Monitor<strong>in</strong>g data collected from <strong>the</strong> prototype build<strong>in</strong>g were used to calculate <strong>the</strong> needed size <strong>of</strong>resistance heaters that were <strong>the</strong>n <strong>in</strong>serted <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> model to simulate <strong>the</strong> build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>ternal loadsdue to people and plug loads. The plug loads <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> model were electric light<strong>in</strong>g,computers, and miscellaneous <strong>of</strong>fice equipment. Based on <strong>the</strong> average 20 W/m 2 measured <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>prototype build<strong>in</strong>g as a typical occupied workday period, <strong>the</strong> heaters were sized at 240 W/m 2 , ortwelve times that <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> prototype build<strong>in</strong>g to result <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> same buoyant driv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>for</strong>ce. This wascalculated by assum<strong>in</strong>g equal Grash<strong>of</strong> (Gr) numbers between <strong>the</strong> reduced-scale model and <strong>the</strong>prototype. Simplify<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> expression <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> Grash<strong>of</strong> number, and equat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> reduced-scalemodel Gr to <strong>the</strong> prototype Gr:H T M HT P(6.1)In order to obta<strong>in</strong> a temperature difference <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> reduced-scale model that is 12 times that <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>prototype build<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>the</strong> heaters need to provide 12 times <strong>the</strong> heat <strong>in</strong>put <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> space. Two 0.25meter by 0.15 meter heaters that were rated to generate 7,750 watts per square meter, 295.3 wattstotal, were <strong>in</strong>stalled <strong>for</strong> each half-floor plate. However, <strong>the</strong> heaters were actually deliver<strong>in</strong>g lessthan <strong>the</strong> rated value, or 7,440 watts per square meter, 283.5 watts. The result<strong>in</strong>g total <strong>in</strong>ternalload was 2,000 watts <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> build<strong>in</strong>g, or approximately 240 W/m 2 , which is proportional to <strong>the</strong>prototype build<strong>in</strong>g occupied conditions.The heaters used to represent <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternal loads were relatively small <strong>in</strong> physical size, measur<strong>in</strong>g0.15 meters by 0.25 meters, compared to <strong>the</strong> floor area <strong>of</strong> a half floor plate, 1.2 meters by 1.8meters. Orig<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong>re was an alum<strong>in</strong>um plate <strong>of</strong> one-quarter <strong>in</strong>ch thickness (0.006 mm) on <strong>the</strong>ground floor only. The heaters were placed on top <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> alum<strong>in</strong>um plate, represent<strong>in</strong>g auni<strong>for</strong>mly distributed <strong>in</strong>ternal load. In ref<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> model, a three-quarter <strong>in</strong>ch ledge was<strong>in</strong>stalled underneath <strong>the</strong> perimeter <strong>of</strong> each floor, to provide additional support and to reduce <strong>the</strong>amount <strong>of</strong> sagg<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>the</strong> weight <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> plywood. This added perimeter support made itpossible to accommodate alum<strong>in</strong>um plates on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r floors as well to ensure that <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>teriorheat load approximated a distributed load ra<strong>the</strong>r than two large po<strong>in</strong>t heat sources. Thisref<strong>in</strong>ement resulted <strong>in</strong> a configuration that more accurately represented <strong>the</strong> prototype-build<strong>in</strong>gsituation. Two 0.6m x 0.6m x 0.003m alum<strong>in</strong>um sheets were added to each heated zone, o<strong>the</strong>rthan <strong>the</strong> ground floor, underneath each heater, to provide a more distributed heat load. This isshown <strong>in</strong> Figure 34. The temperatures measured <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> alum<strong>in</strong>um plate varied from 75°C at <strong>the</strong>heater to 65°C at <strong>the</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>st distance from <strong>the</strong> heaters.Light sources were <strong>in</strong>stalled <strong>in</strong>side <strong>the</strong> model to provide illum<strong>in</strong>ation to assist with flowvisualization. Compact fluorescent lamps were