Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jobe

Numerical simulation for optimization of the indoor environment of an

occupied office building using double-panel and ventilation radiator
Ghogare Abhijeet Ganesh a, Shobha Lata Sinha a, Tikendra Nath Verma b, *
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Raipur, 492013, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Manipur, 795004, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This study focuses on the numerical analysis by means of computational fluid dynamics of the variation in the
Computational fluid dynamics overall comfort in a small office/room, due to the presence of heat-generating and non-heat generating elements.
Thermal comfort The study is valuable in understanding the correlation between internal heat generation by humans and the
Double panel radiator
quality of the indoor environment. Two types of the radiator were compared using two different geometric
Ventilation radiator
Occupants
models. Double-panel radiator and ventilation radiator was used for two different geometric models by keeping
other geometry parameters unchanged. Various case studies have been analyzed to ascertain the impact of
computer, monitor, and occupant individually on indoor environmental quality for both the models. By intro­
ducing two occupants, two monitors, and two computers in an empty room, the average indoor temperature of
the room raised by 22.64% and 25%. Due to an increase in the average temperature of an indoor environment,
occupants would usually feel uncomfortable. To optimize the models, radiator heat flux has been reduced. The
study would be worthwhile for the design and optimization of domestic rooms/offices with occupants, furniture
and various other involuntary heat sources.

1. Introduction
To handle the global warming effects and to control the rising energy
use, it is necessary to preserve energy resources. A large amount of en­
ergy can be hoarded in the building sector alone; it consumes about 30
%–40% of the total energy use in the world. The interest in the study of
sustainable eco-friendly building development is growing, to obtain the
indoor environmental quality (IEQ) at less energy use. The total energy
use in buildings depends on the following factors, (1) weather, (2)
building envelope, (3) indoor design standards, (5) building operation
and maintenance, (4) building energy and services system (6) occupants
activity [1–3]. The occupant’s activities are the significant cause of the
discrepancy between predicted and real building performance [4]. To
manage all the factors affecting energy use and comfort conditions in the
building, the study of heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning is
important. The principal aim of heating ventilation and air conditioning
(HVAC) is to maintain the adequate balance between indoor environ­
mental quality (IEQ) and energy use of the appliances that have been
used for maintaining the favorable indoor environmental quality [5].
Several studies has been done on indoor environments, such as the
study of thermal comfort in a room by various heating methods by
Olesen et al. [6]. This research study experimentally investigates the
nine heating methods and found that all methods are suitable to create
acceptable indoor thermal comfort in a well-insulated room. Among the
all heating methods radiator, heating is the most commonly used
method. After years of advancement in CFD software products, the
computational study was conducted by Myhren et al. for the same
experimental model used by Olesen et al. entitled "Flow patterns and
thermal comfort in a room with heating by panels, floors and walls" [7].
In this study, the author studied three different types of heating methods
numerically. The author also compared the two types of radiators, me­
dium temperature radiator with large surface area and a
high-temperature radiator with the low surface area. The study
discovered that both radiators give acceptable indoor thermal condi­
tions. But in the case of medium temperature radiator with large surface
area, you can find the problem of a weaker counterattack with cold air
and can lead to the problem of cold air flow draught [7]. The study
"Design considerations with ventilation radiators: comparisons with
traditional two-panel radiators" by Myhren et al. [8] Compare the design
and operation of two types of radiators, the traditional radiator, and the
ventilation radiator. The study shows that ventilation radiators are more
energy-efficient than traditional radiators. This study has been

