Thermal Comfort Inside and Outside Buildings

  • Richard de DearEmail author
  • Jungsoo Kim


Engineers and architects are required to consider human occupants or pedestrians during the design process. The topic of human thermal comfort is often considered to be a long way from the traditional, hard science disciplines normally associated with engineering. Nevertheless there is a scientific basis for thermal comfort. The topic draws on several scientific disciplines, including physics (especially heat transfer and meteorology) and physiology. But most importantly of all, thermal comfort falls within the scope of psychology, since it is defined as ‘that condition of mind that expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment’. Some general principles are relevant to the topic of thermal comfort both indoors and outdoors, but there are some very striking differences between the two settings as well, and these differences have significant implications for engineering of indoor and semi-outdoor climates.


Thermal comfort PMV/PPD HVAC Adaptive comfort Natural ventilation 


  1. ASHRAE (2013) ANSI/ASHRAE standard 55-2013: thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouyer J, Vinet J, Delpeche P, Carre S (2007) Thermal comfort assessment in semi-outdoor environments: application to comfort study in stadia. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 95:936–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. de Dear R (1998) A global database of thermal comfort field experiments. ASHRAE Trans 104(1b):1141–1152Google Scholar
  4. de Dear R (2011) Revisiting an old hypothesis of human thermal perception: alliesthesia. Build Res Inf 39(2):108–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Dear R, Brager G (1998) Developing an adaptive model of thermal comfort and preference. ASHRAE Trans 104(1):145–167Google Scholar
  6. Deuble MP, de Dear R (2012) Mixed-mode buildings: a double standard in occupants’ comfort expectations. Build Environ 54:53–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fanger PO (1970) Thermal comfort. Danish Technical Press, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  8. Heschong L (1979) Thermal delight in architecture. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  9. Hoeppe P (2002) Different aspects of assessing indoor and outdoor thermal comfort. Energy Build 34:661–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim J, de Dear R (2012) Impact of different building ventilation modes on occupant expectations of the main IEQ factors. Build Environ 57:184–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Matzarakis A, Rutz F, Mayer H (2010) Modelling radiation fluxes in simple and complex environments: basics of the RayMan model. Int J Biometeorol 54(2):131–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Morgan C, de Dear R (2003) Weather, clothing and the thermal adaptation to indoor climate. Clim Res 24(3):267–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nakano J, Tanabe S (2004) Thermal comfort and adaptation in semi-outdoor environments. ASHRAE Trans 110:543–553Google Scholar
  14. Nakayoshi M, Kanda M, Shi R, de Dear R (2015) Outdoor thermal physiology along human pathways: a study using a wearable measurement system. Int J Biometeorol 59(5):503–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Spagnolo J, de Dear R (2003) A field study of thermal comfort in outdoor and semi-outdoor environments in subtropical Sydney Australia. Build Environ 38(5):721–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Yang W, Wong NH, Jusuf SK (2013) Thermal comfort in outdoor urban spaces in Singapore. Build Environ 59:426–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Zagreus L, Huizenga C, Arens E, Lehrer D (2004) Listening to the occupants: a web-based indoor environmental quality survey. Indoor Air 14(8):65–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Architecture, Design and PlanningUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations