The combined effects of temperature and noise on the comfort perceptions of young people with a normal Body Mass Index

Journal Pre-proof The combined effects of temperature and noise on the comfort perceptions of young people with a normal Body Mass Index Hongyu Guan, Songtao Hu, Guodan Liu, Lu Zhang

PII:

S2210-6707(19)33534-6

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101993

Reference:

SCS 101993

To appear in:

Sustainable Cities and Society

Received Date:

9 June 2019

Revised Date:

26 November 2019

Accepted Date:

26 November 2019

Please cite this article as: Guan H, Hu S, Liu G, Zhang L, The combined effects of temperature and noise on the comfort perceptions of young people with a normal Body Mass Index, Sustainable Cities and Society (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101993

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2019 Published by Elsevier.

The combined effects of temperature and noise on the comfort perceptions of young people with a normal Body Mass Index

Hongyu Guan Songtao Hu Guodan Liu Lu Zhang

School of Environmental and Municipal Engineering, Qingdao University of Technology, Qingdao, China, 266033

Corresponding author: Songtao Hu e-mail: [email protected]; Tel: +0086-13361229267; Fax: +0086-532-85071710

ro of

Address：No.11 Fushun Road，Qingdao，Shandong Province，China，266033.

Highlights

Experiments were conducted in a controlled chamber under conditions of cool

-p



conditions, neutral conditions, warm conditions and construction noise (55, 65,

Subjects’ thermal sensation vote (TSV), thermal comfort vote (TCV), acoustic

lP



re

75, 85dB).

comfort vote (ACV) and total annoyance sensation vote (TASV) were collected. Heart rate (HR) as a physiological change index was tested to explain the

na



interaction between thermal environment and noise. The combined effects of temperature and noise on human perceptions were more

ur



Jo

significant in the warm environment.

Abstract：

This study aims to investigate the combined effects of temperature and noise on human perceptions. Eighteen subjects participated in the experiments ， which contained three temperature conditions (20℃:RH50%, 25℃:RH50%, 30℃:RH50%.)

and four noise levels (construction noises, 55,65,75,85dB). The results showed temperature and noise had combined effects on human perceptions. On the one hand, the noise had different impacts on thermal perceptions in different temperature environments. Although the effect of noise did not influence thermal sensation significantly at 20℃ and 25℃, thermal comfort was more uncomfortable when the noise increased. Thermal comfort increased 1.85 scales with an increase from 55dB to

ro of

85dB at 30℃. Variations of heart rate also reflected the same pattern. HR was not only significantly associated with the effect of temperature but noise as well. On the

other hand, noises were perceived as more uncomfortable at 30℃. Total annoyance

-p

sensation was influenced by noise significantly. The vote of total annoyance sensation

re

was higher 1.96 scales in 85dB than 55dB at 30℃. From the perspective of creating comfortable environments, noise control should be more stringent in a hot

lP

environment. It is worth mentioning the conclusions were based on eighteen young

na

people and need a larger sample size to confirm the results.

ur

Keywords: Thermal comfort; Noise; Acoustic comfort; Total annoyance sensation;

Jo

Combined effects

1 Introduction In recent years there has been an increase in public awareness about the effects of the indoor environment on people’s comfort and health

[1]

. Many studies have been

carried out on specific thermal effects in different application fields, such as natural

ventilated spaces, dynamic environment

[2-6,3,4,5,6]

. It can be concluded that many

prediction models and theories about thermal comfort have been formed such as PMV (Predicted Mean Vote), thermal adaptation, dynamic thermal comfort, and local thermal comfort. Thermal comfort has a wide connotation, also including physiological and psychological aspects, in addition to the ambient characteristics

[7,8]

. Several studies

environment in the Psychology research field

[9,10,11]

ro of

have been conducted on the relation between people’s emotions and their thermal

. The condition of mind could be

influenced by thermal climate, but also other sensory stimuli and individual preference .

-p

[12]

re

Current standards specify criteria for separate aspects of the indoor environment, e.g. thermal climate, air quality or noise, with only little consideration of possible

lP

interactions between the different types of exposure

[13]

. ASHRAE Guideline 10P [14]

.

na

emphasized the importance of interaction between indoor environmental factors

Thermal comfort should be taken into account, together with visual comfort, acoustic

ur

comfort, protection against electromagnetic radiation and air quality, to ensure appropriate quality and sustainability of the living environment [15,16].

Jo

Noise has been listed as one of the four major pollutions in the world, seriously

threatening human physical and mental health. Noises such as construction noise, traffic noise, and office noise are randomly occurring factors, and the sound pressure level changes irregularly. The impacts of noise have been well-studied from the views of working performance

[17]

, sick building syndrome

[18]

, human health

[19]

and

emotions

[20]

. A considerable amount of research has been done about the possible

influence of noise on thermal sensation and interactions between the perception of temperature and noise. Pellerin [21] established an equivalence of acoustic perception to thermal sensation, specifically, a change in temperature of 1℃ had the same effect as a change in the noise of 2.6dB (Fan noise,35~75dB). Nagano