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: verma.tikks@gmail.com (T.N. Verma).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101139
Received 24 April 2019; Received in revised form 12 December 2019; Accepted 21 December 2019
Available online 26 December 2019
2352-7102/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
G.A. Ganesh et al.
conducted on the empty room model. The presence of humans and
furniture in the room can change the airflow pattern and thermal
comfort requirements. Hence the occupant and furniture should be
introduced in the room for more applied analysis. The study entitled
"Conjugate flow modeling and heat transfer in a ventilated room for
internal thermal comfort assessment" by Horikiri et al. [9]. He discov­
ered that for warm conditions in the interior environment, the walls of
the room must be well insulated or low thermal conductivity of the wall
is required. Horikiri has carried out another numerical study entitled
"Numerical optimization of thermal comfort improvement for an inte­
rior environment with occupants and furniture" [10]. In This study
author compared the furnished and unfurnished room to obtain the
desired indoor thermal comfort using a traditional double panel radi­
ator. “Energy consumption in the office room for displacement venti­
lation” by Qasim et al. In this study, various exhaust location has been
investigated and found that the energy saving can be improved by up to
25% by combining the exhaust vent with one of the room’s heating
source [11]. “Indoor environmental quality and energy consumption in
the building based on occupant behavior” by Iman Asadi et al. [12]. The
study states that the changeable human psychological parameter is a
disadvantage to predict indoor comfort. The deprived IEQ causes sick
building syndrome, additional energy consumption and a decrease in
human productivity. “Thermal comfort and energy-saving enhance­
ments in an office room” Ahmed et al. [13]. In this study, the author
combined the heat flux source and outlet vent to improve the energy
performance and he found that the energy requirements reduced by
47%. “Thermal modeling of insulator for energy saving in the existing
residential building” by Jain et al. [14]. This study corroborates exper­
imentally and numerically that the insulated walls using locally acces­
sible insulation materials decrease the ambient temperature and ensure
some economic thermal comfort of the building. "Effect of supply air
temperature on indoor thermal comfort in a room with radiant heating
and mechanical ventilation" by Wu et al. [15]. this study examines the
effect of the temperature of the incoming air in the indoor environment
with floor and ceiling heating. According to the study conducted, he
found that there is no significant effect of the temperature of the
incoming air on the vertical temperature gradient, but rather the sub­
stantial effects on the draught and PPM and PMV. Therefore, for the
present study, it is decided to heat the indoor air instead of heating the
inlet air. The authors conducted other similar studies based on the
improvement of the quality of the indoor environment [16,17].
Instinctively humans seek a comfortable environment. Along with
the energy conservation in the building sector, comfort conditions for
occupants are also important. A comfortable environment improves the
working efficiency, health, and quality of living [18]. Thermal comfort
is the condition of mind that expresses satisfaction with the thermal
environment. There are many factors influencing the thermal comfort of
the occupier of the building. (1) Metabolic rate, (2) Mean radiant tem­
perature, (3) Air temperature, (4) Clothing insulation, (5) Operative
temperature, (6) Airspeed, (7) Relative humidity [19,20].
Metabolic rate outlined as “The level of conservation of chemical
energy into heat and mechanical work by the metabolic activities of the
human being [20]. Human emits heat continuously. The level of the heat
is affected by the metabolic rate and may affect the overall comfort
conditions in an occupied zone. The metabolic rate of an individual
depends on the activity level and environmental conditions [22]. The SI
unit for the metabolic rate is met (1met ¼ 58.2 W/m2). The metabolic
rate for sleeping persons is about 0.7 met, for the person sitting quietly is
about 1met, if a person performing light activities such as standing or
walking is about 1.2–1.5 met, for a person performing a high level of
activity it is more than 2 met. Metabolic rates of individuals may vary
with respect to time [20,22]. Metabolic rate and physiological adapta­
tion are the most important factors that affect the thermal comfort of
occupants in the room [23]. Therefore, the effect of the metabolic rate of
the human being on the indoor environment must be studied carefully.
The mean air temperature and comfort depends on the type of
2
Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139
ventilation system used in building design. In naturally ventilated sys­
tems, the occupant can tolerate a temperature range of 25–28 � C [13].
While in the case of mechanical heating desired temperature is about 22
�
C under cold climate conditions [7,20and21]. The comfort temperature
range of people from various continentals may vary. People in tropical
regions feel more comfortable at a higher temperature than that of the
sub-tropical region’s people [25]. The overall optimal thermal comfort
temperature range for an occupant is 20–25 � C [20,24]. In the case of
mechanical heating, radiation also affects thermal comfort in a room. In
order to unify the effects of air temperature and radiation temperature,
it is necessary to keep the operative temperature in mind [26,27].
The rate of air movement at a point, without consideration of the
direction or the average airspeed to which the body exposed also affects
the thermal comfort of occupants. Draught is an unwanted local cooling
of occupants caused by air movement. It is a very serious problem in
ventilated or air-conditioned buildings [19]. Cold draught creates
excessive cooling at uncovered occupant’s body part such as ankle, neck,
and feet [28]. The uneven circulation of cold air may cause draught
related problems. Even at a very low air velocity (0.05 m/s), an occupant
can feel the air movement. Though the air velocity is low but flows with
high turbulence creates more draught related problems [29]. The
required speed of air to maintain comfort conditions depends on the
room thermal conditions, at a high temperature (28 � C) requires more
airspeed as compared to low temperatures (23 � C). Due to the draught
problem, low airspeed at low temperatures is preferred instead of high
airspeed at high temperatures to obtain thermal comfort [20,24].
The climate conditions in various parts of the world are different
according to their geographical locations. South and Southeast Asian
countries are generally humid as compared to European countries.
Relative humidity has no significant effect on thermal conditions at low
temperatures (22 � C) but at a higher temperature (28 � C), it causes
discomfort for occupants. For thermal comfort conditions in the occu­
pied zone, relative humidity should be in the range 30–60% [20].
Thermal comfort in the building, therefore, depends on the climatic
conditions in that region and to improve human thermal comfort it is
necessary to design bioclimatic designs [30]. The clothing factor also
affects the occupant’s thermal comfort; it works as an insulator and
limits the thermal interaction between occupants and the surrounding
atmosphere. Clothing factor expressed in terms of clo (1 clo ¼ 0.155
m2� C/W) [31]. The clothing factor affects the occupant’s thermal
comfort perception and ultimately affects the energy use required for
controlling the room’s thermal comfort conditions [32]. The clothing
factor for the region considered depends on the respective local climate
and building conditions. The clothes of higher clo value can be used by
people in very cold regions for thermal comfort [33]. The satisfactory
clothing insulation for an occupant is 0.59 clo and 0.69 clo for summer
and winter respectively [34,35].
CFD is a solver and it has many applications in HVAC. Thermal
comfort in a room can be numerically simulated using computational
fluid dynamics (CFD). It is a useful tool for predicting air velocity and
temperature [36]. There is a large collection of turbulent models
available in CFD for turbulent simulation. Each model is having its own
advantages and disadvantages. Standard k- ε model with enhanced wall
treatment used extensively for good computational results at the low
cost of simulation [37].
Atmospheric conditions of Sweden in winter are very cold and
require mechanical heating. The temperature of inlet fresh air is 5 � C.
This cold inlet airdrops the overall indoor air temperature and further
causes discomfort. The desired indoor environmental quality in the
room can be restored by heating indoor air with the use of a radiator as a
heating system [7,8]. The indoor environmental quality influenced by
many factors, hence maintaining thermal comfort in an indoor envi­
ronment is complicated work [3]. The design of the building and the
arrangement of the heat source, the furniture, the location of the inlet
and outlet ventilation also affects the indoor environmental quality [9,
10]. Many authors ignore some factors such as radiation temperature,
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Table 1 the sidewalls and a chair on which occupants are sitting. Along with the
Specification of geometry. furniture and occupants, computers and monitors were also placed on
Geometry (objects) Size (L � B � Position in room table 0.05 m away from the wall as shown in Fig. 1. There is a negligible
H) gap between the wall and the table. The heat transfer and fluid patterns
Front and rear wall 4.8 � 2.7 m2 inside the small gap were neglected as they don’t affect the room ther­
Walls with inlet and 2.4 � 2.7 m2 mal conditions. For further study, block-shaped occupants were intro­
outlet duced in the room. The occupants are sitting centrally on the chair and
Ceiling and floor 4.8 � 2.4 m2 no air gap between chair and occupant. The total height of the occupant
Window 2.4 � 1.2 m2 Below inlet vent
0.8 m above floor level
sitting on a chair is taken as 1.3 m. The detailed description of the
Inlet 0.50 � 0.02 m2 Above window occupant and furniture installation is given in Table 1 [10].
1) Double-panel 0.50 � 0.02 m2 In between radiator panels
radiator 2.2. Boundary conditions
2) Ventilation
radiator
Outlet 0.80 � 0.05 m2 A wall opposite to the window The initial indoor air temperature in the room was taken 16 � C. All
Radiator 1.40 � 0.05 � Mid position along the wall and below the walls of the room including the floor and ceiling were considered as
1) Plate 1 0.60 m3 the window, an adiabatic wall. Tables and chairs are non-heat generating elements.
2) Plate 2 1.40 � 0.05 � 0.01 Away from the wall. The window exposed to the outdoor cold climate and maintained at a
0.60 m3
Occupants 0.15 � 0.15 � Mid position along the sidewall and 0.35
constant temperature of 14 � C. The location of the inlet vent used for
1) Leg 0.55 m3 m offset of the respective wall fresh cold air inlet was different for (M1 and M2) double-panel radiator
2) Thigh 0.35 � 0.15 � Sitting centrally on the chair and ventilation radiator respectively. For the double-panel, radiator
3) Body 0.15 m3 inlet vent located above the glass window and for ventilation radiator,
4) Head 0.30 � 0.20 �
inlet provided in between the two heating panels of the radiator (Fig. 2).
0.60 m3
0.30 � 0.20 � Inlet air temperature for M1 is taken as 5 � C, while in case of M2 inlet
0.30 m3 temperature taken as 12 � C. The inlet temperature at the ventilation
Table 1.30 � 0.05 � Mid position along a side wall, radiator inlet is 5 � C but while passing through the radiator plates the
1) Leg 0.70 m3 0.2 m offset air temperature increases to 12 � C. The pre-heating of cold air ( 5 � C)
2) Top 1.30 � 0.40 �
0.05 m3
takes place in between radiator panels and gives the preheated air of 12
Chair 0.37 � 0.30 � The mid-position of the wall,
�
C at room inlet. The detailed study and comparison of both the radia­
0.40 m3 0.05 m away from the sidewall tors and used boundary conditions can be found in the study by Myhren
Monitor 0.50 � 0.05 � The mid-position of the sidewall, et al. [8]. Due to the major role of natural convection (Gr/Re2 >> 1),
0.40 m3 0.05 m offset
heat and mass transfer the properties of air such as thermal expansion
Computer 0.35 � 0.175 0.1 m away from the monitor
� 0.40 m3 coefficient (α), thermal conductivity (k), density (ρ), specific heat (Cp)
taken into consideration.
Occupants have been sitting on a chair and supposed to be reading or
airflow, and turbulence generated by nearby occupants. Therefore, to writing some text document on the monitor. Due to the low activity level
study their effect carefully and to obtain good indoor comfort, these (metabolic rate), the occupant generates low heat flux [20,38] to
factors must be studied. maintain the body temperature to 30 � C. The total volume of an occu­
This paper focuses comprised of a significant section: (1) 3-D CFD pant is about 0.18–0.20 m3. Clothing insulation has been used all over
model, (2) Monitoring planes and lines, (3) Grid independence test, (4) the occupant body surface as per the winter clothing requirement.
validation of 3-D CFD model, and (5) model implementation into Incompressible flow considered for study due to the very low velocity of
simulation tools. The two models have been used and evaluated daily inlet air (Pr ¼ 0.7). Monitors and computers also act as a continuous
base room activities, both the models have the same geometry internal heat source when they are on [39,40]. The heat flux of the
arrangement except the type of radiator. For model 1(M1) double-panel radiator was kept constant to obtain the required thermal conditions in
radiator and for model 2(M2) ventilation radiator used. In a model using the room. The detailed boundary conditions used are listed below in
a ventilation radiator, the inlet vent is located between the two panels of Table 2.
the radiator as shown in Fig. 2. The numerical simulations were
executed for both the models, for various causes. The 3-D ventilated 2.3. Monitoring planes and lines
room equipped with two computers, two monitors, two tables, two
chairs and two occupants with respective radiator for M1 and M2. This For further study, after modifying the geometry of room several
study focuses on the numerical analysis of the variation in overall surfaces were created. Plane 1 passing through the origin (Z ¼ 0 m), to
comfort conditions in a small room, due to involuntary heat sources analyze the overall room comfort conditions. To capture the comfort
(computer, monitor, occupants) and furniture. conditions in the occupied zone another plane has been (P2) plotted (X
¼ 2.4 m). The total height of the sitting occupant is about 1.3 m from the
2. Physical problem floor level. The effect of draught is dominant at the neck and ankle level
[42], to control the draught effect we need to study and control the
2.1. The CFD room model comfort condition at the shoulder (neck) and ankle level of the occupant.
To capture the thermal and flow conditions at shoulder and feet level,
The 3-D CFD model room, a small office building with dimensions of plane 3 (P3) and plane 4 (P4) were plotted, at a height of 1.1 m and 0.1 m
4.8 m � 2.7 m � 2.4 m (L � H � W) was created using ICEM. The Same respectively from the floor level as shown in Fig. 2.
room model was previously used by Olesen et al. for an experimental To study and compare the thermal comfort conditions in the room,
study [6] and by myhren et al. and Horikiri et al. for numerical study [9, four monitoring lines (l1, l2, l3, l4) were plotted on midplane (P1)
and10]]. A small office room consists of insulated walls including floor throughout the height of the room at a distance of X ¼ 0.6 m, X ¼ 1.8 m,
and ceiling, glazed glass window, radiator, inlet vent for fresh air and X ¼ 3.0 m, and X ¼ 4.2 m respectively from window as shown in Fig. 2
outlet on the wall opposite to inlet. The detailed description of installed (b). Comfort conditions in the room can be analyzed by plotting the total
geometry is specified in Table 1. temperature, radiation temperature, air velocity and turbulence in­
The furniture in a room includes two tables placed in the middle of tensity contours on various planes in the room. Both the planes P3 and P4

