8
Personalized ventilation: evaluation of different air terminal devices Arsen K. Melikov * , Radim Cermak, Milan Majer International Centre for Indoor Environment and Energy, Technical University of Denmark, Building 402, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark Abstract Personalized ventilation (PV) aims to provide clean air to the breathing zone of occupants. Its performance depends to a large extent on the supply air terminal device (ATD). Five different ATDs were developed, tested and compared. A typical office workplace consisting of a desk with mounted ATDs was simulated in a climate chamber. A breathing thermal manikin was used to simulate a human being. Experiments at room air temperatures of 26 and 20 8C and personalized air temperatures of 20 8C supplied from the ATDs were performed. The flow rate of personalized air was changed from less than 5 up to 23 l/s. Tracer gas was used to identify the amount of personalized air inhaled by the manikin as well as the amount of exhaled air re-inhaled. The heat loss from the body segments of the thermal manikin was measured and used to calculate the equivalent temperature for the whole body as well as segments of the body. An index, personal exposure effectiveness, was used to assess the performance of ATDs in regard to quality of the air inhaled by the manikin. The personal exposure effectiveness increased with the increase of the airflow rate from the ATD to a constant maximum value. A further increase of the airflow rate had no impact on the personal exposure effectiveness. Under both isothermal and non-isothermal conditions the highest personal exposure effectiveness of 0.6 was achieved by a vertical desk grill followed by an ATD designed as a movable panel. The ATDs tested performed differently in regard to the inhaled air temperature used as another air quality indicator, as well as in regard to the equivalent temperature. The results suggest that PV may decrease significantly the number of occupants dissatisfied with the air quality. However, an ATD that will ensure more efficient distribution and less mixing of the personalized air with the polluted room air needs to be developed. # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Personalized ventilation; Air distribution; Air quality; Thermal comfort 1. Introduction Total-volume ventilation and air-conditioning of rooms is at present the method most used in practice. Mixing and displacement room air distribution are the main principles applied. Displacement ventilation has been shown to provide occupants with better air quality, especially in rooms with non-passive, heatedcontaminant sources [1]. However, unlike mixing ventilation, vertical air temperature difference in rooms with displacement ventilation exists with low air temperatures near the floor. High air velocities often exist near the floor as well. Thus, if not well designed, the risk of local discomfort due to draught and vertical temperature difference in rooms with displacement ventilation is high [2,3]. Studies [4,5] show that the same air is perceived by people as being of poor quality at a high air temperature but of better quality at a low air temperature. Therefore, assessment of quality of the inhaled air by measurements should be based on its temperature, humidity and gas concentration [6]. In both rooms with mixing ventilation and those with displacement ventilation, the temperature of the air that will reach the breathing zone of occupants (especially under summer con- ditions) will be relatively high. This will affect occupants’ satisfaction with the perceived air quality. A field study in rooms with displacement ventilation found that almost 50% of the occupants were not satisfied with the indoor air quality [7,8]. The air quality perceived by the occupants will improve when more fresh air is supplied to the space. However, this may cause draught discomfort for some occupants. In practice, rooms are used by occupants with different physiological and psychological response, clothing, activity, individual preferences to the air temperature and movement, time response of the body to changes of the room tempera- ture, etc. Thus, total-volume ventilation has limitations and is often unable to provide each occupant simultaneously with high level of thermal comfort and air quality. Often, occupants in rooms with mixing or displacement ventilation have to compromise between preferred thermal comfort and perceived air quality, because some people are very sensitive to air movement while others are sensitive to the air quality. The compromise is different for each occupant and also dif- fers in time. The disadvantage of the total-volume ventilation Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836 Abbreviations: PV, personalized ventilation; ATD, air terminal device * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (A.K. Melikov). 0378-7788/02/$ – see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII:S0378-7788(02)00102-0

Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

  • Upload
    sudoku

  • View
    215

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

research stuff

Citation preview

Page 1: Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

Personalized ventilation: evaluation of different air terminal devices

Arsen K. Melikov*, Radim Cermak, Milan MajerInternational Centre for Indoor Environment and Energy, Technical University of Denmark, Building 402, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark

Abstract

Personalized ventilation (PV) aims to provide clean air to the breathing zone of occupants. Its performance depends to a large extent on the

supply air terminal device (ATD). Five different ATDs were developed, tested and compared. A typical office workplace consisting of a desk

with mounted ATDs was simulated in a climate chamber. A breathing thermal manikin was used to simulate a human being. Experiments at

room air temperatures of 26 and 20 8C and personalized air temperatures of 20 8C supplied from the ATDs were performed. The flow rate of

personalized air was changed from less than 5 up to 23 l/s. Tracer gas was used to identify the amount of personalized air inhaled by the

manikin as well as the amount of exhaled air re-inhaled. The heat loss from the body segments of the thermal manikin was measured and used

to calculate the equivalent temperature for the whole body as well as segments of the body. An index, personal exposure effectiveness, was

used to assess the performance of ATDs in regard to quality of the air inhaled by the manikin. The personal exposure effectiveness increased

with the increase of the airflow rate from the ATD to a constant maximum value. A further increase of the airflow rate had no impact on the

personal exposure effectiveness. Under both isothermal and non-isothermal conditions the highest personal exposure effectiveness of 0.6 was

achieved by a vertical desk grill followed by an ATD designed as a movable panel. The ATDs tested performed differently in regard to the

inhaled air temperature used as another air quality indicator, as well as in regard to the equivalent temperature. The results suggest that PV may

decrease significantly the number of occupants dissatisfied with the air quality. However, an ATD that will ensure more efficient distribution

and less mixing of the personalized air with the polluted room air needs to be developed.

