Accepted Manuscript

Title: Thermal comfort: Design and assessment for energy

saving

Author: Francesca Romana d’AMBROSIO Alfano Bjarne W.

Olesen Boris Igor Palella Giuseppe Riccio

PII: S0378-7788(14)00515-5
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.06.033
Reference: ENB 5127

To appear in: ENB

Received date: 28-2-2014

Revised date: 20-6-2014
Accepted date: 21-6-2014

Please cite this article as: F.R.A.M.B.R.O.S.I.O. ALFANO, B.W. OLESEN, B.I.
PALELLA, G. RICCIO, Thermal comfort: design and assessment for energy saving,
Energy and Buildings (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.06.033

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.
As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.
The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof
before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that
apply to the journal pertain.
 THERMAL COMFORT: DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT

FOR ENERGY SAVING

t
Francesca Romana d’AMBROSIO ALFANO

ip
DIIN - Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale – Università di Salerno

cr
Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132 - 84084 Fisciano (Salerno), Italy

us
Bjarne W. OLESEN

an
International Centre for Indoor Environment and Energy (ICIEE), Department of Civil Engineering,

Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Nils Koppels Allé 402, DK-2800 Kgs, Lyngby, Denmark
M
Boris Igor PALELLA
ed

DII - Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale – Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II

Piazzale Vincenzo Tecchio 80, 80125 Napoli, Italy.

pt

Corresponding author. email: palella@unina.it; tel. +39 0817682618; fax +39 0812390364
ce

Giuseppe RICCIO

DII - Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale – Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II

Ac

Piazzale Vincenzo Tecchio 80, 80125 Napoli, Italy.

Page 1 of 45
 ABSTRACT

Thermal comfort is one of the most important aspects of the Indoor Environmental Quality due to

its effects on well-being, people’s performance and building energy requirements. Its attainment is

not an easy task requiring advanced design and operation of building and HVAC systems, taking

into account all parameters involved. Even though thermal comfort fundamentals are consolidated

t
topics for more than forty years, often designers seem to ignore or apply them in a wrong way. De-

ip
sign input values from standards are often considered as universal values rather than recommended

cr
values to be used under specific conditions. At operation level, only few variables are taken into ac-

us
count with unpredictable effects on the assessment of comfort indices. In this paper, the main crite-

ria for the design and assessment of thermal comfort are discussed in order to help building and
an
HVAC systems designers and operators to navigate the complex and varied world of standards in

the field of thermal environment for improving indoor environmental quality and energy saving.
M
The examples discussed in the paper will also be useful for the standardization, leading to harmo-

nized documents more readable for all users.

ed
pt

Keywords: IEQ, Thermal comfort, HVAC systems, building design, PMV.

ce

1. INTRODUCTION
Ac

For many years acoustic comfort [1, 2], thermal comfort [3‒ 5], visual comfort [6, 7] and indoor

air quality [8, 9] have been studied separately by physiologist, engineers, occupational health spe-

cialist, industrial hygiene experts and architects. The first studies about the physiological response

of man with respect to the thermal environment were made by Claude Bernard [10] who dealt with

the biological regulation in his famous work published in 1865 and entitled “Introduction à l’étude

de la medicine éxpérimentale”.
2

Page 2 of 45
 Only in recent years, application of the ergonomics principles stated the need to achieve a good

IEQ (Indoor Environmental Quality), as a result of thermal, visual, acoustic comfort and indoor air

quality. The awareness increased that an adequate design of the indoor environment – where people

work and live – requires a synergic approach to all facets involved [11–13] in full compliance with

sustainability [13-18].

t
IEQ strictly affects the overall building energy performances – as expressed in the 2002/91/EC

ip
European Directive [19, 20] – and it exhibits an antagonistic relationship with respect to the energy

cr
saving requirements. Reaching thermal comfort requires a good building design and conditioning of

us
the space (heating, cooling, and ventilation). A good lighting requires either large transparent sur-

faces (natural light, windows) or artificial lighting, which both may result in too high indoor tem-
an
peratures, too high heat losses/gains and electrical energy use. Assuring a good Indoor Air Quality

(IAQ) requires a good selection of low emitting building materials and a ventilation system (natural,
M
mechanical or hybrid). Therefore, the simultaneous maximization of the overall comfort and the re-

duction of the building energy demand has become a must. From this perspective, using sources of
ed

renewable energy – as required by more and more pressing international laws [21‒ 23] and pro-

grams like the European Horizon 2020 [24, 25], several US plans [26‒ 28] – can obviously contri-
pt

bute to achieve such a goal. It is even more important to change the way we design the buildings
ce

and systems by taking into account the binomial "IEQ - building energy use". As a consequence,

project teams need to be multi-disciplinary and in an integrated design process be able to simulate
Ac

energy performance of buildings and evaluate indoor environmental conditions.

Another not negligible matter is that a poor IEQ can promote increasing symptoms of SBS [29],

acute respiratory illnesses [29, 30], allergies and asthma, sick leaves and a significant reduction of

the people’s performance [30]. As a consequence, the costs related to a poor IEQ could be even

greater than those related to a good building design and HVAC system and far higher costs than

energy [31].
3

Page 3 of 45
 Unfortunately IEQ is often used in marketing with slogans like "Buy our product and reach the

living comfort", where the performance is not documented. It is understandable that a common user

or occupant lack information and expertise on what is a good indoor environment. It is however not

acceptable that some designers use the word comfort in contexts where this is not justified, probably

aiming to win a client with interesting or intriguing solutions.

t
Designing the indoor environmental quality is not an easy task. To follow technical standards

ip
(see figure 1) and building codes or blindly trust results obtained with a commercial software,

cr
generally is not enough to achieve a design compliant with the environmental quality. Designing

us
IEQ means thinking case by case, project by project in order to find the best solution under the

specific context every time. There are general rules to be respected, but a designer should always
an
remember that a project of comfort is a project that ultimately puts people and their needs in the

center. It must be approached from both ergonomic and technical points of view. Assessments and
M
commissioning should be treated in a similar way. Concerning specific skills and general rules to be

followed, it is noteworthy to mention that often a strict compliance with the rules does not
ed

guarantee comfort for all occupants/users. It could happen that a perfect project from the regulatory

point of view can create problems for some people. This is due to the fact that our methods and
pt

standards are not perfect, and that people are very different in their requirements to the
ce

environment. This paper will show that the standards are sometimes unclear because in some

situations it is not easy to understand the application of certain criteria. As a consequence, this may
Ac

result in different or inconsistent interpretations.

To help building, HVAC systems designers and operators to navigate the complex and varied

world of standards in the field of thermal environment, this paper will show ways to design and

assess thermal comfort. At design level, it will be shown that input values suggested in standards

can be used only under specific conditions to obtain the required IEQ levels. At operational level a

great importance will be devoted to the variables to be taken into account for the calculation of
4

Page 4 of 45
comfort indices. Examples here discussed will be useful also for the Standardization, leading to

harmonized documents more readable for all users. All issues of the discussion will be seen from

the perspective and practice of a European designer. The general principles discussed here are

however valid all over the world.

t
2. THERMAL COMFORT

ip
According to the definition by ASHRAE [32, 33], thermal comfort is the condition of mind that

cr
expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment and is assessed by subjective evaluation. This

us
condition can also be assessed by means of objective investigations looking at the human body as a

thermodynamic system exchanging heat with the surrounding physical environment [34, 35].

2.1 Overall thermal comfort an

The thermal comfort conditions of the human body as a whole can be evaluated by means of the
M
PMV index [36] which integrates the influence of the thermal comfort factors (air temperature, air

velocity, mean radiant temperature, humidity, clothing and activity) into a value on a 7-points scale
ed

[33] (see table 1). The PMV-index is an objective method based on an analysis of the heat balance

equation for the human body together with the influence of the physical environment and expressed
pt

as a subjective sensation. Although PMV index is expressed on a thermal sensation scale, it defines
ce

thermal comfort conditions rather than the thermal sensation. Therefore it can be used as an index

for the thermal environment assessment from the perspective of building and HVAC system per-
Ac

formances.

