Personalized environmental control systems (PECS): A systematic review of performance evaluation methods for thermal comfort, air quality and energy

Review (2025)
Author(s)

Douaa Al-Assaad (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Eindhoven University of Technology)

Ilaria Pigliautile (Università degli Studi di Perugia, eCampus University)

Jun Shinoda (Technical University of Denmark (DTU))

Rajan Rawal (CEPT University)

Maíra André (University of Sydney)

Siddhi Vashi (CEPT University)

Roberto Rugani (University of Pisa)

Giulia Torriani (Eurac Research)

Pablo Martinez-Alcaraz (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)

undefined More Authors

Research Group
Building Design & Technology
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2025.113471 Final published version
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
Building Design & Technology
Bibliographical Note
Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository as part of the Taverne amendment. More information about this copyright law amendment can be found at https://www.openaccess.nl. Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public.
Journal title
Building and Environment
Volume number
284
Article number
113471
Downloads counter
145
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

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.

Files

1-s2.0-S0360132325009448-main.... (pdf)
(pdf | 10.7 Mb)
- Embargo expired in 22-01-2026
License info not available