# 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Personalized ventilation; Air distribution; Air quality; Thermal comfort

1. Introduction

Total-volume ventilation and air-conditioning of rooms is

at present the method most used in practice. Mixing and

displacement room air distribution are the main principles

applied. Displacement ventilation has been shown to provide

occupants with better air quality, especially in rooms with

non-passive, heated contaminant sources [1]. However, unlike

mixing ventilation, vertical air temperature difference in

rooms with displacement ventilation exists with low air

temperatures near the floor. High air velocities often exist

near the floor as well. Thus, if not well designed, the risk of

local discomfort due to draught and vertical temperature

difference in rooms with displacement ventilation is high

[2,3]. Studies [4,5] show that the same air is perceived by

people as being of poor quality at a high air temperature but of

better quality at a low air temperature. Therefore, assessment

of quality of the inhaled air by measurements should be based

on its temperature, humidity and gas concentration [6]. In both

rooms with mixing ventilation and those with displacement

ventilation, the temperature of the air that will reach the

breathing zone of occupants (especially under summer con-

ditions) will be relatively high. This will affect occupants’

satisfaction with the perceived air quality. A field study in

rooms with displacement ventilation found that almost 50% of

the occupants were not satisfied with the indoor air quality

[7,8]. The air quality perceived by the occupants will improve

when more fresh air is supplied to the space. However, this

may cause draught discomfort for some occupants.

In practice, rooms are used by occupants with different

physiological and psychological response, clothing, activity,

individual preferences to the air temperature and movement,

time response of the body to changes of the room tempera-

ture, etc. Thus, total-volume ventilation has limitations and

is often unable to provide each occupant simultaneously

with high level of thermal comfort and air quality. Often,

occupants in rooms with mixing or displacement ventilation

have to compromise between preferred thermal comfort and

perceived air quality, because some people are very sensitive

to air movement while others are sensitive to the air quality.

The compromise is different for each occupant and also dif-

fers in time. The disadvantage of the total-volume ventilation

Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836

Abbreviations: PV, personalized ventilation; ATD, air terminal device* Corresponding author.

E-mail address: [email protected] (A.K. Melikov).

0378-7788/02/$ – see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

PII: S 0 3 7 8 - 7 7 8 8 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 0 2 - 0

Page 2: Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

principle is that often room air movement is changed due to

furniture rearrangement and this may increase occupants’

complaints of draught and/or poor air quality.

Environmental conditions acceptable for most occupants

in a room may be achieved by providing each occupant with

the possibility to generate and control his/her own preferred

local environment. Personalized ventilation (PV) aims to

provide each occupant with personalized clean air direct to

the breathing zone. Each occupant can control the environ-

ment at his/her workplace. Thus, occupants’ satisfaction and

productivity can be increased as a result of improved air

quality, thermal comfort and control over the environment.

Energy use may be lowered, depending on system design

and operation. In order to improve the quality of the inhaled

air, clean personalized air should reach the breathing zone

unmixed with the polluted room air. The velocity should be

low in order to avoid draught.

In a calm, comfortable environment, upward free convec-

tion movement exists around the human body due to the

temperature difference between the room air and the surface

of the clothing and of the skin of bare body parts. The free

convection flow becomes weak when the temperature differ-

ence is small. The airflow is slow and laminar with a thin

boundary layer at the lower body parts, and fast and turbulent

with a thick boundary layer at the height of the head. The free

convection movement will change the skin temperature due to

convection heat transfer and will thus affect man’s thermal

sensation. The free convection flow transports air, which

might be contaminated from the lower part of the space,

upward to the breathing zone. It also carries the bioeffluents

and vapor emitted from the human body. Furthermore, occu-

pants’ breathing generates an air movement due to exhalation.

The interaction between the airflow from the PV, the free

convection flow around the body and the airflow of exhalation

is of primary importance for occupants’ thermal comfort and

inhaled air quality [6]. The interaction is influenced by the

strength of the free convection flow and the thickness of its

boundary layer, the characteristics of the invading flow gen-

erated by the PV (mean velocity, velocity profile, turbulence

intensity, direction, temperature, etc.), the posture, shape and

area of the occupant’s body exposed to the invading flow, the

clothing design, etc.

The supply air terminal device (ATD) is an essential part

of any PV system. It plays a major role in the distribution of

air around the human body and thus, determines occupants’

thermal comfort and perceived air quality.

A study on performance of five different supply ATDs in

regard to occupants’ thermal comfort and inhaled air quality

was designed and performed. The results are presented in

this paper.

2. Experimental method

2.1. Experimental facilities and conditions

A typical office workplace, consisting of a desk with a

personal computer, was simulated in a climate chamber. The

ATDs were mounted on the desk. The climate chamber was

5 m � 6 m � 2:5 m. It is possible to maintain temperature

and relative humidity of the air inside the chamber with a

high degree of accuracy. The velocity generated by the

ventilation system of the chamber is lower than 0.06 m/s.

A detailed description of the climate chamber is given in [9].

