- مبلغ: ۸۶,۰۰۰ تومان
- مبلغ: ۹۱,۰۰۰ تومان
Harbin is located in China’s severe cold area with a long and cold winter. Currently, some buildings are overheated in winter, which not only waste energy, but also may weaken human adaptability to the cold climate. A long-term field tracking study was carried out from 2013 to 2015 covering two space heating periods in Harbin. Two types of residential heating environments, respectively warm exposure and cool exposure environments were investigated to discover relation between different indoor heating temperatures and human thermal responses. Totally, 36 residents volunteered as participants. The subjective survey and environmental parameters monitoring were simultaneously conducted. The results show that all participants could adapt to their thermal environments well. But the participants’ thermal adaptation was evidently discrepant in different exposures. The neutral temperature was 1.9 °C higher in warm exposure than cool exposure sample after clothing insulation standardization, which suggests the possible effects of physiological and psychological adaptation. The discrepancy between AMV and PMV was greater in cool versus warm exposure. The results indicate that a higher thermal comfort zone might be formed for the residents exposing to a high indoor heating temperature for a long period in winter. Furthermore, a broader acceptable temperature range was presented in this climate area than ASHRAE steady-state comfort zone in winter. These findings have far-reaching implication for reasonable energy use.
The long-term indoor thermal exposure during space heating period can impact human thermal adaptability according to the results. Occupants could actively adapt to their indoor heating environments. The occupants’ thermal comfort and acceptance levels were generally high in both exposures. Occupants’ thermal neutrality was always distributed around their mean indoor air temperature. And there are evidently different temperature distributions with AMV and TCV in two exposures. A higher thermal comfort zone was formed in the warm exposure group. Occupants’ neutral temperatures were different in two groups. The neutral temperature was still 1.9 C higher in warm exposure versus cool exposure based on clothing standardization, which verified the physiological and psychological adaptation to some extent. The AMV was always higher than PMV predictions in cool exposure group but they were closer in warm exposure group. The participants’ AMV was much higher in cool exposure than that in warm exposure environment at the overlapped temperature range. And the difference became larger as the PMV prediction moved to the warm side. It indicates that the long-term indoor thermal exposure undermined human’s adaptability to cold climate at different degrees. The occupants’ acclimatization to coldness was better in cool exposure than warm exposure environment