De Dear, R (2011) Revisiting an old hypothesis of human thermal perception: Alliesthesia. Building Research & Information, 39(2), pp. 108-117. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Many new technologies and approaches to the provision of comfort inside buildings such as displacement ventilation, mixed-mode strategies, personally controllable (task-ambient) designs, chilled beams as well as some old but recently fashionable ones such as natural ventilation are prompting a rethink of the accepted comfort wisdom. How can a single combination of thermal environmental parameters be deemed unacceptable in a conventional heating ventilation and air-conditioning setting, and yet be regarded as acceptable, or even pleasant, in a naturally ventilated or mixed-mode setting? Why do current comfort standards prescribe static and isothermal conditions for comfort in one building, and dynamic and spatially variable indoor climates for comfort in another? The phenomenon of alliesthesia is used to differentiate thermal pleasure from thermal neutrality and acceptability. Alliesthesia is proposed as the logical framework of a new approach to thermal comfort modelling, building on the solid foundation of multi-node physiological models currently available in the literature.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | acceptability; alliesthesia; asymmetry; isothermal; static; thermal comfort; thermal perception; thermal pleasure; thermoreceptor; transient |
| Index terms: | neutrality, thermal pleasure, modelling, ventilation, new technology, thermal comfort, beam, strategy, indoor climate, comfort, natural ventilation, thermal perception |
| Subjects: | air quality, analytical methods, environmental science, ethical practice, occupational health and safety management, structural engineering, building performance, innovation and technology management, environmental engineering, management |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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