[22]

reported that the

auditory condition significantly affected thermal sensation (46.6dB: air-conditioning

ro of

noise; 58.5, 72.9, 79.9, and 95.5dB: traffic noise). Tiller’s [23] experiment showed that a 7 point increase in noise level would produce a 1% decrease in the mean thermal

comfort composite rating, while sound quality (whether the sound was neutral or

-p

rumbly) did not influence the thermal comfort rating(Building ventilation noise, [24]

showed

re

RC-30~RC-50). However, there also exist different voices. Fanger’s study

that noise has no significant effect on thermal sensation and human skin temperature

lP

(40dB: fan noise and 85dB: white noise). Witterseh [18] also found that noise exposure

na

decreased work performance but did not interact with thermal sensation (35dB: fan noise and 55dB: open-plan office noise). Yang et al. [25] showed three-minute moderate

ur

noise exposure did not affect temperature or humidity sensations (Fan and babble noise, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65dB). Huang et al. [26] draw a conclusion according to which narrower

Jo

temperature ranges are accepted at higher noise levels and lower noise levels are tolerated by subjects far from thermoneutrality, at the basis of the indoor environment classification charts. Previous research

[21, 23]

focused on the interactions between air conditioning

equipment noise and thermal environment. And research methods were subjective

questionnaires, lacking physiological parameters. These results have a reference for interactive effects that exist for the range of variables studied. Construction noises are also common in China. They are characterized by sudden, non-permanent, high intensity, concentrated duration, and difficult control, which have a serious impact on urban residents. Different noises affect human perceptions

[25,27]

. There is a lack of

research about the influence of construction noise and thermal environment on human

ro of

comfort. The objective of this study is to verify the combined effects of exposure to

construction noise and thermal conditions on human perceptions based on questionnaires and physiological parameters.

-p

2 Methodology

re

2.1 Participants

The present experiment was approved by the University Ethics Committee. 18

lP

subjects (male: 9; female：9) were recruited. They volunteered to participate in this

na

experiment. Before the experiment, hearing screening tests were carried out with an audiometer (AD 104), and all the subjects had normal hearing. All participants

ur

provided written informed consent before the study. The participants' characteristics are shown in Table 1.

Jo

All participants were asked to avoid alcohol and smoking in the previous

experiments. Considering different clothing insulations have effects on thermal sensation, they wear the standard uniform that simulates a light clothing ensemble. The clothing insulation value was 0.6clo, which was typical in summer. During the experiment, the subjects were allowed to read books to simulate daily office work. The

estimated metabolic rate was about 1.0 met. This is similar to the daily work of the subjects. 2.2 Experimental conditions The research aimed to verify the combined effects of exposure to construction noise and thermal conditions on human perceptions in the office room. Offices are less likely to experience an extreme thermal environment. Therefore, this study was mainly

ro of

carried out in the near thermal comfort zone. Cool, neutral, and warm sensations were chosen. Fanger

[28]

developed an analytical model to predict thermal comfort. PMV

-p

combines four physical parameters (air temperature, mean radiant temperature, air

re

velocity, and relative humidity) and two human variables (clothing insulation and activity). The relative humidity was set 50% and the air velocity was less than 0.1m/s in

lP

this study. To ensure equivalent room air temperature and mean radiant temperature,

na

each thermal condition was set at least 15 h before the test. The chamber is an indoor room. The mean radiant temperature was assumed to equal to the air temperature. The

ur

metabolic rate was about 1.0 met and the clothing insulation was 0.6clo. The PMV equation was used to invert the air temperature. Three room temperature levels (20℃,

Jo

25℃, 30 ℃) corresponding to cool, neutral, and warm sensations were chosen. The same temperature difference (20 ℃ ,25 ℃ ,30 ℃ ) or larger temperature difference (18℃,24℃,30℃)were used in similar studies [29,30]. Four different sound pressure levels (55dB, 65dB, 75dB, and 85dB) were chosen, which included measured daytime median noise exposure levels

[31]

. The same noise

sound pressure level difference was used in a similar study [29]. 2.3 Experimental facility Experiments were conducted in a climate chamber with dimensions of 4.5 m×2.5m×2.0m (W×D×H) at Qingdao University of Technology. The climate chamber equipped with air conditioners and the control precision is ±0.5 ℃ . Wave-like sound-absorbing cotton is placed on the top and side of the environmental simulation

ro of

cabin to reduce the effects of other noise and reverberation outside the experiment.

However, it should be noted that the chamber had a background noise of 35dB produced by the climate chamber ventilation system. The noise stimuli were presented

-p

using a loudspeaker positioned in the central area of the desk.

re

The layout of the chamber is shown in Fig.1.

Air temperature, velocity, and relative humidity were measured by a

lP

multi-parameter ventilation meter (Model 8386, USA). For the temperature sensor, the testing range is -17.8–93.3 °C and the accuracy is ±0.3 °C. For relative humidity, the

na

testing range is 0–95% and the accuracy is ±3%. For velocity, the testing range is 0 ∼50

ur

m/s and the accuracy is ±3.0% of reading or ±0.015 m/s. The noise level was tested by a noise meter (AWA6291, China). The test range is 10Hz-20000Hz and the most

Jo

testing value is 140dB.

The statistics of tested environmental parameters are shown in Table 2.

2.4 Experimental set-up and procedure Participants were divided into 3 groups. Females and males were randomly divided into three groups. Each group has 3 females and 3 males. Each group

participated in an experimental session involving the same thermal condition but under different levels of noise. To maintain an identical thermal state across the participants, who were all to be exposed to a different environment, it was necessary for the participants to wait for 20 min in the pre-conditioning chamber while wearing the experimental uniform. The pre-conditioning chamber was controlled at an indoor temperature of 25℃ and a

ro of

relative humidity of 50% for PMV=0.