3
G.A. Ganesh et al.
Fig. 1. Schematic view of 3-D configuration (a) Room model with a couple of computers, Monitor, occupants, chair, table and radiator, (b) Top view of modeled
room, (c) Dimensions of an occupant.
are not illustrated in results, but rather both included in the discussion of
draught, turbulence, and to estimate the temperature gradient. Comfort
conditions calculated using CFD for the empty room model have been
well validated with the given results in the experimental study of Olesen
et al. [6] and recent numerical study of Horikiri et al. [10].
3. Numerical methodology
3.1. Case description
The 3-D ventilated room having 4.8 m length, 2.7 m height and 2.4 m
4
Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139
width while the floor area of the room is 4.8 � 2.4 m2. The bounding
walls, including floor and ceiling considered as an adiabatic surface
(zero heat flux). The radiator is the chief heating system, while the
monitor, computer, and occupants are the internal heat sources. The
impact of occupants, computer, Monitor, and furniture on the indoor
thermal condition was analyzed by using different case studies, listed
below in Table 3.
In order to maintain the adequate temperature in the occupied zone,
radiator flux should be adjusted as per the desired thermal comfort
conditions. Various cases were considered, to study the effects of heat
sources on the thermal and flow characteristics of the room along with
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 2. Schematic view of (a) Four monitoring planes P1, P2, P3, P4, (b)Empty room model with Double-panel radiator (M1), (c) Empty room model with Ventilation
radiator (M2).

Table 2 Table 3
Boundary conditions and models. Research.
Geometry Boundary conditions Case no. Radiator Occupant Computer Monitor
(q) (q) (q) (q)
Inlet Uniform & constant,
a) Double-panel radiator T air ¼ 5 � C Case 1
b) Ventilation radiator T air ¼ 12 � C a) Effect of occupants, ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
U air ¼ 0.70 m/s computer and monitor
Outlet Outflow heat flux on an indoor
Window constant temperature, environment for M1 and
T window ¼ 14 � C M2.
Walls (ceiling and floor) Exposed to the outdoor surroundings, b) Numerical optimization
Adiabatic (q ¼ 0) of thermal comfort in M1
Radiator Constant heat flux, and M2 with computers,
a) Double-panel radiator To maintain 40–42 � C surface temperature. monitors and humans.
b) Ventilation radiator To maintain 34–35 � C surface temperature. Case 2
Occupants (Seated, Reading, The metabolic rate of 1.0 met. a) Effect of occupants flux ✓ ✓ � �
Writing) alone on the indoor
Monitor Uniform heat flux of 40 W/m2 environment for M1 and
Computer Uniform heat flux of 55 W/m2 M2
Chair No heat generation, adiabatic b) Numerical optimization
Table No heat generation, adiabatic of thermal comfort in M1
Turbulent model Standard k-ε [16,36,38] and M2 with humans
Radiation Discrete ordinate (DO) Radiation [8,11,38] only.
Scheme for pressure The second-order, a SIMPLE algorithm [9,11,
17]

5
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

the comparison of two models. The heat flux of heat-generating bodies is Table 4
listed in Table 2. Model constant for standard k-ε.
C1ε 1.44
3.2. Airflow and heat transfer C2ε 1.92
Cμ 0.09
In the current study, the CFD program has been used to investigate σk 1.0
1.3
the airflow and thermal conditions in the 3-D modeled room. Continuity, σε

momentum, and energy equations were solved using the same software.
The Reynolds-Average Navier-Stokes (RANS) was adopted together with Model constants for the standard k-ε model are given in Table 4.
the two-equation standard k–ε turbulent model with enhanced wall All the heat-generating bodies along with the radiator may increase
treatment, as of its high computational economy and it predicts the overall radiation temperature, hence thermal radiation needs to be
reasonably well the airflow and turbulence in an enclosed environment studied [48,49]. Heat energy can be transferred in the form of electro­
[37,43]. The discrete ordinates radiation model [41] was used to cap­ magnetic waves. The thermal band for radiation heat transfer is between
ture the radiation effects of various heat sources on room airflow and 0.1 μm and 1000 μm [50]. Discrete ordinate radiation transport equa­
temperature distribution. The Boussinesq estimate is employed to tion which is predefined in Ansys fluent was solved to consider the effect
consider the full buoyancy effect and capture the smallest change in of radiation. The transport equation of the radiation model is described
room air density. In a flow of strong buoyancy, the Body Weighted in equation (8) [48].
schemes work well for interpolating the pressure and other properties Z
[44,45]. σ T 4 σ s 4π ! !
rðIð!r ;! s Þ! r ;!
s Þ þ ða þ σ s ÞIð! s Þ ¼ an2 þ Ið r ; s Þ
The fine unstructured hex mesh has been generated around the oc­ π 4π 0
cupants and heat sources to capture the thermal and flow conditions � φð! r ;! (8)
0
s ÞdΩ
around the occupants [46]. To tackle with the non-linearity of the mo­
mentum equation, velocity pressure coupling the semi-implicit method Inlet velocity of fresh cold airflow is very low (0.7 m/s), flow is
for pressure-linked equations (SIMPLE) algorithm has been used [47]. considered to be in-compressible and Prandtl number (Pr No.) for air is
The second-order upwind discretization scheme was used for the inter­ taken as 0.7. The Re 2 ratio is used to identify the type of convection. If
Gr

polation of scalars on the cell faces [10].

Gr
Re2
≫1 then the natural convection plays a crucial role in heat transfer
(Rinlet > 600). The flow is considered to be dominated by the buoyancy
3.3. Numerical model force. The dimensionless numbers used in the present study are given in
equations (9)–(12) [8,54].
For all types of flows, ANSYS Fluent solves conservation equations gβðTradiator TÞL3
for mass and momentum, while the energy conservation equation was Gr ¼ (9)
υ2
solved for flows involving heat transfer or compressibility. Transport
equations can be solved for the turbulent flows. Numerical analysis of gβðTradiator TÞL3
Ra ¼ (10)
the above problems requires solving the governing equations of mass, υα
momentum, and energy along with the suitable turbulent model. The
governing equations of fluid dynamics and the energy equations are ρVL
Re ¼ (11)
given below (1–4) [48]. μ

∂ρ � The fluid needs to be assumed as a boussinesq fluid or as an ideal gas

þ r: ρ→
V ¼0 (1) for simulation of buoyancy using the RANS equations. In the present
∂t
study, fluid is assumed as a boussinesq fluid. The term given below is
∂ðρuÞ � ∂p ∂τxx ∂τyz ∂τzx known as the boussinesq parameter and added in the momentum
þ r: ρu→
V ¼ þ þ þ þ ρfx (2)
∂t ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂z equation.
��
∂ðρuÞ � ∂p ∂τxy ∂τyy ∂τyz ρ ¼ ρref 1 β T Tref (12)
þ r: ρv→
V ¼ þ þ þ þ ρfy (3)
∂t ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂z
3.4. Thermal comfort and physical parameters
∂ðρwÞ � ∂p ∂τxz ∂τyz ∂τzz
þ r: ρw→
V ¼ þ þ þ þ ρfz (4)
∂t ∂z ∂x ∂y ∂z According to ISO 7730, the temperature difference between the feet
Ansys fluent solves the energy equation in the following form, and the head level is the main factor, which affects the indoor thermal
comfort. The temperature difference between the feet and head level
� ��
∂ !
ðρEÞ þ r:ð V ðρE þ pÞÞ ¼ r: keff rT
X ! ¼
hj J j þ τeff ⋅ ⋅! (5) should be less than 3 � C (Thead – Tfoot < 3 � C) [19]. To describe the
∂t j
V
thermal comfort in the room two parameters can be used i.e. comfort
temperature Tcomfort and operative temperature [51]. Comfort temper­
k-ε turbulence model solves the Reynolds Averaged Navies-Stokes ature is preferred over the operative temperature because it takes into
equation along with the equations of the production of turbulence ki­ account the balance between radiation temperature, air temperature,
netic energy (k), its dissipation rate (ε) given below, in equation (6) and and air velocity. TOperative is a simplified form of TComfort , if the airspeed is
(7).
below 0.1 m/s. The values for comfort, operative, and radiation tem­
�� � �
∂ ∂ ∂ μ ∂k perature can be calculated by equations below (13, 14, and 15) [7,
ðρkÞ þ ðρkui Þ ¼ μþ t : þ Gk þ Gb ρε Ym þ Sk (6) 48and52].
∂t ∂xi ∂xj σk ∂xj
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
� � TRadiation þ TAir ð10:UAir Þ
∂ ∂ ∂ � μ � ∂ε ε ε2 TComfort ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi (13)
ðρεÞ þ ðρεui Þ ¼ μþ t : þ C1ε : ðGk þ C3ε þ Gb Þ C2ε :ρ: 1 þ ð10:UAir Þ
∂t ∂xi ∂xj σε ∂xj k k
þ Sε TRadiation þ TAir
TOperative ¼ (14)
(7) 2

