2010/09/01 by Francesca Romana d’Ambrosio Alfano, Francesca Romana d’AMBROSIO ALFANO, Boris Igor Palella +3 · 1 citation
Environmental Science · Medicine · #Climate Change and Health Impacts #Thermoregulation and physiological responses #Urban Heat Island Mitigation
paper · pdf · doi:10.2486/indhealth.ms1097
openalex publication_date 2010/09/01 · crossref created 2010/09/01 · crossref issued 2011/01/01 · crossref published 2011/01/01 · crossref published-print 2011/01/01 · crossref deposited 2021/05/20 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · crossref indexed 2026/07/30 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/31
A reliable assessment of the thermal environment should take into account the whole of the six parameters affecting the thermal sensation (air temperature, air velocity, humidity, mean radiant temperature, metabolic rate and thermo-physical properties of clothing). Anyway, the need of a quick evaluation based on few measurements and calculations has leaded to like best temperature-humidity indices instead of rational methods based on the heat balance on the human body. Among these, Canadian Humidex, preliminarily used only for weather forecasts, is becoming more and more widespread for a generalized assessment of both outdoor and indoor thermal environments. This custom arouses great controversies since using an index validated in outdoor conditions does not assure its indoor reliability. Moreover is it really possible to carry out the thermal environment assessment ignoring some of variables involved in the physiological response of the human body? Aiming to give a clear answer to these questions, this paper deals with a comparison between the assessment carried out according to the rational methods suggested by International Standards in force and the Humidex index. This combined analysis under hot stress situations (indoor and outdoor) has been preliminarily carried out; in a second phase the study deals with the indoor comfort prediction. Obtained results show that Humidex index very often leads to the underestimation of the workplace dangerousness and a poor reliability of comfort prediction when it is used in indoor situations.