During this waiting time, the participants were informed about the experimental

content and were explained the questionnaire content. The subjects were told they

-p

would experience different environments, and they were asked to fill out their feelings

re

truthfully and measure heart rates at a set time. None of this had an impact on health. They were allowed to read books. The questionnaire included thermal sensation,

lP

thermal comfort, acoustic comfort, and total annoyance sensation. Thermal sensation: a

na

conscious subjective expression of an occupant’s thermal perception of the environment, commonly expressed using the categories “cold”, “cool,” “slightly cool”,

ur

“neutral”, “slightly warm”, “warm”, and “hot” [32]. The thermal sensation was evaluated using a scale that combined the 7-point. Thermal sensation votes (TSV) ranged from

Jo

-3(cold) to +3(hot).Thermal comfort: that condition of mind that expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment and is assessed by subjective evaluation [Error! Bookmark not defined.].

According to experiments by Velt et al. [33], thermal comfort was assessed using

a 5-point scale (from 0 = comfortable, + 4 = extremely uncomfortable) based on ISO Standard 10551.Acoustic comfort: a state of contentment with acoustic conditions.

Like TCV, acoustic comfort votes (ACV) were also based on five levels (0 = comfortable, 4 = extremely uncomfortable). Total annoyance sensation: that annoyance of mind in the combined thermal and acoustic environment. Total annoyance sensation votes (TASV) were also based on five levels: not annoyed (0), a little annoyed (1), annoyed (2), very annoyed (3) and unbearable (4). Then subjects came into the chamber. After a half-hour of thermal adaptation,

ro of

participants were arranged to be in one noise level environment for 15 min. During the experiment, they were asked to fill in questionnaires. Considering the possible

influence of noise on the physiological parameters, the subject’s heart rate (HR) was

-p

tested using small desktop apparatus (Omron, HEM-7320, with measuring a range of

re

40–180 times per minute and accuracy of ±5%). They performed HR test by themselves and then recorded on the questionnaire form. After that, the noise level was changed by

lP

the operating staff. The whole process of each experiment lasted for 110 min with a

na

constant thermal environment.

It is important to offer the samples to the participants in a counterbalanced way to

ur

prevent order effects. The sound was played in random order during the experiment. Fig. 2 shows the schedule of each test.

Jo

3 Results

Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 21. The analysis of variance

(ANOVA) was used in this study. The level of significance was fixed at P=0.05. The effects of the different variables on TSV, TCV, ACV, TASV, and HR were measured using partial eta squared (p2) [29,34].

3.1 Thermal sensation vote Table 3 showed the results of two-way ANOVAs for TSV. TSV was significantly associated with the main effect of temperature, the main effect of noise, and their interaction. TSV in three temperature conditions were shown in Fig.3. During the experiment,

ro of

the mean value of TSV was increased as the temperature was increased. The effect of noise on thermal sensation was different in three temperature conditions. In cool

conditions (20℃), the mean value of TSV was less than 0. The subjects felt cool. The

-p

mean value of TSV was not affected by the noise level. In a neutral environment (25℃), noise very slightly causes an increase in the subjective evaluation of thermal sensation.

re

That indicated thermal sensation was near neutral, and people feel comfortable. In

lP

warm conditions(30℃), the value of TSV was increased with an increase in noise level. People feel hotter in a noisy environment.

na

Since the effect of temperature on thermal sensation may depend on the noise level,

ur

each noise level was analyzed separately. According to Table 4, the effect of temperature on TSV was significant in every noise condition, which is a well-known

Jo

result.

Similarly, the effect of noise level on TSV was tested for all temperature

exposures separately in Table 5. At 30℃, there were significant differences in TSV between different noise levels. At 25℃ and 20℃, the effect of noise level on TSV was not significant. In general, the effect of noise was significant in warm conditions.

3.2 Thermal comfort vote Thermal comfort is “that condition of mind which expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment” [35]. Table 6 showed the results of two-way ANOVAs for TCV. TCV was significantly associated with the main effect of temperature, the main effect of noise, and their interaction.

ro of

TCV of subjects was shown in Fig. 4. It could be seen that the mean value of TCV at 25℃ was lower than the value in 20℃and 30℃. In warm or cool conditions, people felt more uncomfortable than neutral conditions. However, compared with TCV of cool

-p

conditions, TCV of warm conditions was high and people felt more uncomfortable.

During the experiment, the velocity in the chamber was less than 0.2m/s. In warm

re

conditions, the human body can only maintain the heat balance by sweating, resulting

lP

in people in thermal discomfort. Furthermore, the subjects live in the north in China mostly and were more accustomed to the cold environment.

na

In the noise experiment, with the noise level increased, the value of thermal

ur

comfort became larger. That indicated people felt more uncomfortable at the high noise levels. Noise is a disadvantage that affects thermal comfort. From the analysis results in

Jo

3.1, it can be seen that although in cool conditions the value of TSV hardly changed, the value of TCV increased. The thermal sensation is different from thermal comfort. In cool conditions, noise could not affect thermal sensation and noise could cause thermal discomfort. For a warm environment, thermal comfort increased 1.85 scales with an increase from 55dB to 85dB. Therefore no matter what the conditions, noise reduction

is conducive to improving thermal comfort. These phenomena indicate that when talking about thermal comfort, not only temperature but also noise should be taken into account. Table 7 showed the statistical analysis of the effect of temperature on TCV. It could be seen that the effect of temperature on TCV was significant. Table 8 showed the influence of the noise level on TCV in three temperatures. It could be seen that the

ro of

effect of temperature on TCV was significant in cool and warm conditions. In neutral conditions, it had a non-significant difference on TCV between 65dB and 75dB. This

-p

suggested that noise effects can be masked in neutral conditions.

