Nicol, J F; Hacker, J; Spires, B and Davies, H (2009) Suggestion for new approach to overheating diagnostics. Building Research & Information, 37(4), pp. 348-357. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
In a changing climate there is increasing concern about the risk of overheating in UK buildings, particularly those with a low-carbon footprint which cannot rely on mechanical cooling. This gives rise to concern among building professionals about how overheating risk can best be assessed. Current Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) guidance uses a simple definition of overheating as the exceedance of 28C for more than 1% of occupied hours, based on simulations using weather files from a 'design summer year' (DSY). There is increasing evidence that this criterion is both insensitive and open to abuse. This paper uses field surveys of thermal (dis)comfort and the adaptive thinking behind the British and European Standard BS EN15251 to propose a new approach. It takes account of the effect of indoor and outdoor climate on the dissatisfaction of building occupants. An alternative definition of overheating in buildings is proposed, along with an approach to predicting the magnitude and/or frequency of occurrence of overheating in buildings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adaptive thermal comfort; comfort; design summer year; discomfort; overheating; standards |
| Index terms: | thermal comfort, comfort, discomfort, carbon footprint, weather, building services engineer, evidence, summer, overheating, survey, building professional |
| Subjects: | climate science, evaluation and assessment methods, profession, thermal systems, data collection methods, occupational health and safety management, health risk and incident analysis, environmental impact, air quality, environmental engineering |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here