Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, cilt.284, ss.1-32, 2025 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
Personalized Environmental Control Systems (PECS) can improve both
comfort and energy efficiency by shifting indoor climate control toward
localized, occupant-tailored comfort, unlike conventional systems that
condition entire, partly unoccupied spaces uniformly. . Despite their
potential, the absence of standardized assessment and reporting methods,
and the diversified PECS technical specifics hinder consistent performance evaluation practices. Conducted in the framework of IEA
EBC’s Annex 87, this review, based on the PRISMA statement, provides a
comprehensive overview of existing methods and indicators used to
evaluate the performance of PECS, specifically targeting thermal and air
quality domains. A novel three-layered classification approach was
applied to categorize PECS types, and reviewed studies were grouped into
four methodological categories: building simulation, CFD, chamber, and
field studies. The review identifies methods’ usage trends, benefits,
and limitations. Among 302 reviewed papers, more than half (61 %) adopt
controlled laboratory tests, while CFD is the most used simulation
method (68.6 % of simulation studies). Field studies are a minority,
highlighting the limited implementation of PECS in real-world scenarios.
Simulations are cost effective in rapidly prototyping and developing
PECS. However, the insights they provide into PECS performance are
limited by either model resolution constraints or high complexity.
Comfort evaluations do not consider individual occupant differences nor
behavior inherent to PECS. It is through experiments that knowledge can
be gained on realistic occupant responses. However, they can be resource
intensive and require careful planning. This review provides best
practice guidelines to assist researchers in improving quality reporting
of their methods.