The Acceptable Air Velocity Range for Local Air Movement in The Tropics

The perception of locally applied airflow was studied with tropical subjects who had become passively acclimatized to hot conditions in the course of their day-to-day life. During the experiments, 24 subjects (male and female) performed normal office work in a room equipped with six workstations. They were exposed to local airflow from the front and toward the face at six air velocities (0.15, 0.3, 0.45, 0.6, 0.75, and 0.9 m/s) at ambient temperatures of 26°C, and 23.5°C and local air temperatures of 26°C, 23.5°C, and 21°C. Each combination was maintained for 15 minutes, during which the subjects responded to computer-administered questionnaires on their thermal and draft sensations using visual-analogue scales. The results showed that the subjects preferred air movement within a certain range, i.e., a higher percentage was dissatisfied at both low and high velocity values. Most dissatisfaction with air movement is caused by thermal sensation, with air movement perception accounting for a smaller proportion. The subjects preferred air movement to be between “just right” and “slightly breezy” and preferred their thermal sensation to be between “neutral” and “slightly cool.” The study also identified an acceptable air velocity range from 0.3 up to 0.9 m/s under the experimental conditions. This velocity range is relevant for the design of personalized ventilation in practice. This preferred velocity range is higher than the maximum velocity permissible under ASHRAE Standard 55 (ASHRAE 2004) in situations where subjects have no control over local air movement.

[1]  N. Wong,et al.  Thermal comfort for naturally ventilated houses in Indonesia , 2004 .

[2]  Arsen Krikor Melikov,et al.  Performance of Personalized Ventilation in Conjunction with Mixing and Displacement Ventilation , 2006 .

[3]  Povl Ole Fanger,et al.  Human Response to Five Designs of Personalized Ventilation , 2006 .

[4]  Fred Bauman,et al.  A field study of thermal environments and comfort in office buildings , 1988 .

[5]  O FangerP,et al.  The effect on man's comfort of a uniform air flow from different directions. , 1974 .

[6]  A. Melikov,et al.  Impact of airflow interaction on inhaled air quality and transport of contaminants in rooms with personalized and total volume ventilation , 2003 .

[7]  Taylor Francis Online HVAC & R research , 1995 .

[8]  A. Hwang [Thermal comfort]. , 1990, Taehan kanho. The Korean nurse.

[9]  Standard Ashrae Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy , 1992 .

[10]  Richard de Dear,et al.  Field experiments on occupant comfort and office thermal environments in a hot-humid climate , 1994 .

[11]  Povl Ole Fanger,et al.  Findings of Personalized Ventilation Studies in a Hot and Humid Climate , 2005 .

[12]  K. W. Tham,et al.  Temperature and ventilation effects on performance and neurobehavioral-related symptoms of tropically acclimatized call center operators near thermal neutrality , 2005 .

[13]  J. Toftum,et al.  Air movement--good or bad? , 2004, Indoor air.

[14]  Fariborz Haghighat,et al.  Field study of occupant comfort and office thermal environments in a cold climate , 1997 .

[15]  Povl Ole Fanger,et al.  Perceived air quality and thermal sensation with personalised ventilation system , 2002 .

[16]  Richard de Dear,et al.  Locally controlled air movement preferred in warm isothermal environments , 1994 .

[17]  A. Melikov Personalized ventilation. , 2004, Indoor air.

[18]  K. Cena,et al.  Field study of occupant comfort and office thermal environments in a hot, arid climate , 1999 .

[19]  P. Fanger,et al.  Spot Cooling - Part 1: Human response to cooling with air jet , 1994 .

[20]  Arsen Krikor Melikov,et al.  Personalized ventilation: air terminal devices with high efficiency , 2003 .

[21]  P. Fanger,et al.  Air turbulence and sensation of draught , 1988 .