3.9 Article

Human response to air movement - Evaluation of ASHRAE's draft criteria (RP-843)

Journal

HVAC&R RESEARCH
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages 187-202

Publisher

AMER SOC HEATING REFRIGERATING AIR-CONDITIONING ENG, INC,
DOI: 10.1080/10789669.2003.10391064

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to evaluate the present ASHRAE Standard 55-1992 draft criteria and to describe how air movement is perceived at thermal sensations slightly cooler and slightly warmer than neutral. At temperatures 18degreesC, 20degreesC 23degreesC, 26degreesC and 28degreesC (64.4degreesF, 68degreesF, 73.4degreesF, 78.8degreesF, and 82.4degreesF), 40 subjects at slightly cool, neutral, and slightly warm overall thermal sensation were exposed to air velocities that were increased step-by-step from less than 0.1 m/s to 0.8 m/s (19.7 fpm to 157.5 fpm). Subjects who felt cool or slightly cool perceived air movement as being uncomfortable at lower air velocities than did subjects feeling neutral or warmer. No difference in draft sensitivity between subjects feeling neutral, slightly warm, or warm was observed. A smaller percentage of subjects were dissatisfied due to draft than prescribed by ASHRAE Standard 55 guidelines on air movement. The discrepancy could be explained by the effect of thermal sensation and activity level on draft sensitivity. Permissible mean air velocities as recommended by the standard thus provide a conservative upper limit for air velocity that protects occupants who are sensitive to air movement, occupants who feel cooler than neutral, or occupants who are occupied mostly with sedentary work. To accommodate all occupants in a given indoor environment, therefore, it is recommended that air movement generated by the HVAC system be designed according to the criteria in the current Standard 55 to minimize complaints of draft. To provide comfort for occupants who prefer more air movement, local air movement under individual control is easy to generate, e.g., by a desk fan.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available