PMV has been formulated on the basis of experimental studies with people exposed to different

thermal conditions during tests in controlled climatic room [5, 36] and it can be used under the con-

ditions specified in ISO Standard 7730 [37] with limitations of the physical and personal parame-

ters and in the range -2 to +2 (see table 2). PMV can be used for the design of new buildings or for

the assessment of existing buildings. In case of naturally ventilated or free-running buildings in

5

Page 5 of 45
warm climates, several studies have shown [38‒ 41] that the PMV predict a warmer sensation than

found in the studies, as people’s expectations to the thermal environment may be different in these

types of buildings. Fanger and Toftum [38] proposed an extension of the PMV model to free-

running buildings by introducing an expectancy factor depending on previous thermal experiences

of the occupants, to be multiplied with PMV to reach the mean thermal sensation vote of the occu-

t
pants. Also in a new Chinese standard the criteria for thermal comfort in free-running buildings is

ip
based on a modified/corrected PMV-index [42].

cr
Although the PMV index is well known within the scientific and the HVAC-designers communi-

us
ties, it is often not directly used in practice. Instead the thermal comfort specifications are expressed

in terms of temperature and relative humidity rather to take into account the other parameters affect-

ing thermal comfort. an

To estimate the PMV it is required to know the values of four environmental parameters related
M
to the indoor environment as air temperature, mean radiant temperature, air velocity and humidity

(ta, tr, va and pa; humidity may also be expressed as relative humidity) and two personal parameters
ed

as activity and clothing [33, 37]. The four environmental parameters are related to the thermo-

physical conditions of the building envelope and the heating, cooling and ventilation systems. The
pt

two personal parameters (M and Icl) may in practice be difficult to estimate and are assumed in the
ce

design depending on season (summer-winter) and type of space (activity level, dress code etc.).

To express the quality of the thermal environment as a quantitative prediction of the percentage
Ac

of thermally dissatisfied (i.e. people who feel too cool or too warm) the PPD-index (Predicted per-

centage of Dissatisfied) is also used. The PPD is correlated to the PMV value by means of the equa-

tion (1) whose mathematical structure reveals that a little percentage of dissatisfied (5%) can be ex-

pected under thermal neutrality conditions (i.e. PMV=0).

PPD  100  95  exp  0.3353PMV 4  0.2179PMV 2  (1)

Page 6 of 45
2.2 Local discomfort

Thermal discomfort may be caused by the body (as a whole) being too warm or too cool, but also

by a part of the body being too warm or too cool [35]. Therefore, a further condition of thermal

comfort is that there must not be local thermal discomfort [35, 37]. Local thermal discomfort is

usually considered in terms of:

t
 vertical air temperature differences [43];

ip
 warm and cool floors [44];

cr
 draughts [45];

us
 radiant temperature asymmetries [46, 47];

In these cases there is also introduced a percentage of dissatisfied PD as index, whose calculation

depends upon the kind of local discomfort [35, 37].

an
2.3 The role of the relative humidity
M
Humidity is among the four physical variables affecting the thermal sensation and worth discussing

separately. According to Fanger’s theory [5, 48], humidity has only a minor influence on the ther-
ed

mal comfort conditions (thermal neutrality); but humidity has a significant influence on the heat
pt

balance for the human body at high metabolic rates, in hot environments (high operative tempera-

tures) and under transient conditions [35]. At high metabolic rates, an increase in humidity directly
ce

inhibits the evaporation rate. At high operative temperatures, when people feel warm or hot, the

sweating will increase; but a high humidity will inhibit the evaporative heat loss. The humidity has
Ac

also an influence on indoor air quality and other aspects of comfort. In moderate environments, the

relative humidity should not be below 20% because mucous membranes start to dry up and as an

indirect effect the static electricity could occur. At a relative humidity above 70%, the risk for aller-

genic factors and mould growth on surfaces will result in poor indoor air quality [48‒ 50]. In muse-

ums [51, 52] or in environments hosting special electronic devices control of the relative humidity

is a must.
7

Page 7 of 45
3. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CATEGORIES OF THE THERMAL ENVIRONMENT

Criteria for the thermal environments can be expressed in different categories [53, 54] according

to table 3 regarding overall comfort and local discomfort. Each category [53] is briefly summarized

in table 4. The values of the percentage of dissatisfied reported in table 3 are not additive. In fact, it

t
has been proved that the dissatisfaction is mainly due to the higher sensitivity of the thermoregula-

ip
tory system, therefore a subject who complains about one of the local discomfort causes, may also

cr
complain about one or more of the others.

us
The draught rate has to be evaluated at ankle and neck levels which are the most sensitive areas

of the body. Since Turbulence Intensity Tu varies in the range 30-60% in case of typical mixing
an
ventilation, a default value of Tu = 40% is recommended. Therefore, the air velocity value consis-

tent with category II has to be less than 0.16 m/s in winter (lower air temperatures) and 0.25 m/s in
M
summer (higher air temperatures) as shown in figure 2.

. The analysis of the PMV values reported in table 5 highlights an effect of the relative humidity
ed

strongly related to the PMV values. When the PMV value falls in the range between -0.50 and

+0.50, no class shift occurs if the relative humidity value varies with respect to the reference value
pt

of 50%, for PMV values outside the range ±0.50, the relative humidity can play a stronger effect on
ce

the index resulting in a shift of category.

To obtain a reliable assessment of the thermal environment during operation, care has to be de-
Ac

voted to the accuracy of instruments for the measurement of physical quantities [55, 56, 57] – espe-

cially in case of mean radiant temperature [58]. In most cases, it may be easier to measure operative

temperature directly. This issue plays a crucial role (e.g. at commissioning level) when cheap in-

struments with accuracy values near to limits values suggested by ISO 7726 are used [55, 58, 59].,

Uncertainties in the measuring chain [57], procedures adopted for the evaluation of the metabolic

rate (i.e. tables, heart rate measurement, oxygen consumption measurement, double labeled water
8

Page 8 of 45
method, direct calorimetric method) [40, 41, 60] and the evaluation of the basic clothing thermal in-

sulation [61] could make very difficult in field studies to exactly verify a given category. The effect

appears very noticeable when PMV value is in the range between -0.20 and +0.20. In fact, accord-

ing to previous results [56] and as shown in the figures 1 and 2, PMV sensitivity with respect to the

variables is about a pair of decimals.

t
ip
4. THERMAL ENVIRONMENT DESIGN

cr
The values of the variables affecting PMV index can be settled at design stage or measured dur-

us
ing testing or monitoring of the environment and the energy performance of the building. At design

level, users can make reference to the EN 15251 [53] that provides design values allowing the at-

tainment of the desired level of environmental quality. an

For heating and cooling systems, EN 15251 [53] recommends, based on the given ranges of
M
PMV index, an upper (cooling) and lower (heating) design value for the operative temperature, to.

This quantity is defined as an average between the air temperature and the mean radiant tempera-
ed

ture, weighted by the convective, hc, and the radiative, hr, heat transfer coefficients [31, 55]. The

reference equation is the following:

pt

hc  ta  hr  tr
to  (2)
hc  hr
ce

Using operative temperature instead of PMV ranges undoubtedly simplifies the design stage. The
Ac

main concern is that an inattentive designer could make reference to tables and diagrams that can be

applied only under strict and clear conditions (i.e. air velocity, relative humidity, metabolic rate and

clothing insulation values) often not reported in the captions where the word "example" is common-

ly used. In the design it is however also sometimes important to estimate the mean radiant tempera-

ture for evaluation of the temperature distribution in a space [55, 58, 62].

