporation
models, discusses their strengths and weaknesses, and of body fluids. The body’s temperature control system tries
shows how the two models are included in the main to maintain an average core body temperature of
thermal comfort standards. The mean focus of this paper approximately 37 °C even when thermal disturbances
is on office work and office environments. Thermal occur. According to Fanger, the human body should meet a
comfort research of course is not limited to office number of conditions (2). These requirements for steady-
environments alone. Some of the non-office state thermal comfort are: (i) the body is in heat balance,
environments studied include residential buildings (5-7), (ii) mean skin temperature and sweat rate, influencing the
homes of older people (8,9), transportation including heat balance, are within certain limits, and (iii) no local
commercial airlines (10), places of worship (11,12), discomfort exists.
military field settings (13), health care settings (14) and
(patient recording in) emergency rooms (15), including Fanger defined PMV as the index that predicts, or
those with special needs as people with multiple sclerosis represents, the mean thermal sensation vote on a standard
and persons with a disablement (16,17), schools (18-20), scale for a large group of persons for any given
sleep environments (13,21), transitional spaces (22,23), and combination of the thermal environmental variables,
outdoor locations, for instance, in outdoor pedestrian zones activity and clothing levels (2). The PMV-model includes
and parks. As current comfort standards do not deal with all the major variables influencing thermal sensation and
outdoor thermal comfort (24), outdoor thermal comfort is quantifies the absolute and relative impact of six factors of
not treated in this paper. Also, we briefly address the which air temperature, mean radiant temperature, air

766
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 1. PMV, its input parameters, its relation to PPD, and its expression on the ASHRAE 7-point scale of thermal sensation.

velocity and relative humidity are measured, and activity (2,28). According to international standards, PMV should
level and clothing insulation are estimated with the use of be kept 0 with a tolerance of ±0.5 scale units in order to
tables (Figure 1). Activity level is measured in terms of ensure a comfortable indoor environment (29).
metabolic rate, or met units, and clothing insulation in clo
units (27). The PMV-model is often referred to as a static 3.1.2. Validity of the model
model, as it is based on a steady-state energy balance. It Since the introduction of the PMV-model,
can not predict the exact response to a step change. numerous studies on thermal comfort in both real life
However, the PMV-model is not as static as is often situations and in climate chambers have been conducted.
suggested, as one can use different parameters as input for Many of these studies proved the strength of the PMV-
the model, i.e., different values of activity level and model, while others led to criticism to the model as a
clothing insulation. This however may have consequences whole, its geographical application range, application in
to the reliability of the overall assessment of comfort. various types of buildings, and the model’s input
parameters (30). According to some of the studies reviewed
The PMV-model is based on Fanger’s comfort by van Hoof, the PMV-model provides just a first
equation. The satisfaction of this equation is a condition for approximation to the prediction of thermal comfort in
optimal thermal comfort of a large group of people. PMV ‘natural’ settings, the three middle categories of the
predicts the mean thermal sensation vote for a large group ASHRAE 7-point scale of thermal sensation seem to be not
of persons and indicates the deviation from presumed entirely valid, and the PMV-model cannot properly deal
‘optimal’ thermal comfort or thermoneutrality. Results of with great between-individual differences in optimal
the model are expressed on the 7-point ASHRAE scale of thermal conditions (30). At the same time, there are many
thermal sensation (Figure 1). The central three categories of studies that confirm the validity of PMV for air-conditioned
this scale are labeled ‘slightly cool’, ‘neutral’, and ‘slightly offices. Recently, a validation study by Tse et al. found that
warm’, which match an acceptable sensation. Based on PMV accurately represented the average thermal sensation
PMV, the Predicted Percentage of Dissatisfied (PPD) can of occupants of air-conditioned offices, and that it was not
be determined (Figure 1). affected by other human factors as body mass and health
status (31). Also, Nasrollahi et al. have drawn the
Fanger derived his comfort equation for use conclusion that PMV is valid index for use in Iranian air-
within temperate climate zones. Although this equation conditioned buildings (32). Humphreys and Nicol
may probably be applied in the tropics as well, Fanger conducted secondary analyses on existing databases
stated such application needed further investigation (2). containing world-wide thermal sensation data in order to
The PMV-model has been applied for almost 40 years evaluate the overall accuracy of PMV (33). Through the
throughout all building types all over the world, even calculation of PMV for each particular occasion,
though the model was intended for application by the Humphreys and Nicol subtracted the corresponding actual
HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) industry comfort vote from it. This process yielded 16,762 usable
in the creation of artificial climates in controlled spaces individual discrepancies, each of which was an unbiased

767
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 2. Relation between PMV and PPD, and other thermal sensation indices, as found by Fanger (2), Yoon et al. (35), Araújo
and Araújo (36), Mayer (37), de Paula Xavier and Lamberts (38), Andreasi and Lamberts (39), and Hwang et al. (40,41). There is
an overlap between the studies from Brazil (38,39).

but low precision estimate of the true discrepancy between experimental index than to being a theoretical index based
PMV and the actual vote (33). All 16,762 discrepancies on thermal equilibrium. It can be said that [a range of
were pooled into a single distribution, which was closely conditions with still air, 0.6 clo] is the only range of
normal, had a mean value of 0.11 scale units, and a application of PMV that is supported by experimental
standard deviation of 1.22 scale units. According to evidence.”
secondary analysis, the mean discrepancy indicated that the
calculated value of PMV, for the data as a whole, is higher Researchers have compared the outcomes of the
than the actual ASHRAE vote by 0.11±0.01 scale units. PMV-model to the actual thermal sensation votes of
This bias was qualified by Humphreys and Nicol as being subjects (actual mean vote, AMV). Differences were as
‘not large’. The analysis of results from the various much as 1.3 ASHRAE-scale units for climate chamber
buildings, climates, and seasons across the world showed studies (30). Other studies have investigated the relation
that PMV is free from serious bias (33). When the separate between PMV and PPD or Actual Percentage of
database samples were analyzed in terms of predictive Dissatisfied, for instance, Humphreys and Nicol (33), and
accuracy of PMV by file, 33 out of a total of 41 samples have found a different relation than the one described by
showed evidence of bias in PMV. For 31 of the 41 groups Fanger (2) (Figure 2). Even though some of these studies
the mean discrepancy exceeded ±0.25 scale units, for 13 were carried out with a small number of subjects, they do
files it exceeded ±0.5 scale units, and for 5 it even indicate that the PMV-model should be applied with
exceeded ±1 scale unit. Humphreys and Nicol found that caution, since errors may occur when using this large-group
the more thermal conditions moved away from neutral, the model for small samples. Also, the data in Figure 2 were
larger the bias was (33). They concluded that PMV is only collected in East-Asia (35,40,41), South-America
reliable between -0.5 and 0.5 scale units (i.e., the comfort (36,38,39), and Germany (37), in both naturally ventilated
zones stated in ISO 7730 (29)), which has severe buildings and climate chamber settings. Another issue that
implications for the use of the PMV-model in field settings. is being raised is whether the relation between PMV and
PPD is entirely symmetric, both on the cooler and the
Mochida and Sakoi have discussed the PMV- warmer side (Figure 2). Also, Becker and Paciuk found that
model by addressing the equation of evaporative heat loss the symmetry of PPD around the optimum of
from the skin surface, the equation of respiratory heat loss, thermoneutrality was not valid for residential buildings
the thermal load, and the model’s application and use (34). (42). Particularly on the warmer side, less people were
They conclude that “in environments other than when dissatisfied than based on the PMV-PPD relation. It should
PMV=0 and thermal equilibrium is achieved in a neutral be noted that the scatter (Figure 2) is very large, which may
physiological condition, PMV is closer to being an be due to the variability among different investigated

768
Thermal comfort: research and practice

populations and/or the small size of samples. Also, Furthermore, thermal sensations outside of the three central
Fanger’s curve may probably be somewhat too steep, categories of the ASHRAE 7-point scale of thermal
possibly reflecting problems in the definition of dissatisfied sensation do not necessarily reflect discomfort for a
subjects. substantial number of persons. Von Grabe and Winter
showed that people who are voting -2 and +2 on the
Despite all the studies confirming the validity of ASHRAE 7-point scale of thermal sensation or beyond are
the PMV-model, field studies have given momentum to not necessarily dissatisfied (52). Also, people who are
discussions on the validity and reliability of the model for voting between -1 and 1 are not necessarily satisfied with
use in real world settings and on the global application of their thermal environment either (52).
the PMV-model in all types of buildings.
3.1.4. Application in non-air conditioned buildings and
3.1.3. Semantics and thermoneutrality as an ideal extensions
According to the PMV-model, the optimal (most As mentioned before, the PMV-model is applied
comfortable) thermal sensation is neutral. Apart from throughout the world in all types of buildings. However,
thermal sensations, there are other measures related to the the model was developed from laboratory studies, and the
perception of the thermal environment, including thermal effects of building type were not considered and neither
satisfaction, thermal acceptability, thermal comfort, and were the influences of environmental psychology. Thermal
thermal preference. These measures also indicate the comfort is the summation of not only technological and
appropriateness of a given thermal condition. Direct physiological aspects, but also social and psychological
measures of thermal satisfaction and acceptability are not conditions. In a review study by Brager and de Dear of
incorporated in the current PMV-model. field studies in air-conditioned and naturally ventilated
buildings, it was found that the observed and predicted
Researchers recognize the important role neutral temperatures were overestimated by as much as 2.1
semantics and linguistics play in weather and (indoor) K, and underestimated by up to 3.4 K (51). Both these
climate perception (43-46), as latent dimensions may exist extremes were found for naturally ventilated buildings.
that underlie people’s use of adjectives, as well as According to de Dear and Brager, the PMV-model is not
systematic variations between different language groups applicable to naturally ventilated buildings, because the
and populations, and perhaps between different language model only partly accounts for thermal adaptation to the
writing systems. Pitts also found that conditions of thermal indoor environment (53). These research advances have led
neutrality and comfort are significantly different for to the development of adaptive thermal comfort models,
English-language respondents than for other language which are described in the section 3.2.
groups in his study (43). Consider this in combination with
the fact that English is the lingua franca in science. Despite all criticism, the PMV-model has many
strengths. These strengths have led to the proposal of
Humphreys and Hancock concluded that numerous modifications of the original model, though none
thermoneutrality does not necessarily correspond to the of these developments have yet found wide-spread
desired or preferred thermal sensation (47). For instance, application in environmental engineering practice (30). One
when it is very warm outside, people prefer somewhat cool interesting extension of the PMV-model was proposed by
conditions over thermoneutrality or slightly warm. When it Fanger and Toftum, which is an extension to free-running
is very cold outside, people prefer slightly warm buildings in warm climates by incorporating expectation
conditions. Thermoneutrality is thus not always the ideal. into the evaluation of thermal comfort, and by reducing the
Butala and Muhič found that in a neutral thermal situation activity level in warm contexts (54). The PMV-model is
in air-conditioned buildings only a quarter of subjective actually a kind of adaptive model too since it accounts for
evaluations indicated that people felt neutral too (48). This behavioral adjustments and fully explains adaptation
too was a reconfirmation of earlier statements made by occurring in air-conditioned buildings (28). The new
Fountain et al., who stated that the thermal sensation extension acknowledges the importance of expectations
cannot be assumed to be the equivalent of the accounted for by the adaptive model, while at the same
aforementioned evaluative measures, and that the PMV- time not abandoning the current PMV-model’s input
model requires critical interpretation and application (49). parameters that impact the heat balance. Humphreys et al.
These statements were supported by numerous field and conclude that the more complex the index (PMV, ET*,
climate chamber studies, which showed differences SET*), the lower the correlation with subjective warmth,
between both neutral and preferred temperatures, as well as suggesting that increasing the completeness of the index
differences between field and climate chamber research. may actually introduce more error than it removes (55,
These differences can be as large as 3 K. Overviews of cited in 45). A similar effort to combine the PMV-model
such studies are given by van Hoof (30), Daghigh et al. and adaptive approaches was made by Yao et al. for the
(50), and Brager and de Dear (51). The studies mentioned Chinese context (56).
above show that thermal neutrality is not always the ideal
situation for occupants, as some prefer non-neutral thermal 3.2. Adaptive thermal comfort and personal control
sensations (for instance, somewhat warm, slightly cool). 3.2.1. Adaptation and thermal comfort
These sensations may even be distributed asymmetrically As stated before, our body maintains thermal
around thermal neutrality (which may be related to findings equilibrium with the environment through a range of
shown in Figure 2), and may be affected by season. autonomous physiological thermoregulatory actions. Apart