A breathing thermal manikin consisting of 16 body seg-

ments was used to simulate a human being. The manikin sat on

an office chair in front of the computer at a distance of

approximately 0.15 m from the desk. During most of the

tests, it was in an upright position. However, several tests were

also performed with the manikin leaning forward (approxi-

mately 0.1 m from the upright position). The surface tem-

perature of the manikin was controlled to be equal to the skin

temperature of an average person in thermal comfort and heat

loss from each body segment was measured. The manikin was

dressed as specified later in this section.

The manikin was equipped with an artificial lung that simu-

lates the human breathing function. The breathing cycle (inha-

lation, exhalation and pause) and the amount of respiration air as

well as temperature and humidity of the exhaled air were con-

trolled. The artificial lung was adjusted to simulate breathing

Nomenclature

cE;N2O concentration of N2O in exhaled air (ppm)

cI concentration of SF6 in inhaled air (ppm)

cI,0 concentration of SF6 in inhaled air without

personalized ventilation (ppm)

cI;SF6SF6 concentration in inhaled air (ppm)

cI;N2O concentration of N2O in inhaled air (ppm)

cP concentration of SF6 in inhalation zone (ppm)

cPV concentration of SF6 in personalized air (ppm)

cPV;SF6SF6 concentration in personalized air (ppm)

cR concentration of SF6 in exhaust room air

(ppm)

cS concentration of SF6 in supply room air (ppm)

cS;SF6SF6 concentration in air supplied to the

chamber (ppm)

C thermal resistance offset of skin temperature

control system of thermal manikin equal to

0.054 (K m2/W)

Qt measured sensible heat loss (W/m2)

teq manikin-based equivalent temperature (8C)

Dteq,h difference in manikin-based equivalent tem-

perature for the head (8C)

Dtinh difference in temperature of inhaled and room

air (8C)

Greek letters

eP personal exposure effectiveness

eRI re-inhaled exposure index

eV ventilation effectiveness

830 A.K. Melikov et al. / Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836

Page 3: Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

of an average sedentary person performing light physical work:

breathing frequency of 10 times/min, volume of 6 l/min, breath-

ing cycle of 2.5 s inhalation, 2.5 s exhalation and 1.0 s break,

and exhaled air with a temperature of 34 8C and a relative

humidity of 95%. The air was exhaled from the nose and

inhaled through the mouth. A mixture of 90% CO2 and 10%

N2O (dinitrogen oxide) was used to mark the air exhaled by the

manikin. The two gases have the same physical properties

(same density) and do not react with each other [6]. The

temperature of the inhaled air was measured by a fast thermistor

mounted inside the mouth cavity of the manikin. The breathing

manikin is described in detail by Melikov et al. [6,10].

Five different ATDs were developed and studied. The

ATDs are schematically shown in Fig. 1. The movable panel

(MP) allows the direction of the personalized airflow in

relation to the occupant to be changed within a wide range.

The results discussed in this paper were obtained with the

MP positioned 0.2 m in front of the manikin’s face and 0.3 m

above the nose. The flow of personalized air was directed

toward the manikin’s face. The direction of the personalized

airflow from the computer monitor panel (CMP), mounted

on the monitor at a distance of 40 cm from the edge of the

desk, could be changed on a vertical plane. The results for

this ATD reported in the following were obtained when it

was inclined at 208 toward the manikin (isothermal condi-

tions) and when inclined 108 apart from the manikin (non-

isothermal conditions). The vertical desk grill (VDG) and

the horizontal desk grill (HDG) mounted at the edge of the

desk provide, respectively, a vertical and a horizontal flow of

personalized air direct to the breathing zone of the occupant

or against the occupant’s body. During the tests, two of the

ATDs, namely CMP and VDG, were tested also in modified

versions, CMP-mod and VDG-mod having a 50% larger and

a 50% smaller cross-sectional area, respectively. The last

ATD, the personal environments1 module (PEM) consists

of two nozzles mounted at the two edges of the desk. They

allow for changes of the direction of the personalized air in

horizontal and vertical planes. In this experiment, the noz-

zles were located at a distance of 0.8 m from the manikin,

generating air jets directed toward its face. This device is

described in detail in [11,12], is available on the market, and

was provided by the manufacturer.

Isothermal (winter) conditions with an operative tempera-

ture of 20 8C and a personalized air temperature of 20 8C and

non-isothermal (summer) conditions with an operative tem-

perature of 26 8C and a personalized air temperature of 20 8Cwere simulated in the climate chamber (the room air tem-

perature was equal to the mean radiant temperature). Experi-

mentswereperformedatairflowratesof less than5upto23 l/s.

During the ‘‘summer’’ experiments, the manikin was dressed

with underwear, short-sleeved T-shirt, pants, socks and shoes,

giving a total clothing insulation of 0.062 m2�8C/W (0.4 clo)

[13]. During the ‘‘winter’’ experiments, the clothing garment

was underwear, short-sleeved T-shirt, long-sleeved shirt,

sweatshirt, pants, socks and shoes, providing a total thermal

insulation of 0.155 m2�8C/W (1.0 clo). In both cases, the

manikin was seated on the office chair with an additional

thermal insulation of 0.023 m2�8C/W (0.15 clo).

2.2. Measuring procedure

A constant dose of tracer gas, sulphur hexafloride (SF6),

was used to mark continuously the air in the chamber.

