[6] CAN WE PROVE IT?                

ARGON PERSONAL AIR CONTROL SYSTEM (APACS)

LABORATORY TEST REPORT 
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY
[Click here to view report]

Appendix A: Data Tables

The tests described in the subject report were performed at UC Berkeley by Research Specialist Fred Bauman, a very experienced researcher in the field of air distribution.  The purpose of the tests was to measure and confirm the ability of APACS to provide the needed cooling to satisfy each and every individual occupant for total comfort control under all foreseeable conditions. 

The test facility measured only dry (sensible) heat.  As the report indicates, the cooling effect of skin moisture (latent cooling) is equal to or greater than sensible cooling.  Especially at extremes when the occupant is very hot and perspiring, APACS can remove all the heat generated, provide thermal equilibrium, and thus make the occupant comfortable. 

The heat generated (metabolism) can vary from 360 to 3000 Btuh per person, a range of almost 10 to 1¹.  This is the reason for providing up to 70 CFM [33 L/s] of personal air flow – even though this high heat output is rare in an office environment.  The norm is 360 to 800 Btuh, which requires only 0 to 30 CFM [14 L/s].  Maximum air velocity will be 200 FPM (1.04 m/s), or 2.1 MPH, which is very comfortable (see Table 3, Pg. 11). 

This study demonstrates the ability of APACS to remove heat with localized air flow instead of air temperature change, and to provide personal control of perceived temperature through a range of approximately 15°F [8°C] without affecting other people.

TECHNICAL SUMMARY

[Click here] to see a Technical Summary of APACS design (PDF file). 

To have a printed copy of the test report mailed to you, Click Here.  

PERSONALIZED VENTILATION BETTER THAN MIXING VENTILATION

J. Kaczmarczyk, A. Melikov and P.O. Fanger studied the response of 60 human subjects to a personalized ventilation system (PVS), providing control of positioning of the air terminal device and the airflow rate, compared with the response to mixing ventilation (MV).²  Perceived air quality, thermal comfort, intensity of Sick Building Syndrome (SBS) symptoms and performance of subjects were studied during 3 h 45 min exposures.  Conclusions were as follows:

• PVS improved air quality and decreased SBS symptoms in comparison with mixing ventilation at the studied office air temperatures of 23°C and 26°C.

• The improvement in perceived air quality with PVS depends on the room air temperature and the temperature difference between room and personalized air.  The greatest improvement was observed when the temperature of the personalized air was lower than the room air.

• Improved occupant self-estimated performance was indicated; improvement in objectively measured performance is expected to occur in practice for a longer exposure time.

• The occupants used efficiently the provided control of the airflow rate and the positioning of the air terminal device.

• The benefits presented in human response were obtained with the PVS, which had rather modest ventilation effectiveness.  PVS with higher ventilation effectiveness could increase the benefits and the further development of such devices is recommended.

[Top] [Home]