769
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 3. Relation between PMV and PPD in summer for air conditioned buildings (n=29), and buildings with natural (n=21) or
mechanical (n=11) ventilation in the Netherlands (62).

from these actions, people have a wide range of strategies (56). Occupants of air-conditioned buildings tend to adapt
to adapt to indoor and outdoor thermal conditions. The less, and this makes their thermal sensation more sensitive
hypothesis of adaptive thermal comfort predicts that to changes in temperature. They become finely tuned to the
contextual factors and past thermal history modify the narrow range of comfort temperatures and develop high
occupant’s thermal expectations and preferences (57). expectations for homogeneous, cool environments.
People in warm climate zones would prefer higher indoor
temperatures than people living in cold climate zones, Wilhite describes such environments as ‘comfort
which is in contrast to the assumptions underlying comfort capsules’, and air conditioning one of the tools involved in
standards based on the PMV-model (57). Adaptation is the ‘homogenization of people’, leading to ‘thermal
defined as the gradual lessening of the human response to monotony’, even though early air conditioning engineers
repeated environmental stimulation, and can be both made efforts to avoid designing monotonous thermal
behavioral (clothing, windows, ventilators), physiological environments (67). Stoops mentions that the environment
(acclimatization) as well as psychological (expectation) in modern buildings has little resemblance to the
(28,53,57). environment of the savannah in which the human species
evolved (68). Stoops provides an example from physiology,
In practice, differences in the perception of the and mentions that our cardiovascular and thermoregulatory
thermal environment were found among occupants of systems are interrelated. “Increases in exercise levels that
naturally ventilated (also referred to as free-running), fully drive increased cardiovascular activity also increase
air-conditioned and mixed mode (hybrid) buildings (57). It metabolic heat output that must be balanced by the
was found that for naturally ventilated buildings the indoor thermoregulatory system. However, unlike the
temperature regarded as most comfortable increased cardiovascular system, there is no scientific recognition that
significantly in warmer climatic contexts, and decreased in the thermoregulatory system may itself require exercise for
colder climate zones (58). This is reflected by numerous health. In fact, our entire effort in conditioning our living
studies reviewed by van Hoof (30), including studies from and working environments is to provide thermal conditions
the UK (59), Libya (60), Pakistan (61), the Netherlands that minimize thermal discomfort. We therefore are
(62) (Figure 3), Iran (63), Italy (64,65) and Thailand (66). intentionally minimizing the use of our thermoregulatory
These studies showed that the neutral temperature observed system with the way we build and condition our buildings
in air-conditioned buildings differs from that observed in (68).”
naturally ventilated buildings in the same climatic context.
De Dear et al. showed that occupants of fully air- Occupants of naturally conditioned buildings turn
conditioned buildings are twice as sensitive to changes in out to be more active in thermoregulatory adaptation
temperature as occupants of naturally conditioned buildings through changes in activity level and clothing (behavioral

770
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 4. Comparison of the RP-884 adaptive model and the ‘static’ model (based on PMV predictions) for centrally-controlled
buildings in terms of comfort temperatures (57).

adaptation), and appear more tolerant to a wider range of Another recent project that investigated the
temperatures (psychological adaptation). A recent study adaptive hypothesis was the EU project Smart Controls and
from the UK by Yun et al. showed that in summer, the Thermal Comfort (SCATs) (72,73). This project aimed to
temperature of an office occupied by active window users reduce energy use by air conditioning systems by varying
can be up to 2.6 K lower than that of passive window users the indoor temperature in line with the outdoor temperature
(69). Occupant control might lead to temperatures that vary through the use of an ‘adaptive algorithm’. Nicol and
from room to room within the same free-running building. Humphreys mentioned before that a “low energy” standard
which increases discomfort may be no more sustainable
In short, the indoor temperature regarded as most than one which encourages energy use because of the
comfortable increases significantly in warmer climatic adaptive principle that occupants may well use energy to
contexts, and decreases in colder climate zones, due to alleviate their discomfort (74). The project was carried out
adaptation. In a study from South-Korea and Japan by in 26 European offices in France, Greece Portugal, Sweden
Chun et al., it was found that the thermal history influenced and the UK, many of which were naturally ventilated office
indoor comfort experienced in identical climate chamber buildings in free-running mode outside the heating season
conditions (n=52), which form the basis of the PMV-model (45). A relationship between indoor comfort and outdoor
(70). The Yokohama subjects responded with cooler climate was developed for free-running buildings (Figure
thermal sensations than Seoul subjects. It was also found 7), which is somewhat different from the method described
that subjects who use air conditioning at home responded in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 (1).
with warmer thermal sensations than the subjects who did
not use air conditioning. At the same time, Olesen (71) The adaptive models derived by various
raised the question if air conditioning at home affects the researchers do not yield the same outcomes. For instance,
adaptation process of working in a naturally conditioned Tablada et al. have calculated comfort temperatures using
office? De Dear et al. proposed two models of adaptive four adaptive models, which ranged from 26.8 °C to 28.2
thermal comfort, one for centrally controlled building that °C, an interval of as much as 1.4 K (77). Also, differences
showed overlap with the PMV-model (Figure 4), and a in comfort temperatures can also be the result of the type of
second for naturally ventilated buildings (Figure 5) (56). outdoor temperature parameter chosen for analysis. For the
The latter one has been incorporated in ANSI/ASHRAE Netherlands, with its moderate climate, this difference can
Standard 55 in a modified version (Figure 6), and relates be as much as 3 K (78).
the comfort temperature indoors to the monthly average
temperature outdoors. According to these models, past 3.2.2. Adaptive opportunities and personal control
thermal history (the weather of the preceding days) modify An important feature of the adaptive hypothesis is
the occupant’s thermal expectations and preferences, that people have means to individually control their thermal
including the choice of clothing. environment within the naturally ventilated building in

771
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 5. Comparison of the RP-884 adaptive model and the ‘static’ model (based on PMV predictions) applied to naturally
ventilated buildings in terms of comfort temperatures (57).

free-running mode. Having control over the environment is is discussed in various papers, including van Hoof and
a very effective way to limit the negative health effects of Hensen (78), Kwok and Rajkovich (84), and Toftum et al.
stress, since one can use external coping strategies (79). (85).
There is not such a strict need for prescriptive standards if
individual control over the thermal climate is provided, Another means of adaptation runs via being able
allowing all occupants to be satisfied, for instance, by being to close and open windows. Umemiya et al. studied this
able to slightly adjust temperature at the workplace level behavior for Japanese homes (n=10 apartments, with
(49,80). The design ranges of the systems may be natural and mechanical cooling) and found that window
somewhat broader, whereas criteria for speed of the control opening is done most when the indoor temperature is about
action to have effect and controllability are desired. This 5 K higher than the outdoor temperature in the cooling
requires systems designed for user involvement, both season (86). The ratio of the conditions when neither air
physical (individual temperature control), or “social, where conditioner nor window opening is used has a peak when
the physical conditions are seen as a natural consequence of indoor PMV is between 1.5 and 1.75 in the cooling season.
the situation, rather than arbitrarily imposed” (81). People Yun et al. found that there is a close connection between
become more tolerant of departures from thermoneutrality perceived control and actual control (with respect to
as a result of all indoor parameters, as people are to a window use), and that occupants with a high level of
certain extent responsible for the control of them. perceived control use their windows more frequently than
others with a low level of perceived control (87). However,
One of these means is to adjust garment there might be a risk of draft by operating windows,
ensembles. The amount of clothing worn by people is depending on whether the windows are operated by the
significantly correlated with outdoor temperatures; the person in question or by a colleague. Without personal
warmer, the fewer clothes people wear as long as they are control, air movement limits are determined by predictions
free to choose the clothes they wish to wear (82). There are, of draft discomfort. In a study by Toftum, it was found that
however, differences between genders in adapting closing when occupants are feeling warmer than neutral, at
and garment ensembles worn. In offices with strict dress temperatures above 23 °C or at raised activity levels,
codes, this poses a problem to adaptive opportunities, and people generally do not feel draft at air velocities typical
can lead to an increased need for energy. In the summer of for indoor environments (up to approximately 0.4 m/s)
2005, the Ministry of Environment in Japan promoted (88). In the higher temperature range, very high air
“Cool Biz” fashion, where ties and jackets are not worn and velocities up to around 1.6 m/s were found to be acceptable
comfort is maintained even at 28 °C (83). At the same time, at air temperatures around 30 °C, though they might be
“Warm Biz” fashion, where comfort is maintained at 20 °C, undesirable for other reasons. Many naturally ventilated
was also introduced in winter. Clothing can thus be buildings in Europe are in free-running mode around
reconsidered from an environmental standpoint (83). The summer only. When assessing the indoor climate in
potential of the adaptive model for reduced energy use, naturally ventilated spaces in Brazil, Cândido et al. found
particularly in the tropics, and in relation to climate change, that subjects preferred higher air velocities that even went

772
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 6. Optimum operative temperatures in naturally ventilated spaces as a function of prevailing outdoor temperature, as
given in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 (1).