Complete mixing of the tracer gas with the air supplied to

the chamber was achieved as the tracer gas was dosed to the air

long before it entered the chamber. The personalized air was

kept free of the tracer gas. As already discussed, a mixture of

CO2 and N2O was dosed in the air exhaled by the manikin.

The concentration of SF6 and N2O was measured in the air

inhaled by the breathing thermal manikin, in the air supplied

to the climate chamber and in the air supplied by the PV

system. The measurements were made by a gas monitor

based on the photo-acoustic infrared detection method of

measurement. The concentration measured under steady-

state conditions during the last 30 min of each experiment

was averaged and analyzed.

During the experiments the inhalation took 2.5 s of a 6 s

breathing cycle; only the temperature measured during the

inhalation period was averaged and used in the analyses.

2.3. Criteria for assessment

Several indices have been used to assess the air distribu-

tion efficiency in rooms and around human body. Ventilation

effectiveness, eV, is widely used:

eV ¼ cR � cS

cP � cS

(1)

where cR is concentration of pollution in exhaust room air, cS

the concentration of pollution in supply room air, cP the

concentration of pollution in the inhalation zone.

This index is indefinitely large when cS and cP are equal.

Furthermore, it is difficult to compare the performance of

different ATDs based on ventilation effectiveness when a

large portion of personalized air is inhaled. Brohus [14]

Fig. 1. Air terminal devices studied: movable panel (MP), computer

monitor panel (CMP), vertical desk grill (VDG), horizontal desk grill

(HDG) and personal environments1 module (PEM).

A.K. Melikov et al. / Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836 831

Page 4: Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

defined the breathing (inhalation) zone as a semisphere with

a radius of 0.3 m. However, as shown by Melikov et al. [6]

this definition is not accurate, especially with PV, due to the

complex airflow conditions.

The aim of PV is to provide occupants with 100% clean

personalized air. In order to assess easily the performance of

PV with different ATDs, an index, personal exposure effec-

tiveness, eP, expressed as the percentage of personalized air

in inhaled air, was used [22]:

eP ¼ cI;0 � cI

cI;0 � cPV

(2)

where cI,0 is the concentration of pollution in the inhaled air

without PV, cI the concentration of pollution in the inhaled

air, cPV is concentration of pollution in personalized air.

This index is equal to one when 100% of personalized air

is inhaled and it is equal to zero if no personalized air is

inhaled. A carefully designed and properly maintained PV

system should provide clean air with no pollutants, i.e.

cPV ¼ 0. For this condition, Eq. (2) can be simplified to:

eP ¼ cI;0 � cI

cI;0(3)

During the experiments without PV, the SF6 concentration

in the climate chamber was uniform and the SF6 concentra-

tion in the inhaled air was equal to the SF6 concentration in

the air supplied to and exhausted from the chamber. There-

fore, in the present study, eP was modified as:

eP ¼ cS;SF6� cI;SF6

cS;SF6� cPV;SF6

(4)

where cS;SF6is the SF6 concentration in the air supplied to the

chamber (ppm), cPV;SF6the SF6 concentration in the perso-

nalized air (ppm), cI;SF6the SF6 concentration in the inhaled

air (ppm).

The re-inhaled exposure index [6] was used to assess the

amount of exhaled air re-inhaled by an occupant due to the

interaction of airflow of personalized air and airflow of

exhalation:

eRI ¼cI;N2O

cE;N2O

(5)

where cI;N2O is the concentration of N2O in the inhaled air

(ppm), cE;N2O the concentration of N2O in the exhaled air

(ppm).

Manikin-based equivalent temperature, teq, was used to

assess the performance of the ATDs in regard to occupants’

thermal comfort [15]. The manikin-based equivalent tem-

perature is defined as the temperature of a uniform enclosure

in which a thermal manikin with realistic skin surface

temperature would lose heat to the environment at the same

rate as it would in the actual environment. In this study, the

manikin-based equivalent temperature, teq, was calculated

by the following expression:

teq ¼ 36:4 � CQt (6)

where 36.4 is the deep body temperature (8C), Qt the

measured sensible heat loss (W/m2), C the thermal resis-

tance offset of the surface temperature control system of the

thermal manikin equal to 0.054 (K m2/W).

3. Results and discussion

The purpose of PV is to achieve the highest possible

quality of the air inhaled by occupants by providing clean air

at the breathing zone. Thus, the quality of the inhaled air

when PV is applied should be better than with a total-volume

ventilation system (mixing and displacement). Ideally, the

inhaled air should consist of 100% personalized air, i.e.

eP ¼ 1.

Fig. 2 compares the ventilation effectiveness obtained

with the tested ATDs under isothermal conditions at differ-

ent flow rates. The results show that the ventilation effec-

tiveness increases with the flow rate. However, it is rather

difficult to find the amount of personalized air inhaled by the

manikin as well as to rank the performance of the tested

ATDs. Therefore, the personal exposure effectiveness index

(Eq. (2)) was used in this study.

The personal exposure effectiveness of the ATDs is

compared in Figs. 3 and 4 for isothermal and non-isothermal

conditions, respectively. The personal exposure effective-

ness as a function of the flow rate is shown in the figures. The

performance of the ATDs was different and it changed with

the flow rate. It was also affected by the air temperature

conditions. The results showed that an increase in the flow

rate from zero has no immediate effect on the personal

exposure effectiveness. Only when a certain initial flow rate

is reached does the personal exposure effectiveness for most

of the ATDs studied start to increase rapidly with the flow

rate, i.e. the personalized air penetrates the free convection

flow around the body and reaches the face of the manikin.