4.1. Mechanically ventilated environments

Page 9 of 45
 In table 6 we have reported the minimum winter and the maximum summer operative tempera-

ture values for different environmental categories for buildings provided with heating and cooling

systems proposed in Annex A.3of EN 15251 [53]. It is noteworthy to highlight that PMV values are

strictly related to the values of each input variable, therefore all values summarized in table 6

should be used only under the specific conditions assumed for clothing, activity, air velocity and

t
humidity.

ip
EN 15251 does not clearly report information about the assumed air velocity and relative humid-

cr
ity values to be used. Therefore designers and professional could be led to think that those tempera-

us
ture values are almost “universal”. Moreover EN 15251 does not specify whether static or dynamic

clothing insulation values have to be used according to EN ISO 9920 [61] (see section 5.4). This ef-
an
fect of clothing insulation is however negligible for seated persons. To evaluate the effect of differ-

ent assumptions for humidity and air velocity, table 6 shows the PMV values corresponding to the
M
operative temperature values suggested by EN 15251 under different air velocity (0.05, 0.10 and

0,15 m/s) and relative humidity (40% and 60%) conditions. According to the data in table 6, the
ed

minimum (maximum) operative temperature values for each class are not consistent with the mini-

mum (maximum) PMV values of the selected class up to lead to a shift in category.
pt

4.2 Naturally ventilated environments

ce

For buildings without mechanical cooling systems and easy access to operable windows, EN

15251 recommends the adaptive comfort approach [63‒ 66]. This method can only be applied to
Ac

spaces where the occupants are engaged in near sedentary physical activities with metabolic rates

within 1.0‒ 1.3 met and without clothing policies, to allow occupants to freely adapt their clothing

insulation to the indoor and outdoor thermo-hygrometric conditions. Mechanical ventilation with

unconditioned air (in summer) may be utilized, but opening and closing of windows shall be of

primary importance to regulate thermal conditions in the space. Finally, spaces may be provided by

a heating system but it must not be in operation.

10

Page 10 of 45
For the calculation of the comfort operative temperature values in summer for the categories la-

belled as I, II and III EN 15251 reports special plots based on experimental data [63, 64] as a func-

tion of the exponentially-weighted running mean of the outdoor temperature. About the applicabil-

ity of these plots, EN 15251 only allows designers to use them under sedentary activity conditions.

If the operative temperature in summer season exceeds the criteria for the specified category, EN

t
15251 requires that either the design document list how much the criteria are exceeded or a cooling

ip
system must be designed using the criteria for a building with mechanical cooling. This must be

cr
accepted by the client.

us
In buildings where there are fans (that can be controlled directly by occupants) or other means for

personal air speed adjustment (e.g. Personal Ventilation systems) the upper temperature limits
an
above-discussed can be increased by a few degrees. The exact temperature correction depends upon

the air speed that is generated by the fan and can be derived from Figure 4 from ISO 7730 [37]. The
M
combinations of air velocity and temperature defined by the curves in this figure result in the same

total heat transfer from the skin. The reference point for these curves is an air temperature value of
ed

26 °C (this is the upper limit for several kind of buildings or spaces in class II [56]), 0.20 m/s air ve-

locity, typical summer clothing (0,5 clo) and sedentary activities (1.2 met). In figure 4, several plots
pt

are depicted corresponding to different values of the difference between the mean radiant and the
ce

air temperature [37]. Observe that EN 15251 [53] reports only one curve referred to uniform condi-

tions (ta=tr=to): this means that such a diagram, even if not explicitly specified – can be applied
Ac

only to uniform conditions, which is often the case in well-designed low energy buildings. Some re-

searches in the field [67] revealed that the Draught Rate, DR decreases with increasing metabolic

rate or if the subject feels slightly warm [64]; anyway these effects have not been quantified yet.

The adaptive approach allows wider intervals of indoor temperature in naturally ventilated build-

ings, which increases the potential for energy savings as a mechanical cooling system is not re-

quired. However, if these intervals are acceptable in practice and will the higher accepted tempera-
11

Page 11 of 45
tures result in decreased performance is still being debated as reviewed by Halawa and van Hoof

[68]. In this review they stressed the vulnerabilities of this approach by trying to highlight hidden

assumptions forming the basis of this theory. In the wake of the ideas by Fanger and Toftum [38]

and some results in the field [41, 69] they recognized the need for more elaborate PMV-model

based solutions that reflect the real sensation in naturally ventilated buildings. As it is not very clear

t
when the adaptive approach can be used and if there are negative effects on indoor air quality be-

ip
cause of increased emission from materials at higher temperatures, the adaptive approach is not al-

cr
ways the best solution to design thermal comfort.

us
4.3.Reference values for energy calculations

EN 15251 Standard reports the ranges of the operative temperature to be used for the dynamic
an
simulation of the buildings (see table 7). Preferred values for design should be those at the middle

of each range; but different values within the ranges are also allowed. In any case the right values
M
for the metabolic rate [60] and the dynamic clothing insulation [37, 56] have to be used. Concerning

the relative humidity designers can make reference to the values in table 8. Usually humidification
ed

or dehumidification are not neededexcept in special buildings (i.e. museums, some health care facil-

ities, process control, paper industry etc.).

pt
ce

5. ASSESSMENT OF THE THERMAL ENVIRONMENT IN EXISTING BUILDINGS

As expressed in section 2, thermal comfort can be investigated from the perspectives of the
Ac

thermal sensation and the heat balance. The investigation of thermal sensation is a precondition of a

correct ergonomic approach. This is why investigations with subjective evaluations from the occu-

pants play a key role. It is recommended that an assessment of the thermal environment requires a

four-step analysis: a) cognitive survey; b) subjective investigation; c) instrumental survey; d) calcu-

lation of the indices.

5.1 The cognitive survey

12

Page 12 of 45
 In large buildings, it is not possible to carry out measurement everywhere. Therefore an adequate

selection of the local environments to be investigated is required. To this purpose, it is necessary to

have the building layout with the specifications of the functions of each environment to allow a fur-

ther inspection and take a look of all the problems that can be encountered within the building.

5.2 The subjective investigation

t
To detect critical situations, the direct judgment of the people exposed to the environment is rec-

ip
ommended. This is why this step should be carried out by means of the administration of suitable

cr
questionnaires designed in compliance with ISO EN 10551 [70], mentioned also in ISO 28802 [71]

us
to allow harmonization of the results. In the past years, several papers dealt with subjective investi-

gations carried out by means of questionnaires not compliant with ISO 10551 [72‒ 73]. Unfortu-
an
nately, results from these studies cannot contribute to a better knowledge on the subjective response

mainly because the questions are formulated in different manners making any reliable comparison
M
very difficult.

5.3. The instrumental survey

ed

To obtain the values of the four physical quantities required for the estimation of comfort and

discomfort indices (see section 2), calibrated instruments compliant with the requirements of ISO
pt

7726 Standard [55] have to be used. The same care should be paid for the selection of heights at
ce

which measurements have to be carried out [55] (e.g. the probes should be placed at ankle, abdo-

men and head levels whose heights from the floor are related to the position of the subject that is
Ac

0.1, 1.1 and 1.7 m for standing and 0.1, 0.6 and 1.1 m for seated persons.

Instrumental surveys are very often carried out by restricting the number of variables measured

to the air temperature and the relative humidity only. As a consequence, if both the relative humid-

ity (that plays a minor role on the thermal sensation in comfortable indoor environments) and the air

velocity are not taken into account, false conclusions are often made from the measurements [74].

Air temperature or better operative temperature and relative humidity alone may be used for re-
13

Page 13 of 45
cording over time (whole working week) to document variations. This must however be supple-

mented with detailed measurements at some work places including air velocity at different heights.

Another facet to take into account about the instrumental surveys is the long term assessment

which will be discussed later in this paper.

5.4 Calculation of Indices

t
The recommended clothing insulation values to be used are for summer 0.50 clo and for winter

ip
1.0 clo. It is however unclear under which conditions during the year the clothing insulation for the

cr
evaluation should be changed. Can you in spring-fall assume that people during the same day

us
change clothing between 0.5 and 1.0 clo? Or will the change be at a specific outside temperature as

a step changes or over some time period? In spaces, where people have a higher activity level
an
(walking, extensive leg-arm movement) the dynamic insulation of clothing should be taking into

account according to ISO EN 9920 Standard. As a consequence, these values should be corrected
M
by the effect of the body movements [75‒ 78] with special equations reported in both ISO EN 7730

[37] and ISO EN 9920 Standards [61] before calculating PMV (by tables or by software reported in
ed

the annexes of ISO EN 7730 Standard). Examples of this effect are shown in table 9.