beyond the 0.8 m/s limit prescribed by ANSI/ASHRAE office is going to be too hot (90). “Although workers are
Standard 55 (89). generally recipients of environmental conditions decided
elsewhere, and their agency in the workplace is physically
The use of thermostats is not included as a means and socially limited, many are not passive about it (90).”
of adaptation in the current adaptive thermal comfort Karjalainen and Koistinen conducted a study among 27
models, as it would mean that a building is -strictly occupants of 13 offices in Finland on temperature control
speaking- not in a free-running mode. In a forum paper, use (93). Temperature controls were often not used when
Mithra (90) mentions a study by Huizenga et al. (91) that people experienced thermal discomfort, as systems were
uses data comprising responses from 34,169 occupants in installed without considering end-users, and interfaces turn
215 buildings throughout North America and Finland. out to be difficult to operate. In 2009, Karjalainen
Respondents with access to a thermostat or an operable concluded that the perceived control over room temperature
window were found to be more satisfied with workplace is remarkably low in Finnish offices (n=3,094 respondents)
temperature. Of the subjects with access to thermostats versus at home (94). Office occupants have fewer
76% were satisfied, whereas only 56% of occupants opportunities to control the thermal environment and deal
without access to a thermostat were satisfied. For the case worse with the thermostats. Karjalainen also found that
of access to an operable window, the ratio was 67% versus even though females in Finland were more critical of their
57% satisfaction. These percentages become more thermal environments, males used thermostats in
important when looking at the number of people that have households more often than females did (95). Would this
access to thermostats and operable windows. Only a mere mean that in office settings women are more reluctant to
10% of occupants had access to a thermostat, and only 8% control their indoor environment and that men are more
had access to an operable window. Occupants with portable willing to operate technological means?
heaters and fans had lower satisfaction than those without,
as the presence of such devices might indicate a deficiency Thermal comfort however does not seem to be
in the HVAC system of the buildings. The situation in entirely dependent on building factors and options for
residential situations might be slightly different. A study personal control. Derksen et al. investigated the influence
from Japan showed that when houses are poorly insulated of some organizational and management characteristics on
and heating appliances are inadequate, staying in the only thermal comfort and related stress in office environments in
heated room as a means of behavioral thermoregulation the Netherlands (96). Through factor analysis they found
increases (92). When even the warmth of the heated living that perceived thermal comfort correlated or was associated
room is inadequate, residents spend more time near heating with (i) employees’ stress, (ii) employees’ over-
appliances. Personal control and the voluntary character of commitment to work, and (iii) employees’ perceived
exposure seem important. Mithra states that some workers privacy. The managerial characteristics of an organization
have more limited means to adapt physically, but seem to influence thermal comfort as perceived by its
nevertheless do, for instance, by stacking books and papers employees. Further exploration of organizational and
in front of vents, dressing warm, opening doors that are management characteristics lies outside the scope of this
marked ‘keep closed’, and by working at home when the paper.

773
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Table 1. Criteria for PMV, PPD and operative temperature for typical spaces.
Category General comfort Operative temperature range [°C]
PPD [%] Predicted Mean Vote [-] Winter [1.0 clo and 1.2 met] Summer [0.5 clo and 1.2 met]
A <6 -0.2<PMV<+0.2 21.0-23.0 23.5-25.5
B <10 -0.5<PMV<+0.5 20.0-14.0 23.0-26.0
C <15 -0.7<PMV<+0.7 19.0-25.0 22.0-27.0

Table 2. Applicability of the categories in the standard and their associated acceptable ranges of operative temperature around
the adaptive comfort temperature in case of free-running building, or PMV in case of mechanically controlled buildings (76).
Category Explanation To [K] PMV [-]
I High level of expectation only used for spaces occupied by very sensitive and fragile persons ±2 ±0.2
II Normal expectation for new buildings and renovations ±3 ±0.5
III Moderate expectation (used for existing buildings) ±4 ±0.7
IV Values outside the criteria for the above categories (only acceptable for a limited period)

Table 3. Validity intervals for PMV input parameters, taken and adapted from ISO 7730 and Humphreys and Nicol (29,33).
Parameter ISO 7730 Humphreys and Nicol
PMV free from bias if: Comment
Clothing insulation [Icl] 0-2 clo (0- 0.3<Icl<1.2 clo (chair Overestimation of warmth of people in lighter and heavier clothing, serious bias
0.310 m2KW-1) included) when clothing is heavy. Little information exists for conditions when Icl<0.2 clo
Activity level [M] 0.8-4 met (46- M<1.4 met Bias larger with increased activity. At 1.8 met overestimation sensation of
232 Wm-2) warmth by 1 scale unit
‘Hypothetical heat load’ M·Icl<1.2 units of met·clo Serious bias at 2 units (about 18 K)
[M·Icl] (about 10.8 K)
Air temperature [ta] 10-30 °C Overestimation warmth sensation to>27 °C1. At higher temperatures bias
becomes severe. Upper limit to approximately 35 °C in ISO 7730. Data by
Humphreys and Nicol do not indicate an unambiguous lower limit.
Mean radiant temperature 10-40 °C
[t ]
r
Vapor pressure [pa] or 0-2.7 kPa or RH<60% Suggested bias becomes important if pa>2.2 kPa
relative humidity [RH] 30-70%
Air velocity [va] 0-1 ms-1 va<0.2 ms -1
Overestimation warmth sensation va>0.2 ms-1. Underestimation cooling effect of
increased va
to = operative temperature, which is a function of air temperature, mean radiant function, and a weighing factor A that depends
1.

on air velocity. t o = At a + (1 − A)t r ; in which A=0.5 if va<0.2 ms-2; A=0.6 if 0.2 ≤ va<0.6 ms-2; and A=0.7 if 0.6 ≤ va<1.0 ms-2.

4. THERMAL COMFORT STANDARDS different targets of thermal satisfaction (category A for 90%
acceptability, B for 80% and C for 70%). These categories are
4.1. Standards and the PMV-model an indicator of how close the indoor environment is controlled
In European countries ISO 7730 is the current in relation to a certain set-point. Close control is regarded as
standard for evaluating thermal comfort, together with EN “denoting a superior building” (76).
15251, which covers thermal comfort as well as other indoor
environmental parameters (29,75). CR 1752 is a technical
report on ventilation that deals with the quality of the indoor For an appropriate use of the PMV-model, the
climate too (97). ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 is the standard parameters involved in the calculation of PMV need to be
in North America that deals with thermal comfort (1). These within certain boundaries (Table 3). The bandwidths of these
documents specify comfort zones in which a large percentage comfort parameters are subject to discussion. According to
of occupants with given personal parameters will regard the Humphreys and Nicol, the validity intervals stated in the
environment as acceptable. An important issue of discussion international standard ISO 7730 contribute largely to the biases
during the latest round of standard revisions was the in PMV, and the bandwidths for valid use are much narrower
incorporation of an adaptive thermal comfort evaluation (33). The quality of predictions and evaluations also depends
method. Such adaptive models have been introduced in on the accuracy of input parameters, especially the estimations
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 for the evaluation of the indoor of clothing insulation and activity level, and measurements.
environment in naturally conditioned buildings as well as in PMV is intrinsically more sensitive to air velocity, metabolism
EN 15251. and clothing insulation than for air or radiant temperature,
which can have serious consequences to the model’s
The PMV-model, a method prescribed by ISO 7730 outcomes. Calculated clothing insulation can differ by as much
for evaluating general or whole-body thermal comfort, is as 20% depending on the source of common tables and
also included in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55. ISO 7730 algorithm (98). In addition, Havenith et al. state that
specifies three different levels of acceptability (classes) standardized methods for determining the metabolic rate are
for general thermal comfort and local thermal insufficient to accurately classify buildings to within 0.3 PMV
discomfort parameters in compliance with CR 1752 scale units (99).
(Table 1) (plus a fourth class that goes beyond the
boundaries of Class C), and a similar schema has been Apart from the discussions on input parameter
proposed for ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55. The bandwidths, there is discussion on the class system (100).
background is that it may be desirable to establish Arens et al. discuss the bandwidth of class A and/or I, and

774
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Table 4. Recommended levels of acceptability for 3 classes of environment for local discomfort.
Category DR [%] PD [%] to vertical air temperature PD [%] to warm or PD [%] to radiant temperature
(draft) difference cold floor asymmetry
A <15 <3 <10 <5
B <20 <5 <10 <5
C <25 <10 <15 <10
Category Vertical air temperature Floor surface temperature [°C] Radiant temperature asymmetry [K]
difference [K]
Warm ceiling Cool ceiling Cool Warm
wall wall
A <2 19-29 <5 <14 <10 <23
B <3 19-29 <5 <14 <10 <23
C <4 17-31 <7 <18 <13 <35

state that “a narrow range should presumably be preferable In real buildings, the indoor environment is often
to the building occupants to justify its increased energy characterized by transient or spatially non-uniform
cost.” There are unsolved questions on the widths at which conditions, including thermal conditions. Thermal
temperature ranges are detected, preferred, and judged conditions in buildings are seldom steady, due to the
unacceptable by the occupants. Arens et al. ask interaction between building structure, climate, occupancy,
themselves some very relevant questions (100): “If and HVAC system (103). Transient conditions in the
occupants were in individual rooms with individual indoor environment include periodic variations, step
thermostats which they could adjust according to their changes, ramps and drifts. The PMV-model is valid only
clothing [levels, activity levels], and personal for invariant conditions (2). According to Goto et al.,
preferences, would they control their temperature steady-state models (including PMV-model) for the
around a narrow band as in Class A, or would they prediction of thermal sensation seem to be applicable after
control to a band more like Class B or C? If, rather than approximately 15 minutes of constant activity (104). Zhang
controlling the temperature themselves, it were controlled and Zhao found that under non-uniform conditions overall
for them, would they really prefer Class A control to Class thermal acceptability and comfort were correlated closely,
B control? Would they notice the difference?” A re- but not to overall thermal sensation due to non-uniformity
examination of three databases of occupant satisfaction in (105). Many studies investigate human responses in non-
buildings showed that Class A does not to provide higher uniform environments. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 sets
acceptability for occupants than class B and C limits to temperature cycles depending on 3 categories of
environments. Arens et al. further conclude that the thermal acceptability. Non-cyclic temperature changes that
“theoretical basis of tight [PMV-based] building control last longer than 15 minutes will not be allowed to exceed
is flawed. […] PMV itself may lack the precision 0.6 K/h. ISO 7730 does not include any transient criteria.
needed to handle the fine distinctions needed for the
three-class system of control. […] Class A as a category If criteria for good general thermal comfort have
is unsupportable as a basis for environmental control in to be met 100% of occupancy time, even in extreme
office buildings, given the energy costs of designing and weather conditions, the heating and cooling capacities
controlling to its specifications (100).” required would be prohibitive. Economic and
environmental considerations lead to allowing thermal
The new European Standard EN 15251 and its conditions to exceed the recommended ranges for a limited
contents are described by Olesen et al. (101) and Olesen amount of time. For long-term evaluations -using computer
(102). This standard has a significant overlap with the simulation tools- ISO 7730 has incorporated weighted
previously mentioned standards for thermal comfort. The hours (WH). The WH criterion is similar to the method
standard distinguishes between building types and spaces, prescribed in directives of the Dutch Government Building
due to variation in needs, activity levels, and clothing, that Agency (62). The time during which PMV exceeds the
seem especially true for kindergartens and department comfort boundaries is weighted with a factor that is a
stores. According to Nicol and Humphreys, EN 15251 uses function of PPD. This “weighted time” is then added for a
a category system (using Roman numbers, not letters) that characteristic working period during one year and is an
seeks to distance itself from the implication of closer overall index of indoor environmental quality. The method
control being superior (76) (Table 2). which is used in the Netherlands, however, has serious
disadvantages in terms of communicating results to clients,
4.2. Local discomfort, transient conditions and long- building owners and architects.
term evaluation in standards
It is not known how dissatisfaction due to local 4.3. Adaptive thermal comfort in standards and the
discomfort relates to whole-body thermal dissatisfaction. relation to the PMV-model
Therefore, the standards include diagrams showing the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 has incorporated a
relation between the percentage of dissatisfied (PD) and model of adaptive thermal comfort, called Adaptive
various local comfort parameters (Table 4), as well as a Comfort Standard (ACS) (Figure 6) for occupant-controlled
diagram to estimate the air velocity required to offset an naturally ventilated buildings. The ACS prescribes a mean
increase in temperature. In order to apply this diagram, it is comfort zone band of 5 K for 90% acceptance, and another
essential that occupants have some degree of personal of 7 K for 80% acceptance, both centered around the
control over the air velocity for reasons of acceptability. optimum comfort temperature (Tcomf) (Equation 1).