selected due to <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>the</strong>rmal efficiency, andprovided adequate light levels with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> model without <strong>the</strong> addition <strong>of</strong> large amounts <strong>of</strong> excessheat. There were three compact fluorescent light bulbs, 9 watts each, that were located <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>central atrium; one at each floor level. When airflow visualization was not <strong>in</strong> process, <strong>the</strong>selamps were turned <strong>of</strong>f so that <strong>the</strong>y did not contribute to <strong>the</strong> heat load with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> model. Evenwhen all three lamps were on, <strong>the</strong>y contributed less than 2 percent additional heat load <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>model.6.3.2 CFD ModelPHOENICS (CHAM 2002) is a general-purpose s<strong>of</strong>tware package which predicts quantitativelyhow fluids (air, water, oil, etc) flow <strong>in</strong> and around eng<strong>in</strong>es, process equipment, build<strong>in</strong>gs,100
natural-environment features, <strong>the</strong> associated changes <strong>of</strong> chemical and physical composition, and<strong>the</strong> associated stresses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> immersed solids.A model with <strong>the</strong> same geometry and dimensions as <strong>the</strong> scaled physical model was created us<strong>in</strong>g<strong>the</strong> PHOENICS program. The surround<strong>in</strong>g conditions were made to simulate <strong>the</strong> test chamberconditions, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> dimensions, wall temperature and location with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> chamber. As with<strong>the</strong> scaled physical model, <strong>the</strong>re are cutouts <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> w<strong>in</strong>dow and stack vent open<strong>in</strong>gs with <strong>the</strong>same size as those elements <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> physical model. The CFD model however did not usecolumns <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> simulation, as <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> scaled physical model <strong>the</strong> columns have a negligible effecton both <strong>the</strong> airflow patterns and temperature. A cross-section <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> CFD model is shown <strong>in</strong>Figure 35.Figure 35. PHOENICS Scale Model GeometryThe CFD s<strong>of</strong>tware was found to have limitations <strong>for</strong> use <strong>in</strong> simulations <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reduced scale airmodel. Surfaces such as walls and floors are considered adiabatic <strong>in</strong> CFD simulations. Therewas no easy way to simulate <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>rmal properties associated with heat loss through <strong>the</strong>envelope or between floor constructions. The surfaces <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> experimental case, <strong>the</strong> reducedscaleair model, were not adiabatic and had some amount <strong>of</strong> heat loss through <strong>the</strong> envelope.Results from <strong>the</strong> reduced scale air model with heat loss <strong>for</strong> each experiment provided data <strong>for</strong>comparison with each correspond<strong>in</strong>g CFD simulation with adiabatic walls. The strength <strong>of</strong> heatsource used <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> reduced-scale air model were also described <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> CFD model. Theprescribed heat sources <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> CFD model were 283W each, to simulate <strong>the</strong> heaters <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>physical scaled model, and <strong>the</strong>re<strong>for</strong>e <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternal loads <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> prototype build<strong>in</strong>g. The heatsource, sited <strong>in</strong> approximately <strong>the</strong> same location as <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> scaled physical model, was distributedover <strong>the</strong> entire size <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> alum<strong>in</strong>um plates. In <strong>the</strong> s<strong>in</strong>gle zone model, heat loss through <strong>the</strong> wallswas modeled <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> atrium portion, as is described <strong>in</strong> Section 6.5.1.1 S<strong>in</strong>gle Heated ZoneExperiments.101
- Page 2 and 3:
Thesis Committee:Leon R. Glicksman,
- Page 4 and 5:
Table of ContentsTable of Contents
- Page 6 and 7:
7.1.3 Full Model Case .............
- Page 8 and 9:
Figure 41. Wind Direction Data for
- Page 10 and 11:
List of TablesTable 1. Energy End U
- Page 12 and 13:
Table 64. Comparison of Dimensionle