6
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 3. Grid independence test for a CFD model used in present numerical study, at four locations (a) X ¼ 0.6 m, (b) X ¼ 1.8 m, (c) X ¼ 3.0 m, (d) X ¼ 4.2 m

289000 and 386000 respectively. The results of three different sizes of

the grid as mentioned above are compared and was observed no sig­
nificant change in comfort temperature and velocity. Velocity compar­
ison results were not illustrated in the present study since velocity
analysis unidirectional probes were used in an experimental study and
air velocity obtained by CFD differs from the mean air velocity calcu­
lated by unidirectional probes [7].
The results for the above study was obtained at different locations in
the room. The observed deviation in temperature and velocity is about
0.5 � C and 0.04 m/s respectively, but that the overall flow patterns were
always the same.
All the results were compared with the numerical results given in
research work by Myhren et al. [7,8], the closest results were obtained
for 289000-grid resolution (Fig. 3) and hence it has been used for further
calculations. Grid independence test plays a very important role in CFD
simulation concerning result accuracy and forecast of cost.

4. Validation of the model

The results obtained for thermal conditions in an empty room by

Fig. 4. Comparison of comfort temperature profiles at X ¼ 1 m for empty room
Models (M1 and M2) with published experimental results by Olesen et al. [6].
Z comfort temperature increases in the upper fluid domain, this possibly
4π
T 4Radiation ¼
1
IdΩ (15)
4:σ 0 of buoyancy force due to the flow of cold air stream at the inlet and low
3.5. Grid independence test and specification of the model
Due to the complexity of geometry, commercialized ICEM CFD
software was used in this study to generate the unstructured hex-mesh.
The finite volume numerical method was used to solve problem. A grid
independence test was conducted on three grid resolutions 179000,
using a double panel radiator and ventilation radiator have been
compared with the same CFD model recently used [6,8and10]. The
empty room model results were well-validated by the experimental re­
sults given by Olesen et al. [6] (Fig. 4) and also with numerical results
(Fig. 5) [10]. After comparing the trends of room comfort temperature in
an empty room with the available experimental and numerical data, the
same profile shape, variation and pattern can be observed from a plotted
graph (Figs. 4 and 5). In the case of M1 slight variation in trends can be
observed at a mid-part of the domain (1 m < y < 2 m) on l1 as shown in
Fig. 5. The maximum variation in temperature is about �0.5 � C. The
caused due to the influence of the buoyancy effect. As a combined effect
temperature of the glass window, the region near the inlet and a radiator
are of high turbulence.
In the case of M2, the inlet is located between the two radiator panels,
at a height of 0.65 m from floor level, this causes a strong mixing of a
cold and warm air stream in this region. This leads to high turbulence in
the lower part of the domain. For the validation of the model, computed
the comfort temperature at the four monitoring lines l1, l2, l3 and l4 and

7
G.A. Ganesh et al.
Fig. 5. Comparison of the comfort temperature profile for empty room M1 and M2 at four locations, for the present study and published numerical data (Z ¼ 0) [10].
(a) X ¼ 0.6 m, (b) X ¼ 1.8 m, (c) X ¼ 3.0 m, (d) X ¼ 4.2 m.
Fig. 6. a) Experimental set up of 4 bed ICU room (Experimental case 1) b) Experimental set up of 2 bed ICU room with a partition (experimental case 2) (all di­
mensions are in mm).
compared with the same numerical data previously used for M1. The
slight variation in comfort temperature profiles of �0.7 � C was observed
in the lower fluid domain (0.10 m<y>0.50 m), while above this domain
the comfort temperature variation is very low as � 0.3 � C as shown in
Fig. 5. Finally, for further validation of the model volume flow rate
balance through the room has been calculated and observed that the
volume flow rate of 7 L/s is constant throughout the fluid domain.
Hotwire anemometer, Laser doppler velocity-meter (LDV), Particle
image velocity-meter (PIV) are three measuring instruments, normally
used for measurement in the indoor air study.
In the past, flow visualization was the main tool for verifying existing
physical principles and discovering flow phenomenon. The flow pattern
is visualized by seeding visible particle by use of a lighting sheet, this
method is used in indoor air studies by many researchers as it provided
lots of useful flow field information. One main disadvantage of this
method is that only qualitative flow field data can be received. Thermal
anemometer such as Hotwire is widely applied in the area of the indoor
8
Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139
air environment. The basic rule is to evaluate the fluid velocity by
sensing the heat transfer changes from electrically heating sensors.
The following experimental setup has been used for validation of the
numerical model of the occupied room. The geometrical construction of
the model room for the purpose of this investigation has width, depth
and height of the room as 1835 mm, 1225 mm, and 1225 mm respec­
tively. The model is validated for two arrangements. Fig. 6 (a) demon­
strates the experimental setup of the four-bed ICU model room
considered for validation. It consists of four patients and beds of sizes 40
mm � 140 mm x 455 mm and 250 mm � 350 mm x 500 mm respec­
tively. Patients with a bed that is near to the inlet is 445 mm and patients
with bed which are near to the outlet is 1140 mm away from the north
wall. The distance between the two patients is 225 mm. Inlet and outlet
consist of the rectangular cross-section of size 120 mm � 200 mm. Inlet
is located on the north wall, 200 mm from roof and outlet is located in
the south wall, 200 mm from the floor. Also, both are 160 mm away
from the east wall. In order to ensure the required unidirectional airflow
G.A. Ganesh et al.
Fig. 7. (a & b) Comparision between simulated & visualization results for four bed ICU model room.
at the inlet of the model room, a duct is fabricated. Air is allowed to enter
the model room through one inlet vent through the duct and leaves
through the other opposite outlet vent. The length of the duct is 1500
mm and ensures unidirectional and horizontal flow.
Fig. 6 (b) demonstrates the experimental setup of the 2-bed ICU
model room with partition considered for validation. The dimensions of
the room are the same as those considered in the four-bed ICU model
room. Layout of 2-bed ICU model room consists of two patients with a
bed, the dimensions of both are considered the same as per experiment
case 1, and each patient is oriented at the center of the room and 331
mm from north and south wall respectively. One partition of size 100
mm � 500 mm X 1000 mm is kept between the centers of two patients.
The principle of flow visualization in the present work is based on the
injection of smoke in the flow field and taking pictures of the flow
pattern. The smoke particles follow the path of airflow. The smoke being
visible, the flow pattern is visible to the naked eye and can be photo­
graphed. The dispersion of smoke particles by the airflow is captured by
a still camera. Experimental measurements have been carried out under
steady-state conditions by stabilizing the room (thermal and fluid con­
ditions) for more than 3 h before recording air velocity, air temperature
and visualizing smoke concentration. The function of the illumination
system is to provide a uniform source of high-intensity light which is
dispersed by smoke particles so as to take their photographs.
For airflow Setup, the flow of air is produced by a fan. In order to
ensure the required unidirectional and airflow at the inlet of the model
room, a duct is of 1.5 m length is made. Accurate measurement of the
velocity flow field inside the enclosure is required. In order to visualize
the flow field by smoke, it is necessary to generate smoke. The use of
smoke in wind tunnels began towards the end of the nineteenth century
and has subsequently been developed into an important research tool.
Smoke visualization is the most widely used method for natural con­
vection flow visualization. Smoke visualization has been normally used
Fig. 8. (a &b) Comparision between simulated & visualization results for two bed ICU model room with partition.
9
Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139
to qualitatively assess the flow field inside an enclosure.
Flow visualization has been carried through the flow of smoke in the
test chamber. A thermal anemometer has been used for velocity mea­
surement during experimentation. For velocity measurement during
experimentation using a thermal anemometer, a slot of 1000 mm � 30
mm is created at the top and bottom of the model to fit the strip of the
same dimension with holes of 6 mm at every 100 mm. Fig. 7 displays the
simulated result of the velocity vector and experimental visualization
respectively for the four-bed ICU model room when the inlet velocity is
0.2 m/s. The simulation results and the experimental visualization are
compared and it is found that the airflow patterns are matching to a
great extent.
The mainstream from the inlet while touching the ceiling, strikes the
opposite wall and moves downwards. The stagnant zone is observed
beneath the inlet part. One recirculating zone has been formed which
can be easily visualized, between the north wall and patient (Fig. 7).
Smoke smoothly escapes from an exit hole can be easily visualized.
There is a stagnant zone in the left bottom corner which can be clearly
visualized in both simulated and experimental results. The simulation
results and the experimental visualization are compared and found that
the airflow patterns are matching to a great extent. Fig. 8(a and b)
display the simulated result of the velocity vector and experimental
visualization respectively for two bed ICU model room with partition,
when the inlet velocity is 0.2 m/s.
The simulated flow pattern has been found similar to flow visuali­
zation by smoke. There is a stagnant zone in the left bottom corner
which can be clearly visualized in both simulated and experimental
results. The mainstream from the inlet while touching the ceiling, strikes
the opposite wall and moves downwards. One recirculating zone is
formed which is between patients shown in the experimental result
(Fig. 8 (a)). The simulated vertical air velocity component along a
horizontal line at the center of the inlet is created and has been validated
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 9. Validation and Comparison of the comfort temperature profile for room models (M1 and M2) enclosing a pair of an occupant, computer, monitor, and
furniture at four locations for the present study and published numerical data. (Z ¼ 0). (a) X ¼ 0.6 m, (b) X ¼ 1.8 m, (c) X ¼ 3.0 m, (d) X ¼ 4.2 m.

