Thermal Comfort of the Student Recreation and Wellness Center Kent State University Campus

1
Thermal Comfort of the Student Recreation and
Wellness CenterKent State University Campus

• By Brian Blystone
• Environmental Technology III
• Professor Adil Sharag-Eldin, Ph.D.

2
Hypothesis

• Due to the shading system being inadequate, the
  south-facing glass façade adjacent to the fitness
  floor of the SRWC has too much heat gain for the
  users thermal comfort.

3
Research Methods

• HOBOs
• Modeling Analysis
• PMV Calculations

4
HOBOs Objective

• To place one HOBO in the fitness floor area that
  would be affected by the glass façade and place
  another HOBO under the same air supply but in an
  area not affected by the wall.
• Compare the Results

5
HOBOs Locations
6
Control Desk (13 Days)
7
Control Desk Analysis

• 13 Day Average 73.9F
• ACSM Standard for Control
• Desk Areas 72F to 78F

8
Fitness Floor (13 Days)
9
Fitness Floor Analysis

• 13 Day Average 71.4F
• ACSM Standard for Fitness Floor
• Areas 68F to 72F

10
Body Responses to Dry Bulb Temperature

• Temperature Body Response
• 78F Activity level is falling, difficult to
  fall asleep or stay asleep, Good for
  bathing or showering
• 75F When clothed feelings of fatigue, and
  sleepiness. Optimum temperature when
  unclothed
• 72F Best temperature for year round with
  activity with light clothing
• 70F Midpoint for summer comfort.
• 68F Midpoint for winter comfort. Some
  may feel cool.
• Data from ACSM Health/Fitness Facility Standards
  and Guidelines.

11
Modeling Objective

• The objective of building the scale model on the
  fitness floor and the shading system was to
  determine if it was adequate in shading during
  the overheated period.

12
Overheated Period
13
Overheated Period
14
Model AnalysisMarch/September

• 9 a.m. 3 p.m.
• Noon

15
Model AnalysisApril/August

• Exterior Shading Exterior and
  Interior
• at Noon Shading
  at Noon

16
Model AnalysisMay/July

• 9 a.m. 3 p.m.
• Noon

17
Model AnalysisJune 21st

• Noon

18
PMV Calculations Objective

• PMV stands for Predicted Mean Vote
• Based on a scale from 3 to 3. -3 being the
  coldest and 3 being the hottest.
• Using www.penman.es.mq.edu.au/rdedear/pmv/ a PMV
  number is reached based on the conditions and on
  what most people would like
• This was done to see if the existing and standard
  conditions are comfortable .

19
Standard Conditions

• Input Parameters
• Environmental Parameters Personal Parameters
• Ambient temperature (C) 21.1 Subject
  weight (kg) 80
• Radiant temperature (C) 21.1 Subject
  surface area (m2) 1.8
• Barometric pressure (hPa) 1013 Clothing
  insulation (clo) 0.36
• H2O vapor pressure (hPa) Metabolic rate (W
  m-2) 240
• Relative humidity () 50.0 Work rate
  - external (W m-2) 0
• Room air velocity (m s-1) 0.13 Exposure
  time (min) 30
•  Comfort Model Results
• Effective Temperature (ET) 21.11
• Standard Effective Temperature (SET) 25.09
•  Discomfort (DISC) 0.20 Comfortable
• Thermal Sensation (TSENS) 0.01 Neutral
• Predicted Mean Vote (PMV) 2.30 Warm
• Predicted Percentage Dissatisfied (PPD) 88.34
•  Heat Stress Index (HSI) 47.47
•  

20
Existing Conditions

• Input Parameters
• Environmental Parameters Personal Parameters
• Ambient temperature (C) 21.8 Subject
  weight (kg) 80
• Radiant temperature (C) 21.8 Subject
  surface area (m2) 1.8
• Barometric pressure (hPa) 1013 Clothing
  insulation (clo) 0.36
• H2O vapor pressure (hPa) 6.7 Metabolic
  rate (W m-2) 240
• Relative humidity () 25.6 Work rate
  - external (W m-2) 0
• Room air velocity (m s-1) 0.13 Exposure
  time (min) 30
•  Comfort Model Results
• Effective Temperature (ET) 20.47
• Standard Effective Temperature (SET) 24.63
•  Discomfort (DISC) 0.18 Comfortable
• Thermal Sensation (TSENS) 0.01 Neutral
• Predicted Mean Vote (PMV) 2.34 Warm
• Predicted Percentage Dissatisfied (PPD) 89.42
•  Heat Stress Index (HSI) 43.12

21
Thermal Comfort Chart
22
Conclusions

• The dry bulb temperatures of the fitness floor
  are well within the standards set by ACSM.
• The shading system is designed very well for
  shading the overheated period.
• PMV values have shown that conditions are
  adequate.
• Therefore, if there is a problem with the thermal
  comfort of the fitness floor area of the SRWC, it
  is not because of direct heat gain.