IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i19p6843-d1249024.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining Occupant-Comfort Responses to Indoor Humidity Ratio in Conventional and Vernacular Dwellings: A Rural Indian Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Suchi Priyadarshani

    (Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India)

  • Roshan R. Rao

    (Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India)

  • Monto Mani

    (Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India)

  • Daniel Maskell

    (Department of Architecture & Civil Engineering, BRE Centre in Innovative Construction Materials (BRE CICM), University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK)

Abstract

Optimum indoor humidity is often associated with comfort and overall well-being. Occupant comfort is often evaluated with a focus on “thermal comfort” using the PMV (predicted mean vote), PDD (predicted percentage of dissatisfied), and adaptive thermal comfort models. Humidity-determined comfort parameters, like skin and respiratory comfort, are well acknowledged in the scientific community, but strangely not considered for indoor comfort computations. This study proposes a new computational approach for describing and evaluating humidity-related skin comfort in buildings using skin temperature, evaporative loss, and skin wettedness as critical parameters. The Development and validation of the computational model was demonstrated through a case study in a rural Indian context. The case study involves real-time monitoring of indoor environmental parameters and humidity-determined occupant comfort votes recorded through a novel aggregated humidity comfort vote method. The simulation results were compared with the community comfort/health survey. It was observed that, even at neutral skin temperatures, an increase in skin wettedness increases the thermal sensation vote. Clothing varies according to gender, community, and personal preferences, influencing physiological parameters which determine comfort. The acceptable humidity ratio was found to be in the range of 17.4 to 22.6 g-wv/kg-da for Indian participants. Including humidity-related comfort parameters in building simulation tools would aid in selecting building materials for improved indoor comfort.

Suggested Citation

  • Suchi Priyadarshani & Roshan R. Rao & Monto Mani & Daniel Maskell, 2023. "Examining Occupant-Comfort Responses to Indoor Humidity Ratio in Conventional and Vernacular Dwellings: A Rural Indian Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-27, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:19:p:6843-:d:1249024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/19/6843/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/19/6843/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Wallner & Ute Munoz & Peter Tappler & Anna Wanka & Michael Kundi & Janie F. Shelton & Hans-Peter Hutter, 2015. "Indoor Environmental Quality in Mechanically Ventilated, Energy-Efficient Buildings vs. Conventional Buildings," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-16, November.
    2. Peter Wallner & Peter Tappler & Ute Munoz & Bernhard Damberger & Anna Wanka & Michael Kundi & Hans-Peter Hutter, 2017. "Health and Wellbeing of Occupants in Highly Energy Efficient Buildings: A Field Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-11, March.
    3. Peeters, Leen & Dear, Richard de & Hensen, Jan & D'haeseleer, William, 2009. "Thermal comfort in residential buildings: Comfort values and scales for building energy simulation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(5), pages 772-780, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hélène Niculita-Hirzel, 2022. "Latest Trends in Pollutant Accumulations at Threatening Levels in Energy-Efficient Residential Buildings with and without Mechanical Ventilation: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-12, March.
    2. Chengju Wang & Juan Wang & Dan Norbäck, 2022. "A Systematic Review of Associations between Energy Use, Fuel Poverty, Energy Efficiency Improvements and Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-29, June.
    3. Taleghani, Mohammad & Tenpierik, Martin & Kurvers, Stanley & van den Dobbelsteen, Andy, 2013. "A review into thermal comfort in buildings," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 201-215.
    4. Enescu, Diana, 2017. "A review of thermal comfort models and indicators for indoor environments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1353-1379.
    5. Wang, Zhe & Hong, Tianzhen, 2020. "Learning occupants’ indoor comfort temperature through a Bayesian inference approach for office buildings in United States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    6. Wang, Zhu & Wang, Lingfeng & Dounis, Anastasios I. & Yang, Rui, 2012. "Multi-agent control system with information fusion based comfort model for smart buildings," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 247-254.
    7. Rama Curiel, José Adrián & Thakur, Jagruti, 2022. "A novel approach for Direct Load Control of residential air conditioners for Demand Side Management in developing regions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    8. Jin Wei & Fangsi Yu & Haixiu Liang & Maohui Luo, 2020. "Thermal Performance of Vertical Courtyard System in Office Buildings Under Typical Hot Days in Hot-Humid Climate Area: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, March.
    9. Arteconi, Alessia & Patteeuw, Dieter & Bruninx, Kenneth & Delarue, Erik & D’haeseleer, William & Helsen, Lieve, 2016. "Active demand response with electric heating systems: Impact of market penetration," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 636-648.
    10. Filippín, C. & Flores Larsen, S., 2012. "Summer thermal behaviour of compact single family housing in a temperate climate in Argentina," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 3439-3455.
    11. Roberto Robledo-Fava & Mónica C. Hernández-Luna & Pedro Fernández-de-Córdoba & Humberto Michinel & Sonia Zaragoza & A Castillo-Guzman & Romeo Selvas-Aguilar, 2019. "Analysis of the Influence Subjective Human Parameters in the Calculation of Thermal Comfort and Energy Consumption of Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-23, April.
    12. Xiaoping Liu & Xiaojiao Wu & Linjing Chen & Rui Zhou, 2018. "Effects of Internal Partitions on Flow Field and Air Contaminant Distribution under Different Ventilation Modes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, November.
    13. Lorenzo Capasso & Daniela D’Alessandro, 2021. "Housing and Health: Here We Go Again," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-9, November.
    14. Masoud Esfandiari & Suzaini Mohamed Zaid & Muhammad Azzam Ismail & Mohammad Reza Hafezi & Iman Asadi & Saleh Mohammadi, 2021. "A Field Study on Thermal Comfort and Cooling Load Demand Optimization in a Tropical Climate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    15. Zhang, Sheng & Cheng, Yong & Fang, Zhaosong & Huan, Chao & Lin, Zhang, 2017. "Optimization of room air temperature in stratum-ventilated rooms for both thermal comfort and energy saving," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 420-431.
    16. Krüger, E.L. & Laroca, C., 2010. "Thermal performance evaluation of a low-cost housing prototype made with plywood panels in Southern Brazil," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 661-672, February.
    17. Zhixing Li & Mimi Tian & Xiaoqing Zhu & Shujing Xie & Xin He, 2022. "A Review of Integrated Design Process for Building Climate Responsiveness," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-35, September.
    18. Radhi, Hassan & Eltrapolsi, Ali & Sharples, Stephen, 2009. "Will energy regulations in the Gulf States make buildings more comfortable - A scoping study of residential buildings," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(12), pages 2531-2539, December.
    19. Jenkins, D.P. & Peacock, A.D. & Banfill, P.F.G. & Kane, D. & Ingram, V. & Kilpatrick, R., 2012. "Modelling carbon emissions of UK dwellings – The Tarbase Domestic Model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 596-605.
    20. Yohanis, Yigzaw Goshu & Mondol, Jayanta Deb, 2010. "Annual variations of temperature in a sample of UK dwellings," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 681-690, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:19:p:6843-:d:1249024. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.