against the measured results. Line emerges from the center of inlet and
moves straight to the opposite wall and its co-ordinate is (0.925, 0.925),
(0.965, 0.965) and (0, 1.835).
5. Result and discussion
After getting an acceptable outcome from the justification of a 3-D
empty room model, further simulations were carried out by modifying
the room geometry as mentioned in Table 1. The computational results
for comfort conditions in the room were compared with standard

Fig. 10. Comfort temperature (� C) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.

10
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 11. Velocity magnitude (m/s) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.

numerical data for each case. Fig. 10 (b, d) shows the thermal plumes generated by the heat-
generating elements. From the figure it is clear that the thermal
plumes generated by the occupant are much larger than the computer
5.1. Effect of involuntary heat sources and furniture
and monitor, this is because of the large surface area of the occupant.
The maximum temperature of neighboring thermal plume around an
A numerical simulation was carried out for case 1 and the results
occupant is 29.23 � C and 30.61 � C for M1 and M2 respectively. The
were plotted on respective planes. For an empty room, M1 and M2
thermal plumes observed more stable in the domain near the ceiling.
thermal comfort conditions were obtained by maintaining radiator
The thermal plumes from the occupant also get affected by various
surface temperature at 40 � C and 34.5 � C respectively [8]. For the study
personal factors such as mouth exhalation, clothing and furniture
of case 1, the radiator temperature kept unchanged and introduced all
arrangement [53]. The air temperature gradient for two horizontal
the geometry elements in the room. To study the combined effect of all
planes P3 and P4 in an occupied zone is about 1.9 � C and 1.4 � C for M1
heat generating bodies on the indoor environment, simulations were
and M2 respectively. The minute dissimilarity in thermal conditions of
carried as per the boundary conditions mentioned in Table 1. To study
M1 and M2 is because of the inlet vent position.
the factors affecting comfort conditions in the room, contours were
plotted on the respective planes. The presence of the occupant, com­
5.1.2. Air velocity
puter and monitor changes the airflow pattern, produces thermal plumes
The region near the window wall is strongly influenced by the
and raises the average air temperature in the room. Total temperature,
buoyancy force. The warm air rising from the radiator and cold air
Radiation temperature, turbulence intensity, and air velocity contours
supply from the inlet creates the positive and negative buoyancy effect
were plotted on P1 and P2. The factors which were affecting mostly the
respectively in the region near the radiator. Hence the higher velocity of
room thermal conditions are discussed below.
magnitude 0.65 m/s and 0.44 m/s for M1 and M2 respectively noticed in
this region. From Fig. 11 it is clear that the air velocity close to the floor
5.1.1. Total temperature
is 0.16 m/s for X < 1.8 m and for M2 it is 0.13 m/s for X < 1 m. For M1 air
Due to the combined effect of all heat generating bodies, the average
velocity close to the occupied zone is higher, which possibly can cause
temperature of the indoor environment was raised up to 26 � C and 26.5
discomfort to the occupant. While for M2, air velocity in the entire
�
C for M1 and M2 respectively. The abrupt rise in average temperature
domain is less than 0.1 m/s except for the region near the heat-
was due to the combined effect of computer, monitor, and occupant
generating bodies.
internal heat generation. The region near the radiator (0 m<X>0.4 m)
Fig. 11 shows the velocity distribution around the occupant
(0 m<Y>2.2 m) for M1 and (0 m<X>0.6 m) (0 m<Y>1 m) for M2 shows
throughout the domain height of the room. For M1 high air velocity of
a wide range of temperature due to the mixing of cold and warm air
magnitude 0.261 m/s is clearly seen around the occupant, furniture,
(Fig. 10).

11
G.A. Ganesh et al.
Fig. 12. Radiation temperature (� C) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.
computer, and monitor, as they act as an obstacle to the flow of air in the
domain. This obstacle possibly creates turbulence and eddies in the
nearby region. Also near the sidewall, the velocity magnitude is very
high. From Fig. 11, it can be clearly seen that the high velocity present in
the field of high thermal plumes, this is due to the buoyancy effect
caused by the high-temperature thermal plumes. The maximum air ve­
locity magnitude near the occupant on planes P3 and P4 is 0.15 m/s and
0.10 m/s the respectively. Air velocity is nearly constant with the
magnitude of 0.08 m/s throughout the fluid domain except for the re­
gion near the radiator, occupancy, furniture, and walls. For M2
maximum air velocity around the occupant is 0.11 m/s. Air velocity on
P3 and P4 are 0.13 m/s and 0.11 m/s respectively. For the same volume
flow rate, the air velocity magnitudes in the case of M2 found lower than
that of M1.
5.1.3. Radiation temperature
Along with the convective heat transfer, radiant heat transfer also
contributes to the rise in the average indoor environment temperature. It
is observed that the radiation temperature at the inlet is lowest in the
entire fluid domain (20 � C) and near a radiator is highest (31.35 � C).
Fig. 12 (b, d) shows the radiation temperature distribution near the
occupant.
The pattern of radiation thermal plumes and total temperature
thermal plume are different in nature due to the presence of buoyancy
force. From Fig. 12 it is clear that the average radiation temperature
emitted by the occupant is 31.9 � C and at the body, folds are 34.23 � C,
while this temperature increases with the increased metabolic rate of an
occupant. The radiation temperature gradient around an occupant is
2.21 � C and 1.37 � C in the fluid domain outside the occupied zone. The
12
Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139
mid part of the fluid domain (0.55 m<y>1.5 m) is of high radiation
temperature. From Fig. 12, it is clearly seen that both M1 and M2 nearly
shows the identical radiation temperature distribution throughout the
fluid domain. This clearly indicates that to avoid the direct effects of
heat source radiation, the occupancy must be at least 0.5 m away from
the heat source.
5.1.4. Turbulence intensity
For M1, turbulence intensity in the domain near the window wall for
(0 m < X < 1 m) and (0 m<Y>2.3 m) is very high. Maximum value
23.88% observed below inlet vent, while the regions near the ceiling and
floor are at a maximum value of 5%. The remaining fluid domain has a
constant and uniform turbulence intensity of 1.25%. Fig. 13 shows
turbulence intensity for M1, a maximum value of 6.29% around occu­
pant and 9% near the side walls. On P3 and P4, the low value of turbu­
lence intensity 1.45% found.
In the case of M2, turbulence intensity in the region near the radiator
(0 m < X < 1 m) (0 m<Y>2.3 m) has found higher as compared to the
remaining fluid domain. The maximum turbulence intensity of value
15.80% observed at the inlet vent and 5.64% on the floor level. The
maximum turbulence intensity of 3.43% found in the occupied zone.
High turbulence of value 8.43% is at the shoulder level of an occupant.
For the remaining domain, it is limited to 0.93%. The human occupation
must be at a distance from heat sources and walls of the room to avoid
discomfort caused by turbulence.
From Fig. 9 and above observations, it is clear that the indoor
environmental quality is not comfortable for occupants and will habit­
ually feel uncomfortable due to high indoor temperature [20]. In this
situation, thermal comfort can be restored either by increasing the inlet
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 13. Turbulence intensity (%) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.