775
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 7. Design values for the upper and lower limits for operative temperature in free-running buildings for three categories of
acceptability as a function of the running mean outdoor temperature as incorporated in Annexe A2 of EN 15251 (45,75,76).

Tcomf = 17.8 + 0.31Tair,out (1) C. Naturally ventilated office buildings that comply with
the requirements for application of the ACS are small in
The outdoor air temperature is based on a mean number since most office buildings are equipped with some
monthly outdoor temperature, in contrast to earlier models form of air-conditioning these days. It seems that the
which were based on outdoor ET*. This model is thermal comfort standards take this into account.
incorporated into the standard as an optional method,
applicable in naturally ventilated office buildings (not EN 15251 (Annexe A2) includes an adaptive
homes) for people engaged in near sedentary activity (1 to comfort temperature model (Figure 7), which applies to all
1.3 met) who are able to freely adapt their clothing, when buildings that are being neither heated nor cooled
mean monthly outdoor temperatures are between 10 and 33 mechanically (free-running), where people have access to
°C. Above 33 °C the only predictive tool available is the operable windows and where one is relatively free to adjust
PMV-model, which is unreliable for predicting thermal clothing ensembles. This model relates neutral
responses of people in free-running buildings (33,57). temperatures indoors to outdoor temperatures. Nicol and
There should be no mechanical cooling system in the space, Humphreys see the arising of a conflict between the
although mechanical ventilation with unconditioned air definition of comfort for free-running buildings, which is
may be utilized as long as operable windows are the buildings-based, and that for mechanically cooled buildings
primary means of regulating the indoor thermal (76).
environment. The ACS is not applicable for spaces with a
heating system in operation. Although there has been much The adaptive comfort models in both
debate as to whether the ACS should be applicable to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55 and EN 15251 are
hybrid buildings, this type of buildings is excluded in the conceptually similar, though several differences exist.
latest revision to ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55. The These are described by Nicol and Humphreys (45). First of
research report by de Dear et al. contained a model for fully all, the databases for the derivation of the models are
air-conditioned buildings (57) (Figure 4), but this model different (ASHRAE RP-884 versus SCATs). Second, the
was not incorporated into ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55. building classification differs. The ASHRAE chart applies
The standard recommends building consultants to assess only to naturally ventilated buildings, while the EN 15251
local discomfort separately when necessary. chart applies to any building in the free-running mode.
Third, the derivation of the neutral temperature is different,
ISO 7730 has not incorporated any adaptive which leads to deviations in neutral temperatures. Fourth,
model, but allows the thermal indoor environment in the outdoor temperature is defined differently (monthly
naturally conditioned buildings with a high degree of mean outdoor air temperature versus a more realistic
personal control to be within the comfort limits of category exponentially weighted running mean of the outdoor air

776
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 8. Comparison of the 80% acceptability rating for the Dutch adaptive model (ISSO 74 (78,106)) and PMV (relative va:
0.10-0.20 m/s, RH: winter 40%, summer 70%, ta= t r , Icl: winter 0.95 clo, spring/fall 0.84 clo, summer 0.71 clo and hot summer
period 0.60 clo) (25).

temperature). An advantage of EN 15251 is that it relies on perceptibility of the indicator, i.e., its straightforward
actual weather data which display more variability than do conception of the information (25). At the same time, van
the historic monthly means (45). der Linden et al. conclude that a heat balance approach has
a larger flexibility and a wider applicability. In their study,
Besides the international developments in the van der Linden et al. elaborate the linkage between PMV
field of adaptive thermal comfort evaluation methods and and the adaptive model by investigating the search space
standardization, there are also local initiatives. One for PMV input parameters in relation to the ‘adaptive’
example is the introduction of an adaptive guideline in the assessment (25). The results show that for moderate
Netherlands, ISSO 74 (78,106). This Adaptive Temperature maritime outdoor climates, PMV is well able to explain the
Limit method (ATL) should be used for evaluating design results derived by using an adaptive model (Figure 8).
phase simulations as well as assessing existing buildings
for regular activity and clothing levels, and is intended as a 4.4. Interactions with other parameters
replacement method for the Dutch WH criterion. The Overall comfort also originates from other
PMV-model remains in use for situations with high environmental factors as odors/indoor air quality, lighting
metabolism or clothing insulation. The ATL method can be and noise levels. These interactions are not always
used only for office buildings and workspaces. It understood in great detail, although CR 1752 and EN
distinguishes between two different types of office 15251 deal with all these aspects of the indoor environment
buildings; type Alpha with a high degree of occupant separately, but not in an integrated manner. Experimentally,
control and type Beta with a low degree of occupant the effects of environmental conditions upon human
control. capabilities have been studied most often through the
imposition of a single stressor in isolation (107). Candas
In temperate climate zones, the comfort zones of and Dufour state that while many studies have shown
the adaptive models and the PMV-model are to a large multi-sensory integration between touch, vision and
extent superimposed over one another (78). A great hearing in different areas of the brain, few studies have
arithmetic advantage of adaptive models is their relative highlighted multisensory regions in the cerebral cortex
simplicity, compared to the PMV-model that requires six which involve thermal sensation (107).
input parameters and iterative calculations. One of the great
disadvantages of adaptive models is their application range, Smaller studies investigated the combined effects
which is limited to offices and workspaces only. The PMV- of noise and temperature (108,109), temperature, air quality
model is applied throughout most types of buildings, and sound pressure level (110), the perception of indoor air
although one might pose questions to the validity of such a quality and enthalpy in relation to temperature (28,111), the
wide application range. Van der Linden et al. mention their interaction between thermal comfort, sound, view and
relative simplicity when carrying out assessments as an daylight (112), and illumination and thermoregulation
advantage of the adaptive models, as well as the (113). Candas and Dufour reviewed a number of such

777
Thermal comfort: research and practice

studies and conclude that “thermal components are very compliance with the abovementioned standards, as they are
dominant factors in determining global comfort (107). One based on the assumption of minimizing discomfort (68).
simply cannot avoid thermal stimuli, unlike stimulations by Stoops mentions that it is logical that buildings are
other sensory modalities (noise, light, odors).” Also, conditioned in such a way that hypothermia and
Candas and Dufour conclude that “vasodilatation under hyperthermia are avoided, and questions if current
high illuminance or high temperature color environments standards go too far in prescribing thermal conditions;
may slightly lower core temperature, which may act on limiting the thermal stimulation that people could actually
thermal comfort” (107). need for long-term health (68). Even though there is no
current scientific justification for the alternative scenario
Results of interaction studies have not yet led to outlined by Stoops, it might be plausible from the
an overall understanding of the impact of the total indoor perspective of evolutionary biology. Another point raised
environment on occupants, but provide just first steps. by Stoops is related to the character of current standards,
Hence, interactions are not within the focus of the which are mainly applied by the engineering community.
standards. This community accepts the existing standards because
they are based on a physics-centered interpretation of
In case of healthy persons, building occupants physiology and the pure physics of thermal balance, even
balance the good features against the bad to reach their though applying such standards result in occasional
overall assessment of the indoor environment (73). Not all problems (68). Focus should not be on the underlying
aspects are equally important in this subjective averaging physics, but on the occupants of actual buildings in all their
process, for instance, satisfaction with warmth and air variety. However, such a conclusion implies that clear and
quality is more important than satisfaction with the level of unequivocal recommendations in terms of thermal comfort
lighting or humidity. Moreover, the relative importance of needs cannot be drawn if large differences between
the various aspects differ from country to country (in case occupants seem to exist. The concept of ‘one solution fits
of the importance of the contribution of air movement all’ does not seem to match with every day thermal comfort
between France and Greece), making it impossible to realities (68).
develop an internationally valid index to rate office
environments by means of a single number (73). 5. ADVANCES IN COMPUTERIZATION:
MODELING AND PERFORMANCE
4.5. Health and comfort
HVAC systems and buildings with air 5.1. Computerization and simulation
conditioning are also within the focus of health studies, Increased computational power, improvements to
with the term Sick Building Syndrome as its best-known equipment and software, and the overall computerization of
exponent. A review by Yu et al. mentions the increasing society have had an impact on thermal comfort research
health problems associated with air conditioning systems and practice. The dynamic thermal interaction between a
and indoor air quality in buildings equipped with such building, and the HVAC systems which service it, is
systems (114). A study from Hong Kong by Wong et al. difficult to predict (119). Building performance simulation
found that significantly higher levels of airborne bacteria has developed over the last three decades to allow the
and fungi were seen during non-office hours when the air simultaneous solution of the thermal and mass flow paths
conditioning system was shut down, and that levels of within buildings. This allows engineers to quantify the
airborne bacteria and fungi are correlated with the thermal environment to which occupants are exposed during the
environmental parameters in some offices (115). Also, design phase (120).
recirculation of a large fraction of air by many air
conditioning systems limits ventilation and increases indoor One of the possibilities that have come within
pollution levels (116). Mendell and Mirer re-examined data reach are real-time thermostats that might be based on
from 95 U.S. office buildings and investigated relationships personal user profiles that include data on an individual’s
between building-related symptoms and thermal metrics preferred temperature, and sensitivity to deviations on the
constructed from real-time measurements (117). Findings lower and warmer side. Indoor climate control of the future
suggest that less conditioning of buildings in both winter should be pro-active, and intelligent systems should be able
and summer may have unexpected health benefits. Health to predict the needs of occupants on a space-level, for
effects are also not within the scope of the standards, even instance, based on outdoor weather, temperature profiles in
though they form an ever increasing field of study and adjacent rooms, and the way a space is utilized. The
become important in daily engineering practice. After introduction and development of new control systems will
reevaluation of a large database composed of 1,272 undoubtedly be closely linked to energy conservation,
responses, Toftum concludes that the degree of control over automated choice of energy sources and strategic (time)
the indoor environment, as perceived by the occupants of a management. This view is shared by de Dear and Brager,
building, seems more important for the prevalence of who stress the need for a more integrative view of
adverse symptoms and building-related symptoms than the optimizing the indoor environment, energy consumption,
ventilation mode per se (118). This implies that even the and productivity (28).
latest advances in building controls should not compromise
the occupants’ perception of having some degree of Within building energy simulation two
control. According to Stoops, there is no real health-based approaches to air flow modeling are extant: nodal networks
physiological reason to condition the buildings in and computational fluid dynamics (121). These approaches

