This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
The main purpose of research on occupant behaviour is to enhance building energy performance. However, it is difficult to reduce the energy use without understanding the occupant, their needs and preferences. Individual differences and preferences for the thermal environment in relation to the spatial context are overlooked in the main stream of research. This study investigates the patterns of occupant thermal preference based on individual differences in perceiving the thermal environment to enhance user comfort and energy performance. A novel method of Visual Thermal Landscaping is used, which is a qualitative method to analyse occupant comfort and user behaviour according to the spatial context. This method drives away from the notion of ‘thermal neutrality’ and generic results, rather it opens to details and meaning through a qualitative analysis of personal-comfort, based on individual differences and spatial context information. Field test studies of thermal comfort were applied in five office buildings in the UK, Sweden and Japan with overall 2313 data sets. The primary contribution of the study was the recognition of four patterns of thermal preference, including consistent directional preference; fluctuating preference; high tolerance and sensitive to thermal changes; and high tolerance and not-sensitive to thermal changes. The results were further examined in a longitudinal field test study of thermal comfort. In several cases, occupant thermal comfort and preferences were observed to be influenced by the impact of outdoor conditions, when the windows were fixed. Practical solutions for research, practice and building design were recommended with direct implications on occupant comfort and energy use.
Sally Shahzad; John Kaiser Calautit; Ben Richard Hughes; B.K. Satish; Hom B. Rijal. Patterns of thermal preference and Visual Thermal Landscaping model in the workplace. Applied Energy 2019, 255, 113674 .
AMA StyleSally Shahzad, John Kaiser Calautit, Ben Richard Hughes, B.K. Satish, Hom B. Rijal. Patterns of thermal preference and Visual Thermal Landscaping model in the workplace. Applied Energy. 2019; 255 ():113674.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally Shahzad; John Kaiser Calautit; Ben Richard Hughes; B.K. Satish; Hom B. Rijal. 2019. "Patterns of thermal preference and Visual Thermal Landscaping model in the workplace." Applied Energy 255, no. : 113674.
Sally Shahzad; John Kaiser Calautit; Katrina Calautit; Ben Hughes; Angelo I. Aquino. Advanced personal comfort system (APCS) for the workplace: A review and case study. Energy and Buildings 2018, 173, 689 -709.
AMA StyleSally Shahzad, John Kaiser Calautit, Katrina Calautit, Ben Hughes, Angelo I. Aquino. Advanced personal comfort system (APCS) for the workplace: A review and case study. Energy and Buildings. 2018; 173 ():689-709.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally Shahzad; John Kaiser Calautit; Katrina Calautit; Ben Hughes; Angelo I. Aquino. 2018. "Advanced personal comfort system (APCS) for the workplace: A review and case study." Energy and Buildings 173, no. : 689-709.
The neutral thermal sensation (neither cold, nor hot) is widely used through the application of the ASHRAE seven-point thermal sensation scale to assess thermal comfort. This study investigated the application of the neutral thermal sensation and it questions the reliability of any study that solely relies on neutral thermal sensation. Although thermal-neutrality has already been questioned, still most thermal comfort studies only use this measure to assess thermal comfort of the occupants. In this study, the connection of the occupant’s thermal comfort with thermal-neutrality was investigated in two separate contexts of Norwegian and British offices. Overall, the thermal environment of four office buildings was evaluated and 313 responses (three times a day) to thermal sensation, thermal preference, comfort, and satisfaction were recorded. The results suggested that 36% of the occupants did not want to feel neutral and they considered thermal sensations other than neutral as their comfort condition. Also, in order to feel comfortable, respondents reported wanting to feel different thermal sensations at different times of the day suggesting that occupant desire for thermal comfort conditions may not be as steady as anticipated. This study recommends that other measures are required to assess human thermal comfort, such as thermal preference. Practical application: This study questions the application of neutral thermal sensation as the measure of thermal comfort. The findings indicate that occupant may consider other sensations than neutral as comfortable. This finding directly questions the standard comfort zone (e.g. ASHRAE Standard 55) as well as the optimum temperature, as many occupants required different thermal sensations at different times of the day to feel comfortable. These findings suggest that a steady indoor thermal environment does not guarantee thermal comfort and variations in the room temperature, which can be controlled by the occupant, need to be considered as part of the building design.
Sally Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; John K Calautit; Ben R Hughes. Does a neutral thermal sensation determine thermal comfort? Building Services Engineering Research and Technology 2018, 39, 183 -195.
AMA StyleSally Shahzad, John Brennan, Dimitris Theodossopoulos, John K Calautit, Ben R Hughes. Does a neutral thermal sensation determine thermal comfort? Building Services Engineering Research and Technology. 2018; 39 (2):183-195.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; John K Calautit; Ben R Hughes. 2018. "Does a neutral thermal sensation determine thermal comfort?" Building Services Engineering Research and Technology 39, no. 2: 183-195.
Sally Shahzad; John Kaiser Calautit; Angelo I. Aquino; Diana S.N.M. Nasir; Ben Richard Hughes. A user-controlled thermal chair for an open plan workplace: CFD and field studies of thermal comfort performance. Applied Energy 2017, 207, 283 -293.
AMA StyleSally Shahzad, John Kaiser Calautit, Angelo I. Aquino, Diana S.N.M. Nasir, Ben Richard Hughes. A user-controlled thermal chair for an open plan workplace: CFD and field studies of thermal comfort performance. Applied Energy. 2017; 207 ():283-293.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally Shahzad; John Kaiser Calautit; Angelo I. Aquino; Diana S.N.M. Nasir; Ben Richard Hughes. 2017. "A user-controlled thermal chair for an open plan workplace: CFD and field studies of thermal comfort performance." Applied Energy 207, no. : 283-293.
Sally Shahzad; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit; Diana S.N.M. Nasir. Computational and Field Test Analysis of Thermal Comfort Performance of User-controlled Thermal Chair in an Open Plan Office. Energy Procedia 2017, 105, 2635 -2640.
AMA StyleSally Shahzad, Ben Hughes, John Kaiser Calautit, Diana S.N.M. Nasir. Computational and Field Test Analysis of Thermal Comfort Performance of User-controlled Thermal Chair in an Open Plan Office. Energy Procedia. 2017; 105 ():2635-2640.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally Shahzad; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit; Diana S.N.M. Nasir. 2017. "Computational and Field Test Analysis of Thermal Comfort Performance of User-controlled Thermal Chair in an Open Plan Office." Energy Procedia 105, no. : 2635-2640.
The aim of this work was to investigate the performance of a roof-mounted cooling windcatcher integrated with heat pipes using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and field test analysis. The windcatcher model was incorporated to a 5m x 5m x3 m test room model. The study employed the CFD code FLUENT 15 with the standard k-ɛ model to conduct the steady-state RANS simulation. The numerical model provided detailed analysis of the airflow and temperature distribution inside the test room. The CO2 concentration analysis showed that the system was capable of delivering fresh air inside the space and lowering the CO2 levels. The thermal comfort was calculated using the Predicted Mean Vote (PMV) method. The PMV values ranged between +0.48 to +0.99 and the average was +0.85 (slightly warm). Field test measurements were carried out in the Ras-Al-Khaimah (RAK), UAE during the month of September. Numerical model was validated using experimental data and good agreement was observed between both methods of analysis
John Kaiser Calautit; Angelo I. Aquino; Sally Shahzad; Diana S.N.M. Nasir; Ben Richard Hughes. Thermal Comfort and Indoor air Quality Analysis of a Low-energy Cooling Windcatcher. Energy Procedia 2017, 105, 2865 -2870.
AMA StyleJohn Kaiser Calautit, Angelo I. Aquino, Sally Shahzad, Diana S.N.M. Nasir, Ben Richard Hughes. Thermal Comfort and Indoor air Quality Analysis of a Low-energy Cooling Windcatcher. Energy Procedia. 2017; 105 ():2865-2870.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJohn Kaiser Calautit; Angelo I. Aquino; Sally Shahzad; Diana S.N.M. Nasir; Ben Richard Hughes. 2017. "Thermal Comfort and Indoor air Quality Analysis of a Low-energy Cooling Windcatcher." Energy Procedia 105, no. : 2865-2870.
Two office layouts with high and low levels of thermal control were compared, respectively traditional cellular and contemporary open plan offices. The traditional Norwegian practice provided every user with control over a window, blinds, door, and the ability to adjust heating and cooling. Occupants were expected to control their thermal environment to find their own comfort, while air conditioning was operating in the background to ensure the indoor air quality. In contrast, in the British open plan office, limited thermal control was provided through openable windows and blinds only for occupants seated around the perimeter of the building. Centrally operated displacement ventilation was the main thermal control system. Users’ perception of thermal environment was recorded through survey questionnaires, empirical building performance through environmental measurements and thermal control through semi-structured interviews. The Norwegian office had 35% higher user satisfaction and 20% higher user comfort compared to the British open plan office. However, the energy consumption in the British practice was within the benchmark and much lower than the Norwegian office. Overall, a balance between thermal comfort and energy efficiency is required, as either extreme poses difficulties for the other
Sally Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit. Energy and comfort in contemporary open plan and traditional personal offices. Applied Energy 2017, 185, 1542 -1555.
AMA StyleSally Shahzad, John Brennan, Dimitris Theodossopoulos, Ben Hughes, John Kaiser Calautit. Energy and comfort in contemporary open plan and traditional personal offices. Applied Energy. 2017; 185 ():1542-1555.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit. 2017. "Energy and comfort in contemporary open plan and traditional personal offices." Applied Energy 185, no. : 1542-1555.
In modern offices, user control is being replaced by centrally operated thermal systems, and in Scandinavia, personal offices by open plan layouts. This study examined the impact of user control on thermal comfort and satisfaction. It compared a workplace, which was designed entirely based on individual control over the thermal environment, to an environment that limited thermal control was provided as a secondary option for fine-tuning: Norwegian cellular and British open plan offices. The Norwegian approach provided each user with control over a window, door, blinds, heating and cooling as the main thermal control system. In contrast, the British practice provided a uniform thermal environment with limited openable windows and blinds to refine the thermal environment for occupants seated around the perimeter of the building. Field studies of thermal comfort were applied to measure users’ perception of thermal environment, empirical building performance and thermal control. The results showed a 30% higher satisfaction and 18% higher comfort level in the Norwegian offices compared to the British practices. However, the energy consumption of the Norwegian case studies was much higher compared to the British ones. A balance is required between energy efficiency and user thermal comfort in the workplace.
Sally Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit. A study of the impact of individual thermal control on user comfort in the workplace: Norwegian cellular vs. British open plan offices. Architectural Science Review 2016, 60, 49 -61.
AMA StyleSally Shahzad, John Brennan, Dimitris Theodossopoulos, Ben Hughes, John Kaiser Calautit. A study of the impact of individual thermal control on user comfort in the workplace: Norwegian cellular vs. British open plan offices. Architectural Science Review. 2016; 60 (1):49-61.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit. 2016. "A study of the impact of individual thermal control on user comfort in the workplace: Norwegian cellular vs. British open plan offices." Architectural Science Review 60, no. 1: 49-61.
This study compared building-related symptoms in personal and open plan offices, where high and low levels of control over the thermal environment were provided, respectively. The individualized approach in Norway provided every user with a personal office, where they had control over an openable window, door, blinds, and thermostat. In contrast, the open plan case studies in the United Kingdom provided control over openable windows and blinds only for limited occupants seated around the perimeter of the building, with users seated away from the windows having no means of environmental control. Air conditioning was deployed in the Norwegian case study buildings, while displacement ventilation and natural ventilation were utilized in the British examples. Field studies of thermal comfort were applied with questionnaires, environmental measurements, and interviews. Users’ health was better in the Norwegian model (28%), while the British model was much more energy efficient (up to 10 times). The follow-up interviews confirmed the effect of lack of thermal control on users’ health. A balanced appraisal was made of energy performance and users’ health between the two buildings.
Sally S. Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit. Building-Related Symptoms, Energy, and Thermal Control in the Workplace: Personal and Open Plan Offices. Sustainability 2016, 8, 331 .
AMA StyleSally S. Shahzad, John Brennan, Dimitris Theodossopoulos, Ben Hughes, John Kaiser Calautit. Building-Related Symptoms, Energy, and Thermal Control in the Workplace: Personal and Open Plan Offices. Sustainability. 2016; 8 (4):331.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally S. Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit. 2016. "Building-Related Symptoms, Energy, and Thermal Control in the Workplace: Personal and Open Plan Offices." Sustainability 8, no. 4: 331.
John Kaiser Calautit; Ben Richard Hughes; Sally Salome Shahzad. CFD and wind tunnel study of the performance of a uni-directional wind catcher with heat transfer devices. Renewable Energy 2015, 83, 85 -99.
AMA StyleJohn Kaiser Calautit, Ben Richard Hughes, Sally Salome Shahzad. CFD and wind tunnel study of the performance of a uni-directional wind catcher with heat transfer devices. Renewable Energy. 2015; 83 ():85-99.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJohn Kaiser Calautit; Ben Richard Hughes; Sally Salome Shahzad. 2015. "CFD and wind tunnel study of the performance of a uni-directional wind catcher with heat transfer devices." Renewable Energy 83, no. : 85-99.
Two office layouts with high and low levels of thermal control were compared, respectively Norwegian cellular and British open plan offices. The Norwegian practice provided every user with control over a window, blinds, door, and the ability to adjust heating and cooling. Occupants were expected to control their thermal environment to find their own comfort, while air conditioning was operatingin the background to ensure the indoor air quality. In contrast, in the British office, limited thermal control was provided through openable windows and blinds only for occupants seated around the perimeter of the building. Centrally operated displacement ventilation was the main thermal control system. Users’ perception of thermal environment was recorded through survey questionnaires, empirical building performance through environmental measurements and thermal control through semi-structured interviews. The Norwegian office had35% higher user satisfaction and 20% higher user comfort compared to the British open plan office. However, the energy consumption in the British practice was within the benchmark and much lower than the Norwegian office. Overall, a balance between thermal comfort and energy efficiency is required, as either extreme poses difficulties for the other.
Sally S. Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit. Energy Efficiency and User Comfort in the Workplace: Norwegian Cellular vs. British Open Plan Workplaces. Energy Procedia 2015, 75, 807 -812.
AMA StyleSally S. Shahzad, John Brennan, Dimitris Theodossopoulos, Ben Hughes, John Kaiser Calautit. Energy Efficiency and User Comfort in the Workplace: Norwegian Cellular vs. British Open Plan Workplaces. Energy Procedia. 2015; 75 ():807-812.
Chicago/Turabian StyleSally S. Shahzad; John Brennan; Dimitris Theodossopoulos; Ben Hughes; John Kaiser Calautit. 2015. "Energy Efficiency and User Comfort in the Workplace: Norwegian Cellular vs. British Open Plan Workplaces." Energy Procedia 75, no. : 807-812.