The correction procedure of static clothing insulation requires the knowledge of the relative air
pt

velocity var as input vale. This issue has been extensively discussed in ISO EN 9920 and ISO EN
ce

7933 [79] taking also into account the direction of the air velocity with respect to the person. Unfor-

tunately, neither ISO 7730 nor EN 15251 Standard report equations for var, therefore it is desirable
Ac

that in the future both standards introduce the most common formula:

var  va  0.0052  M  58.2  (3)

where metabolic rate M is expressed in W m-2.

5.4.1 The role of the operative temperature

14

Page 14 of 45
 From a rigorous perspective, operative temperature has to be evaluated by means of equation (2).

Anyway, ISO 7726 [55] suggests two simplified procedures. The former is based on a weighted av-

erage between air temperature and the mean radiant temperature:

t o  A  t a  (1  A)  t r (4)

where the value for the coefficient A is a function of the relative air velocity (see table 10).

t
ip
The latter consists of the simple average between ta and tr values:

ta  tr
to 

cr
(5)
2

with var < 0.2 m/s and the absolute value of the difference between the radiant temperature and

us
the air temperature less than 4 °C. Equation (4) is reported also in the ASHRAE 55 [33] with the

an
further restriction of a metabolic rate in the range from 1.0 to 1.3 met and in the absence of direct

solar radiation.
M
Equation (4) highlights a very important issue: at high air velocity, when the heat transfer coeffi-

cient by convection is higher, the weight of air temperature is higher than mean radiant temperature.
ed

From the HVAC design perspective this issue has to be carefully taken into account in case of heat-

ing radiant systems where the positive effect on the comfort could be jeopardized by a poor air dis-
pt

tribution.
ce

Table 11 shows PMV values and categories offices (see table 7) obtained by calculating the op-

erative temperature according to Eq. (2) and Eq. (5). Data showed in table 11 confirm that the re-
Ac

duction of the relative weight of radiative heat flow with respect to convective resulting from the

use of Eq. (5) can affect the evaluation of PMV resulting in a shift of the category. Since the differ-

ences can be significant, designers should be aware of the problem and technical standards should

help them in using the best practice to deal with the topic. However in well-designed low energy

buildings the difference between mean radiant temperature and air temperature is less than 2K.

5.4.2 The long-term assessment

15

Page 15 of 45
 It is almost impossible that the PMV value or operative temperature value in a building always

falls into the same category over time and space. Therefore EN 15251 suggests three methods (in-

stead of five as in ISO EN 7730) for the long term assessment:

Method A: this is the easiest method and it is based on the calculation of the number of hours (or the

percentage of hours) during which PMV or operative temperature values exceed comfort ranges.

t
Method B: in this case the time during which the actual operative temperature exceeds the specified

ip
range during the occupied hours is weighted by a factor depending upon how many degrees the

cr
range has been exceeded. The procedure is based on the calculation of a weight coefficient wf de-

us
fined as following:

wf = 0 (6)
an
if the operative temperature value falls in the range between to,limit,lower and ÷ to,limit,upper;

wf = to-to,limit (7)
M
if the operative temperature value is above the comfort range.

For a characteristic period during a year, the product of the weighting factor and time ϑ is summed.
ed

The summation of the product ϑ w has the unit of hours.

Warm period:
pt

ϑ w = Σ wf ⋅ ϑ for to > to,limit,upper (8a)

ce

Cold period:

ϑ w = Σ wf ⋅ ϑ for to < to,limit,lower (8b)

Ac

Method C: procedure is similar to Method B, but the weighted coefficient is calculated on the basis

of the PMV and PPD values rather than the operative temperature. Starting from a PMV-

distribution on a yearly basis and the relation between PMV and PPD, wf is calculated according to:

wf = 0 (9)

if the PMV values is within the comfort ranges;

16

Page 16 of 45
 PPDactualPMV
wf  (10)
PPDPMV limit

if the PMV values exceed the comfort ranges;

where:

PPDactualPMV is the PPD value corresponding to the actual PMV value;

t
PPDPMVlimit is the PPD value corresponding to PMVlimit.

ip
cr
For the calculation of the weighted time eq. (8a) and (8b) of the method B can be used by substi-

tuting PMV to the operative temperature.

us
These methods – that require a continuous microclimatic monitoring over the time or used on re-

an
sults from dynamic building simulation programs – have to be dealt with carefully especially be-

cause EN 15251 does not reports limit values for the physical quantities. Once the weighted values
M
have been calculated there is no information on acceptable criteria for the calculated values and the

relation to the discomfort sensation and the environmental category.

ed

Another issue is that equations (6) to (9) for the calculation of the weighting factor wf are not

consistent with those reported in ISO 7730 Standard [37]. In fact, while EN 15251 takes into ac-
pt

count the situations in which the operative temperature or the PMV exceed comfort ranges, ISO
ce

7730 makes use of a more complicated criteria not easy to deal with. In particular, for method B,

ISO 7730 [37] requires that:

Ac

wf = 1 (11)

if the operative temperature value is equal to the upper or the lower value of the comfort range;

to  to,limit
wf  1  (12)
to,optimal  to,limit

if ǀ toǀ > ǀ to,optimalǀ . Unfortunately ISO 7730 does not report a definition for to,optimal.

For the method C the weighting factor is obtained by the following equations:

17

Page 17 of 45
 wf = 1 (13)

if the PMV value is equal to the upper or the lower value of the comfort range;

PPDactualPMV
wf  (14)
PPDPMV limit

for ǀ PMVǀ > ǀ PMV,limitǀ .

t
On the basis of the comparison of the long term procedures reported in EN 15251 and EN ISO 7730

ip
it is inconceivable that a common designer could use procedures not consistent with each other.

cr
Therefore, in the future big efforts have to be made in order to produce standards consistent each

other and really able to help operators in the field to follow the best practices to assess the IEQ.

us
6. CONCLUSIONS an
This paper has dealt with some of the main topics of thermal comfort which cannot be neglected
M
by HVAC designers and by all people involved in the management of the thermal environment as

engineers, architects, occupational doctors and industrial hygienists.

ed

The methods for evaluating thermal comfort are based on a robust theory established more than

40 years ago and regulated by several standards at European and International level. These stan-
pt

dards are the clear evidence of the complexity of the topic and the high level of competence re-
ce

quired to deal with it.

At design level, it has been stressed how input values for physical and personal parameters
Ac

suggested by standards, being merely examples, have to be used only under specific conditions.

This is particularly important for the operative temperature, whose design values strongly affect the

energy calculations, the relative humidity and clothing insulation.

For the assessment in existing buildings, the effect of the measurement/evaluation of the main

variables affecting the thermal sensation has been discussed. Specifically:

18

Page 18 of 45
  Measurement errors due to poor metrological performances of instruments (i.e. low

accuracy, measurement chain, etc.) or wrong measurement protocols (wrong positions

and heights, incorrect evaluation of some variable and so on) can result in significant

mistakes when PMV values are in the range between -0.20 and +0.20.

