Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

Subjective Thermal Comfort in the Environment with Spot Cooling System

Hayato Ohashi1, Hitomi Tsutsumi1, Shin-ichi Tanabe1, Ken-ichi Kimura1,
Hideaki Murakami2, Koji Kiyohara3
1
Department of Architecture, Waseda University, Japan
2
Kyushu Electric Power Co.,Inc., Japan
3
Kyudenko Co.,Inc., Japan

Corresponding email: ohashi@tanabe.arch.waseda.ac.jp

SUMMARY

Subjective experiments were conducted in a climate chamber to evaluate subjective thermal

comfort in the environment with spot cooling system, simulating a big factory. Five
conditions combined supply air temperature and air volume were set for the first test. The
condition without spot cooling system was also examined. Two types of diffusers were
developed in the second test. Seven males were exposed for 90 minute under the conditions
with and without spot cooling. Subjective metabolic rate were assumed to be 1.8 met.
Subjects voted their thermal sensation, air velocity sensation, comfort sensation in the
experiments every 30 minute.
Thermogram showed that spot cooling system without diffusers cooled down only upper body
of subjects, where they felt the draght. On the other hand, it was possible to cool down their
whole body using the diffuser. Subjects preferred the condition with the diffuser, where they
felt “thermally neutral”.

INTRODUCTION

In large space such as a factory, it is not feasible to control the air in the entire space with
HVAC system without huge energy consumption. The air-conditioning in large space usually
targets only the occupied zone. It is important that the occupied zone air-conditioning satisfies
a comfortable feeling of the human body, and decrease the air-conditioning load as much as
possible. Spot cooling system used at the factory is one of the occupied zone air-conditioning,
and have potential for energy conservation. The workers' physiological and subjective
responses to such environments are different from those to typical uniform thermal
environments, and are far less understood for Japanese.
In this research, subjective experiments were conducted to evaluate thermal comfort of
Japanese subjects in the environment with spot cooling system, simulating a big factory.
Different combinations of the jet air temperature and volume, and the shape of diffusers were
examined.

METHODS
Experimental Design
Two kinds of subjective experiments were conducted in a climate chamber to evaluate
subjective comfort in the environment with spot cooling system in 2005. Supply air
temperature, air volume and shape of diffuser were set for the purpose of evaluating the
human comfort under the spot cooling. In the first test, supply air temperature and volume
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

from spot cooling system were controlled. The shape of diffusers was varied in the second test.
Seven college-aged males who were in good health were exposed to the experiments. All
subjects were volunteers who were paid for participating in the experiment. Considering their
circadian rhythms, all subjects took part in the experiments at the same time of day.

Experimental Conditions
Table 1 lists experimental conditions.
In the first experiment, three supply air temperature, 19°C, 25°C and 31 °C, with 400m3/h of
supply air volume were set. The condition with small supply air of 200m3/h at 19oC were also
examined. Additionally, the condition without spot cooling system was also analyzed.
In the second experiment, two types of diffusers, type I and II, were developed. The condition
without diffuser was compared with the condition with 2 types of diffuser. Supply air
temperature and air volume was set at 19oC and 400m3/h for all condition. Table 2 shows 3
kinds of diffusers.
For all conditions in both the first and second test, outlet of spot cooling system equipped 3.0
m above the floor. The spot cooling system had a nozzle with an outlet diameter of 0.2m. The
temperature where is not influenced by spot cooling system (ambient temperature) were kept
at 31 oC simulating a factory [1]. In the experiments, subjects wore hat, work wear (long
sleeve), shirt, shoes, socks.

Table 1. Experimental condition

First experiment Second experiment
without
Condition 19_200 19_400 25_400 31_400 NONE Type I Type II
diffuser
Supply air
19.0 19.0 25.0 31.0 - 19.0
temperature [°C]
Supply air volume
200 400 400 400 0 400
[m3/h]
Ambient temperature
31.0
[°C]
Outlet altitude[m] 3m above floor
Outlet diameter[mm] 200φ
Diffuser Nozzle Type I Type II
Clothing hat, work wear (long sleeve), shirt, shoes, socks