Fig. 14. Comparison of the comfort temperature profile for room models (M1 and M2) enclosing a pair of occupant, computer, monitor, and furniture at four lo­
cations, for the present study and published numerical data (Z ¼ 0). (a) X ¼ 0.6 m, (b) X ¼ 1.8 m, (c) X ¼ 3.0 m, (d) X ¼ 4.2 m.

air velocity and holding radiator heat flux constant or by maintaining 5.2. Numerical optimization of thermal comfort in M1 and M2 with
inlet velocity constant and dropping the radiator heat flux [10]. computers, monitors and humans

This study focuses on the optimization of indoor environmental

quality in order to obtain the required thermal comfort conditions for an

13
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 15. Optimized Comfort temperature (� C) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.

occupant without altering the room arrangements. In order to save more
energy instead of increasing inlet velocity, simulations were carried out
on both the models by reducing the heat flux of the radiator and
maintaining a constant flow rate of 7 L/s. It was found that the thermal
comfort conditions in the room can be restored by decreasing the radi­
ator surface temperature to 29 � C and 22 � C for M1 and M2 respectively.
Fig. 14 shows the comparison of trends of optimized comfort tempera­
ture for M1 and M2 with the numerical results of an empty room model.
From Fig. 14, it is clearly seen that the maximum variation in the
comfort temperature trend of 2.2 � C is observed at l1, while at other
monitoring lines this variation is less than 1 � C. This variation observed
up to the height of 1.5 m for all the monitoring lines. The variation in
comfort temperature trends was arising due to changing fluid flow
patterns and turbulence occurring in the fluid domain. The region near
the inlet has been very much affected by the cold airflow at the inlet and
the presence of re-circulations in the respective fluid domain. To obtain
the thermal comfort temperature for both the models, the surface tem­
perature of the radiator was reduced by 11–12 � C. The average

Fig. 16. Velocity magnitude (m/s) Contours after optimization for M1 a) on P1, and for M2 b) on P1.

14
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 17. Comparison of the comfort temperature profile for room models (M1 and M2) enclosing a pair of the occupant, and furniture at four locations, for the present
study and published numerical data (Z ¼ 0). (a) X ¼ 0.6 m, (b) X ¼ 1.8 m, (c) X ¼ 3.0 m, (d) X ¼ 4.2 m.

temperature of the indoor environment for optimization maintained at monitors. The rise in indoor air temperature is about 22.64% (5 � C) and
21 � C for both models. The rise in temperature indicates the net effect of 25% (5.5 � C) for M1 and M2 respectively. These results confirm that the
heat generated by a couple of occupants, two computers and two presence of internal heat-generating bodies other than radiator in the

Fig. 18. Comfort temperature (� C) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.

15
G.A. Ganesh et al.
Fig. 19. Velocity magnitude (m/s) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.
fluid domain also influences the indoor environmental quality (IEQ).
Fig. 15 shows the thermal comfort conditions at mid-plane and
thermal plumes generated by the occupant in the occupied zone. Opti­
mization of models results in a fall of average indoor environment
temperature and the buoyancy effect also decreases. The small change in
air velocity (�0.05 m/s) for the entire fluid domain was observed, while
the region near the radiator shows a considerable drop in velocity
magnitude as an effect of decreased buoyancy force. Due to the Presence
of flow obstacle, the substantial turbulence and swirls in the occupied
region (1.7 m<X>2.7 m) can be observed throughout the domain height
(Fig. 16). In the region near the occupant and upper domain, the velocity
distribution for M2 is more stable as compared to M1. For P2, no sig­
nificant change in velocity distribution was observed as compared to
Fig. 11, hence not illustrated in the study.
After optimization, the radiation temperature near occupant
decrease by 4–4.5 � C and in remaining fluid domain temperature de­
creases by 2–2.5 � C for both the models. There is no considerable change
in the pattern of radiation temperature distribution as compared to
Fig. 12. A very minor change of �1% is observed in turbulence intensity
for an entire fluid domain, except region near radiator and inlet (2–3%),
hence both the contours are not illustrated in the present study. The air
temperature gradient at planes 3 and 4 found less than 1.5 � C/m and the
air velocity near the head region is 0.13 m/s, while at other parts of the
body is 0.1 m/s for all models.
16
Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139
5.3. Effect of computer, monitor, and occupant individually
Case 2 was performed to study the individual effects of an occupant,
computer, and monitor on indoor environmental quality. The computer
and monitor units had been turned off (q ¼ 0 W/m2) throughout the
study without altering the room arrangement. Constant heat flux was
given to the radiator, to obtain a radiator surface temperature of 40 � C
and 34.5 � C for M1 and M2 respectively, as per the empty room comfort
requirements. The comfort temperature trends were plotted for both the
models and also compared with the available numerical results of
thermal comfort for the empty room model (Fig. 17). The small differ­
ence between M1 and M2 temperature trends can be seen from Fig. 17.
This variation is occurring due to unlike inlet vent location and altered
boundary conditions of the computer and monitor (see Fig. 18).
5.3.1. Total temperature
The average temperature of the indoor environment rises to 24 � C
and 24.5 � C for M1 and M2 respectively due to the presence of occupants
only. The rise in indoor average temperature is about 13.20% (3 � C) and
15.56% (3.5 � C) respectively for M1 and M2 as compared to an empty
room. For M2 air temperature in the mid-domain is higher than that of
M1, possibly due to the location of the inlet vent. For M2, immediate
heating of cold air takes place while in case of M1 heating of air takes
place due to the mixing of warm and cold air. The fluid domain involved
in the air heating process for M1 is somewhat larger as compared to M2.
The maximum temperature of neighboring thermal plume around an
occupant is 26.94 � C and 26.83 � C respectively for M1 and M2. This
G.A. Ganesh et al.
Fig. 20. Radiation temperature (� C) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.
temperature is lower than that of case 1, hence it is clear that the thermal
plumes generated by occupant get affected by nearby heat sources. The
air temperature gradient for P3 and P4 in an occupied region is 1.5 � C/m
and 1.1 � C/m for M1 and M2 respectively. If compared with case 1 there
is a considerable drop in temperature gradient due to changed boundary
conditions of computers and monitors. Therefore, when designing the
perfect indoor thermal comfort, attention should be paid to the number
of occupants in the room and their respective metabolic rates according
to their activity level.
5.3.2. Air velocity
Fig. 19 shows, the region near the radiator is of high velocity of
magnitude 0.66 m/s and 0.42 m/s for M1 and M2 respectively. Velocity
magnitude adjacent to the sidewall is very low at 0.024 m/s and 0.018
m/s for M1 and M2 respectively. By comparing these air velocities with
the previous case it indicates that the air velocity is also get affected by
nearby heat sources and air temperature. On comparing Figs. 11 and 19,
it is clearly observed that the air velocity near the sidewall is strongly
influenced by the buoyancy effect due to the heat generation of com­
puters and Monitors. The air velocity near the walls and corners of
various bodies are quite higher than the remaining fluid domain since
they act as an obstacle in airflow and creates eddies and swirls. For
domain in between the table and occupant for both the models, air ve­
locity on P3 and P4 is nearly the same as 0.108 m/s. The velocity dif­
ference for P3 and P4 in the occupied zone is found to be nearly constant
and of magnitude less than 0.04 m/s and 0.03 m/s respectively for M1
and M2.
17
Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139
5.3.3. Radiation temperature
The effect of changed boundary conditions can be clearly seen from
Fig. 20, the radiation-temperature near the computer and monitor is
around 25 � C and 25.75 � C for M1 and M2 respectively. Near occupant,
thermal radiation temperature is about 28.5 � C (Fig. 20). The radiation
temperature in the mid-domain is slightly less as compared to a case 1
study (Fig. 12). For P3 and P4, the maximum radiation temperature
gradient around occupant is 0.76 � C/m and 0.58 � C/m for M1 and M2
respectively. While for the domain outside the comfort zone is 1.73 � C/
m and 1.94 � C/m (see Fig. 21).
5.3.4. Turbulence intensity
Significant changes were observed in turbulence intensity near the
sidewalls and the occupant. For M1, the region near the radiator is of
high turbulence having a value of 20.18% and at floor level 10.08% for
X < 1.5 m. For M2, near radiator turbulence intensity is 14.71% for X <
1.5 m.
Regions with low temperatures having low turbulence intensity and
higher for high temperatures. Due to changed boundary conditions, very
low turbulence of 2–3% is observed near sidewalls. For P3 and P4
reduction in the turbulence intensity of 1–2% observed as compared to
case 1. The overall turbulence intensity in the occupied zone is found
lower than 10% for both the models. Fig. 17 shows unfavorable thermal
conditions in the room for occupancy. To control the indoor environ­
ment in the fluid domain, the solution needs to be optimized by con­
trolling the radiator heat flux.
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 21. Turbulence intensity (%) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.

Fig. 22. Comparison of the comfort temperature profile for room models (M1 and M2) enclosing a pair of the occupant, and furniture four locations, for the present
study and published numerical data [9,10] (Z ¼ 0). (a) X ¼ 0.6 m, (b) X ¼ 1.8 m, (c) X ¼ 3.0 m, (d) X ¼ 4.2 m.

18
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Fig. 23. Optimized Comfort temperature (� C) Contours for M1 a) on P1, b) on P2, and for M2 c) on P1, d) on P2.

Fig. 24. Velocity magnitude (m/s) Contours after optimization on P1 for a) M1, and (b) M2.

