SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Politeknik Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 29 Sayı: 5

Combined Effects of Indoor Environmental Parameters on Overall Comfort

Kapalı Mekan Çevresel Parametrelerinin Genel Konfor Üzerindeki Birleşik Etkileri

Okan Şimşek(ADANA ALPARSLAN TÜRKEŞ BİLİM VE TEKNOLOJİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MİMARLIK VE TASARIM FAKÜLTESİ, MİMARLIK BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0003-3500-9438
Pages
1–9
Publication Date
2026-09-14
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This study examines how multiple physical environmental parameters jointly influence users’ perceptions of overall comfort in indoor educational settings.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines how multiple physical environmental parameters jointly influence users’ perceptions of overall comfort in indoor educational settings.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A total of 102 participants voluntarily took part in the study, and ethical approval was obtained prior to data collection.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, the findings confirm the multidimensional nature of indoor comfort and underscore the importance of integrated design strategies prioritizing temperature, humidity, and vertical illuminance to enhance indoor environmental quality and user experience.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Genel konfor · iç mekan çevre kalitesi · ısısal konfor

Abstract

This study examines how multiple physical environmental parameters jointly influence users’ perceptions of overall comfort in indoor educational settings. Field measurements and user surveys were conducted simultaneously across three enclosed spaces within the Faculty of Architecture and Design at Adana Alparslan Türkeş Science and Technology University. The investigated parameters included air temperature, relative humidity, air velocity, mean radiant temperature, sound pressure level, horizontal illuminance, and vertical illuminance. A total of 102 participants voluntarily took part in the study, and ethical approval was obtained prior to data collection. Correlation and multiple linear regression analyses indicated that air temperature, relative humidity, and vertical illuminance were significant predictors of overall comfort. Specifically, higher air temperature and humidity levels were associated with decreased comfort, while greater vertical illuminance improved comfort, emphasizing the importance of eye-level lighting for user satisfaction. Other variables—air velocity, sound pressure level, and horizontal illuminance—did not show statistically significant effects. Participants’ feedback also highlighted the need for improved thermal regulation, humidity control, and lighting quality. Overall, the findings confirm the multidimensional nature of indoor comfort and underscore the importance of integrated design strategies prioritizing temperature, humidity, and vertical illuminance to enhance indoor environmental quality and user experience.

Özet

Bu çalışma, kapalı mekanlarda çoklu fiziksel çevresel parametrelerin kullanıcıların genel konfor algısı üzerindeki birleşik etkilerini incelemektedir. Alan ölçümleri ve kullanıcı anketleri, Adana Alparslan Türkeş Bilim ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi Mimarlık ve Tasarım Fakültesi’nde yer alan üç farklı kapalı mekanda eş zamanlı olarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında hava sıcaklığı, bağıl nem, hava hızı, ortalama ışınımsal sıcaklık, ses basınç düzeyi, yatay aydınlık düzeyi ve düşey aydınlık düzeyi parametreleri değerlendirilmiştir. Toplam 102 katılımcı çalışmaya gönüllü olarak katılmış olup, veri toplama süreci öncesinde etik kurul onayı alınmıştır. Korelasyon ve çoklu doğrusal regresyon analizleri sonucunda, hava sıcaklığı, bağıl nem ve düşey aydınlık düzeyinin genel konfor üzerinde anlamlı belirleyiciler olduğu saptanmıştır. Özellikle yüksek hava sıcaklığı ve bağıl nem düzeylerinin konfor algısını olumsuz etkilediği, buna karşılık artan düşey aydınlık düzeyinin konforu artırdığı belirlenmiş; bu durum göz hizasındaki aydınlık düzeyinin kullanıcı memnuniyeti açısından önemini ortaya koymuştur. Hava hızı, ses basınç düzeyi ve yatay aydınlık düzeyi ise istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etki göstermemiştir. Katılımcı geri bildirimleri, ısısal konfor ve aydınlık düzeyinin iyileştirilmesine yönelik gereksinimleri de vurgulamaktadır. Genel olarak bulgular, kapalı mekan konforunun çok boyutlu yapısını doğrulamakta ve iç mekan çevresel kalitesini ve kullanıcı deneyimini artırmak için sıcaklık, bağıl nem ve düşey aydınlık düzeyine öncelik veren bütüncül tasarım yaklaşımlarının önemini ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Şimşek, O. (2026). Combined Effects of Indoor Environmental Parameters on Overall Comfort. Politeknik Dergisi, Cilt: 29 Sayı: 5, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2339/politeknik.1841509

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (41)