 The uncertainties due to the evaluation of the personal parameters metabolic rate and

t
basic clothing insulation are very significant.

ip
The critical discussion in the paper should help all involved users to navigate the complex and

cr
varied world of standards in the field of thermal environment. The discussion will also be useful for

us
the standardization committees, allowing the preparation of clearer and well-harmonized standards

in continuous evolution.
an
M
SYMBOLS

Ab Body surface area, m2

ed

fcl Clothing surface area factor, dimensionless

hc Convective heat transfer coefficient, W m-2 K-1

pt

hr Radiative heat transfer coefficient, W m-2 K-1

ce

Icl Basic clothing thermal insulation, clo

Icl,dyn Dynamic clothing thermal insulation, clo

Ac

Icl,r Resultant clothing thermal insulation, clo

M Metabolic rate, W/m2

pa Water vapour partial pressure, Pa

PMV Predicted Mean Vote, dimensionless

PPD Predicted Percentage of Dissatisfied, %

19

Page 19 of 45
 RH Relative humidity, %

SD Standard deviation of the air velocity, m·s-1

ta Air temperature, °C

ta,0.1 Air temperature measured at 0.1 m from the floor, °C

ta,1.1 Air temperature measured at 1.1 m from the floor, °C

t
tcl Clothing surface temperature, °C

ip
tf Floor temperature, °C

cr
to Operative temperature, °C

us
to,max,summer Maximum operative temperature in summer, °C

to,min,winter Minimum operative temperature in winter, °C

tpr an
Plane radiant temperature, °C

tr Mean radiant temperature, °C

M
tsk Mean skin temperature, °C

Tu Local turbulence intensity, %

ed

va Air velocity, m s-1

va,l Local mean air velocity, m s-1

pt

var Relative air velocity, m s-1

ce

wa Humidity ratio, g/kg

GREEK LETTERS
Ac

t Air temperature increment, °C

tpr Radiant asymmetry, °C

(PMV) PMV deviation from the nominal value, dimensionless

η External mechanical efficiency, dimensionless

ϑ Time, h

20

Page 20 of 45
 Θw Time weighted, h

REFERENCES

1. L. Beranek, Revised criteria for noise in buildings, Noise Control Engineering Journal 3

t
(1957) 19-27.

ip
2. L.F Yerges, Sound, Noise, and Vibration Control, Van Nostrand Reinhold, London, 1969.

cr
3. C.P. Yaglou, W.E. Miller, Effective temperature with clothing, ASHVE Transactions 31

us
(1925) 89-99.

4. A.P. Gagge, L.P. Herrington, C.E.A Winslow, Thermal interchanges between the human
an
body and its environment American Journal of Hygiene 26(1) (1937) 84-102.

5. P.O. Fanger, Thermal Comfort, Danish Technical Press, Copenhagen, 1970.

M
6. R.J. Hawkes, D.L Loe, E. Rowlands, A note towards the understanding of lighting quality,

Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society 8 (1979) 111-120.

ed

7. J.A. Veitch, Psychological processes influencing lighting quality. Journal of the Illuminating

Engineering Society 30(1) (2001) 124-140.

pt

8. C.P. Yaglou, E.C. Riley, D.I Coggins, Ventilation requirements, ASHRAE Transactions 42
ce

(1936) 133–162.

9. P.O. Fanger, Introduction of the olf and decipol units to quantify air pollution perceived by
Ac

humans indoors and outdoors, Energy and Buildings 12 (1988) 1–6.

10. C. Bernard, Introduction à l'étude de la médicine éxpérimentale, Éditions Garnier-

Flammarion, Paris, 1966.

11. ASHRAE. Proposed New Guideline 10, Criteria for Achieving Acceptable Indoor Environ-

ments. GPC 10P Public Review Draft, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air

Conditioning, Atlanta, 2010.

21

Page 21 of 45
12. EN 15251. Indoor environmental input parameters for design and assessment of energy per-

formance of buildings addressing indoor air quality, thermal environment, lighting and

acoustics. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 2007.

13. F.R. d’Ambrosio Alfano, E. Ianniello, B.I. Palella, G. Riccio G, Thermal comfort design in

indoor environments: A comparison between EU and USA approaches. HB 2006 - Healthy

t
Buildings: Creating a Healthy Indoor Environment for People, Proceedings 2, pp. 1-6.

ip
14. R. Haslam, P. Waterson, Ergonomics and Sustainability, Ergonomics 56(3) (2013)

cr
343‒ 347.

us
15. A. Hedge, J.A, Green buildings need good ergonomics. Ergonomics 56(3) (2013) 492‒ 506.

16. E. Grandjean, Fitting the task to the Man. Taylor and Francis, London and Philadelphia,

1986.
an
17. W. Karwowski, Ergonomics and human factors: the paradigms for science, engineering, de-
M
sign, technology and management of human-compatible systems. Ergonomics 48(5) (2005)

436-463.
ed

18. P. Cenni, F.R. d’Ambrosio Alfano, L’evoluzione del percorso ergonomico in ingegneria.

Atti del III Convegno Nazionale di Storia dell’Ingegneria. S. D’Agostino (editor). Cuzzolin,
pt

Napoli, 2010 (in Italian).

ce

19. Parliament of the European Union, Council Directive of 16 December 2002 on the energy

performance of buildings (2002/91/EC).

Ac

20. Parliament of the European Union, Directive 2010/31/EU L of 19 May 2010 on the energy

performance of building (recast), 2012.

21. Parliament of the European Union, Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of

the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources

and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC.

22

Page 22 of 45
22. One Hundred Ninth Congress of United States of America, Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub-

lic Law 109–58. August 8, 2005.

23. Republic of China, Renewable Energy Law of the People's Republic of China, Adopted at

the 14th Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress on

February 28, 2005, http://www.china.org.cn/china/LegislationsForm2001-2010/2011-

t
02/14/content_21917464.htm (Accessed on 2013 November, 22th).

ip
24. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enlarg/med/horizon_2020_en.htm (Accessed on 2013, No-

cr
vember 10th).

us
25. http://www.h2020.net (Accessed on 2013, May 10th).

26. REN 21 (Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century), Renewables 2012,

Global Status Report, an

http://www.ren21.net/Portals/0/documents/Resources/%20GSR_2012%20highres.pdf (Ac-
M
cessed on 2013 December 22).

27. US Environmental Protection Agency, National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency Vision
ed

for 2025: A Framework for Change (Executive Summary).

http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/documents/suca/vision.pdf (Accessed on 2013 November

pt

22).
ce

28. US President Barack Obama, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic

Performance, October 5 2009.

Ac

29. W.J. Fisk, Health and productivity gains from better indoor environments and their relation-

ship with building energy efficiency, Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 25(1)

(2000) 537-566.

30. J. Andersson, A. Boerstra, D. Clements-Croome, K. Fitzner, S.O. Hanssen, Indoor Climates

and Productivity in Offices, REHVA Guidebook 6, Wargocki P. and Seppänen O. Editors,

2006.
23

Page 23 of 45
31. O.A. Seppanen, Association of ventilation rates and CO2 concentrations with health and

other responses in commercial and institutional buildings. Indoor Air 9(4) (1999) 226-252.

32. ASHRAE, Thermal Comfort In: ASHRAE Fundamentals, Ch. 9, American Society of Heat-

ing, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, 2009.

33. ASHRAE, Thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy. ANSI/ASHRAE Stan-

t
dard 55, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers, At-

ip
lanta, 2013.

cr
34. A.P. Gagge, A.C. Burton and H.C. Bazett, A practical system of units for the description of the

us
heat exchange of man with his thermal environment, Science NY 94 (1941) 428-430.

35. K.C. Parsons, Human Thermal Environments: The Effects of Hot, Moderate, and Cold Envi-

an
ronments on Human Health, Comfort and Performance. 2nd ed., Taylor and Francis, Lon-

don, 2003.
M
36. P.O. Fanger, Calculation of Thermal Comfort: Introduction of a Basic Comfort Equation.

ASHRAE Trans 73(2) (1967) 1‒ 20.

ed

37. ISO 7730. Ergonomics of the thermal environment - Analytical determination and interpre-

tation of thermal comfort using calculation of the PMV and PPD indices and local thermal
pt

comfort. Geneva: International Standardization Organization, 2005.

ce

38. P.O. Fanger, J. Toftum, Extension of the PMV model to non-air-conditioned buildings in

warm climates, Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 533‒ 536.

Ac

39. N.H. Wong, S.S. Khoo, Thermal comfort in classrooms in the tropics, Energy and Buildings

35 (2003) 337-51.

40. M.A. Humphreys, J.F. Nicol, The validity of ISO-PMV for predicting comfort votes in

every-day thermal environments, Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 667-684.