Navai and Veitch

[36]

re

3.3 Acoustic Comfort Vote

defined acoustic comfort as “a state of contentment with

lP

acoustic conditions”. Table 9 showed the results of two-way ANOVAs for ACV. ACV was significantly associated with the main effect of temperature, the main effect of

na

noise, and their interaction.

ur

Figure 5 presented subjects’ ACV under different temperatures and noise conditions respectively. Under the same temperature, the mean value of ACV varied

Jo

with noise sound pressure. With the noise level increased, ACV got higher. When the noise level was lower (55dB, 65dB), subjects felt slightly uncomfortable. However, when the noise level was increased to 75 dB, the value of ACV changed differently in three temperatures. Compared with the ACV of cool conditions, ACV was higher in warm conditions and neutral conditions. That meant subjects were uncomfortable in

warm conditions and neutral conditions. As for 85dB, subjects became very uncomfortable or even intolerable in warm conditions. In a cool environment, the acoustic comfort vote was smaller 1.2 scales in 55dB than 85dB.In a warm environment, the difference in acoustic comfort between 55dB and 85dB was 2.1 scales. Statistical analysis of ACV was shown in Tables 10 and 11. As statistical analysis (Table 10) had shown the difference of ACV in 85dB in different temperature

ACV was significant for all temperature conditions.

-p

3.4 Total Annoyance Sensation Vote

ro of

conditions was significant. As had been stated in Table 11, the effect of noise level on

Total annoyance sensation vote is a subjective evaluation considering temperature

re

and noise level in this experiment. Table 12 showed the results of two-way ANOVAs

lP

for TASV. TASV was significantly associated with the main effect of noise. The TASV of subjects were shown in Fig.6. As the noise level increased,

na

participants’ TASV increased. The relationship between TASV and temperature: TASV30℃>TASV20℃>TASV25℃.In neutral conditions, TASV was the lowest. TASV

ur

was lower in cool conditions than warm conditions. A stronger annoyance was

Jo

observed when participants were in warm conditions. In a warm environment, the vote of total annoyance sensation was higher 1.96 scales in 85dB than 55dB. Tables 13 and 14 showed statistical analysis of TASV. The effect of temperature

on TASV was not significant. The effect of noise on TASV was different at different temperatures. In warm conditions, ANOVA indicated that TASV was significantly associated with the noise. In cool and neutral conditions, there was a significant effect

between high noise levels and low noise levels, such as 85dB and 55dB. 3.5 TCV vs. ACV vs. TASV A correlation between the TASV and the mean votes of the occupants from the thermal, acoustic point of view was tried in this section in Table 15. To better understand the combined annoyance sensation of thermal comfort and acoustic comfort, an equation (1) was established. Through the analysis of the equation,

little effect on TASV.

TASV=0.3241+0.2522  TCV+0.5462  ACV R2=0.8559

(1)

-p

3.6 Heart rate

ro of

TASV is mainly affected by the acoustic comfort votes. The thermal comfort vote had

re

Fig.7 showed the change of HR under different experimental conditions. Table 16 showed the results of two-way ANOVAs for HR. HR was significantly associated with

lP

the main effect of temperature, the main effect of noise. From a medical point of view,

na

in warm conditions the body's temperature is high. And the activity of cells is relatively active, resulting in increased myocardial oxygen consumption. To provide more

ur

oxygen to the body, the heart needs to provide more blood, which in turn leads to an increase in HR [37,38].

Jo

In this study, the average increase of HR was about 5 bpm when the temperature

was increased from 20℃ to 30℃. The average increase in HR was about 2 bpm when the noise level increase 10dB. Detailed results reported in Tables 17 and 18 showed that HR was not only significantly associated with the effect of temperature but noise as well.

3.7 TCV vs. HR The mean values of TCV and HR in each condition were compared. See Fig. 8. As it had been found that the values of TCV at 25℃ were smaller than TCV at 20℃ and 30℃. HR increased as temperature increased in all conditions. In each temperature, with noise level changing from low to high, the increase of HR corresponded with the increase of TCV. And linear relations between HR and TCV could be developed for

ro of

each temperature based on mean values.

From Fig. 8, the maximum difference of mean HR among noise levels was 6 bpm at 30 °C, the maximum difference of mean HR among temperature was 9 bpm at 85dB.