The initial flow rate, at which the personal exposure effec-

tiveness starts to increase, depends on the distance of the

ATD from the occupant as well as on the design and size

(cross-section) of the ATD. It is also clear from the results

Fig. 2. The ventilation effectiveness obtained with the tested ATD as a

function of the flow rate of personalized air under isothermal conditions:

personalized air temperature and room air temperature 20 8C.

832 A.K. Melikov et al. / Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836

Page 5: Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

shown in the figures that the increase in the personal

exposure effectiveness becomes marginal at a certain flow

rate until it reaches a steady-state maximum value. The flow

rate at which the maximum personalized exposure effec-

tiveness is achieved is referred to in this paper as a minimum

flow rate.

The results of this investigation showed that for the flow

rates studied (up to 23 l/s) the ATDs were not able to provide

100% of personalized air in the manikin’s inhalation. The

highest personal exposure effectiveness, i.e. the highest

amount of personalized air in the inhaled air, was reached

by CMP-mod, 0.75 at a rather high flow rate of 21 l/s under

non-isothermal conditions. The performance of this ATD is

discussed later in this paper.

The maximum personal exposure effectiveness achieved

by the VDG was 0.6 at a minimum airflow rate of approxi-

mately 10 l/s. The minimum flow rate needed in order to

achieve maximum personal exposure effectiveness for the

remaining ATDs was: 5 l/s for HDG, 10 l/s for PEM and

20 l/s for CMP and MP. The performance of VDG and MP

was high for a relatively wide range of airflow rates. These

two ATDs, especially VDG, performed best under non-

isothermal conditions. Faulkner et al. [12] compared the

performance of three ATDs similar to VDG, HDG and PEM

based on air change effectiveness and pollutant removal

efficiency indices. These indices were calculated based on

data from concentration measurements at several points

around a heated but not breathing manikin, including a

point 3 cm below the tip of the nose. They also identified

that VDG and HDG provided more personalized air to the

face of the manikin than PEM. PEM located far from the

manikin generates a turbulent jet, which is fully developed

and therefore, well mixed with the polluted surrounding air

by the time it reaches the face of the manikin.

The size of the ATDs had a different impact on their

performance. As already mentioned, two of the tested ATDs,

VDG and CMP, were modified: the cross-sectional area of

VDG was decreased by 50% and the cross-sectional area of

CMP was increased by 50%. The two new ATDs are referred

to in the following as VDG-mod and CMP-mod. Fig. 5

compares the performance of the modified and the original

ATD under isothermal conditions. The comparison shows

that for the VDG, the change in the size had almost no

impact on the personalized exposure effectiveness. How-

ever, the change of the cross-sectional area of the CMP had a

considerable impact on the performance of the ATD. Much

greater personal exposure effectiveness, up to 0.75, was

achieved by enlargement of this ATD. However, the results

in the figure also show that much higher airflow rates were

needed for this ATD in order for it to perform better than the

rest of the tested ATDs. In fact, personalized air was inhaled

by the manikin first when the flow rate from CMP-mod

increased above 13 l/s. A considerable difference in the

personal exposure effectiveness was observed for CMP-

mod under both isothermal and non-isothermal conditions.

Under non-isothermal conditions the personal exposure

effectiveness with this ATD was below 0.1 for the whole

range of tested airflow rates. Smoke visualization indicated

that under non-isothermal conditions the low-velocity

Fig. 3. Personal exposure effectiveness as a function of the airflow rate

from ATDs. Isothermal (winter) conditions: room air temperature 20 8C,

personalized air temperature 20 8C. Horizontal desk grill (HDG), vertical

desk grill (VDG), personal environments1 module (PEM), computer

monitor panel (CMP) and movable panel (MP).

Fig. 4. Personal exposure effectiveness as a function of the airflow rate

from ATDs. Non-isothermal (summer) conditions: room air temperature

26 8C, personalized air temperature 20 8C. Horizontal desk grill (HDG),

vertical desk grill (VDG), personal environments1 module (PEM),

computer monitor panel (CMP) and movable panel (MP).

Fig. 5. Comparison of the performance of VDG and VDG-mod and CMP

and CMP-mod under isothermal conditions. VDG-mod has a 50% smaller

cross-sectional area than VDG and CMP-mod has a 50% larger area than

CMP.

A.K. Melikov et al. / Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836 833

Page 6: Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

airflow from CMP-mod dropped on the desk and the perso-

nalized air mixed with the room air. The results of the

comparison shown in Fig. 5 demonstrate the importance

of the airflow interaction at the breathing zone; this must be

carefully considered during the design of PV systems in

practice. It was found that the relationships presented in

Figs. 3, 4 and 5 depend on the posture of the manikin.

Experiments on this effect are in progress.

The present standards and guidelines recommend ventila-

tion rates from 4 to 10 l/s occupant in offices without

smoking and up to 30 l/s occupant when some smoking is

allowed [16,17]. ATD with a large outlet, providing laminar

airflow with a low velocity that will not cause draught

discomfort for the occupants, has been previously suggested

by Melikov [18] as one of the design recommendations for

PV systems. Such an ATD will make it possible to provide

the high airflow rate of 30 l/s occupant, as recommended in

the guidelines [17], at relatively low velocity without local

thermal discomfort. In practice, however, most often 10 l/s

per occupant may be required. Under these conditions, better

results will be achieved by a relatively small ATD, such as

VDG, compromising for the inhaled air quality.

The different airflow distribution achieved by the tested

ATDs had a significant impact on the temperature of the

inhaled air as well as on the amount of re-inhaled air. The

ventilation effectiveness (eV), the personal exposure effec-

tiveness (eP), the re-inhaled exposure index (eRI, in %), and

the difference in the temperature of the inhaled air with and

without PV (Dtinh), for the tested ATDs under both isother-

mal and non-isothermal conditions, are listed in Table 1(a

and b). The difference in the equivalent temperature for

the head (Dteq,h), identified with and without PV, is listed in

the table as well. This parameter will be discussed later in

the paper. The parameters are listed in the table for two flow

rates of personalized air. The first flow rate, 10 l/s, represents

the minimum amount of outdoor air typically required by the

ventilation standards and guidelines [16,17] per building

occupant today. The second flow rate corresponds to the

minimum flow rate of personalized air needed to achieve

maximum personal exposure effectiveness with each of the

tested ATDs. For VDG and PEM, these two flow rates are

identical.

Similar to the findings in [6], the results of this study show

that a rather small amount of exhaled air (<1%) was re-

inhaled with the tested ATDs. Nevertheless, in this regard

two of the tested ATDs, VDG and PEM performed best; less

than 0.3% of the exhaled air was re-inhaled by the manikin

with this ATD. For CMP and MP, the amount of re-inhaled

air increased with the increase of the flow rate. The opposite

tendency was observed for PEM. The amount of re-inhaled

air was higher under non-isothermal conditions in compar-

ison with isothermal conditions for all ATDs.

In a calm environment, people inhale mainly the air from

the free convection flow around the body. Therefore, the

temperature of the inhaled air is higher than the ambient air

temperature. The inhaled air temperature without PV mea-

sured during this experiment was 21.6 8C at a room air

temperature of 20 8C and 28.1 8C at a room air temperature

of 26 8C. The results of the present study show that the

temperature of the inhaled air generally decreased with an

increase in the flow rate from the ATDs, under both iso-

thermal and non-isothermal conditions. The personalized air

was able to penetrate the free convection flow around the

body. However, under isothermal conditions, the inhaled air

temperature with PV was measured only slightly lower than

the inhaled temperature without PV and nearly the same for

Table 1

Ventilation effectiveness (eV), personal exposure effectiveness (eP), re-inhaled exposure index (eRI), inhaled air temperature difference (Dtinh) and manikin-

based equivalent temperature difference for the head (Dteq,h) identified with the tested ATDs under isothermal and non-isothermal conditions

Air terminal device Flow rate of personalized air (l/s) eV eP eRI Dtinh (8C) Dteq,h (8C)

(a) Isothermal (winter) conditionsa

HDG 10 1.61 0.38 0.19 �0.6 �4.5

5 1.54 0.35 0.21 �0.3 �0.8

VDG 10 1.92 0.48 0.03 �0.6 �3.9

PEM 10 1.45 0.31 0.20 �1.0 �3.1

CMP 10 1.35 0.26 0.46 �0.8 �0.8

20 1.82 0.45 0.35 �0.9 �3.1

MP 10 1.69 0.41 0.56 �0.3 �0.7

20 2.38 0.58 0.66 �0.5 �2.5

(b) Non-isothermal (summer) conditionsb

HDG 10 1.30 0.23 0.49 �2.2 �3.2

5 1.32 0.24 0.48 �2.1 �0.7

VDG 10 2.27 0.56 0.30 �5.1 �6.0

PEM 10 1.52 0.34 0.25 �3.3 �3.1

CMP 10 1.39 0.28 0.67 �2.9 �2.0

20 1.59 0.37 0.75 �4.5 �3.6

MP 10 1.47 0.32 0.61 �3.2 �2.4

20 2.00 0.50 0.74 �4.6 �4.2

aRoom air 20 8C, 30% RH; personalized air 20 8C, 30% RH.bRoom air 26 8C, 30% RH, personalized air 20 8C, 30% RH.

834 A.K. Melikov et al. / Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836

Page 7: Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

all ATDs studied. The inhaled air temperature decreased

substantially by increasing the temperature difference

between the personalized air and the room air

(Table 1(b)). Under non-isothermal conditions (room air

temperature 26 8C), the ATD with the greatest ability to

decrease the inhaled air temperature was VDG. The inhaled

air temperature decreased by 5 8C from the inhaled air

temperature without PV. The decrease of inhaled air tem-

perature by MP and PEM was also high, whereas HDG

decreased the inhaled air temperature by only about 2 8C.

Increasing the temperature difference, the inhaled air tem-

perature may further be decreased; however, this may

decrease the amount of personalized air in the inhaled air,

due to a buoyancy effect, and may also cause thermal

discomfort for the occupant due to local cooling of the body.

The quality of the inhaled air is the most important

criterion for performance assessment of PV systems. How-

ever, it is also important that at comfortable temperatures the

PV does not affect occupants’ thermal comfort and that in a

warm environment it provides the body with cooling. As

already mentioned, the manikin-based equivalent tempera-

ture was used in the present study to assess the performance

of the ATDs in respect to occupants’ thermal comfort. The

equivalent temperature for the whole body and some of the

16 body segments decreased when the flow rate of perso-

nalized air increased. The ability of the ATDs tested to affect

the whole-body heat loss was evaluated by calculating the

difference in the manikin-based equivalent temperature

caused by the PV and the equivalent temperature measured

without a PV system. The results obtained at the minimum

flow rate for each of the tested ATDs are compared in Fig. 6.

The equivalent temperature measured without PV (reference

condition) was 21.1 and 26.6 8C at room temperatures of 20

and 26 8C, respectively.

The comparison in Fig. 6 shows that under isothermal

(winter) conditions the cooling effect is low, 0.4 8C for HDG

and CMP, and 0.8 8C for VDG and PEM. Thus, occupants

may feel slightly cooler with VDG and PEM. Occupants

may decrease the flow rate through these two ATDs, which

will improve their thermal comfort, but will also decrease

the personal exposure effectiveness, i.e. the quality of the

inhaled air. Under non-isothermal (summer) conditions (26/

20 8C), the cooling effect of all ATDs, except MP, is around

1 8C. Under these conditions, the cooling effect of MP is

almost twice as high, 1.9 8C. This cooling effect, even

though small, may be sufficient for many occupants who

need only minor adjustment of the local thermal environ-

ment. Tszuki et al. [11] tested two ATDs and reported

differences in the cooling power as well. A decrease of

the personalized air temperature (if possible) can further

increase the cooling effect of the body caused by the PV

system.

Draught, defined as unwanted local cooling of the body

due to air movement, is one of the most frequent complaints

in practice. Studies show that the neck and the feet are the

body parts most sensitive to draught [19]. The body parts

directly exposed to the personalized air can be cooled more

than is acceptable for the occupants. For example, if occu-

pants’ arms and hands are exposed to cool air supplied

upward from the edge of the table, the occupant will feel

uncomfortable and his/her performance may decrease even

when the whole body feels thermally comfortable. The

draught sensation increases when mean velocity and turbu-

lence intensity increase and air temperature decreases.

Furthermore, airflow toward the front of the body causes

less discomfort than airflow from the back [20,21]. The

tested ATDs distribute the air with relatively high velocity

mainly at the front of the body, i.e. the head, the chest, the

arms and the hands. For most of the tested ATDs (except

HDG), the equivalent temperature measured for the head at

the minimum airflow needed to achieve maximum perso-

nalized exposure effectiveness was lower than the other

body segments of the manikin, i.e. the head was cooled

most. The performance of the tested ATDs in this regard can

be seen in Table 1(a and b). The difference in the equivalent

temperature for the head (Dteq,h), measured with PV and

without PV is listed in the table. The greatest cooling effect

was measured with VDG under both isothermal and non-

isothermal conditions. The cooling effect measured with

CMP and MP under non-isothermal conditions was high as

well. In general, it may be expected that occupants, in order

to decrease draught discomfort, will use PVat low flow rates,

and this will cause a decrease in the amount of inhaled

personalized air (the personal exposure effectiveness

decreases when the flow rate decreases) and an increase

in the inhaled air temperature. These changes will have a

negative impact on the quality of the air as perceived by

occupants.

In general, it may be expected that two of the tested ATDs,

namely VDG and MP, will perform well in practice since

they will not affect occupants’ general thermal sensation

significantly and will provide more personalized air in

Fig. 6. Decrease in the whole-body manikin-based equivalent temperature

caused by personalized ventilation from the reference condition (without

personalized ventilation). The effect of the tested ATDs is compared. The

comparison is made for the minimum flow rate (shown in the figure)

needed to achieve maximum personal exposure effectiveness. Winter

conditions (room and personalized air temperature of 20 8C) and summer

conditions (room air temperature of 26 8C and personalized air

temperature of 20 and 23 8C) are compared.

A.K. Melikov et al. / Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836 835

Page 8: Melikov Etal Energy and Buildings

inhalation. Occupants may reduce the warmth sensation in

summer using the cooling power of MP. However, human

response to these designs needs to be identified before

applying them in practice. This research is in progress.

The tests performed and reported in this paper were limited

to only a few of many possible conditions that would occur in

practice. The performance of HDG and VDG will depend on

the posture of the occupant (seated upright or leaning forward

or backward) which may change in time. In the case of MP, the

preferences of the occupants in regard to the distance between

their face and the ATD may be different. Occupants may

change flow rate, temperature and direction of personalized

air during the day and this will affect the performance of PV. It

may be possible in the future to introduce a control system that

will to some extent compensate for these changes. The results

of this study reveal that further research is needed in order to

develop ATDs with better performance than those tested and

reported in this paper.

4. Conclusions

The performance of five ATDs for a PV system was tested

in regard to occupants’ thermal comfort and quality of

inhaled air. A breathing thermal manikin was used to

simulate a human being. Both isothermal and non-isother-

mal conditions were examined.

An index, personal exposure effectiveness, expressed as

the percentage of personalized air in inhaled air, was used to

assess the performance of the tested ATDs. The personal

exposure effectiveness increased with the increase of the

airflow rate from the ATDs to a constant maximum value,

which was not affected by a further increase of the airflow.