41. J. van Hoof, Forty years of Fanger’s model of thermal comfort: comfort for all? Indoor Air

18 (2008) 182-201.
24

Page 24 of 45
42. B. Li, R. Yao, Q. Wang, Y. Pan, W. Yu, The Chinese evaluation standard for the indoor

thermal environment in free-running buildings (Conference Paper), Proceedings of 7th Win-

dsor Conference: The Changing Context of Comfort in an Unpredictable World 2012, 15p.

43. B.W. Olesen, Local Thermal Discomfort Technical review, Bruel & Kjaer English ed. (1)

(1985) 3-42.

t
44. B.W. Olesen, Thermal Comfort Requirements for Floors Occupied by People with Bare

ip
Feet, ASHRAE Transactions 83(2) (1977) 41-57.

cr
45. P.O. Fanger, C.L.K. Pedersen, Discomfort due to air velocities in spaces, Proceedings Of

us
Meeting of Commission B1, B2, E1 of International Institute of Refrigeration 4 (1977) 289-296.

46. D.A. McIntyre, Indoor climate, Applied Science, London, 1980.

an
47. B.W. Olesen, Local Thermal Discomfort, Bruel and Kjaer, Technical Review no 1, Copen-

hagen, 1985.
M
48. P.O. Fanger, Air humidity, comfort and health, Proceedings of Meeting of IIF-IIR (Com-

mission E1), Paris, France (2003) 192-195.

ed

49. D.P. Wyon, L. Fang, L. Lagercrantz, P.O. Fanger, Experimental Determination of the Limit-

ing Criteria for Human Exposure to Low Winter Humidity Indoors (RP-1160). HVAC&R
pt

Research 12(2) (2006) 201-213.

ce

50. L.G. Berglund, Comfort and Humidity, ASHRAE Journal 40(8) (1998) 35-41.

51. G. Pavlogeorgatos, Environmental parameters in museums, Building and Environment 38

Ac

(2003) 1457–1462.

52. L. Bellia, A. Capozzoli, P. Mazzei, F. Minichiello, A comparison of HVAC systems for

artwork conservation, International Journal of Refrigeration 30 (8) (2007) 1439-1451.

53. EN 15251. Indoor environmental input parameters for design and assessment of energy per-

formance of buildings addressing indoor air quality, thermal environment, lighting and

acoustics. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 2007.

25

Page 25 of 45
54. B.W. Olesen, The philosophy behind EN 15251: Indoor environmental criteria for design

and calculation of energy performance of buildings, Energy and Buildings 39 (2007)

740‒ 749.

55. ISO 7726. Ergonomics of the thermal environment - Instruments for measuring physical

quantities. Geneva: International Standardization Organization, 1998.

t
56. F.R. d'Ambrosio Alfano, B.I. Palella, G. Riccio, The Role of Measurement Accuracy on the

ip
Thermal Environment Assessment by means of PMV Index, Building and Environment

cr
46(7) (2011) 1361-1369.

us
57. F.R. d’Ambrosio Alfano, B.I. Palella, G. Riccio, The role of measurement accuracy on the

heat stress assessment according to ISO 7933: 2004, WIT Transactions on Biomedicine and

Health 11 (2007) 115‒124. an

58. F.R. d’Ambrosio Alfano, M. Dell’Isola, B.I. Palella, G. Riccio, A. Russi, On the Measure-
M
ment of the Mean Radiant Temperature and its Influence on the Indoor Thermal Environ-

ment Assessment, Building and Environment 63 (2013) 79-88.

ed

59. M. Dell’Isola, A. Frattolillo, B.I. Palella, G. Riccio, Measurement Uncertainties Influence

On The Thermal Environment Assessment, International Journal of Thermophysics 33(8-9)

pt

(2012) 1616‒ 1632.

ce

60. ISO 8996. Ergonomics of the thermal environment - Determination of metabolic rate. Ge-

neva: International Standardization Organization, 2004.

Ac

61. ISO 9920. Ergonomics of the thermal environment – Estimation of the thermal insulation

and evaporative resistance of a clothing ensemble. Geneva: International Standardization

Organization, 2009.

26

Page 26 of 45
62. G. Cannistraro, G. Franzitta, C. Giaconia, G. Rizzo, Algorithms for the calculation of the

view factors between human body and rectangular surfaces in parallelepiped environments,

Energy and Buildings 19(1) (1992) 51-60.

63. G.S. Brager, R.J. de Dear, Thermal adaptation in the built environment: a literature review,

Energy and Buildings 27(1) (1998) 83-96.

t
64. R.J. de Dear, G.S. Brager, Developing an adaptive model of thermal comfort and preference,

ip
ASHRAE Transactions 104(1A) (1998) 145-167.

cr
65. M.A. Humphreys, J.F. Nicol, Understanding the adaptive approach to thermal comfort.

us
ASHRAE Transactions 104(1B) (1998) 991-1004.

66. R.J. de Dear, T. Akimoto, E.A. Arens, G. Brager, C. Candido, K.W.D. Cheong, B. Li, N.
an
Nishihara, S.C. Sekhar, S. Tanabe, J. Toftum, H. Zhang, Y. Zhu, Progress in Thermal Com-

fort Research Over the Last Twenty Years, Indoor Air 23(6) (2013) 442-461.
M
67. J.L. Niu, Effects of turbulent air on human thermal sensations in a warm isothermal envi-

ronment, Indoor Air 10(4) (2000) 289-296.

ed

68. E. Halawa, J. van Hoof, The Adaptive Approach to Thermal Comfort: a critical overview,

Energy and Buildings 51 (2012) 101-110.

pt

69. F.R. d’Ambrosio Alfano, E. Ianniello, B.I. Palella, PMV–PPD and acceptability in naturally
ce

ventilated schools, Building and Environment 67 (2013) 129-137.

70. ISO 10551. Ergonomics of the thermal environment ‒ Assessment of the influence of the
Ac

thermal environment using subjective judgement scales. Geneva: International Standardiza-

tion Organization, 1995.

71. ISO 28802. Ergonomics of the physical environment ‒ Assessment of environments by

means of an environmental survey involving physical measurements of the environment and

subjective responses of people. Geneva: International Standardization Organization, 2012.

27

Page 27 of 45
72. L. Zagreus, C. Huizenga, E. Arens, D. Lehrer D, Listening to the occupants: a Web-based

indoor environmental quality survey, Indoor Air 14(8) (2004) 65-74

73. C. Peretti, V. De Giuli, M. De Carli, Analisi critica dei questionari come approccio

soggettivo per la valutazione della qualità degli ambienti interni, Proceedings of 65°

Congresso Nazionale ATI, 13-17 Settembre 2010, Domus De Maria (Cagliari), Italy. ISBN

t
8890411632 (abstract in Italian).

ip
74. F.R. d’Ambrosio Alfano, B.I. Palella, G. Riccio, Thermal Environment Assessment Reli-

cr
ability Using Temperature-Humidity Indices, Industrial Health 49 (2011) 95–106.

us
75. G. Havenith, R. Heus, W.A. Lotens, Changes in clothing heat and vapour resistance due to

posture, movement and wind. Proceedings of 13th Symposium on Man-Thermal environ-

an
ment Systems, Hokkaido University, 1989, 194-197.

76. G. Havenith, R. Heus, W.A. Lotens, Clothing ventilation, vapour resistance and permeabil-
M
ity index: changes due to posture, movement and wind, Ergonomics 33(8) (1990) 989-1005

77. G. Havenith, H. Nilsson, Correction of clothing insulation for movement and wind effects, a
ed

meta-analysis, European Journal of Applied Physiology 92 (2004) 636-640.

pt

78. G. Havenith, H. Nilsson, Correction of clothing insulation for movement and wind effects, a

meta-analysis, European Journal of Applied Physiology 93 (2005) 506 (erratum).

ce

79. ISO 7933. Ergonomics of the thermal environment – Analytical determination and interpre-

tation of heat stress using calculation of the predicted heat strain – ISO 7933 Standard. Ge-
Ac

neva: International Standardization Organization, 2004.