-p

The impact of temperature exceeded the impact of noise level on HR.

re

4 Discussion 4.1 Effects of noise on thermal perceptions

lP

The results showed that noise levels have little effect on the cool and neutral

na

sensations, as seen in Fig.3 and the results of statistical analyses. Concerning the warm sensation, statistical significance was seen in the difference in the noise levels. K. [39]

have also shown that noise significantly but very slightly causes an

ur

Borsky et al.

increase in the subjective evaluation of thermic feeling (SETF). Other studies

[25,40]

Jo

found no effects of noise on thermal sensation. The possible reason to explain the discrepancy can be the noise type. In our study, the noise type was construction noise. In the previous studies

[25,41]

, fan noise or traffic noise was selected. Different noises

affected human perception [Error! Bookmark not defined.]. Although the noise level has little effect on cool and neutral sensations, there were

significant differences in the thermal comfort of the noise level. When the noise level increased, the values of TCV increased. The subjects felt uncomfortable. These results are reproducible as shown in previous studies

[20, 25]

. Thermal comfort has a wide

connotation, also including physiological and psychological aspects. As stated in ASHRAE Standard, “thermal comfort is a condition of mind that expresses satisfaction with the thermal environment and is assessed by subjective evaluation”

[42]

. Different

comfort. 4.2 Effects of thermal conditions on acoustic perceptions

ro of

noise levels have different effects on subjects' emotions and further affect thermal

-p

With the noise level increased, ACV got higher and subjects felt uncomfortable.

re

The relationship between the temperature and ACV was similar to that the noise level and TCV mentioned above. When the noise level got 85dB, the temperature had a

[Error! Bookmark not defined.,Error! Bookmark not defined.] .

In high noise

na

previous studies

lP

significant effect on ACV, as seen in Table 8. The result is reproducible as shown in

environments, it is necessary to pay more attention to the comfort of the thermal

ur

environment.

4.3 Effects of the combined environments on HR

Jo

The effect of temperature and noise on HR has been reported in previous

documents. The studies of Gagge [43], Madaniyazi [44] and Haingying Wang [45] support the notion that HR will increase when the temperature increases. Qiuyun Mo [46] found HR increase under noise exposure conditions. These references supported the effect of temperature and noise level on HR found in this study. In warm conditions, high levels

of noise act as bad stimuli and human emotions change. The cellular activity in the body is gradually active, resulting in an increase in myocardial oxygen consumption. The heart needs more blood to provide oxygen to the body, and the heart rate is getting faster and faster. 4.4 Limitations of this study and future research The current experiments were carried out in a well-controlled laboratory setting.

ro of

The advantage is that the effects of interventions can be monitored carefully. However, field studies are required to test whether the correlation between acoustic comfort and thermal comfort is also present in daily life environment and whether the results are

-p

practically relevant. And prolonged exposure should be considered in a future study to

re

identify the interaction between noise and thermal conditions.

Inevitably, there are other limitations to this study. Besides the sound pressure

lP

level, there are other sound characteristics that can affect people's feelings, like noise

na

frequency and type of sound. Some evidence suggests that at the same sound pressure level, the low frequency noise annoyance is greater than the high frequency noise

[47]

.

ur

Therefore, it is necessary to study the effect of noise frequency and type of sound on thermal sensation and physiological parameters.

Jo

Another limitation is the sample size. The number of subjects was 18. Though in

some studies about thermal comfort fewer subjects Bookmark not defined.]

[Error! Bookmark not defined., Error!

were involved, the sample size is considered small. In order to

further confirm the results, expanding of sample size is necessary. Besides, the human could experience higher noise and temperatures when they

work in outdoor. Individual differences are more likely to occur in high temperature and high noise environments. Considering this, the individual differences in higher temperature and noise environment should be explored in the future. Considering the possible thermal environment experienced by humans, three kinds of temperature were selected: warm (30℃), neutral (25℃), and cool (20℃). In the studies of thermal comfort, although there were studies on the impact of large temperature differences

ro of

such as 5℃ or 6℃ on human perceptions[29,30], more studies were carried out on the temperature differences of 2℃ or 3℃ [23,26,48]. So the increments of 5℃ may be large.

26, 28 and 30) should be picked in the future.

re

5 Conclusions

-p

To help to reduce the granularity of the results, more temperature degrees (e.g. 20, 22,

The main goal of the present research is to investigate the interactions between

na

presented as follows.

lP

temperature and construction noise on human perceptions. The key findings are

The temperature had a significant effect on thermal sensation and thermal comfort.

ur

The noise had a different impact on thermal sensation in different temperature environments. For cool (20℃) and neutral (25℃) environment, with the increase of

Jo

noise sound pressure level, TSV had no significant changes. Although the effect of noise did not influence thermal sensation significantly, thermal comfort was more uncomfortable when the noise level increased. For a warm environment (30℃), the noise had an effect on TSV and TCV. As the noise level increased from 55dB to 85dB, the subjective votes increased 1.85 scales. It showed that when the noise level

increased, the subjective perceptions became worse, and the influence of noise was more significant at 30℃.

Noise can significantly affect acoustic comfort. Subjects felt more acoustic comfortable in low sound pressure levels, such as 55dB, 65dB, than high sound pressure levels, such as 85dB. The temperature also affected on ACV. This

ro of

phenomenon was more obvious at 30℃. In a cool environment, the acoustic comfort vote was smaller 1.2 scales in 55dB than 85dB.In a warm environment, the difference in acoustic comfort between 55dB and 85dB was 2.1scales.

-p

Total annoyance sensation was significantly influenced by noise. In a loud noisy

re

environment, people were more prone to irritability. The vote of total annoyance sensation was higher 2.0 scales in 85dB than 55dB at 30℃.

lP

Physiologically, the heart rate was affected by temperature and noise. As the temperature and noise level increase, the heart rate increased. The average increase in

na

HR was about 5 bpm when the temperature was increased from 20℃ to 30℃. The

ur

average increase in HR was about 2 bpm when the noise level increase 10dB. From the perspective of creating a comfortable environment, the noise has an

Jo

adverse effect on comfort. And noise control should be more stringent in a hot environment.