- Page 15 and 16:
Chapter 1.0IntroductionEnergy consu
- Page 17 and 18:
insulated building envelopes with t
- Page 19 and 20:
energy usage and efficient design.
- Page 21 and 22:
Figure 3. European Patent Office Bu
- Page 23:
selecting boundary conditions) to e
- Page 26 and 27:
2.2.1 Buoyancy-Driven VentilationVe
- Page 28 and 29:
Figure 7. Neutral Pressure Level fo
- Page 30 and 31:
Combined wind-buoyancy flow is more
- Page 32 and 33:
design. The depth of natural ventil
- Page 34 and 35:
of cooling required by 30 percent o
- Page 36 and 37:
considered when determining how the
- Page 38 and 39:
environmental conditions are examin
- Page 40 and 41:
As natural ventilation is prevalent
- Page 43 and 44:
Chapter 3.0Evaluation of Prototype
- Page 45 and 46:
Figure 12. Interior Atrium ViewFigu
- Page 47 and 48:
Table 8. Prototype Building Window
- Page 49 and 50: Figure 15. HOBO® H8 Series Tempera
- Page 51 and 52: Finally, airflow visualization was
- Page 53 and 54: only is the airflow almost never at
- Page 55 and 56: Table 10. Window Bag Device Measure
- Page 57 and 58: Mon 7-21Tue 7-22Wed 7-23Thu 7-24Fri
- Page 59 and 60: 12:00 AM1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 A
- Page 61 and 62: 27-Jul27-Jul28-Jul28-Jul29-Jul30-Ju
- Page 63 and 64: A range of air exchange rates was f
- Page 65 and 66: the windows on the second floor, or
- Page 67 and 68: Total Electric (kWh/m2)Total Gas (k
- Page 69 and 70: movement, Houghton Hall has much le
- Page 71 and 72: Chapter 4.0Modeling and Visualizati
- Page 73 and 74: for future design of similar type b
- Page 75 and 76: lower and upper openings and natura
- Page 77 and 78: the acceptable diffusion rate, or
- Page 79 and 80: applications involving full-scale b
- Page 81 and 82: digital camera with both manually o
- Page 83 and 84: Chapter 5.0Dimensional Analysis and
- Page 85 and 86: u oHgHT2uocu Hpo1Re Ar1Re Pr(5.7)(5
- Page 87 and 88: X HM X HP(5.16)5.3.2 Kinematic Sim
- Page 89 and 90: Radiation was found to have an impa
- Page 91: height is used for the full-scale b
- Page 94 and 95: 6.3 Model Descriptions6.3.1 Physica
- Page 96 and 97: Figure 30. Floor Plan of the Protot
- Page 98 and 99: Figure 31. North Facade of Model wi
- Page 102 and 103: By default, there was no accounting
- Page 104 and 105: 40-location card inserted into the
- Page 106 and 107: 6.5 ExperimentsTo evaluate the mode
- Page 108 and 109: modified to determine the impact of
- Page 110 and 111: Figure 39. Two Heated Zone ModelWit
- Page 112 and 113: minute interval, the model was assu
- Page 114 and 115: Figure 42. Cross-Section of Wind-Ge
- Page 116 and 117: Table 25. Wind-Assisted Ventilation
- Page 118 and 119: Figure 44. Heaters and Zones for a)
- Page 120 and 121: Height from Floor (m)Height from Fl
- Page 122 and 123: Where V is the outlet velocity, A o
- Page 124 and 125: Table 32. Conduction Heat Loss for
- Page 126 and 127: a) Air Modelb) Water ModelFigure 50
- Page 128 and 129: Height from Floor (m)The temperatur
- Page 130 and 131: Height from Floor (m)In the atrium
- Page 132 and 133: First NorthUpper Window 0.17 m/s -0
- Page 134 and 135: Height from Floor (m)the column at
- Page 136 and 137: Height from Floor (m)Height from Fl
- Page 138 and 139: Height from Floor (m)3.53.02.52.01.
- Page 140 and 141: was less than 12 percent. These val
- Page 142 and 143: Table 39. Variation of Outlet Wind
- Page 144 and 145: temperature of the air was the same
- Page 146 and 147: 3.532.521.55m/s4m/s3m/s2m/s1m/s1.5m
- Page 148 and 149: 3.532.521.55m/s4m/s3m/s2m/s1m/s1.5m
- Page 150 and 151:
The average and exhaust internal bu
- Page 152 and 153:
Table 43. Calculated Wind and Buoya
- Page 154 and 155:
In the last two lines, for both the
- Page 156 and 157:
Figure 80. CFD Simulation of the Te
- Page 158 and 159:
uoyancy case the air from the groun
- Page 160 and 161:
160
- Page 162 and 163:
windows of naturally ventilated bui
- Page 164 and 165:
difficult to select the boundary co
- Page 166 and 167:
simulations are able to do would al
- Page 168 and 169:
Bordass, W.T., A.K.R. Bromley and A
- Page 170 and 171:
Linddament, M. 1996. Why CO2? Air I
- Page 172 and 173:
172
- Page 174 and 175:
MODEL: K20-8SERIAL: 10047RECORDER_I
- Page 176 and 177:
2 Boiler-3 50.00 C1 N1 1.0 ON ON OF
- Page 178 and 179:
|PW|DESCRIP |KW |KWH|KVA|KVH|------
- Page 180 and 181:
2:5 ;day_ofYr17:P30 ;EOT = 0.000075
- Page 182 and 183:
2:3136:P30 ;DUM2 = -0.040891:-4.089
- Page 184 and 185:
;7:21 ;input location;8:0 ;mulptipl
- Page 186 and 187:
;79:P22 ;EXC w/DELAY (only for dela
- Page 188 and 189:
1:45 ;port5 (homeSense)2:31 ;exit l
- Page 190 and 191:
13:P95 ;ENDIF14:P95 ;ENDIF15:P3 ;pu
- Page 192 and 193:
2:20 ;RH30:P70 ;sample1:12:20 ;RH31
- Page 194 and 195:
194
- Page 196 and 197:
Five Windows Open: Upper versus Low
- Page 198 and 199:
One Window Open: Upper versus Lower
- Page 200 and 201:
25 cm / 3 m 24.33 26.62 22.68 22.93
- Page 202 and 203:
25 cm / 3 m 24.07 25.26 22.65 22.78
- Page 204 and 205:
Two Stacks Open Temperature Stratif
- Page 206 and 207:
Stacks Closed Temperature Stratific
- Page 208 and 209:
2.3 24.31 24.65 24.781.4 23.35 23.6
- Page 210 and 211:
0.6 20.56 20.67 20.94 21.22 21.41 2