Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDevonshire, J. M.en_US
dc.contributorSayer, J. R.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2007-06-20T15:54:36Z
dc.date.available2007-06-20T15:54:36Z
dc.date.issued2003
dc.identifier98016en_US
dc.identifier.otherUMTRI-2003-32en_US
dc.identifier.otherPB2004 105839en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/55189
dc.description"November 2003."en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 32-33)en_US
dc.description.abstractTwo layers of an infrared-reflective (IRR) film were used in alternating combinations (no treatment, one layer, and two layers) over the driver-side window of a stationary car. In Phase 1 of the experiment, cabin air temperature was held constant at one of two levels (75° F and 90° F [24° C and 32° C]) while subjects rated their thermal comfort. In Phase 2, air temperature was adjusted by fixed steps according to the subjects’ responses (“too hot” or “too cold”). In Phase 1, the IRR treatment significantly improved localized thermal comfort (on the left forearm, which was exposed to direct solar irradiance), but not whole body thermal comfort (although ratings for whole body comfort followed the expected trend). In Phase 2, IRR treatment resulted in subjects indicating that they were comfortable at an average air temperature of 2.5° F (1.4° C) higher than in the untreated condition. The results indicate that reducing radiant heat by the application of an IRR treatment affects subjective assessments of thermal comfort and allows occupants to maintain the same level of comfort in a warmer vehicle cabin. This may imply greater fuel economy savings than have previously been estimated because less cooling of the cabin is required in a vehicle with IRR-treated glazing. The range of conditions investigated in this study was limited, and the results should therefore be considered preliminary. Future research should examine how the following factors influence the relationships observed in this study: the percentage of IR rejection provided by the treatment, the total surface area of the treatment, the duration and amount of the subjects’ irradiant exposure, and a wider range of ambient weather conditions.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipMichigan University, Ann Arbor, Industry Affiliation Program for Human Factors in Transportation Safetyen_US
dc.formatill.en_US
dc.format.extent37en_US
dc.format.extent2037696 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Transportation Research Instituteen_US
dc.subject.otherHeat Transfer/ Cooling/ Heatingen_US
dc.subject.otherHuman Comfort/ Discomforten_US
dc.subject.otherVehicle Interiors/ Passenger Compartmentsen_US
dc.subject.otherSubjective Ratingen_US
dc.subject.otherTemperatureen_US
dc.subject.otherThermal Sense/ Temperature Senseen_US
dc.subject.otherThermal Radiationen_US
dc.subject.otherSide Windowsen_US
dc.subject.otherLaminated Glassen_US
dc.titleRadiant heat and thermal comfort in vehiclesen_US
dc.typeTechnical Reporten_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelTransportation
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelEngineering
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55189/1/UMTRI-2003-32.pdfen_US
dc.owningcollnameTransportation Research Institute (UMTRI)


Files in this item

Show simple item record