Analyzes thermal comfort in building design, suggesting enhanced zoning methods for efficiency.
Occupant thermal comfort plays a central role in building energy modeling (BEM), as it directly influences the design and optimization of HVAC systems. Visualization of thermal comfort parameters facilitates the assessment of system performance, thermal zoning, and variations in indoor environmental quality. This study develops a custom 3D visualization method, integrating Python with the Grasshopper-Honeybee platform, to improve the interpretation of indoor thermal conditions with greater spatial and temporal resolution. Key comfort parameters, including indoor air temperature and mean radiant temperature (MRT), were evaluated on an hourly basis over a representative summer design day, enabling the identification of thermal disparities that single-value metrics often conceal. Building on the single-zone analysis, the model was extended to a two-zone configuration, which revealed that interior areas maintained more stable radiant temperatures compared to perimeter regions. Density-based spatial clustering of MRT distributions substantiated these findings and provided an evidence-based framework for refining thermal zoning strategies. While ASHRAE guidelines commonly recommend simplified zoning approaches such as core-plus-four perimeter divisions, the results underscore that optimal zoning is highly context-dependent, shaped by factors such as room geometry, building type, and window orientation. The 3D visualization enhances interpretability of simulation results, supports alignment between design intent and energy performance, and informs zoning refinements that improve occupant comfort and HVAC responsiveness. Beyond simulation, the grid-based framework also offers practical applications in experimental contexts, guiding the placement of sensors and contributing to the development of digital twin models. Collectively, the methodology demonstrates how spatiotemporal visualization can function as a critical decision-support tool in the early-stage design of energy-efficient and thermally comfortable buildings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Uddin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: