How the building envelope may affect occupant thermal comfort has been investigated. Alternative envelopes for a high-rise office building, which were chosen to comply with the City of Seattle Energy Conservation Code, were employed. The thermal comfortability of the resulting office settings was studied using the simulation program OFFICE which employs the Fanger Comfort Equation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Energy Conservation for New Building Design, Standard 90–75, New York: American Society of Heating, Refigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.s, 1975.
2.
For example, see Chapter 53 of the Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, California, 1978.
3.
Ordinance 108500, Seattle Code for Energy Conservation, Seattle, Washington, August 1979.
4.
Ordinance 784, Energy Conservation Performance Standards for Residential Construction, Davis, California, October 1975.
5.
EmeryA.F.KippenhanC.J.HeerwagenD.R., The Thermal Implications of the City of Seattle Energy Code, Proceedings of the 1980 Conference on Systems Simulation and Economic Analysis of Solar Heating and Cooling, San Diego, California, January 1980.
6.
HeerwagenD.R.EmeryA.E.KippenhanC.J.VareyG.B.Developing Office Building Design and Operating Strategies using UWENSOL and the Comfort Routine, ASHRAE Transactions, 1980, Vol. 86, Part 1.
7.
HeerwagenD.R.EmeryA.E.KippenhanC.F.JohnsonB.J., The Use of Cost-Effectiveness and Comfort Bases for Selecting from Among Alternative Envelope Design Strategies for a High-Rise Office Building, Proceedings of the Sixth National Passive Solar Conference, Portland, Oregon, September 1981, ppg 256–260.
8.
EmeryA.F.KippenhanC.J.HeerwagenD.R.VareyG.B., The Simulation of Building Heat Transfer for Passive Solar Systems. Energy and Buildings, 3, 1981, ppg. 278–294.
9.
FangerP.O.Thermal Comfort: Analysis and Applications in Environmental Engineering, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1972.