5.4. Numerical optimization of thermal comfort in M1 and M2 with
humans alone
For optimization, average indoor temperature maintained at 21 � C
for both the models. To attain the thermal comfort conditions (21 � C) in
the room, radiator heat flux was reduced. The occupant’s body heat
compensates for the reduction in radiator heat flux. From the above
discussion, it is observed that the presence of two occupants in a room
increases the average temperature of the indoor environment by 3–3.5
�
C. While the presence of 2 computers and 2 monitors raises an average
indoor temperature by 2 � C and 2.5 � C for M1 and M2 respectively. After
optimization, the thermal comfort trends of the present study show good
agreement with the desired thermal comfort temperature trends
(Fig. 22).
Considerable variation in temperature trend on l1 up to 1 m in height
can be observed. A maximum temperature difference of 1.7 � C and 2.5
�
C noticed for M1 and M2 respectively, the reason for this was explained
earlier in section 5.2. As shown in Fig. 23, the contours of average
temperature after optimization show almost identical results to the
previously optimized case (5.2), except at the regions near the computer

19
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

and monitors.
While in the case of air velocity (Fig. 24), the turbulence and swirls in
the occupied zone have been (1.7 m<X>2.7 m) reduced by a consid­
erable amount. M2 shows the more stable distribution of air velocity
throughout the fluid domain as compared to M1. There is no significant
change observed in velocity distribution on Contours P2 as compared to
Fig. 19, hence not illustrated in the study.
After optimization, the radiation temperature near occupant was
decreased by 3–4 � C and in remaining fluid domain temperature de­
creases by 2–3 � C for both the models. There is no considerable change
in the pattern of radiation temperature distribution as compare to
Fig. 20. A minor change in turbulence intensity of �1% was observed in
the entire fluid domain. While in the region near the radiator and inlet it
is of 2–3%, hence both the contours are not illustrated in the present
study. From all the previous results, it is clearly found that the region
near the radiator as a source of heat and walls is of high turbulence and
uncertainty in comfort conditions. Therefore, it is recommended that,
for better indoor comfort, the occupancy should be some distance from
the walls and heat sources as mentioned above. For better planning of
the building, it is recommended to find out the occupied zone using all
the previously calculated results that would be appropriate to locate the
human occupation in a building for adequate indoor comfort.
software. The authors have also carried out flow visualization of air flow
pattern in experimental real life model. The following conclusions have
been drawn from this investigation:
� The buoyancy strength increases the average indoor air temperature
and alters the occupant comfort requirements due to heat generating
elements.
� The non-heat generating elements in the room does not influence the
heat transfer but significantly affects the airflow pattern by creating
turbulence and swirls near its corners.
� The ventilation radiator maintains the more stable and uniform in­
door thermal conditions in the room, it gives instant heating
response due to narrow inlet vent of radiator and reduces the risk of
cold draught.
� The optimal indoor thermal comfort can be achieved by reducing the
radiator heat flux, but the risk of draught may arise due to turbulence
and air recirculation near the furniture in the occupied zone.
� Both the radiators maintain a satisfactory vertical temperature
gradient (less than 1.5 � C/m). Hence, it is recommended to use a
ventilation radiator for the lower temperature gradient.
Acknowledgements

6. Conclusion
This present research has been conducted to investigate the airflow,
thermal conditions, radiation temperature and turbulence intensity for
small office/room for two different geometric models and configura­
tions. The computational model was carefully validated against pub­
lished data in literature [6,10] for thermal comfort in a 3-D empty and
occupied room/office model by RANS computations using ANSYS Fluent
All persons who have made substantial contributions to the work
reported in the manuscript (e.g., technical help, writing and editing
assistance, general support), but who do not meet the criteria for
authorship, are named in the Acknowledgements and have given us their
written permission to be named. If we have not included an Acknowl­
edgements, then that indicates that we have not received substantial
contributions from non-authors.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101139.

Nomenclature

a absorption coefficient
clo clothing factor unit
C1ε, C2ε, C3ε model constants in the term of the turbulence model
Gk generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to the mean velocity gradient
Gb generation of turbulent kinetic energy due to buoyancy
k turbulence kinetic energy
keff effective conductivity
S heat sources
!
!r;S direction vector
! !’
r;S scattering direction vector
met metabolic equivalent
M1 room model 1 using Double panel radiator
M2 room model 2 using ventilation radiator
P1 plane 1 passing through the origin (Z ¼ 0)
P2 plane 2 passing through the occupant (X ¼ 0)
P3 plane 3 at a height of occupant shoulder level (Y ¼ 1.1 m)
P4 plane 4 at a height of occupant ankle level (Y ¼ 0.1 m)
q heat flux
Sk,Sε source terms
TRef reference temperature
Thead temperature at head level
Tfoot temperature at foot level
V velocity at inlet
uair air velocity
YM a contribution of fluctuating dilatation in compressible turbulence to the overall dissipation rate

20
G.A. Ganesh et al. Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139

Greek letters
ε dissipation of turbulent kinetic energy
Р density
μ dynamic viscosity
μt turbulent viscosity
σ Stefan Boltzmann constant (5.669 � 10-8) W/m2-K4
σs scattering coefficient
σ k,σε turbulent Prandtl numbers for k and ε respectively
α thermal diffusivity
Φ phase function
β the coefficient of volume expansion
Ω solid angle
Ω’ ✓ � scattering solid angle heat flux on heat flux off