Conflict of interest statement We declare that we have no financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that can inappropriately influence our work, there is no professional or other personal interest of any nature or

kind in any product, service and/or company that could be construed as influencing the position presented in, or the review of, the manuscript entitled.

Acknowledgments This research was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China with contract numbers of 51678314 and 51778305. The authors

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

would like to give thanks to those participants who volunteered for the experiments.

References [1] Pontip,S.N,,& Mohd, Z.K(2015).Appraisal of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) in health care facilities: A literature review. Sustainable Cities and Society,17,61-68. [2] Wang, Haiying, et al. Thermal environment investigation and analysis on thermal adaptation of workers in a rubber factory. Energy & Buildings 158(2018). [3] Lan, Li, Z. Zhai, and Z. Lian. A two-part model for evaluation of thermal neutrality for sleeping people. Building & Environment (2018). [4] Mishra, A. K., M. G. L. C. Loomans, and J. L. M. Hensen. Thermal comfort of heterogeneous and dynamic indoor conditions — An overview. Building & Environment 109(2016):82-100. [5] Wu Y , Liu H , Li B , et al. Behavioural, physiological and psychological responses of passengers to the thermal environment of boarding a flight in winter[J]. Ergonomics, 2018, 61(6):796.

[6] Javad,K.,&Navid G.(2019). Thermal comfort investigation of stratified indoor environment in displacement ventilation: Climate-adaptive building with smart windows.Sustainable Cities and Society 46,101354.

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

[7] Parsons KC. Environmental ergonomics: a review of principles, methods and models. Appl Ergon 2000;31:581– 94. [8] Liu J, Yao R, McCloy R. A method to weight three categories of adaptive thermal comfort. Energy Build 2012;47:312–20. [9] Williams L E, Bargh J A. Experiencing Physical Warmth Promotes Interpersonal Warmth. Science, 2008, 322(5901):606-607. [10] Zhong C B, Leonardelli G J. Cold and Lonely Does Social Exclusion Literally Feel Cold? Psychological Science, 2008, 19(9):838-842. [11] Zhou X, Wildschut T, Sedikides C, et al. Heartwarming memories: Nostalgia maintains physiological comfort. Emotion, 2012, 12(4):678-684. [12] Jr, Frederick H. Rohles. "Temperature & Temperament A Psychologist Looks at Comfort." Ashrae Journal 49.2(2007). [13] Toftum J. Human response to combined indoor environment exposures. Energy & Buildings, 2002, 34(6):601-606. [14] ASHRAE Guideline 10P. Interactions affecting the achievement of acceptable indoor environments; 2010. [15] de Dear RJ, Akimoto T, Arens EA, Brager G, Candido C, Cheong KWD, Li B,Nishihara N, Sekhar SC, Tanabe S, Toftum J, Zhang H, Zhu Y. Progress in thermal comfort research over the last twenty years. Indoor Air 2013;23:442–61. [16] Alfano FRA, Olesen BW, Palella BI, Riccio G. Thermal comfort: design and assessment for energy saving. Energy Build 2014;81:326–36. [17] J.L. Szalma, P.A. Hancock. Noise effects on human performance: a meta-analytic synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 2011, 137(4): 682-707. [18] T. Witterseh, D.P. Wyon, G. Clausen. The effects of moderate heat stress and open-plan office noise distraction on SBS symptoms and on the performance of office work. Indoor Air, 2004, 14: 30-40. [19] M. Basner, W. Babisch, A. Davis, M. Brink, C. Clark, S. Jassen, S. Stansfeld. Auditory and non-auditory effects of noise on health. The Lancet, 2014, 383(9925): 1325-1332. [20]Juang D F, Lee C H, Yang T, et al. Noise pollution and its effects on medical care workers and patients in hospitals. International Journal of Environmental Science & Technology, 2010, 7(4):705-716. [21] Pellerin, N, and V. Candas. Effects of steady-state noise and temperature conditions on environmental perception and acceptability. Indoor Air 14.2(2004):129. [22] Nagano, K., and T. Horikoshi. New comfort index during combined conditions of moderate low ambient temperature and traffic noise. Energy & Buildings 37.3(2005):287-294. [23] Tiller, Dale, et al. Combined Effects of Noise and Temperature on Human Comfort and Performance (1128-RP) (AB-10-017). ASHRAE Conference 2010:420. [24] Fanger, P. O, N. O. Breum, and E. Jerking. Can colour and noise influence man's thermal comfort? Ergonomics 20.1(1977):11-18. [25] Wonyoung Yang, Hyeun Jun Moon and Myung-Jun Kim. Combined effects of short-term noise exposure and hygrothermal conditions on indoor environmental perceptions. Indoor and Built Environment,2017. [26] Huang L , Zhu Y , Ouyang Q , et al. A study on the effects of thermal, luminous, and acoustic environments on indoor environmental comfort in offices[J]. Building & Environment, 2012, 49(1):304-309. [27] Roussarie V , Siekierski E , Viollon S , et al. What's so hot about sound? -Influence of HVAC sounds on thermal comfort[J]. 2005. [28] P.O. Fanger, Thermal Comfort, 1970. [29] Yang W , Moon H J . Combined effects of acoustic, thermal, and illumination conditions on the comfort of discrete senses and overall indoor environment[J]. Building and Environment, 2019, 148:623-633. [30] Pellerin N , Candas V . Effects of steady-state noise and temperature conditions on environmental perception and acceptability.[J]. Indoor Air, 2010, 14(2):129-136. [31] U. Kraus, S. Breitner, R. Hampel, et al., Individual daytime noise exposure in different microenvironments, Environ. Res. 140 (2015) 479–487 https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.envres.2015.05.006. [32] AS.Thermal environment conditions for human occupancy. ASHRAE Standard. Atlanta, GA, US:ASHRAE;

