Teli, D; James, P A B and Jentsch, M F (2015) Investigating the principal adaptive comfort relationships for young children. Building Research & Information, 43(3), pp. 371-382. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Thermal comfort surveys in school classrooms suggest that children have different thermal preferences to adults. This implies a need to revisit the current adult-based thermal comfort models. This paper investigates the principal adaptive comfort relationships that form the basis of adaptive comfort theory, using 2693 pupil thermal sensation responses and measured classroom temperatures from surveys in two naturally ventilated school buildings. The data were examined in two steps. Firstly, each survey set, obtained over one-day visits to the schools, was examined in order to derive the relationship between indoor temperature change and comfort vote with minimum impact of adaptation. Secondly, the data set was investigated over the entire survey period in relation to the weather experienced by the pupils in order to estimate their time for adaptation to outdoor temperature changes. The analysis shows that the basic adaptive comfort relationships are valid for children. However, a difference was found for the correlation coefficients of the comfort temperature to the outdoor running mean temperature between the schools, and a mismatch between their adaptive comfort equations. It is proposed that the difference in the consistency of the weather during the tests is the main reason for this discrepancy.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | adaptive comfort; children; griffiths constant; natural ventilation; school buildings; school classrooms; thermal comfort |
| Index terms: | adaptive comfort, indoor temperature, thermal sensation, adaptation, school classroom, weather, survey, comfort, classroom, pupil, estimate, thermal comfort, mismatch, natural ventilation, children, school building, thermal preference |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, environmental engineering, demography, construction type, financial and cost management, user focus, occupational health and safety management, sociology, air quality, human factors, engineering problems, environmental science |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Design Practice, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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