References [20] ASHRAE, Standard-62.1-2004, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality,
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers,
Atlanta, 2004.
[1] X. Cao, X. Dai, J. Liu, Building energy-consumption status worldwide and the state-
[21] D. Muniak, Regulation Fixtures in Hydronic Heating Installations. Types,
of-the-art technologies for zero-energy buildings during the past decade, Energy
Structures, Characteristics and Applications, Springer, Cham, 2019.
Build. 128 (2016) 198–213, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.06.089.
[22] B.F. Balvedi, E. Ghisi, R. Lamberts, A review of occupant behavior in residential
[2] A. Martinez-Molina, I. Tort-Ausina, S. Cho, J.L. Vivancos, Energy efficiency and
buildings, Energy Build. 174 (2018) 495–505, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
thermal comfort in historic buildings: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 61
enbuild.2018.06.049.
(2016) 70–85, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.03.018.
[23] E. Bourdakis, A. Simone, B.W. Olesen, An experimental study of the effect of
[3] D. Yan, W.O. Brien, T. Hong, D. Yan, W.O. Brien, T. Hong, A. Mahdavi, Occupant
different starting room temperatures on occupant comfort in Danish summer
behavior modeling for building performance simulation : current state and future
weather, Build. Environ. 136 (2018) 269–278, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
challenges, Energy Build. 107 (2015) 264–278, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2018.03.046.
enbuild.2015.08.032.
[24] M. Kharseh, L. Altorkmany, M. Al-khawaj, F. Hassani, Warming impact on the
[4] I. Gaetani, P.J. Hoes, J.L.M. Hensen, Estimating the influence of occupant behavior
energy use of the HVAC system in buildings of different thermal qualities and in
on building heating and cooling energy in one simulation run, Appl. Energy 223
different climates, Energy Convers. Manag. 81 (2014) 106–111, https://doi.org/
(2018) 159–171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.108.
10.1016/j.enconman.2014.02.001.
[5] L. P�erez-lombard, J. Ortiz, I.R. Maestre, J.F. Coronel, Constructing HVAC energy
[25] S. Queiroz, A. Katzschner, D. Gomes, E. Sad, D. Assis, L. Katzschner, Thermal
efficiency indicators, Energy Build. 47 (2012) 619–629, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
comfort comparison and evaluation in different climates, Urban Clim. 23 (2018)
enbuild.2011.12.039.
219–230, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2016.08.007.
[6] B.W. Olesen, E. Mortensen, J. Thorshauge, B. Berg-Munch, Thermal Comfort in a
[26] M. Alejandra Menchaca-Brandan, F. Alonso Dominguez Espinosa, Leon
Room Heated by Different Method, ASHRAE Transactions, Los Angeles Meeting,
R. Glicksman, The influence of radiation heat transfer on the prediction of air flows
vol. 86, 1980. Tech. Paper no. 2556.
in rooms under natural ventilation, Energy Build. 138 (2017) 530–538, https://
[7] J.A. Myhren, S. Holmberg, Flow patterns and thermal comfort in a room with a
doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.12.037.
panel, floor and wall heating, Energy Build. 40 (2008) 524–536, https://doi.org/
[27] P.O. Fanger, B.M. Ipsen, G. Langkilde, B.W. Olessen, N.K. Christensen, S. Tanabe,
10.1016/j.enbuild.2007.04.011.
Comfort limits for asymmetric thermal radiation, Energy Build. 8 (3) (1985)
[8] J.A. Myhren, S. Holmberg, Design considerations with ventilation-radiators :
225–236, https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-7788(85)90006-4.
comparisons to traditional two-panel radiators, Energy Build. 41 (2009) 92–100,
[28] B.W. Olesen, International standards for the indoor environment, Indoor Air 14 (7)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.07.014.
(2004) 18–26, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0668.2004.00268.x.
[9] K. Horikiri, Y. Yao, J. Yao, Modeling conjugate flow and heat transfer in a
[29] P.O. Fanger, N.K. Christensen, Perception of draught in ventilated spaces,
ventilated room for indoor thermal comfort assessment, Build. Environ. 77 (2014)
Ergonomics 29 (2) (2007) 215–235, https://doi.org/10.1080/
135–147, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.03.027.
00140138608968261.
[10] K. Horikiri, Y. Yao, J. Yao, Numerical optimization of thermal comfort
[30] A.B. Daemei, S.R. Eghbali, E.M. Khotbehsara, Bioclimatic design strategies: a
improvement for an indoor environment with occupants and furniture, Energy
guideline to enhance human thermal comfort in the humid climate, J. Build. Eng.
Build. 88 (2015) 303–315, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.12.015.
(2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100758, 100758.
[11] A. Qasim, S. Gao, A. Khaleel, A numerical study on the effects of exhaust locations
[31] S. Schiavon, K. Ho, Dynamic predictive clothing insulation models based on
on energy consumption and thermal environment in an office room served by
outdoor air and indoor operative temperatures, Build. Environ. 59 (2013)
displacement ventilation, Energy Convers. Manag. 117 (2016) 74–85, https://doi.
250–260, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.08.024.
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.03.004.
[32] S. Alam, Impact of Clothing and Activity Level on Energy Consumption and
[12] Iman Asadi, Norhayati Mahyuddin, Payam Shafigh, A review on indoor
Thermal Comfort on the Occupants in the Residential Building in a Cold Climate
environmental quality (IEQ) and energy consumption in building based on
Region, Department of Energy Technology, School of Engineering, Aalto
occupant behavior, Facilities 35 (11/12) (2017) 684–695, https://doi.org/
University, Finland, 2014, 0–7.
10.1108/F-06-2016-0062.
[33] B. Gautam, H.B. Rijal, M. Shukuya, H. Imagawa, A field investigation on the wintry
[13] A.Q. Ahmed, S. Gao, Thermal comfort and energy-saving evaluation of a combined
thermal comfort and clothing adjustment of residents in traditional Nepalese
system in an office room using displacement ventilation, Int. J. Mech. Aerosp. Ind.
houses, J. Build. Eng. 26 (February) (2019) 100886, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Mechatron. Manuf. Eng. 44 (6) (2015) 1085–1090.
jobe.2019.100886.
[14] M. Jain, K.K. Pathak, Author’s accepted manuscript thermal modeling of insulator
[34] L. Wang, J. Kim, X. Jing, H. Yin, Optimal clothing insulation in naturally ventilated
for energy saving in existing residential building, J. Build. Eng. (2018), https://doi.
buildings, Build. Environ. 154 (2019) 200–210, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
org/10.1016/j.jobe.2018.04.012.
buildenv.2019.03.029.
[15] X. Wu, Y. Liu, G. Liu, F. Wang, Z. Wang, Effect of supply air temperature on indoor
[35] Y. Liu, L. Wang, Y. Di, J. Liu, H. Zhou, The effects of clothing thermal resistance
thermal comfort in a room with radiant heating and mechanical ventilation,
and operative temperature on human skin temperature, J. Therm. Biol. 38 (5)
Energy Procedia 121 (2017) 206–213, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
(2013) 233–239, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2013.03.001.
egypro.2017.08.019.
[36] S.A. Nada, H.M. El-Batsh, H.F. Elattar, N.M. Ali, CFD investigation of airflow
[16] T.N. Verma, S.L. Sinha, Contaminant control in the intensive care unit of a hospital,
pattern, temperature distribution and thermal comfort of UFAD system for theater
Appl. Mech. Mater. 592–594 (2231) (2014) 2486–2490. https://doi.org/10.402
buildings applications, J. Build. Eng. 6 (2016) 274–300, https://doi.org/10.1016/
8/www.scientific.net/AMM.592-594.2486, 2002.
j.jobe.2016.04.008.
[17] T.N. Verma, A.K. Sahu, S.L. Sinha, Numerical simulation of air pollution control in
[37] Z. Zhai, Z. Zhang, W. Zhang, Chen, Evaluation of various turbulence models in
hospital, Air Pollut. Contr. (2018) 185–206, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-
predicting airflow and turbulence in enclosed environments by CFD : Part-1 :
7185-0_11. ISBN 978-981-10-7185-0.
summary of Prevalent Turbulence Models, HVAC R Res. 13 (6) (2007) 1–21,
[18] P. Wargocki, D.P. Wyon, Ten questions concerning thermal and indoor air quality
https://doi.org/10.1080/10789669.2007.10391459.
effects on the performance of office work and schoolwork, Build. Environ. 112
[38] Y.J.P. Lin, Z.Y. Xu, Buoyancy-driven flows by a heat source at different levels, Int.
(2016) 359–366, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.11.020.
J. Heat Mass Transf. 58 (2013) 312–321, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[19] ISO EN 7730, Moderate Thermal Environments—Determination of the PMV and
ijheatmasstransfer.2012.11.008.
PPD Indices and Specification of the Conditions for Thermal Comfort, Revised
[39] D. Muniak, Radiators in Hydronic Heating Installations. Structure, Selection and
Version, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 1994, 1994.
Thermal Characteristics, Springer International Publishing, 2017, https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-3-319-55242-2.

21
G.A. Ganesh et al.
[40] D. Muniak, Radiators in Water Heating Installations. Construction, Selection, and
Thermal Characteristics, Scientific and Technical Publishers, 2016, ISBN 978-83-
01-18669-2.
[41] S. Chandrasekhar, Radiative Transfer, Dover Publications, New York, 1960.
[42] Y. Wang, Z. Lian, L. Lan, The effect of turbulence intensity on local skin
temperature and subjective responses to the draft, Energy Build. 43 (10) (2011)
2678–2683, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.06.021.
[43] B.E. Launder, D.B. Spalding, The numerical computation of turbulent flows,
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 3 (1974) 269–289, https://doi.org/10.1016/
0045-7825(74)90029-2.
[44] T.N. Verma, S.L. Sinha, Numerical simulation of contaminant control in the
intensive care unit, J. Med. Imaging Health Inf. 5 (5) (2014) 1–6, https://doi.org/
10.1166/jmihi.2015.1500.
[45] J.K. Lai, E. Merzari, Y.A. Hassan, A. Texas, U. States, International Journal of Heat
and Fluid Flow Sensitivity analyses in a buoyancy-driven closed system with high-
resolution CFD using Boussinesq approximation and variable density models, Int. J.
Heat Fluid Flow 75 (2019) 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijheatfluidflow.2018.11.002.
[46] J. Steven, J. Owen, A. Judith, A. Brown, D. Corey, D. Ernst, N. Long, Science direct
hexahedral mesh generation for computational materials modelling, Procedia Eng.
203 (2017) 167–179, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.803.
[47] H. Wang, H. Wang, F. Gao, P. Zhou, Z.(J.) Zhai, Literature review on pressure–
velocity decoupling algorithms applied to built-environment CFD simulation,
22
Journal of Building Engineering 29 (2020) 101139
Build. Environ. 143 (2018) 671–678, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2018.07.046.
[48] ANSYS Fluent Theory Guide 153, 2013, pp. 724–746, 17.
[49] I. Atmaca, O. Kaynakli, A. Yigit, Effects of radiant temperature on thermal comfort,
Build. Environ. 42 (9) (2007) 3210–3220, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2006.08.009.
[50] Y.A. Cengel, A.J. Ghajar, Heat and Mass Transfer: Fundamentals and Applications,
McGraw Hill Education, 2017.
[51] I. Gaetani, T.U. Eindhoven, P. Hoes, T.U. Eindhoven, J. Hensen, T.U. Eindhoven,
C. Programme, Occupant behavior in building energy simulation : towards a fit-for-
purpose modeling strategy, Energy Build. 121 (2016) 188–204, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.03.038.
[52] O. Kaynakli, M. Kilic, Investigation of indoor thermal comfort under transient
conditions, Build. Environ. 40 (2) (2005) 165–174, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2004.05.010.
[53] Z. Daria, M. Arsen, P. Zbigniew, Impact of personal factors and furniture
arrangement on the thermal plume above a sitting occupant, Build. Environ. 49
(2012) 104–116, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.09.015.
[54] A. Sibo, T.N. Verma, Numerical analysis of natural convection in a room heated
with a radiator and its implication on thermal comfort, J. Therm. Eng. (2019)
(Accepted).