28

Page 28 of 45
*Highlights (for review)

HIGHLIGHTS

We discuss criteria for designing HVAC systems for thermal comfort and energy saving.

We stress the need of a high competence required to deal with thermal comfort issues.

t
We analyze effects of wrong or incomplete input data on design and verification.

ip
We discuss procedure required for comfort indices.

cr
Best practice rules to navigate in the complex world of Standards are proposed.

us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Page 29 of 45
Figure 1. Map of the main ISO and CEN standards in the field of the Ergonomics of The Thermal

Environment.

Figure 2. PMV sensitivity to the accuracies of physical parameters and the whole of parameters af-

t
fecting the thermal sensation for light activity (M = 1.2 met) as a function of the air temperature in

ip
summer (A) and in winter conditions (B) [56]. In the bottom psychrometric charts, ta-wa curves for

cr
a fixed PMV value have been depicted. Continuous lines (dotted) are referred to required (desira-

us
ble) accuracies suggested by ISO 7726 Standard [56].

an
Figure 3. PMV sensitivity to the accuracy of each quantity required for the thermal environment as-

sessment according to ISO 7730 Standard [37] at different PMV nominal values [56]. M = 1.2 met.
M
a)
Figure 4. Air velocity required to offset increased temperature under summer season. For seden-
ed

tary activities Δt < 3 °C and va < 0.82 m/s are required. b) the values on the curves are referred to the

difference tr – ta.
pt
ce
Ac

42

Page 30 of 45
Table 1. 7-points ASHRAE thermal sensation scale [33].

+3 Hot
+2 Warm
+1 Slightly warm
0 Neutral

t
-1 Slightly cool

ip
-2 Cool
-3 Cold

cr
us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

30

Page 31 of 45
Table 2. Ranges of application for the PMV model [37].

Parameter Value Unit

Air temperature 10‒ 30 °C
Mean radiant temperature 10‒ 40 °C
Water vapour partial pressure 0‒ 2700 Pa
Air velocity 0‒ 1.0 m s-1
0.8‒ 4.0 met
Metabolic rate
46‒ 232 W m-2

t
0‒ 2.0 clo

ip
Clothing thermal insulation
0‒ 0.310 m K W-1
2

PMV -2‒ 2 1

cr
us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

31

Page 32 of 45
Table 3. Categories of the overall thermal comfort and local discomfort according to ISO 7730 [37]
and EN 15251 [53] Standards. Please note that the category IV is not considered for the local dis-
comfort.

OVERALL THERMAL COMFORT

Index Condition
ISO 7730

t
Category Category Category

ip
I (A) II (B) III (C)
PMV -0.20 ‒ 0.20 -0.50 ‒ 0.50 -0.70 ‒ 0.70

cr
PPD <6% <10% <15%
EN 15251
Category Category Category Category

us
I II III IV
PMV -0.20 ‒ 0.20 -0.50 ‒ 0.50 -0.70 ‒ 0.70
PPD <6% <10% <15% ≥15%
an
LOCAL DISCOMFORT
Condition
Category Category Category
M
Parameter I II III
PD PD PD
Limit Limit Limit
(%) (%) (%)
ed

ta,1.1 - ta,0.1 <2 °C <3 <3 °C <5 <4 °C <10

tpr,warm ceiling <5 °C <5 <5 °C <5 <7 °C <10
tpr,cool ceiling <14 °C <5 <14 °C <5 <18 °C <10
tpr,warm wall <23 °C <5 <23 °C <5 <35 °C <10
pt

tpr,cold wall <10 °C <5 <10 °C <5 <13°C <10

va (DR) - <10 - <20 - <30
19 ‒ 29 °C 19 ‒ 29 °C 17 ‒ 31 °C
ce

tf
Ac

32

Page 33 of 45
Table 4. Categories considered in ISO 7730 [37] and EN 15251 [53] Standards.

Category Explanation
High level of expectation. Recommended for spaces occupied by very sensitive and
I fragile persons with special requirements like handicapped, sick, very young child-
ren and elderly persons
II Normal level of expectation. Should be used for new buildings and renovations
III Acceptable, moderate level of expectation. May be used for existing buildings
Values outside the criteria for the above categories. This category should only be ac-
IV

t
cepted for a limited part of the year

ip
cr
us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

33

Page 34 of 45
Table 5. Effect of the relative humidity on the assessment of the thermal environment by means of
the PMV index at M =1.2 met and va = 0.10 m/s. In grey are highlightened situation such as chang-
ing RH value from the usual 50% results in a category shift of the environment.

Icl.dyn RH ta= tr= to PMV

CATEGORY
(clo) (%) (°C) (-)
30 -0.1 I
0.5 50 25.3 0.0 I

t
70 +0.1 I

ip
30 -0.1 I
1 50 22.0 0.0 I
70 +0.1 I

cr
30 0.1 I
0.5 50 25.9 0.2 I
70 0.4 II

us
30 0.1 I
1 50 22.9 0.2 I
70 0.3 II
30 -0.3 II
0.5 50
70
30
an
24.6 -0.2
-0.1
-0.3
I
I
II
1 50 21.6 -0.2 I
M
70 -0.1 I
30 0.3 II
0.5 50 26.8 0.5 II
70 0.7 II
ed

30 0.4 II
1 50 24.2 0.5 II
70 0.6 II
30 -0.6 II
pt

0.5 50 23.7 -0.5 II

70 -0.4 II
30 -0.6 II
ce

1 50 19.8 -0.5 II
70 -0.4 II
30 -0.8 -
0.5 50 23.0 -0.7 III
Ac

70 -0.6 II
30 -0.8 -
1 50 18.9 -0.7 III
70 -0.6 II
30 0.5 II
0.5 50 27.4 0.7 III
70 0.9 -
30 0.6 II
1 50 25.1 0.7 III
70 0.9 -

34

Page 35 of 45
Table 6. Examples of design values for the operative temperature in uniform environments
(ta=tr=to) according to EN 15251 Standard [53]. Icl,dyn = 0.5 clo (1.0 clo) in summer (winter) condi-
tions. In bold PMV values resulting in a category inconsistent with that reported in EN 15251 Stan-
dard have been highlightened. Relative velocity has been calculated as: var = va+vw being vw =
0.0052 (M-58.2) with M in W m-2. (A) Landscaped office (M=1.2 met); (B) Kindergarten (M=1.4
met); (C) Department store (M=1.6 met).

to,min,winter
Type Class va = 0.05 m s-1 va = 0.10 m s-1 va = 0.15 m s-1

t
(°C)

ip
RH=40% RH=60% RH=40% RH=60% RH=40% RH=60%
I 21.0 -0.2 -0.1 -0.3 -0.2 -0.4 -0.3
A II 20.0 -0.4 -0.3 -0.5 -0.4 -0.6 -0.5

cr
III 19.0 -0.6 -0.5 -0.8 -0.7 -0.8 -0.7
I 19.0 -0.3 -0.3 -0.4 -0.3 -0.5 -0.4

us
B II 17.5 -0.6 -0.5 -0.7 -0.6 -0.8 -0.7
III 16.5 -0.8 -0.7 -0.9 -0.8 -1.0 -0.9
I 17.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.4 -0.3 -0.4 -0.4
C II
III
16.0
15.0
to,max,summer
-0.6
-0.8
-0.5
-0.7
an -0.7
-0.8
-0.6
-0.8
-0.7
-0.9
-0.6
-0.8
va = 0.05 m s-1 va = 0.10 m s-1 va = 0.15 m s-1
(°C)
M
RH=40% RH=60% RH=40% RH=60% RH=40% RH=60%
I 25.5 0.1 0.3 0.00 0.1 -0.1 0.0
A II 26.0 0.3 0.43 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2
ed

III 27.0 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.6

I 24.5 0.1 0.2 -0.0 0.1 -0.1 0.0
B II 25.5 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.3
III 26.0 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.5
pt

I 24.0 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1

C II 25.0 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4
ce

III 26.0 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.7

Ac

35

Page 36 of 45
Table 7. Temperature ranges for hourly calculation of coolingand heating energy in three categories
of indoor environment [53].

