2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.11.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Local and overall thermal comfort in an aircraft cabin and their interrelations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
42
1
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
2
42
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This result is inconsistent with those of previous studies that reported that the preferred ventilation position should face the head (Stevens et al, 1974;Crawshaw et al, 1975;Hensel, 1981;Li, 2004;Zhang, 2005;Park et al, 2011). In these studies most researchers applied the personal air distribution methods targeting the breathing zone without considering the requirement for thermal comfort.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 79%
“…This result is inconsistent with those of previous studies that reported that the preferred ventilation position should face the head (Stevens et al, 1974;Crawshaw et al, 1975;Hensel, 1981;Li, 2004;Zhang, 2005;Park et al, 2011). In these studies most researchers applied the personal air distribution methods targeting the breathing zone without considering the requirement for thermal comfort.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 79%
“…For example, this study set the metabolic activity level to 75 W for passengers in a relaxed mood (in-flight) and the thermal resistance of the passengers' clothing (clo) to 0.57 clo for summer and 1.01 clo for winter [3]. The external work accomplished was assumed to be 0 W. Considering the low relative humidity and low pressure situation in an aircraft cabin [31,34], the partial water vapor pressure (p w ) of ambient air was set to 221.8 Pa, which corresponds to an average relative humidity of 13% inside a cruising aircraft. For simplicity, this study assumed the mean radiation temperature to be the same as the air temperature in the cabin.…”
Section: Design Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[1]. Park et al [34] showed that 25% of passengers were not satisfied with the thermal environment, as the upper body was too warm or the lower body was too cold. Therefore, the design of the cabin environment needs to be further improved to ensure that it is comfortable and healthy for the flying public and crew members.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Air distribution in airliner cabins is important for the thermal comfort and well-being of travelers and crew members [2]. However, many recent studies [3,4] found that thermal comfort in airliner cabins was not satisfactory. The spatial air temperature distributions in airliner cabins were not uniform, and many passengers found that their upper bodies were too warm and lower bodies too cold.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%