Under both isothermal and non-isothermal conditions and an

airflow rate below 15 l/s, the highest personal exposure

effectiveness, 0.6, was achieved by a VDG providing per-

sonalized air upward to the occupant’s face. A MP allowing

for a change of airflow direction in relation to the occupant,

had a high performance as well.

The amount of exhaled air re-inhaled by the manikin was

rather small with all tested ATDs.

The temperature of the inhaled air decreased with the

increase of the personalized airflow. The lowest temperature

of the inhaled air was achieved by VDG.

The VDG provided greatest cooling of the manikin’s

head. In practice, this may cause draught discomfort for

the occupants.

Further research on the development of ATDs that gen-

erate airflow with minimum mixing of the personalized air

with the polluted room air is recommended.

Acknowledgements

This research was performed with support from the

Danish Technical Research Council (STVF).

References

[1] H. Brohus, P.V. Nielsen, Personal exposure in displacement

ventilated rooms, Indoor Air 6 (1996) 157–167.

[2] A.K. Melikov, J.B. Nielsen, Local thermal discomfort due to draft

and vertical temperature difference in rooms with displacement

ventilation, ASHRAE Transactions 96 (1989) 1050–1057.

[3] G. Pitchurov, K. Naidenov, A.K. Melikov, G. Langkilde, Field study

of occupants thermal comfort in rooms with displacement ventilation,

in: Proceedings of Roomvent, September 2002, Copenhagen,

Denmark, submitted for publication.

[4] L. Fang, G. Clausen, P.O. Fanger, Impact of temperature and humidity

on the perception of indoor air quality, Indoor Air 8 (1998) 80–90.

[5] L. Fang, G. Clausen, P.O. Fanger, Impact of temperature and

humidity on chemical and sensory emissions from buildings

materials, Indoor Air 9 (1999) 193–201.

[6] A.K. Melikov, J. Kaczmarczyk, L. Cygan, Indoor air quality assessment

by a breathing thermal manikin, Indoor Air, submitted for publication.

[7] K. Naidenov, G. Pitchurov, G. Naidenov, A. K. Melikov, Performance

of displacement ventilation in practice, in: Proceedings of Roomvent,

September 2002, Copenhagen, Denmark, submitted for publication.

[8] A.K. Melikov, K. Naydenov, G. Pitchurov, G. Langkilde, Field study

on occupant comfort and office thermal environment in rooms with

displacement ventilation, Indoor Air, submitted for publication.

[9] P. Kjerluf-Jensen, P.O. Fanger, Y. Nishi, A.P. Gagge, A new type test

chamber in Copenhagen and New Haven for common investigation

of man’s thermal comfort and physiological reactions, ASHRAE

Journal January 1975. Vol. 17, No 1, 65–68.

[10] A.K. Melikov, J. Kaczmarczyk, L. Cygan, Indoor air quality

assessment by a breathing thermal manikin, Proceedings of Room-

vent 1 (2000) 101–106.

[11] K. Tsuzuki, E.A. Arens, F.S. Bauman, D.P. Wyon, Individual thermal

comfort control with desk-mounted and floor-mounted task/ambient con-

ditioning (TAC) systems, Proceedings of Indoor Air 2 (1999) 368–373.

[12] D. Faulkner, W.J. Fisk, D.P. Sullivan, D.P. Wyon, Ventilation

efficiencies of task/ambient conditioning systems with desk-mounted

air supplies, Indoor Air 9 (1999) 273–281.

[13] ISO, ISO standard 7730, Moderate Thermal Environments-Determi-

nation of the PMV and PPD Indices and Specification of the

Conditions for Thermal Comfort, International Standards Organiza-

tion, Geneva, 1994.

[14] H. Brohus, Measurement of personal exposure using a breathing

thermal manikin, in: Proceedings of Ventilation’97 on Global

Developments in Industrial Ventilation, Vol. 2, 1997, pp. 781–791.

[15] S. Tanabe, E.A. Arens, F.S. Bauman, H. Zhang, T.L. Madsen, Evalua-

ting thermal environments by using a thermal manikin with controlled

skin surface temperature, ASHRAE Transactions 100 (1) (1994) 39–48.

[16] ASHRAE, ASHRAE Standard 62-1989, Ventilation for acceptable

indoor air quality, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and

Air-conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, 1989.

[17] CEN, CR 1752, Ventilation for Buildings—Design Criteria for the

Indoor Environment, European Committee for Standardization,

Geneva, 1998.

[18] A.K. Melikov, Design of Localised Ventilation, in: Proceeding of the

20th International Congress of Refrigeration, IIR/IIF, September

1999. Sydney, Australia, paper 746.

[19] P.O. Fanger, A.K. Melikov, H. Hanzawa, J.W. Ring, Air turbulence

and sensation of draught, Energy and Buildings 12 (1) (1988) 21–39.

[20] J. Toftum, G. Zhou, A.K. Melikov, Effect of airflow direction on

human perception of draught, in: Proceedings of CLIMA 2000,

August 1997, Brussels, Belgium, paper 366.

[21] E. Mayer, R. Schwab, Direction of low turbulent air flow and thermal

comfort, Proceedings of Healthy Buildings 88 (1988) 577–588.

[22] A.K. Melikov, R. Cermak, M. Majer, Personalized ventilation:

performance of different air terminal devices, in: Proceedings of

CLIMA 2000, September 2001, Napoli, Italy, paper 547.

836 A.K. Melikov et al. / Energy and Buildings 34 (2002) 829–836