Table 2. Three kinds of diffusers

Without diffuser Type I Type II
200
200 200 140
30 30
22°
250 22°
250

401.86 401.86

Experimental Procedure
Figure 1 illustrates the experimental procedure.
Subjects were exposed for 90 minutes under the conditions with and without spot cooling.
One test consisted of 3 sessions. During the 30-minute session, subjects performed walking
up and down the steps [2] in the ambient area, light work which is putting machine screws in
holes and clamping them with nuts in a standing position[3] with spot cooling for 20 minutes.
Subjective metabolic rate was assumed to be 1.8 met [4]. Subjects rated at the beginning of
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

the exposure time and after each task during the session. In the second experiment, the
different type of diffusers was installed for each session.
Session1 Session2 Session3 (1) Change clothes, Questionnaires,
Body temperature
(1) (2) (3) (2) (3) (2) (3) (2) Walking up and down the steps
(3) Light work
psychological amount vote
-30 0 10 30 40 60 70 90 [min.]
Exposure time [90 min.]
Figure 1. Experimental procedure

Measurement
The effect of supply air condition and air flow pattern on human comfort was evaluated by the
result of environmental measurements (the vertical air temperature distribution, the velocity
distribution, vector diagram of the supply air velocity analyzed by PIV), physiological
response (the skin temperature, relative humidity and air temperature in clothing, the
thermogram), and the subjective psychological measurements.
The thermogram is a image visualized the surface temperature of the object. In this
experiment, the surface temperature distribution of the subject working under the spot cooling
system was analyzed with thermogram.
PIV (Particle Image Velocimetry) is a kind of the speed measurement method of the fluid
such as water and air. In second experiment, the vector analysis on the air flow with diffuser
was done by using PIV analysis software (DIPP-Flow) from the image taken with high speed
camera.
Subjects rated their thermal sensation, air velocity sensation, comfort sensation every 30
minute on the questionnaire as shown in Figure 2. The scales were given as visual analogue
scales. Subjects were allowed to rate their sensation either just on the number or between the
numbers on the scales. In the second experiment, subjects also evaluated effect of total
comfort by difference of diffuser.
Thermal sensation Thermal comfort sensation

How do you judge the thermal environment? How do you feel the thermal environment?

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 0 -1 -2 -3

Cold Cool Slightly Neutral Slightly Warm Hot Comfortable Slightly Uncomfortable Very
Cool Warm Uncomfortable Uncomfortable

Air velocity sensation Comfort sensation to air velocity

How do you judge the air velocity from the outlet? How do you feel the air velocity from the outlet?

0 -1 -2 -3 0 -1 -2 -3

Not feel Slightly feel Feel Strongly feel Comfortable Slightly Uncomfortable Very
Uncomfortable Uncomfortable

Figure 2. A part of rating scales

Statistical Analysis

Data obtained in the experiments were analysed with Non-parametric statistical analysis
method [5]. The Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Signed Ranks test was administered between each
condition. In the first experiment, supply air temperature effect was discussed in the pair-wise
comparison between 19_400 and 19_200. According to the comparison between 19_400,
25_400, and 31_400, supply air volume effect was reported. P-values presented in the figures
indicate the level of significance.
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The First Experiment Result
Thermal Environment
Vertical air temperature distribution: Vertical air temperature distribution in occupied zone
was less than 3 °C under the all conditions.
Surface temperature: The surface temperature distribution recorded with thermogram is
presented in Figure3. It was found that spot cooling system without diffusers cooled down
upper body of subjects such as the head, necks, and the backs. This tendency was remarkably
observed under the condition at low supply air temperature or with large air volume.
Subjective vote: The general thermal sensation vote and general comfort sensation vote were
displayed in Figure 4. In two conditions of 19oC in blow temperature, subjects reported
significantly cooler at 19_400 than at 19_200 (p<0.01), and more comfortable at 19_400
(p<0.01). Among three conditions of 400m3/h of supply air volume, people rated significantly
cooler at 19oC and 25oC than at 31oC (p<0.01). Comfort sensation vote under the condition
with 19oC of jet air was significantly greater than with 31oC (p<0.04). Thermal sensation vote
was highest (p<0.01) and most uncomfortable (p<0.04) under the condition without diffuser.
Subjective comfort sensation was the greatest at 19_400. It is found that subjective thermal
sensation vote was scattered near “slightly cool” and subjects felt comfortable under the
condition of low air temperature and large air volume.
19_200 19_400 25_400 31_400 NONE