778
Thermal comfort: research and practice

Figure 9. The correlation between PMV and productivity loss according to Kosonen and Tan (132).

should also include the dynamics of occupants in the discomfort are the most important. Improved indoor
building. Hoes et al. found that occupants have influence environmental quality has a profound impact on
on the thermal environment due to one’s presence and performance, and this subject is thoroughly studied and
activities in the building, and due to one’s control actions reviewed (124-128). Humphreys and Nicol concluded that
(122). The weight of user behavior on building self-assessed productivity was significantly related to
performance increases, particularly for passive or free- satisfaction with the various aspects of the office
running buildings. Current approaches to building environment, while the relation with the measured physical
performance assessment are found to be inadequate for conditions was indirect and weak (126). According to
buildings that have a known close interaction of the user Leaman and Bordass, losses or gains of up to 15% of
with the building. According to Clarke et al., it is turnover in a typical office organization might be
increasingly accepted that occupants alter their attributable to the design, management and use of the
environment to maintain a comfortable condition in indoor environment (129). Fisk and Rosenfeld have
accordance with the adaptive hypothesis (120). In order to estimated that the potential financial benefits of improving
enable design decision support, the control actions and the indoor environmental quality exceed costs by a factor of 18
trigger events have to be understood and encoded into to 47 (130). Seppänen and Fisk have shown that there are
algorithms for inclusion in a predictive environment. links between the improvements to the indoor
environments and reduced medical care cost, reduced sick
5.2. Task performance, productivity and the thermal leave, better performance of work, lower turnover of
environment employees, and lower costs of building maintenance due to
One of the factors that have come within reach of fewer complaints (131).
study by computer is the productivity of workers from
improved performance, for instance, via the automated Kosonen and Tan made a PMV-based
measuring the output of call-centers and office workers productivity model used to estimate the effects of different
(typing tasks). Apart from human interaction and dynamic thermal conditions on productivity (132,133) (Figure 9).
elements of the work environment (123), productivity on The theoretical optimal productivity (task-related
the work floor is also affected by indoor environmental performance) occurs when the PMV value is -0.21 (around
parameters, of which excessive noise, lighting and thermal 24 °C). The normally accepted PMV value of +0.5 leads to

779
Thermal comfort: research and practice

about 12% productivity loss in thinking tasks and 26% in increased in recent years, which is seen from the number of
typing tasks. The boundary constraints for the model are - manikins being manufactured and used, and in the number
0.21<PMV<1.28. Tse and So compared human of publications containing thermal manikin applications.
productivity in an office with conventional set-point control The first thermal manikins were one segmental and
and PMV-based control (134). The conventional control constructed for the purpose of clothing research but it was
caused a significant reduction in human productivity, soon recognized that a heated thermal manikin could also
whereas the PMV-based control performed well. The be used for evaluation of microclimate conditions in closed
authors recommend considering human productivity in the environments, equipped with different HVAC systems.
design of future air-conditioning control, which according
to Tse and Chan could be based on real-time measurements In a thermally non-uniform environment, the
via a distributed smart sensor network (135). Many studies assessment of the thermal environment using the
on task performance were conducted in centrally-controlled conventional methods by measuring several physical
buildings and climate chambers, whereas the relation parameters including air temperature and air velocity is
between task performance and occupant-controlled inaccurate. The most important feature of multi-segmental
buildings is studied in less detail. There seems to be a gap thermal manikins from this aspect is the capability of
between the adaptive thermal comfort studies and providing accurate and repeatable simulation of human
productivity studies. body heat exchanges over the surface in all directions,
which makes them particularly useful in assessing
5.3. Multi-segmental models of human physiology thermally non-uniform environments.
Also complex and detailed (high-resolution)
simulation models of the human body are emerging as a Nowadays, thermal manikins become more and
result of increasing computational power. New multi- more multi-functional and provide a useful and valuable
segmental models of human physiology and thermal complement to direct measurements with human subjects.
comfort are increasingly used, for instance, models by Fiala For conditions with complex and transient heat exchange,
et al. (136), Huizenga et al. (137), and Tanabe et al. (138). thermal manikins assure accurate and reliable values of
These models have their roots either in the Stolwijk (139) whole-body and local heat exchange. They are used to
or the Wissler (140) models, and incorporate more detail determine heat transfer and thermal properties of clothing
including heat transfer within the body and between the (143-146), heat transfer coefficients for the human body
body and its environment, as well as sweating, shivering segments (147,148), to predict human responses to extreme
and vasomotor capabilities. The human body is represented or complex thermal conditions (149,150), to determine air
as a sum of separate body parts, and can be utilized to movement around the human body in closed spaces
describe local effects due to non-uniform environments (151,152), and for evaluation and assessment of the thermal
and/or non-uniform clothing coverage. They are foreseen to environment (153).
gain importance in terms of practical application.
Thermal manikins have been traditionally used
Recent study of Rees et al. predicts the sensations for indoor climate research and this application has
of local thermal discomfort in the near-window region of a increased recently especially within the automobile
room using a detailed, multi-node dynamic IESD-Fiala industry and building sector. The increased use of manikin
model (141). Close to windows occupants may be directly in indoor climate research has led to the development of a
exposed to both transmitted solar radiation and enhanced thermal manikin that can simulate breathing and has been
long wave radiation exchange due to window surfaces that successfully used to assess indoor air quality (154,155),
are noticeably hotter or colder than other room surfaces. including studying of the amount of re-inhaled exhaled air.
This model that enables simulation of the At present breathing thermal manikins are used for the
thermophysiological behavior of 59 human body sectors evaluation of occupants’ thermal comfort and inhaled air
and the calculation of local skin temperatures and heat quality in buildings and vehicles as well as for the
transfer rates was combined with recently developed optimization of performance of HVAC systems with the
models of local thermal comfort (142) and a detailed emphasis on personalized ventilation systems (156-158).
polygonal representation of the person. Calculations of However, existing breathing thermal manikins cannot be
long-wave, diffuse and direct short-wave radiation factors used for simulating human subjective and physiological
coupled with a thermal model showed that a local thermal responses to transient thermal environments (159).
comfort was achieved for only a small range of boundary
conditions that lay within the global thermal comfort A detailed simulation of heat exchange between
envelope and at the same time the predicted global thermal human body and the environment requires a combination of
comfort was insensitive to the window surface temperature. sensible and latent heat transfer. The main mechanism for
This suggests that models that only predict global comfort heat loss in warm environments is sweat evaporation that
without explicit representations of local discomfort will not has a significant role in comparison to the convective,
reveal problematic environmental conditions in near wall radiative and conductive heat transfer. A complete
regions. understanding of these mechanisms and their impact on
thermal comfort is possible only with a simulation of
5.4. Thermal manikins human sweating, which provides valuable information
The use of thermal manikins in research and about heat transfer by evaporation. For this reason different
design field is steadily growing and has significantly complex, sophisticated, multi-function thermal manikins

780
Thermal comfort: research and practice

have been developed recently to study the interactions of application thresholds. The adaptive models pose
the complex body-clothing-environment system. These advantages in terms of practical application and
manikins are able to simulate sweating or perspiration, a interpretation of results, and deal with human responses
walking motion and human dynamic thermoregulatory and adaptation in naturally ventilated settings. Personal
responses over a wide range of environmental conditions. control of the indoor climate and human performance have
become important directions of study and practice.
One example of such a manikin is a one-segment Unfortunately it is very rare that people have actual control
movable sweating fabric manikin ‘Walter’ from Hong over their environment, given that the whole issue of
Kong, which is used to directly measure interactions of the establishing objective criteria for comfort stems right from
surface heat and mass transfer from the human body under the extreme variability that human beings display when it
varying climatic conditions and walking speeds (160,161). comes to establishing thermal comfort. If each and
Another thermal manikin, ADAM, that was a sort of a everyone of use could freely adjust the air temperature and
forerunner of a new generation of multi-segments sweating velocity, and/or his/her activity level or clothing there
thermal manikins, was developed for the American would be ‘no’ discomfort to begin with. The more control
National Renewable Energy Laboratory for comfort testing an individual has over the comfort-related parameters (both
(162). It was primarily intended for vehicle climate comfort physical and behavioral), the more relaxation can be
testing and has been validated only for steady-state tolerated in standards. So it is not so much a matter of
conditions in the range of comfort-related temperatures. naturally versus artificially controlled environments but
Validation has shown deviations in predicted core and skin flexibility versus rigidity whether occupants are
surface temperature of up to 0.6 K and 4.2 K respectively comfortable and satisfied.
(163), with even larger discrepancies of core temperature
under transient conditions (164). Another example is the The computerization of society has led to the
Swiss thermal manikin SAM, developed by Empa - Swiss emergence of sophisticated multi-segmental models of
Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research human physiology and computational fluid dynamics that
for clothing research (165). SAM is a multi-sector can be used for improved thermal comfort predictions for
thermophysiological human simulator, which consists of a laboratory purposes and the design of buildings. A great
sweating heated device coupled with the Fiala multi-node challenge to the use of thermophysiological models is to
model of the human physiology and thermal comfort in link the outcomes to the perception of thermal comfort.
order to simulate human dynamic thermoregulatory Whereas current thermal comfort standards mainly address
responses over a wide range of environmental conditions. low-resolution problems in office building, increased
Recent validation tests conducted for steady-state and, to computational capacities will help solve high-resolution
some extent, transient conditions revealed a good thermal comfort issues in both real-life and laboratory
agreement with the corresponding experimental results settings.
obtained for semi-nude subjects (166). Similar thermal
manikin ‘Newton’, produced by Measurement Technology 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Northwest Company in the United States, is another
example of multi-segments sweating thermal manikin. It is Atze C. Boerstra of BBA Binnenmilieu,
fully jointed and can simulate walking as well as almost Rotterdam, the Netherlands, is gratefully acknowledged for
any possible body pose and consist of up to 34 zones (167). providing feedback to the manuscript.
State of the art in the field of thermal manikins shows that
sophisticated multi-function thermal manikins are more or 8. REFERENCES
less capable of simulating accurately the dynamic overall
thermal behavior for light and moderate transient 1. ASHRAE, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55-2004, Thermal
conditions with some limitations in terms of clothing environmental conditions for human occupancy. Atlanta:
levels. Ongoing research is directed into improving existing American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
human simulators that should respond to the transient Conditioning Engineers (2004)
thermal environment dynamically as real humans do.
2. P. O. Fanger, Thermal comfort. Copenhagen: Danish
6. CONCLUSION Technical Press (1970)

The last twenty years have witnessed significant 3. A. P. Gagge, J. A. J. Stolwijk and Y. Nishi: An effective
advances in the field of thermal comfort that build on the temperature scale based on a simple model of human
foundations laid the preceding century. The PMV-model physiological regulatory response. ASHRAE Trans 77(1),
that was derived in the 1960s is still prescribed by thermal 247-262 (1971)
comfort standards as the most important method to evaluate
thermal comfort. The greatest advantage of the 4. T. Mochida and T. Sakoi: ET* and SET*: Its originality
deterministic PMV-model is its wide application range. The and characteristics. J Hum Environ Sys 6(2), 51-59
emergence of models of adaptive thermal comfort stems
from research from the 1990s and the first decade of the 5. L. Peeters, R. de Dear, J. Hensen and W. D’haeseleer:
21st century. Such models are on the threshold of wide- Thermal comfort in residential buildings: Comfort values
spread application. The current application range is still and scales for building energy simulation. Appl Energy
subject to debate, which leads to the risk of use beyond the 86(5), 772-780 (2009)