  1. Brasche S., Bischof W., “Daily time spent indoors in German homes – Baseline data for the assessment of indoor exposure of German occupants”, International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 208(4): 247–253, (2005).
  2. Klepeis N. E. et al., “The National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS): A resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants”, Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology, 11(3): 231–252, (2001).
  3. Ricciardi P., Buratti C., “Environmental quality of university classrooms: Subjective and objective evaluation of the thermal, acoustic, and lighting comfort conditions”, Building and Environment, 127: 23–36, (2018).
  4. Ullah I., Kim D., “An improved optimization function for maximizing user comfort with minimum energy consumption in smart homes”, Energies, 10(11): 1818, (2017).
  5. Dounis A. I., Caraiscos C., “Advanced control systems engineering for energy and comfort management in a building environment - A review”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13(6–7): 1246–1261, (2009).
  6. Affonso E. O. T. et al., “Framework for assessing the smart buildings intelligence degree”, International Journal of Construction Management, 25(10): 1154–1176, (2025).
  7. Nimlyat P. S., Kandar M. Z., “Appraisal of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) in healthcare facilities: A literature review”, Sustainable Cities and Society, 17: 61–68, (2015).
  8. Elhalid O. B., Isık A. H., “Enhancing passenger experience through real-time onboard comfort estimation using artificial intelligence”, Journal of Polytechnic, 28: 1827–1841, (2025).
  9. Mokhtariyan Sorkhan F., Roumi S., Soltanzadeh Zarandi M., Ashraf Ganjouei M. A., “The impact of indoor environmental quality on occupant satisfaction in commercial buildings”, Energies, 17(6): 1473, (2024).
  10. Rupp R. F., Vásquez N. G., Lamberts R., “A review of human thermal comfort in the built environment”, Energy and Buildings, 105: 178–205, (2015).
  11. Wu H., Wu Y., Sun X., Liu J., “Combined effects of acoustic, thermal, and illumination on human perception and performance: A review”, Building and Environment, 169: 106593, (2020).
  12. Cao B., Ouyang Q., Zhu Y., Huang L., Hu H., Deng G., “Development of a multivariate regression model for overall satisfaction in public buildings”, Building and Environment, 47(1): 394–399, (2012).
  13. Riffelli S., “Global comfort indices in indoor environments: A survey”, Sustainability, 13(22): 12784, (2021).
  14. de Dear R. J., Brager G. S., “Developing an adaptive model of thermal comfort and preference”, Center for the Built Environment, University of California Berkeley, (1998).
  15. Zhang D., Mui K. W., Wong L. T., “Ten questions concerning indoor environmental quality (IEQ) models”, Applied Sciences, 13(5): 3343, (2023).
  16. Wierzbicka A. et al., “Healthy indoor environments: The need for a holistic approach”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(9): 1874, (2018).
  17. ANSI/ASHRAE, “Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy”, ASHRAE Standard 55, (2017).
  18. Fanger O. P., “Thermal comfort: Analysis and applications in environmental engineering”, Danish Technical Press, Copenhagen, (1970).
  19. Gan G., “Analysis of mean radiant temperature and thermal comfort”, Building Services Engineering Research and Technology, 22(2): 95–101, (2001).
  20. Wolkoff P., Kjærgaard S. K., “The dichotomy of relative humidity on indoor air quality”, Environment International, 33(6): 850–857, (2007).
  21. Ninomura P., Rousseau C., Bartley J., “Updated guidelines for design and construction of hospital and health care facilities”, ASHRAE Journal, 48(6), (2006).
  22. Balaras C. A., Dascalaki E., Gaglia A., “HVAC and indoor thermal conditions in hospital operating rooms”, Energy and Buildings, 39(4): 454–470, (2007).
  23. Xia Y. Z., Niu J. L., Zhao R. Y., Burnett J., “Effects of turbulent air on human thermal sensations”, Indoor Air, 10(4): 289–296, (2000).
  24. de Dear R., Xiong J., Kim J., Cao B., “A review of adaptive thermal comfort research since 1998”, Energy and Buildings, 214: 109893, (2020).
  25. ISO 7730, “Ergonomics of the thermal environment”, International Organization for Standardization, (2005).
  26. Vardaxis N. G., Bard D., Persson Waye K., “Review of acoustic comfort evaluation in dwellings”, Building Acoustics, 25(2): 151–170, (2018).
  27. Akbari J., Dehghan H., Azmoon H., Forouharmajd F., “Relationship between lighting and noise levels and productivity”, Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 2013: 527078, (2013).
  28. Felipe Contin de Oliveira S., Aletta F., Kang J., “Self-rated health implications of noise for open-plan office workers”, Building Acoustics, 30(2): 105–125, (2023).
  29. Graham L. T., Parkinson T., Schiavon S., “Lessons learned from 20 years of CBE’s occupant surveys”, Buildings and Cities, 2(1): 166–184, (2021).
  30. Thorseth A., “Light and lighting: Basic terms and criteria for specifying lighting requirements”, European Committee for Standardization, (2024).
  31. Van Den Wymelenberg K., Inanici M., “A critical investigation of lighting design metrics”, LEUKOS, 10(3): 145–164, (2014).
  32. Nasrollahi N., Shokri E., “Daylight illuminance in urban environments”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 66: 861–874, (2016).
  33. Cılasun Kunduracı A., Kızılörenli E., “A design proposal for improving daylight availability of a deep-plan classroom by using tubular daylight guidance systems and movable shading devices”, Journal of Polytechnic, 27: 1305–1316, (2024).
  34. Hamedani Z. et al., “Visual discomfort and glare assessment in office environments”, Building and Environment, 153: 267–280, (2019).
  35. Kızılörenli E., Yaman Y., Uygun İ., “Enhancing lighting efficiency in deep plan classroom: Artificial and daylighting”, Journal of Polytechnic, 28: 469–477, (2025).
  36. Liu Y., Luo M. R., “Effects of display and ambient illuminance on visual comfort”, Color and Imaging Conference, 42–46, (2021).
  37. Zhang J. et al., “Study of human visual comfort based on sudden vertical illuminance changes”, Buildings, 12(8): 1127, (2022).
  38. Benedetti M., Maierová L., Cajochen C., Scartezzini J. L., Münch M., “Optimized office lighting advances melatonin phase”, Scientific Reports, 12(1): 1–13, (2022).
  39. Wen X., Meng Q., Yin Y., Yang D., Li M., Kang J., “Exploring the boundaries of indoor combined thermal-acoustic effects”, Building and Environment, 271: 112580, (2025).
  40. Lam C. K. C., et al., “Cross-modal effects of thermal and visual conditions on outdoor thermal and visual comfort perception”, Building and Environment, 186: 107297, (2020).
  41. Jin Y., Jin H., Kang J., “Combined effects of the thermal-acoustic environment on subjective evaluations in urban squares”, Building and Environment, 168: 106517, (2020).