Figure3. Surface temperature of subject’s body (First experiment)

19_200 19_200
p<0.01

p<0.01

19_400 19_400
p<0.01

p<0.03
p<0.01

25_400
p<0.01

25_400
p<0.01

p<0.01

p<0.04
p<0.01

p<0.01

31_400
p<0.04
p<0.01

31_400
p<0.01

NONE NONE

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 0
Slightly Neutral Slightly Warm Hot Very Uncomfortable Slightly Comfortable
Cold Cool Cool Warm Uncomfortable Uncomfortable
a) General thermal sensation vote b) Thermal comfort sensation vote
Figure 4. Subjective thermal comfort

Air Flow
Subjective vote: The general air velocity sensation vote and comfort sensation vote to air
velocity were shown in Figure 5. Pair-wise comparison between 2 conditions with 19oC of
supply air temperature, significantly greater air velocity sensation was observed in 19_400 air
(p<0.01). Among three conditions of 400m3/h of supply air volume, subjects reported
significantly higher general air velocity sensation at 31_400 than at 19_400 (p<0.02).
There was no significant difference in the comfort sensation to air velocity between any pair
of conditions with spot cooling system by the Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Signed Ranks test.
Subjects rated significantly more uncomfortable under the condition without spot cooling
system than at 19_400, 19_200 and 31_400 (p<0.04), and tend to feel more uncomfortable
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

than at 25_400(p<0.06). It is found that the comfort sensation to air velocity was improved by
setting up the spot cooling system.
p<0.01

19_200 19_400
19_400 19_200
p<0.01
p<0.01

p<0.02
p<0.02

25_400 25_400
p<0.01
p<0.01

p<0.01
p<0.01

31_400

p<0.04
p<0.06
p<0.01

31_400
NONE NONE

-3 -2 -1 0 -3 -2 -1 0
Strongly feel Feel Slightly feel Not feel Very Uncomfortable Slightly Comfortable
Uncomfortable Uncomfortable

a) General air velocity sensation vote b) comfort sensation vote to air velocity
Figure 5. Subjective comfort sensation vote to air velocity

The Second Experiment Result

Thermal environment
Surface temperature: The surface temperature distribution recorded by thermogram is
shown in Figure6. It showed that spot cooling system without diffusers cooled down upper
body of subjects, while it was possible to cool down their whole body using the diffusers. It
was remarkable in the condition using the diffuser type II.
Subjective vote: The general thermal sensation vote and thermal comfort sensation vote were
presented in Figure 7. Thermal sensation votes were scattered near “slightly cool” and
comfort sensation vote “comfort” for all conditions in the second test. Especially, subjects
tended to feel thermally neutral and more comfortable under the condition using the diffuser
type II compared with the condition without diffuser. It is found that subject felt comfortable
when they perceived the thermal environment to be neutral. It is concluded that the thermal
comfort sensation improved by cooling down their whole body using diffusers.
Without diffuser Type I Type II

Figure 6. Surface Temperature(second experiment)

Without Without
diffuser diffuser
p<0.08

p<0.08

Type I Type I

Type II Type II

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 0
Cold Cool Slightly Neutral Slightly Warm Very Uncomfortable Slightly Comfortable
Hot
Cool Warm Uncomfortable Uncomfortable
a) General thermal sensation vote b) Thermal comfort sensation vote
Figure 7. Subjective thermal comfort
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