781
Thermal comfort: research and practice

6. W. Heijs and P. Stringer: Comfort as a property of the Pilmoor, C. Pearson and P. Way: Winter indoor air quality,
dwelling: a conceptual analysis. Neth J Hous Environ Res thermal comfort and acoustic performance of newly built
2(4), 331-356 (1987) secondary schools in England. Build Environ 44(7), 1466-
1477 (2009)
7. W. Heijs and P. Stringer: Research on residential thermal
comfort: some contributions from environmental 20. R.-L. Hwang, T.-P. Lin, C.-P. Chen and N.-J. Kuo:
psychology. J Environ Psychol 8(3), 235-247 (1988) Investigating the adaptive model of thermal comfort for
naturally ventilated school buildings in Taiwan. Int J
8. J. van Hoof and J. L. M. Hensen: Thermal comfort and Biometeorol 53(2), 189-200 (2009)
older adults. Gerontechnology 4(4), 223-228 (2006)
21. K. Tsuzuki, K. Okamoto-Mizuno, K. Mizuno and T.
9. J. van Hoof, H. S. M. Kort, J. L. M. Hensen, M. S. H. Iwaki: Effects of airflow on body temperatures and sleep
Duijnstee and P. G. S. Rutten: Thermal comfort and the stages in a warm humid climate. Int J Biometeorol 52(4),
integrated design of homes for older people with dementia. 261-270 (2008)
Build Environ 45(2), 358-370 (2010)
22. K. Jitkhajornwanich, A. C. Pitts, A. Malama and S.
10. F. Haghighat, F. Allard, A. C. Megri, P. Blondeau and R. Sharples: Thermal comfort in transitional spaces in the cool
Shimotakahara: Measurement of thermal comfort and indoor season of Bangkok. ASHRAE Trans 104(1B), 1181-1193
air quality aboard 43 flights on commercial airlines. Indoor (1998)
Built Environ 8(1), 58-66 (1999)
23. C. Chun, A. Kwok and A. Tamura: Thermal comfort in
11. D. Limpens-Neilen, Bench heating in monumental transitional spaces - basis concepts: literature review and
churches. Thermal performance of a prototype. PhD Thesis. trial measurement, Build Environ 39(10), 1187-1192 (2004)
Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology (2006)
24. P. Höppe: Different aspects of assessing indoor and
12. M. S. Al-Homoud, A. A. Abdou and I. M. Budaiwi: outdoor thermal comfort. Energ Buildings 34(6), 661-665
Assessment of monitored energy use and thermal comfort (2002)
conditions in mosques in hot-humid climates. Energ Buildings
41(6), 607-614 (2009) 25. W. van der Linden, M. Loomans and J. Hensen,
Adaptive thermal comfort explained by PMV. In: P. Strøm-
13. J. van Hoof: Air-conditioned deployable force Tejsen, B. W. Olesen, P. Wargocki, D. Zukowska and J.
infrastructure as a strategy to combat sleep deprivation among Toftum, editors. Proc Indoor Air ’08. Copenhagen, paper
troops in hot countries. Building Serv Eng Res Technol 29(4), ID: 573 (2008)
327-339 (2008)
26. P. O. Fanger: Calculation of thermal comfort:
14. F. van Dijken, J. van Hoof and A. Boerstra, The introduction of a basic comfort equation. ASHRAE Trans
importance of the thermal environment in psychiatric care 73(2), III.4.1-III.4.20 (1967)
settings. In: P. Strøm-Tejsen, B. W. Olesen, P. Wargocki, D.
Zukowska and J. Toftum, editors. Proc Indoor Air ’08. 27. A. P. Gagge, A. C. Burton and H. C. Bazett: A practical
Copenhagen, paper ID: 438 (2008) system of units for the description of the heat exchange of
man with his environment, Science 94(2445), 428-430
15. K. Pantavou, G. Theoharatos, G. Nikolopoulos, G. (1941)
Katavouta and D. Asimakopoulos: Evaluation of thermal
discomfort in Athens territory and its effects on the daily 28. R. J. de Dear and G. S. Brager: Thermal comfort in
number of recorded patients at hospitals’ emergency rooms. Int naturally ventilated buildings, revisions to ASHRAE
J Biometeorol 52(8), 773-778 (2008) Standard 55. Energ Buildings 34(6), 549-561 (2002)

16. L. H. Webb, K. C. Parsons and S. G. Hodder: Thermal 29. ISO, ISO 7730, Ergonomics of the thermal environment
comfort requirements. A study of people with multiple -- Analytical determination and interpretation of thermal
sclerosis. ASHRAE Trans 105(2), 648-660 (1999) comfort using calculation of the PMV and PPD indices and
local thermal comfort criteria. Geneva: International
17. F. Haghighat, G. Donnini, A. C. Megri and G. Giorgi, Organization for Standardization (2005)
Prediction of thermal perception of disabled persons vs
measurement. In: G. Raw, C. Aizlewood and P. Warren, 30. J. van Hoof: Forty years of Fanger’s model of thermal
editors. Proc Indoor Air ’99. Edinburgh, 2, 113-118 (1999) comfort: comfort for all? Indoor Air 18(3), 182-201 (2008)

18. F. van Dijken, J. E. M. H. van Bronswijk and J. Sundell: 31. W. L. Tse, A. T. P. So, W. L. Chan and I. K. Y. Mak:
Indoor environment and pupils' health in primary schools. The validity of predicted mean vote for air-conditioned
Build Res Inf 34(5), 437-446 (2006) offices. Facilities 23(13-14), 558-569 (2005)

19. D. Mumovic, J. Palmer, M. Davies, M. Orme, I. Ridley, 32. N. Nasrollahi, I. Knight and P. Jones: Workplace
T. Oreszczyn, C. Judd, R. Critchlow, H. A. Medina, G. satisfaction and thermal comfort in air conditioned office

782
Thermal comfort: research and practice

buildings: Findings from a summer survey and field 45. F. Nicol and M. Humphreys: Derivation of the adaptive
experiments in Iran. Indoor Built Environ 17(1), 69-79 equations for thermal comfort in free-running buildings in
(2008) European standard EN 15251. Build Environ 45(1), 11-17
(2010)
33. M. A. Humphreys and J. F. Nicol: The validity of ISO-
PMV for predicting comfort votes in every-day thermal 46. J.-Y. Lee, Y. Tochihara, H. Wakabayashi and E. A.
environments. Energ Buildings 34(6), 667-684 (2002) Stone: Warm or slightly hot? Differences in linguistic
dimensions describing perceived thermal sensation. J
34. T. Mochida and T. Sakoi: PMV: Its originality and Physiol Anthropol 28(1), 37-41 (2009)
characteristics. J Hum Environ Sys 6(2), 61-67 (2003)
47. M. A. Humphreys and M. Hancock: Do people like to
35. D. W. Yoon, J. Y. Sohn, and K. H. Cho, The feel ‘neutral’?: Exploring the variation of the desired
comparison on the thermal comfort sensation between the thermal sensation on the ASHRAE scale. Energ Buildings
results of questionnaire survey and the calculation of the 39(7), 867-874 (2007)
PMV values. In: G. Raw, C. Aizlewood and P. Warren,
editors. Proc Indoor Air ’99. Edinburgh, 2, 137-141 (1999) 48. V. Butala and S. Muhič: Perception of air quality and
the thermal environment in offices. Indoor Built Environ
36. V. M. D. Araújo and E. H. S. Araújo, The applicability 16(4), 302-310 (2007)
of ISO 7730 for the assessment of the thermal conditions of
users of the buildings in Natal-Brazil. In: G. Raw, C. 49. M. E. Fountain, G. S. Brager and R. J. de Dear:
Aizlewood and P. Warren, editors. Proc Indoor Air ’99. Expectations of indoor climate control. Energ Buildings
Edinburgh, 2, 148-153 (1999) 24(3), 179-182 (1996)

37. E. Mayer, A new correlation between predicted mean 50. R. Daghigh, N. M. Adam, K. Sopian and B. B. Sahari:
votes (PMV) and predicted percentages of dissatisfied Thermal comfort of an air-conditioned office through
(PPD). In: J. E. Woods, D. T. Grimsrud and N. Boschi, different windows-door opening arrangements. Building
editors. Proc Healthy Buildings/IAQ ’97, Bethesda, 2, 189- Serv Eng Res Technol 30(1), 49-63 (2009)
194 (1997)
51. G. S. Brager and R. J. de Dear: Thermal adaptation in
38. A. A. de Paula Xavier and R. Lamberts: Indices of the built environment: a literature review. Energ Buildings
thermal comfort developed from field survey in Brazil. 27(1), 83-96 (1998)
ASHRAE Trans 106(1), 45-58 (2000)
52. J. von Grabe and S. Winter: The correlation between
39. W. A. Andreasi and R. Lamberts: Thermal comfort in PMV and dissatisfaction on the basis of the ASHRAE and
buildings located in regions of hot and humid climate of the McIntyre scale towards an improved concept of
Brazil. In: Proc Comfort and Energy Use in Buildings – dissatisfaction. Indoor Built Environ 17(2), 103-121 (2008)
Getting them Right. London: Network for Comfort and
Energy Use in Buildings (2006) 53. R. J. de Dear and G. S. Brager: Developing an adaptive
model of thermal comfort and preference. ASHRAE Trans
40. R.-L. Hwang, T.-P. Lin, H.-H. Liang, K.-H. Yang and 104(1A), 145-167 (1998)
T.-C. Yeh: Additive model for thermal comfort generated
by matrix experiment using orthogonal array. Build 54. P. O. Fanger and J. Toftum: Extension of the PMV
Environ 44(8), 1730-1739 (2009) model to non-air-conditioned buildings in warm climates,
Energ Buildings 34(6), 533-536 (2002)
41. R.-L. Hwang, M.-J. Cheng, T.-P. Lin, and M.-C. Ho:
Thermal perceptions, general adaptation methods and 55. M. A. Humphreys, J. F. Nicol and Raja, I A: Field
occupant’s idea about the trade-off between thermal studies of indoor thermal comfort and the progress of the
comfort and energy saving in hot-humid regions. Build adaptive approach. Adv Build Energ Res 1(1), 55-88 (2007)
Environ 44(6), 1128-1134 (2009)
56. R. Yao, B. Li and J. Liu: A theoretical adaptive model
42. R. Becker and M. Paciuk: Thermal comfort in of thermal comfort – Adaptive Predicted Mean Vote
residential buildings – Failure to predict by Standard (aPMV). Build Environ 44(10), 2089-2096 (2009)
model. Build Environ 44(5), 948-960 (2009)
57. R. J. de Dear, G. S. Brager and D. Cooper, Developing
43. A. Pitts: The language and semantics of thermal an adaptive model of thermal comfort and preference,
comfort. In: Proc Comfort and Energy Use in Buildings – Final Report ASHRAE RP-884. Atlanta: American Society
Getting them Right. London: Network for Comfort and of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
Energy Use in Buildings (2006) (1997)