2017.p.2017. [33] Velt K B, Daanen H A M. Thermal sensation and thermal comfort in changing environments. Journal of Building Engineering, 2017, 10:42-46. [34] Li, L., & Lian, Z. (2010). Application of statistical power analysis – how to determine the right sample size in human health, comfort and productivity research. Building & Environment, 45(5), 1202-1213. [35] ASHRAE Standard 55-2004. Thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy. Atlanta: American society of heating, refrigerating, and air conditioning engineers; 2004. [36] Navai M, Veitch J A. Acoustic Satisfaction in Open-Plan Offices: Review and Recommendations. Annals of Botany, 2003, 107(1159):18. [37] Givoni, B, and R. F. Goldman. Predicting heart rate response to work, environment, and clothing. Journal of Applied Physiology34. 2(1973):201. [38] George Wells. The Effect of External Temperature Changes on Heart Rate, Blood Pressure, Physical Efficiency, Respiration, and Body Temperature. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport 25.4(1933):1-4. [39]I. Borsky, L. Hubacova, K. Hartiar, R. Tosh, M. Janousek, T. Trnovec, Combined effect of physical strain, noise and hot environmental conditions on man, Archives of Complex Environmental Studies 5 (1-2) (1993) 75-83 [40 ]K.Nagano,T.Horikoshi,New index of combined effect of temperature and noise on human comfort :summer experiments on hot ambient temperature and traffic noise, Archives of Complex Environmental Studies. [41 ]K.Nagano,T.Horikoshi,New index of combined effect of temperature and noise on human comfort :summer experiments on hot ambient temperature and traffic noise, Archives of Complex Environmental Studies.

re

-p

ro of

[42] ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 55, Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy, 2013, ISSN 1041-2336 [43] Gagge, A. P., J. A. Stolwijk, and J. D. Hardy. Comfort and thermal sensations and associated physiological responses at various ambient temperatures. Environmental Research 2.3(1967):1-20. [44] Madaniyazi, Lina, et al. Outdoor Temperature, Heart Rate and Blood Pressure in Chinese Adults: Effect Modification by Individual Characteristics. Scientific Reports 6 (2016):21003. [45] Wang, Haiying, et al. "Experimental investigation about thermal effect of colour on thermal sensation and comfort." Energy & Buildings 173(2018). [46] Qiuyun Mo, Wenbin Li, Shuanglin Gao .Effects of the noise of wide belt sander for woodworking industry on human heart rate .Journal of Beijing Forestry University (2004)26(3)64—66. [47] Persson, K., and R. Rylander. Disturbance from low-frequency noise in the environment: A survey among the local environmental health authorities in Sweden. Journal of Sound & Vibration 121.2(1988):339-345. [48] M. Luo, X. Zhou, Y. Zhu, J. Sundell. Revisiting an overlooked parameter in thermal comfort studies,

Jo

ur

na

lP

the metabolic rate. Energy and Buildings 118(2016):152-159.

Air Conditioner Outdoor unit

Wall of room

Window

Air Conditioner Indoor unit Decompression controller Chair

Air Conditioned room Door of the room

Loudspeaker Desk Door of the chamber

Fig.1. Layout of Chamber

30min

noise 2

noise 3

noise 4

ro of

20min

noise 1

Sitting in chamber

Preparing tests

13min 2min 13min 2min 13min 2min 13min 2min Fill questionnaires &test HR

Fill questionnaires &test HR

lP

re

-p

Fig.2. Schedule of test

Jo

ur

na

Fig.3. TSV (Mean ±SD) for different temperatures and noise levels

Fig.4. TCV (Mean ±SD) for different temperatures and noise levels

re

-p

ro of

Fig.5. ACV (Mean ±SD) for different temperatures and noise levels

ur

na

lP

Fig.6. TASV (Mean ±SD) for different temperatures and noise levels

Jo

Fig.7. HR (Mean ±SD) for different temperatures and noise levels

ro of

Dots represent 20℃,triangles represent 25℃,squares represent 30℃,blue represent 55dB, green represent 65dB,red represent 75dB, violet represent 85dB.

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

Fig.8. HR and TCV

Table 1 Subjects’ profiles (n=18) Gender

Males

Range

Age(years)

24.5±1.17

23-26

Height(cm)

177.1±4.2

168-180

Body mass(kg)

69.9±7.4

57-80

Age(years)

24.4±1.01

23-26

Height(cm)

165.2±4.6

160-174

Body mass(kg)

53.2±4.5

45-60

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

Females

Mean± SD

Table 2 Tested environmental parameters Tested environmental parameters

Air temperature(℃)

20℃

25℃

30℃

20.3±0.2

25.2±0.2

29.9±0.4

55±2.3

55±2.6

55±1.7

65±2.5

65±1.8

65±2.1

75±1.6

75±1.5

75±1.2

85±2.4

85±1.7

85±1.4

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

Noise level(dB)