Air Flow
Supply air velocity: The vector diagram of the supply air velocity measured with PIV from
the diffuser is displays in Figure8. Under the condition without diffuser, little air flow
diffusion was seen, and flowed toward the subjective position. Air velocity right after nozzle
was about 4.1m/s. Supply air was diffused due to the diffuser, while the air velocity which
reached directly subject got smaller and air flow to the subject was weakened. Especially, it
was remarkable in the condition with diffuser typeII. Air velocity of the diffusion was about
3.5m/s, and that to the direction of the subject was 0.5m/s when the diffuser typeII was
installed. As the result of the velocity distribution measurements, air velocity 1.7m above the
floor indicated up to 1.5m/s under the condition without diffuser and with diffuser type I. In
case of using the diffuser type II, air velocity on the same point was measures to be 0.24m/s.
Subjective vote: Figure9 shows the general air velocity sensation vote and comfort sensation
vote to air velocity. Subjects reported significantly lower air velocity sensation under the
condition with diffuser typeII than any other conditions (p<0.03). In the first experiment,
there was no significant difference in the vote of comfort sensation to air velocity between
any pair of conditions with spot cooling system. However, subjects reported significantly
more comfortable in case of using the diffuser typeI and typeII than without diffuser (p<0.05)
on the second experiment.
Subject reported the air velocity from the outlet was comfortable in case that the velocity
sensation was small. It was found that people could feel great comfort due to cooling down
their whole body even with very small velocity.
Without diffuser typeI typeII

500
Figure 8. vector diagram of the supply air velocity

Without Without
diffuser diffuser
p<0.0
1

Type I
p<0.0

Type I
p<0.0

5
p<0.0
3

Type II Type II
1

-3 -2 -1 0 -3 -2 -1 0
Strongly feel Feel Slightly feel Not feel Very Uncomfortable Slightly Comfortable
Uncomfortable Uncomfortable

a) General air velocity sensation vote b) comfort sensation vote to air velocity
Figure 9. Subjective comfort sensation vote to air velocity

Evaluation of Diffuser
Subjects ranked three type of diffuser in the terms of air supply temperature and velocity. The
evaluation of the diffuser typeI and typeII was higher than that of no diffuser as shown in
Figure10. Especially, the majority people voted the diffuser typeII as 1st place. Though, there
 Proceedings of Clima 2007 WellBeing Indoors

were people who rated the diffuser typeII as 3rd place, too. This is demonstrated that there
was an individual variation in subjects' preference of diffuser.
1st place about temperature 1st place about air velocity 3rd place about air velocity
Without Without
diffuser 0% diffuser 0% Type II
0%
Type I Type I
43% 43%

Without
Type II Type II diffuser
57% 57% 57%
Type I
Figure 10. Evaluation of diffuser 43%

CONCLUSIONS

In order to evaluate subjective comfort in the environment with spot cooling system,
simulating a big factory, two subjective experiments were conducted in the climate chamber.
The first experiments were carried out to evaluate the air supply conditions. Subjects were
exposed to 5 conditions, 19_200, 19_400, 25_400, 31_400, none.
Spot cooling system without diffusers cooled down upper body of subjects. It was remarkable
in the condition such as low supply air temperature and large air volume. It is found that
subjective thermal sensation vote was scattered near “slightly cool” and subjects felt
comfortable under the condition of low air temperature and large air volume. In this
experimental condition, when supply air temperature rose and the volume increased, subjects
rated “feel” on air velocity sensation vote. But there was no significant difference in the vote
of comfort sensation to air velocity between any pair of conditions with spot cooling system

In the second experiment, subjects evaluate the air supply conditions using the diffusers. three
experimental conditions were set, diffuser typeI, typeII and without diffuser.
It was possible to cool down their whole body using the diffusers. It was contemplated that
the thermal comfort sensation improved by cooling down their whole body. Subject reported
the air velocity from the outlet was comfortable in case that the velocity sensation was small.
It was found that people could feel great comfort due to cooling down their whole body even
with very small velocity. The majority people rated the diffuser type II as 1st place, though
there was an individual variation in subjects' preference of diffuser.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Authors appreciate Mr. J Harigaya Mr. Y Nakagawa and Mr. S Nagareda of Waseda
University for their assisting us plan and conduct this research.

REFERENCES
1. Song Sung Ki. 2001. Field Measurements and Simulation on the Heat Load of a Large Factory
Space with Occupied Zone Air-Conditioning. Proceedings of International Conference CLIMA
2000.
2. Tanabe, S. et al. 1995. Effects of humidity on thermal comfort in office space (part 3). Annual
Meeting of SHASE. pp.685-688
3. Melikov, A.K. et al. 1994. Spot cooling -Part 1: Human responses to cooling with air jets.
ASHRAE Transactions, Vol. 100(2). pp.476-499.
4. Fanger, P O. 1970. Thermal Comfort. Danish Technical Press.