Operative Operative
temperature temperature
Type of building or space Category range for heating range for cooling
(Icl,dyn = 1.0 clo) (Icl,dyn= 0.5 clo)
(°C) (°C)
Residential buildings, living spaces (bed room’s liv- I 21.0 – 25.0 23.5 – 25.5
ing rooms etc.) II 20.0 – 25.0 23.0 – 26.0

t
Sedentary activity ~1,2 met III 18.0 – 25.0 22.0 – 27.0

ip
Residential buildings, other spaces (kitchens, stor- I 18.0 – 25.0 -
ages etc.) II 16.0 – 25.0 -
14.0 – 25.0

cr
Standing-walking activity ~1,5 met III -
Offices and spaces with similar activity (single of- I 21.0 – 23.0 23.5 – 25.5
fices, conference rooms, auditorium, cafeteria, res- II 20.0 – 24.0 23.0 – 26.0

us
taurants)
Sedentary activity ~1,2 met III 19.0 – 25.0 22.0 – 27.0
I 19.0 – 21.0 22.5 – 24.5
Kindergarten
II 17.5 – 22.5 21.5 – 25.5
Standing-walking activity ~1,4 met

Department store
anIII
I
16.5 – 23.5
17.5 – 20.5
21.0 – 26.0
22.0 – 24.0
II 16.0 – 22.0 21.0 – 25.0
Standing-walking activity ~1,6 met
M
III 15.0 – 23.0 20.0 – 26.0
ed
pt
ce
Ac

36

Page 37 of 45
Table 8. Example of recommended design criteria [54] for the humidity in occupied spaces if hu-
midification or dehumidification systems are installed.

Design relative Design relative humid-

humidity for the ity for the
Type of building/space Category
dehumidification humidification
(%) (%)
Spaces where humidity criteria are set I 50 30
by human occupancy. Special spaces II 60 25
(museums, churches etc.) may require III 70 20

t
other limits IV >70 <20

ip
cr
us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

37

Page 38 of 45
Table 9. Dynamic clothing insulation values Icl,dyn calculated for typical indoor activities as a func-
tion of the air velocity and for standard basic clothing insulation values (Icl = 0.50 clo in summer
and Icl = 1.0 clo in winter).

Icl M va Icl,dyn va Icl,dyn va Icl,dyn

(clo) (met) (m/s) (clo) (m/s) clo (m/s) (clo)
1.2 0.41 0.42 0.42
1.4 0.40 0.40 0.40
0.5

t
1.6 0.39 0.39 0.39

ip
1.8 0.38 0.38 0.38
0.05 0.20 0.30
1.2 0.97 0.96 0.94

cr
1.4 0.94 0.92 0.91
1.0
1.6 0.91 0.89 0.88
1.8 0.88 0.86 0.85

us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

38

Page 39 of 45
Table 10. Values for A as a function of the relative air velocity var [55].

var (m/s) < 0.2 0.2 to 0.6 0.6 to 1.0

A 0.5 0.6 0.7

t
ip
cr
us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

39

Page 40 of 45
Table 11. Effect of the operative temperature assessment on the PMV evaluation. M=1.2 met,
va=0.10 m/s, R.H.=40% in winter (60% in summer), Icl,dyn = 1.0 clo in winter (0.50 clo in summer).
to(2) and to(5) are the operative temperature values calculated with equations (2) and (5). In bold the
onset of a category shift has been highlightened.
Summer
n. ta tr to(5) to(2)
PMV category
(°C) (°C) (°C)
1 23.5 27.5 25.3 -0.1 I
2 24.5 26.5 25.4 -0.0 I

t
3 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 0.0 I

ip
4 26.5 24.5 25.6 0.1 I
5 27.5 23.5 25.8 0.2 I
6 24 28 25.8 0.1 I

cr
7 25 27 25.9 0.1 I
8 26 26 26 26 0.2 II

us
9 27 25 26.1 0.3 II
10 28 24 26.3 0.4 II
11 25 29 26.8 0.4 II
12 26 28 26.9 0.5 II
13
14
27
28
27
26
27 an27
27.1
0.6
0.6
III
III
15 29 25 27.3 0.8 IV
M
Winter
1 18 22 19.7 -0.8 IV
2 19 21 19.9 -0.7 III
3 20 20 20 20 -0.6 III
ed

4 21 19 20.2 -0.6 III

5 22 18 20.3 -0.5 II
6 19 23 20.7 -0.5 II
pt

7 20 22 20.9 -0.4 II
8 21 21 21 21 -0.4 II
9 22 20 21.1 -0.3 II
ce

10 23 19 21.3 -0.3 II
Ac

40

Page 41 of 45
 MODERATE
ENVIRONMENTS
EN ISO 7730 – PMV/PPD
COLD HOT
ENVIRONMENTS ENVIRONMENTS
EN ISO 11079 – IREQ EN 27243 – WBGT
EN ISO 7933 – PHS
SUPPORT STANDARDS

t
EN ISO 11399 – Principles and application
EN ISO 13731 – Definitions

ip
EN ISO 7726 - Instruments
EN ISO 9920 – Clothing
EN ISO 8996 – Metabolic rate

cr
EN ISO 9886 – Physiological measurements
EN ISO 10551 – Subjective judgement

us
APPLICATIONS
CONTACT
SURFACES ISO 14415 – People with
special requirements
EN ISO 13732-1 – Hot
ISO 14405 – Vehicles
ISO 13732-2 – Moderate
EN ISO 13732-3 – Cold
an EN ISO 15265 – Risk
assessment
M
Figure 1
ed
pt
ce
Ac

44

Page 42 of 45
 24.0 25.5 27.0 28.5 19.5 21.0 22.5 24.0 25.5
1.00 1.00
A B
0.75 0.75
0.50 0.50
ta
0.25 0.25
tr
0.00 va 0.00
-0.25 pa -0.25

t
-0.50 -0.50

ip
-0.75 -0.75

1.20 A B 1.20

cr
0.90 0.90
0.60 M 0.60

us
(PMV)

0.30 Icl 0.30

0.00 ta 0.00
tr
-0.30 -0.30
-0.60
-0.90
va
pa
an -0.60
-0.90
-1.20 -1.20
M
25 A B 25
Humidity ratio, wa (g/kg)

20 20
ed

RH=70%

15 RH=70% 15
+0.
PM

+0.

+0.
60

PM

+0.
V=

35
-0.3

60

10 10
-0.6

35
-0.3
pt
0 ,0
5

=0

RH=30%
0

-0.6
0

.0 0
0

5 RH=30% 5
ce

0 0
24.0 25.5 27.0 28.5 19.5 21.0 22.5 24.0 25.5
Air temperature, ta (°C)
Ac

Figure 2

45

Page 43 of 45
 0.3
PMV=-0,60
0.2

0.1
PMVm

0.0

-0.1

t
ip
-0.2

cr
-0.3
pa tr,des ta,des va,des ta,req Icl M va,req tr,req
0.3

us
PMV=0,00
0.2

0.1
an
PMVm

0.0
M
-0.1

-0.2
ed

-0.3
pa tr,des ta,des va,des ta,req Icl M va,req tr,req
0.3
pt

PMV=+0,60
0.2
ce

0.1
PMVm

0.0
Ac

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3
pa tr,des ta,des va,des ta,req Icl M va,req tr,req

Figure 3

46

Page 44 of 45
 1.4
-5 °Cb
-10 °Cb
1.2
0 °Cb
5 °Cb
1.0 10 °Cb
Airvelocity v a , m/s

a
0.8

t
ip
0.6

cr
0.4

0.2

us
0.0
0.0 1.1 2.2 3.3 4.4
an
temperature rise above 26 °C t, °C
M
Figure 4
ed
pt
ce
Ac

47

Page 45 of 45