Experiment conditions

Table 3 The results of two-way ANOVAs for TSV Main effect of temperature

Interaction of temperature and noise

p

 p2

p

 p2

p

 p2

0.000

0.897

0.000

0.356

0.001

0.301

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

TSV

Main effect of noise

Table 4 Statistical analysis (p value) of temperature on TSV Noise Level(dB)

Temperature(℃)

25

30

55

20

p <0.032

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.002

20

p <0.003

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.000

20

p <0.000

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.000

20

p <0.000

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.000

65

75

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

85

Table 5 Statistical analysis (p value) of noise level on TSV Temperature(℃)

20

25

65

75

85

55

p<0.930

p<1.000

p<0.793

75

p<0.930

_

p<0.793

85

p<0.727

_

_

55

p<0.315

p<0.278

p <0.010

75

p<0.932

_

p <0.102

85

p<0.087

_

_

55

p<0.021

p<0.000

p<0.000

75

p<0.046

_

p<0.178

85

p<0.002

_

_

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

30

Noise Level(dB)

Table 6 The results of two-way ANOVAs for TCV Main effect of temperature

Interaction of temperature and noise

p

p2

p

 p2

p

 p2

0.000

0.864

0.000

0.826

0.000

0.532

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

TCV

Main effect of noise

Table 7 Statistical analysis (p value) of temperature on TCV Noise Level(dB)

Temperature(℃)

25

30

55

20

p <0.002

p <0.033

25

_

p <0.000

20

p <0.007

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.000

20

p <0.003

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.000

20

p <0.000

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.000

65

75

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

85

Table 8 Statistical analysis (p value) of noise level on TCV Temperature(℃)

20

25

65

75

85

55

p <0.048

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.034

_

p <0.000

85

p <0.000

_

_

55

p <0.000

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.635

_

p <0.000

85

p <0.036

_

_

55

p <0.008

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.002

_

p <0.001

85

p <0.000

_

_

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

30

Noise Level(dB)

Table 9 The results of two-way ANOVAs for ACV Main effect of temperature

Interaction of temperature and noise

p

 p2

p

 p2

p

 p2

0.000

0.567

0.000

0.931

0.000

0.557

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

ACV

Main effect of noise

Table 10 Statistical analysis (p value) of temperature on ACV Noise Level(dB)

Temperature(℃)

25

30

55

20

p <0.906

p <0.011

25

_

p <0.015

20

p <0.643

p <0.877

25

_

p <0.757

20

p <0.000

p <0.006

25

_

p <0.212

20

p <0.000

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.002

65

75

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

85

Table 11 Statistical analysis (p value) of noise level on ACV Temperature(℃)

20

25

65

75

85

55

p <0.000

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.003

_

p <0.013

85

p <0.000

_

_

55

p <0.000

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.000

_

p <0.000

85

p <0.000

_

_

55

p <0.048

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.000

_

p <0.000

85

p <0.000

_

_

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

30

Noise Level(dB)

Table 12 The results of two-way ANOVAs for TASV Main effect of temperature

Interaction of temperature and noise

p

 p2

p

 p2

p

 p2

0.085

0.079

0.000

0.577

0.836

0.044

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

TASV

Main effect of noise

Table 13 Statistical analysis of temperature on TASV Noise Level(dB)

Temperature(℃)

25

30

55

20

p <0.466

p <0.668

25

_

p <0.759

20

p <0.610

p <0.787

25

_

p <0.438

20

p <0.409

p <0.711

25

_

p <0.239

20

p <0.581

p <0.193

25

_

p <0.073

65

75

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

85

Table 14 Statistical analysis of noise level on TASV Temperature(℃)

20

25

65

75

85

55

p <0.323

p <0.031

p <0.003

75

p <0.207

_

p <0.295

85

p <0.027

_

_

55

p <0.131

p <0.011

p <0.000

75

p <0.230

_

p <0.087

85

p <0.006

_

_

55

p <0.012

p <0.006

p <0.000

75

p <0.014

_

p <0.002

85

p <0.000

_

_

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

30

Noise Level(dB)

Table 15 Combined comfort analysis: comparison between TCV and ACV given by the occupants Conditions

55dB TCV

65dB ACV

TASV

TCV

75dB ACV

TASV

TCV

85dB ACV

TASV

TCV

ACV

TASV

20℃ 25℃ 30℃ represents votes≤0.8;

represents 0.8＜votes≤1.6;

represents 1.6＜votes≤2.4;

represents 2.4＜

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

votes≤3.2.

Table 16 The results of two-way ANOVAs for HR Main effect of temperature

HR

Main effect of noise

Interaction of temperature and noise

p

 p2

p

 p2

p

 p2

0.000

0.870

0.000

0.731

0.468

0.087

Table 17 Statistical analysis of temperature on HR Temperature(℃)

25

30

55

20

p <0.000

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.009

20

p <0.000

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.001

20

p <0.000

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.000

20

p <0.000

p <0.000

25

_

p <0.000

65

75

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

85

ro of

Noise Level(dB)

Table 18 Statistical analysis of noise level on HR Temperature(℃)

20

25

65

75

85

55

p <0.026

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.043

_

p <0.043

85

p <0.000

_

_

55

p <0.004

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.044

_

p <0.008

85

p <0.000

_

_

55

p <0.033

p <0.000

p <0.000

75

p <0.033

_

p <0.033

85

p <0.000

_

_

Jo

ur

na

lP

re

-p

ro of

30

Noise Level(dB)