44. A. E. Stewart: Linguistic dimensions of weather and 58. R. de Dear: Thermal comfort in practice. Indoor Air
climate perception. Int J Biometeorol 52(1), 57-67 (2007) 14(s7), 32-39 (2004)

783
Thermal comfort: research and practice

59. N. A. Oseland, Thermal comfort in naturally ventilated

versus air-conditioned offices. In: S. Yoshizawa, K. Kimura, 73. M. A. Humphreys: Quantifying occupant comfort: are
K. Ikeda, S. Tanabe and T. Iwata, editors. Proc of Indoor Air combined indices of the indoor environment practicable?
’96, Nagoya, 1, 215-220 (1996) Build Res Inf 33(4), 317-325 (2005)

60. M. A. Ealiwa, A. H. Taki, A. T. Howarth and M. R. Seden, 74. J. F. Nicol and M. A. Humphreys: Adaptive thermal
Field investigation of thermal comfort in both naturally and comfort and sustainable thermal standards for buildings.
mechanically ventilated buildings in Ghadames, Libya. In: G. Energ Buildings 34(6), 563-572 (2002)
Raw, C. Aizlewood and P. Warren, editors. Proc Indoor Air
’99. Edinburgh, 2, 166-171 (1999) 75. CEN, EN 15251, Indoor environmental input
parameters for design and assessment of energy
61. J. F. Nicol, I. A. Raja, A. Allaudin and G. N. Jamy: performance of buildings addressing indoor air quality,
Climatic variations in comfortable temperatures, the Pakistan thermal environment, lighting and acoustics. Brussels:
projects. Energ Buildings 30(3), 261-279 (1999) European Committee for Standardization (2007)

62. K. van der Linden, A. C. Boerstra, A. K. Raue and S. R. 76. J. F. Nicol and M. A. Humphreys: New standards for
Kurvers: Thermal indoor climate building response comfort and energy use in buildings. Build Res Inf 37(1),
characterized by human comfort response. Energ Buildings 68-73 (2009)
34(7), 737-744 (2002)
77. A. Tablada, F. De Troyer, B. Blocken, J. Carmeliet and
63. S. Heidari and S. Sharples: A comparative analysis of H. Verschure: On natural ventilation and thermal comfort
short-term and long-term thermal comfort surveys in Iran. in compact urban environments – the Old Havana case.
Energ Buildings 34(6), 607-614 (2002) Build Environ 44(9), 1943-1958 (2009)

64. I. Fato, F. Martellotta and C. Chiancarella: Thermal 78. J. van Hoof and J. L. M. Hensen: Quantifying of
comfort in the climatic conditions of Southern Italy. ASHRAE relevance of adaptive thermal comfort models in moderate
Trans 110(2), 578-593 (2004) thermal climate zones. Build Environ 42(1), 156-170
(2007)
65. E. Conte and I. Fato, Thermal comfort in mixed mode
buildings. In: O. Seppänen and J. Säteri, editors. Proc Healthy 79. P. A. Vroon, Psychologische aspecten van ziekmakende
Buildings ’00, Espoo, 2, 581-586 (2000) gebouwen. Utrecht: Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht (1990)

66. N. Yamtraipat, J. Khedari and J. Hirunlabh: Thermal 80. P. O. Fanger: Human requirements in future air-
comfort standards for air conditioned buildings in hot and conditioned environments. Int J Refrig 24(2), 148-153
humid Thailand considering additional factors of (2001)
acclimatization and education level. Sol Energy 78(4), 504-517
(2005) 81. D. A. McIntyre, Evaluation of thermal discomfort. In:
B. Berglund, T. Lindvall and J. Sundell, editors. Proc
67. H. Wilhite: The conditioning of comfort. Build Res Inf Indoor Air ’84. Stockholm, 1, 147-158 (1984)
37(1), 84-88 (2009)
82. C. Morgan and R. de Dear: Weather, clothing and
68. J. L. Stoops: Indoor thermal comfort, an evolutionary thermal adaptation to indoor climate. Clim Res 24(3), 267-
biology perspective. In: Proc Comfort and Energy Use in 284 (2003)
Buildings – Getting them Right. London: Network for Comfort
and Energy Use in Buildings (2006) 83. T. Tamura: Clothing as a mobile environment for
human beings - Prospects of clothing for the future. J Hum
69. G. Y. Yun, P. Tuohy and K. Steemers: Thermal Environ Sys 10(1), 1-6 (2007)
performance of a naturally ventilated building using a
combined algorithm of probabilistic occupant behaviour and 84. A. G. Kwok and N. B. Rajkovich: Addressing climate
deterministic heat and mass balance models. Energ Buildings change in comfort standards. Build Environ 45(1), 18-22
41(5), 489-499 (2009) (2010)

70. C. Chun, A. Kwok, T. Mitamura, N. Miwa and A. Tamura. 85. J. Toftum, R. V. Andersen and K. L. Jensen: Occupant
Thermal diary: Connecting temperature history to indoor performance and building energy consumption with
comfort. Build Environ 43(5), 877-885 (2008) different philosophies of determining acceptable thermal
conditions. Build Environ 44(10), 2009-2016 (2009)
71. B. W. Olesen: International standards for the indoor
environment. Indoor Air 14(Suppl. 7), 18–26 (2004) 86. N. Umemiya, G. Inoue and L. Xiaoyong: Survey of
control usage for apartments in Japan in summer and
72. K. J. McCartney and J. F. Nicol: Developing an autumn. Air conditioner and window opening. In: Proc
adaptive control algorithm for Europe: Results of the Comfort and Energy Use in Buildings – Getting them Right.
SCATs Project. Energ Buildings 34(6), 623-635 (2002)

784
Thermal comfort: research and practice

London: Network for Comfort and Energy Use in Buildings 100. E. Arens, M. A. Humphreys, R. de Dear and H.
(2006) Zhang: Are ‘Class A’ temperature requirements realistic or
desirable? Build Environ 45(1), 4-10 (2010)
87. G. Y. Yun, K. Steemers and N. Baker: Natural
ventilation in practice: linking facade design, thermal 101. B. W. Olesen, O. Seppanen and A. Boerstra: Criteria
performance, occupant perception and control. Build Res for the indoor environment for energy performance of
Inf 36(6), 608-624 (2008) buildings. A new European standard. Facilities 24(11-12),
445-457 (2006)
88. J. Toftum: Air movement – good or bad? Indoor Air 102. B. W. Olesen: The philosophy behind EN15251:
14(s7), 40-45 (2004) indoor environmental criteria for design and calculation of
energy performance of buildings. Energ Buildings 39(7),
89. C. Cândido, R. J. de Dear, R. Lamberts and L. 740-749 (2007)
Bittencourt: Air movement acceptability limits and
thermal comfort in Brazil’s hot humid climate zone. 103. J. L. M. Hensen: Literature review on thermal comfort
Build Environ 45(1), 222-229 (2010) in transient conditions. Build Environ 25(4), 309-316
(1990)
90. M. Mithra: Are comfort expectations of building
occupants too high? Build Res Inf 37(1), 79-83 (2009) 104. T. Goto, J. Toftum, R. de Dear and P. O. Fanger,
Thermal sensation and comfort with transient metabolic
91. C. Huizenga, S. Abbaszadeh, L. Zagreus and E. Arens, Air rates, In: H. Levin, editor. Proc Indoor Air ’02. Monterey,
quality and thermal comfort in office buildings: Results of a 1, 1038-1043 (2002)
large indoor environmental quality survey. In: E. de Oliveira
Fernandes, M. Gameiro da Silva and J. Rosado Pinto, editors. 105. Y. Zhang and R. Zhao: Overall thermal sensation,
Proc Healthy Buildings ’06. Lisbon, III, 393-397 (2006) acceptability and comfort. Build Environ 43(1), 44-50
(2008)
92. T. Sawashima and N. Matsubara: Residents’ seasonal
changes of place of occupation in the house as behavioral 106. A. C. van der Linden, A. C. Boerstra, A. K. Raue, S.
thermoregulation. J Hum Environ Sys 10(1), 1-6 (2007) R. Kurvers and R. J. de Dear: Adaptive temperature limits:
A new guideline in the Netherlands: A new approach for
93. S. Karjalainen and O. Koistinen: User problems with the assessment of building performance with respect to
individual temperature control in offices. Build Environ 42(8), thermal indoor climate. Energ Buildings 38(1), 8-17 (2006)
2880-2887 (2007)
107. V. Candas and A. Dufour: Thermal comfort:
94. S. Karjalainen: Thermal comfort and use of thermostats in Multisensory interactions? J Physiol Anthropol Appl Hum
Finnish homes and offices. Build Environ 44(6), 1237-1245 Sci 24(1), 33-36 (2005)
(2009)
108. N. Pellerin and V. Candas: Combined effects of
95. S. Karjalainen: Gender differences in thermal comfort and temperature and noise on human discomfort. Physiol Behav
use of thermostats in everyday thermal environments. Build 78(1), 99-106 (2003)
Environ 42(4), 1594-1603 (2007)
109. K. Nagano, A. Takaki, M. Hirakawa and Y.
96. T. Derksen, F. Franchimon and J. E. M. H. van Bronswijk: Tochihara: Effects of ambient temperature steps on thermal
Impact of management attitudes on perceived thermal comfort. comfort requirements. Int J Biometeorol 50(1), 33-39
Scand J Work Environ Health Supplements(4), 43-45 (2008) (2005)

97. CEN, Technical report CR 1752, Ventilation for buildings: 110. O. Alm, T. Witterseh, G. Clausen, J. Toftum and P. O.
design criteria for the indoor environment. Brussels: European Fanger, The impact on human perception of simultaneous
Committee for Standardization (1998) exposure to thermal load, low-frequency ventilation noise
and indoor air pollution. In: G. Raw, C. Aizlewood and P.
98. G. S. Brager, M. E. Fountain, C. C. Benton, E. A. Arens Warren, editors. Proc Indoor Air ’99. Edinburgh, 5, 270-
and F. S. Bauman, A comparison of methods for assessing 275 (1999)
thermal sensation and acceptability in the field. In: N. A.
Oseland and M. A. Humphreys, editors. Thermal comfort: 111. L. Fang, G. Clausen and P. O. Fanger: Temperature
past, present and future. Garston: Building Research and humidity: important factors for perception of air quality
Establishment, 17-39 (1994) and for ventilation requirements. ASHRAE Trans 100(2),
503-510 (2000)
99. G. Havenith, I. Holmér and K. Parsons: Personal 112. A. M. B. Santos and L. Gunnarsen, Optimizing linked
factors in thermal comfort assessment: clothing pairs of indoor climate parameters. In: G. Raw, C.
properties and metabolic heat production. Energ Aizlewood and P. Warren, editors. Proc Indoor Air ’99.
Buildings, 34(6), 581-591 (2002) Edinburgh, 3, 191-196 (1999)

785
Thermal comfort: research and practice

113. S. H. Kim and W. S. Jeong: Influence of illumination 127. K. W. Tham and H. C. Willem: Temperature and
on autonomic thermoregulation and choice of clothing. Int ventilation effects on performance and neurobehavioral-
J Biometeorol 46(3), 141-144 (2002) related symptoms of tropically acclimatized call center
operators near thermal neutrality. ASHRAE Trans 111(2),
114. B. F. Yu, Z. B. Hu, M. Liu, H. L. Yang, Q. X. Kong 687-698 (2005)
and Y. H. Liu: Review of research on air-conditioning
systems and indoor air quality control for human health. Int 128. M. A. Humphreys and F. J. Nicol: Self-assessed
J Refrig 32(1), 3-20 (2009) productivity and the office environment: Monthly surveys
in five European countries. ASHRAE Trans 113(1), 606-
115. L. T. Wong, K. W. Mui, P. S. Hui, W. Y. Chan and A. 616 (2007)
K. Y. Law: Thermal environmental interference with
airborne bacteria and fungi levels in air-conditioned offices. 129. A. Leaman and B. Bordass: Productivity in buildings:
Indoor Built Environ 17(2), 122-127 (2008) the 'killer' variables. Build Res Inf 27(1), 4-19 (1999)

116. C. J. Weschler: Changes in indoor pollutants since the 130. W. J. Fisk and A. H. Rosenfeld: Estimates of
1950s. Atmos Environ 43(1) (2009) improved productivity and health from better indoor
environments. Indoor Air, 7(3), 158-172 (1997)
117. M. J. Mendell and A. G. Mirer: Indoor thermal
factors and symptoms in office workers: Findings from 131. O. Seppänen and W. J. Fisk: A model to estimate the
the U.S. EPA BASE Study. Indoor Air 19(4), 291-302 cost-effectiveness of improving office work through indoor
(2009) environmental control. ASHRAE Trans 111(2), 663-672
(2005)
118. J. Toftum: Central automatic control or distributed
occupant control for better indoor environment quality 132. R. Kosonen and F. Tan, PMV-derived productivity
in the future. Build Environ 45(1), 23-28 (2010) model as a tool to assess productivity loss. In: K. W. Tham,
S. C. Sekhar and K. W. D. Cheong, editors. Proc Healthy
119. J. L. M. Hensen: Towards an integral approach of Buildings ’03. Singapore, 1, 749-754 (2003)
building and HVAC system. Energ Buildings 19(4),
297-302 (1993) 133. R. Kosonen and F. Tan: Assessment of productivity
loss in air-conditioned buildings using PMV. Energ
120. J. A. Clarke, I. A. Macdonald and J. F. Nicol: Buildings 36(10), 987-993 (2004)
Predicting adaptive responses – simulating occupied
environments. In: Proc Comfort and Energy Use in 134. W. L. Tse and A. T. P. So: The importance of human
Buildings – Getting them Right. London: Network for productivity to air-conditioning control in office
Comfort and Energy Use in Buildings (2006) environments. HVAC&R Res 13(1), 3-21 (2007)

121. J. A. Clarke and J. L. M. Hensen: An approach to the 135. W. L. Tse and W. L. Chan: A distributed sensor
simulation of coupled heat and mass flows in buildings. network for measurement of human thermal comfort
Indoor Air 1(3), 283-296 (1991) feelings. Sensor Actuat A-Phys 144(2), 394-402 (2008)

122. P. Hoes, J. L. M. Hensen, M. G. L. C. Loomans, B. de 136. D. Fiala, K. J. Lomas and M. Stohrer: Computer
Vries and D. Bourgeois: User behavior in whole building prediction of human thermoregulation and temperature
simulation. Energ Buildings 41(3), 295-302 (2009) responses to a wide range of environmental conditions. Int
J Biometeorol 45(3), 143-159 (2001)
123. B. P. Haynes: An evaluation of the impact of the
office environment on productivity. Facilities 26(5-6), 178- 137. C. Huizenga, Z. Hui and E. Arens: A model of human
195 (2008) physiology and comfort for assessing complex thermal
environments. Build Environ 36(6), 691-699 (2001)
124. W. J. Fisk, Estimates of potential nationwide
productivity and health benefits from better indoor 138. S. Tanabe, K. Kobayashi, J. Nakano, Y. Ozeki and M.
environments: An update. In: J. D. Spengler, J. M. Samet Konishi: Evaluation of thermal comfort using combined
and J. F. McCarthy, editors. Indoor air quality handbook. multi-node thermoregulation (65MN) and radiation models
New York: McGraw-Hill, 4.1-4.36 (2001) and computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Energ Buildings
34(6), 637-646 (2002)
125. D. P. Wyon, Thermal effects on performance. In: J. D.
Spengler, J. M. Samet and J. F. McCarthy, editors. Indoor 139. J. A. J. Stolwijk: A mathematical model of
air quality handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill, 16.1-16.16 physiological temperature regulation in man. Tech. Rep.
(2001) CR-1855. Washington: NASA (1971)

126. O. Seppänen, W. J. Fisk and D. Faulkner: Control 140. E. H. Wissler, Mathematical simulation of human
of temperature for health and productivity in offices. thermal behaviour using whole body models. In: A. Shitzer
ASHRAE Trans 111(2), 680-686 (2005) and R. C. Eberhart, editors. Heat transfer in medicine and

786
Thermal comfort: research and practice

biology. 1st edition. New York: Plenum Press, 325-373 154. H. Brohus and P. V. Nielsen: Personal exposure in
(1985) displacement ventilated rooms. Indoor Air 6(3), 157-167
(1996)
141. S. J. Rees, K. J. Lomas and D. Fiala: Predicting local
thermal discomfort adjacent to glazing. ASHRAE Trans 155. Melikov A., Kaczmarczyk J., Cygan L, Indoor air
114(1), 431-441 (2008) quality assessment by a ‘‘breathing’’ thermal manikin. In:
H. B. Awbi, editor. Proc Roomvent ’00. Reading, 1, 101-
142. K. Kubaha, Asymmetric radiant fields and human 106 (2000)
thermal comfort. PhD Thesis. Leicester: Institute of Energy
and Sustainable Development, De Montfort University 156. A. Melikov, R. Cermak and M. Mayer: Personalized
(2005) ventilation: evaluation of different air terminal devices.
Energ Buildings 34(8), 829-836 (2002)
143. ISO, ISO 15831, Clothing- Physiological effects -
Measurement of thermal insulation by means of a thermal 157. A. Melikov, R. Cermak, O. Kovar and L. Forejt,
manikin. Geneva: International Organization for Impact of airflow interaction on inhaled air quality and
Standardization (2004) transport of contaminants in rooms with personalized and
total volume ventilation. In: K. W. Tham, S. C. Sekhar and
144. D. A. Nelson, J. S. Curlee, A. R. Curran, J. M. Ziriax K. W. D. Cheong, editors. Proc Healthy Buildings ’03.
and P. A. Mason: Determining localized garment insulation Singapore, 2, 592-597 (2003)
values from manikin studies: computational method and
results. Eur J Appl Physiol 95(5-6), 464-473 (2005) 158. A. Melikov and J. Kaczmarczyk: Measurement and
prediction of indoor air quality using a breathing thermal
145. M. J. Abreu, An investigation of the thermal comfort manikin. Indoor Air 17(1), 50-59 (2007)
behaviour for active wear using a thermal manikin. In: Proc
7I3M. Coimbra (2008) 159. A. Melikov: Breathing thermal manikins for indoor
environment assessment: important characteristics and
146. F. Al-ajmi, D. L. Loveday and G. Havenith: Thermal requirements. Eur J Appl Physiol 92(6), 710-713 (2004)
insulation of Arabian Gulf men's clothing: Measurements
using a thermal manikin. ASHRAE Trans 112(2), 240-245 160. J. Fan and Y. S. Chen: Measurement of clothing
(2007) thermal insulation and moisture vapor resistance using a
novel perspiring fabric thermal manikin. Meas Sci Technol
147. R. J. de Dear, E. Arens, Z. Hui and M. Oguro: 13(7), 1115-1123 (2002)
Convective and radiative heat transfer coefficients for
individual human body segments. Int J Biometeorol 40(3), 161. X. Qian and J. Fan: Interactions of the surface heat
141-156 (1997) and moisture transfer from the human body under varying
climatic conditions and walking speeds. Appl Ergon 37(6),
148. D. Quintela, A. Gaspar and C. Borges: Analysis of 685-693 (2006)
sensible heat exchanges from a thermal manikin. Eur J
Appl Physiol 92(6), 663-668 (2004) 162. R. B. Farrington, J. P. Rugh, D. Bharathan and R.
Burke: Use of a thermal manikin to evaluate human
149. K. Kuklane, Heat loss from a thermal manikin during thermoregulatory responses in transient, non-uniform,
wet tests with walking simulation. In: Proc 7I3M. Coimbra thermal environments. SAE Trans 113(1), 548-556 (2004)
(2008)
163. J. P. Rugh and D. Bharathan, Predicting human
150. M. B. DuCharme, B. Farnworth, A. Kuczora, J. thermal comfort in automobiles. SAE Trans 114(6), 2508-
Boone, R. Brown and L. Mak, Evaluation of the thermal 2516 (2005)
protection of life rafts using a thermal manikin and human
subjects. In: Proc 7I3M. Coimbra (2008) 164. J. Rugh and J. Lustbader, Application of a sweating
manikin controlled by a human physiological model and
151. D. Zukowska, A. Melikov and Z. Popiolek, Thermal lessons learned. In: Proc 6I3M, Hong Kong (2006)
plume above a simulated sitting person with different
complexity of body geometry. In: O. Seppänen, editor. 165. M. G. M. Richards and N. G. Mattle, Development of
Proc Roomvent ’07. Helsinki, 1, 191-198 (2007) a sweating agile thermal manikin (SAM). In: Proc 4I3M.
Sankt Gallen (2001)
152. D. Zukowska, Z. Popiolek and A. Melikov, Impact of
personal factors and furniture arrangement on the thermal 166. A. Psikuta, M. Richards and D. Fiala, Single- and
plume above a human body. In: O. Seppänen, editor. Proc multi-sector thermophysiological human simulators for
Roomvent ’07. Helsinki, 1, 137-144 (2007) clothing research. In: Proc 7I3M. Coimbra (2008)

153. H. O. Nilsson and I. Holmér: Comfort climate 167. F. Wang, A comparative introduction on sweating
evaluation with thermal manikin methods and computer thermal manikin "Newton" and "Walter". In: Proc 7I3M.
simulation models. Indoor Air 13(1), 28-37 (2003) Coimbra (2008)

787
 Thermal comfort: research and practice

Key Words: Thermal comfort, PMV, adaptation,

standards, HVAC, Personal Control, Thermal Manikins,
Review

Send correspondence to: Joost van Hoof, Hogeschool

Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of
Health Care, Research Centre for Innovation in Health
Care, Bolognalaan 101, 3584 CJ Utrecht, the
Netherlands, Tel: 31-030-2585268, Fax: 31-030-
2540608, E-mail: [email protected]

http://www.bioscience.org/current/vol15.htm

788

View publication stats