Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Using Thermostats for Indoor Climate Control in Offices: The Effect on Thermal Comfort and Heating/Cooling Energy Use
The most commonly used thermostat control variable in heating, ventilating and air-conditioning systems is air temperature. However, people's thermal comfort responds to operative temperature more directly than air temperature. Will the adoption of operative temperature based control lead to better thermal comfort and how will this affect the energy use? To get a better understanding about these questions, simulations have been performed based on three heating and cooling systems in three different geographical locations (Copenhagen, Paris and Rome). The three system are fan-coil system representing convective system and two radiant systems: floor heating/cooling system and radiant ceiling heating/cooling panel system.The results showed that air temperature based thermostat control and operative temperature based thermostat control had different impacts on fan-coil system and radiant systems. For fan-coil system, the use of operative temperature based thermostat control had better thermal comfort conditions and higher energy use than that of air temperature based thermostat control. For the two radiant systems, the results were the opposite. The results were almost the same in different locations. Besides, the thermal comfort difference between the two controls of north office was smaller than that of south office. For fan-coil system, in south office, compared with air temperature based thermostat control, the hours of Cat. I (-0.2≤PMV≤0.2) increased 8.3% for building in Copenhagen, 8.8% for Paris and 14.2% for Rome and hours of Cat. IV (PMV<-0.7 or PMV>0.7) decreased 2.5%, 3.9% and 7.1% respectively when operative temperature based thermostat control was used. Meanwhile, total energy supply increased 13.7% in Copenhagen, 14.3% in Paris and 12.7% in Rome. For radiant systems, the total energy use reduced 3.3% to 8.3% depending on location and type of system when operative temperature based control was used. With this reduction of energy use, thermal comfort in south office was still within recommended ...
Using Thermostats for Indoor Climate Control in Offices: The Effect on Thermal Comfort and Heating/Cooling Energy Use
The most commonly used thermostat control variable in heating, ventilating and air-conditioning systems is air temperature. However, people's thermal comfort responds to operative temperature more directly than air temperature. Will the adoption of operative temperature based control lead to better thermal comfort and how will this affect the energy use? To get a better understanding about these questions, simulations have been performed based on three heating and cooling systems in three different geographical locations (Copenhagen, Paris and Rome). The three system are fan-coil system representing convective system and two radiant systems: floor heating/cooling system and radiant ceiling heating/cooling panel system.The results showed that air temperature based thermostat control and operative temperature based thermostat control had different impacts on fan-coil system and radiant systems. For fan-coil system, the use of operative temperature based thermostat control had better thermal comfort conditions and higher energy use than that of air temperature based thermostat control. For the two radiant systems, the results were the opposite. The results were almost the same in different locations. Besides, the thermal comfort difference between the two controls of north office was smaller than that of south office. For fan-coil system, in south office, compared with air temperature based thermostat control, the hours of Cat. I (-0.2≤PMV≤0.2) increased 8.3% for building in Copenhagen, 8.8% for Paris and 14.2% for Rome and hours of Cat. IV (PMV<-0.7 or PMV>0.7) decreased 2.5%, 3.9% and 7.1% respectively when operative temperature based thermostat control was used. Meanwhile, total energy supply increased 13.7% in Copenhagen, 14.3% in Paris and 12.7% in Rome. For radiant systems, the total energy use reduced 3.3% to 8.3% depending on location and type of system when operative temperature based control was used. With this reduction of energy use, thermal comfort in south office was still within recommended ...
Using Thermostats for Indoor Climate Control in Offices: The Effect on Thermal Comfort and Heating/Cooling Energy Use
Wang, Haiying (Autor:in) / Olesen, Bjarne W. (Autor:in) / Kazanci, Ongun Berk (Autor:in)
01.01.2019
Wang , H , Olesen , B W & Kazanci , O B 2019 , ' Using Thermostats for Indoor Climate Control in Offices: The Effect on Thermal Comfort and Heating/Cooling Energy Use ' , Energy and Buildings , vol. 188-189 , pp. 71-83 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.12.030
Aufsatz (Zeitschrift)
Elektronische Ressource
Englisch
DDC:
690
Using thermostats for indoor climate control in office buildings: The effect on thermal comfort
| BASE | 2017
Using Thermostats for Indoor Climate Control in Office Buildings: The Effect on Thermal Comfort
| BASE | 2017
Thermal comfort and use of thermostats in Finnish homes and offices
| Online Contents | 2009
Thermal comfort and use of thermostats in Finnish homes and offices
| Online Contents | 2009