AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (600.8 KB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Research Article | Open Access

The comparison of design airflow rates with dynamic and steady-state displacement models in varied dynamic conditions

Natalia Lastovets1( ), Risto Kosonen1,2, Juha Jokisalo1
Aalto University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Espoo, Finland
College of Urban Construction, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

A temperature-based method is usually applied in displacement ventilation (DV) design when overheating is the primary indoor climate concern. Different steady-state models have been developed and implemented to calculate airflow rate in rooms with DV. However, in practical applications, the performance of DV depends on potentially dynamic parameters, such as strength, type and location of heat gains and changing heat gain schedule. In addition, thermal mass affects dynamically changing room air temperature. The selected steady-state and dynamic models were validated with the experimental results of a lecture room and an orchestra rehearsal room. Among the presented models, dynamic DV model demonstrated a capability to take into account the combination of dynamic parameters in typical applications of DV. The design airflow rate is calculated for the case studies of dynamic DV design in the modelled lecture room in both dynamic and steady-state conditions. In dynamic conditions of heavy construction in 2-4 hours occupancy periods, the actual airflow rate required could be 50% lower than the airflow rate calculated with the steady-state models. The difference between steady-state and dynamic multi-nodal model is most significant with heavyweight construction and short occupancy period (17%-28%). In cases with light construction, the dynamic DV model provides roughly the same airflow rates for four-hour occupancy period than the Mund’s model calculates. The dynamic model can significantly decrease the design airflow rate of DV, which can result in a reduction of investment costs and electrical consumption of fans.

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Building Simulation
Pages 1201-1219

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
Lastovets N, Kosonen R, Jokisalo J. The comparison of design airflow rates with dynamic and steady-state displacement models in varied dynamic conditions. Building Simulation, 2021, 14(4): 1201-1219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-020-0730-2

1382

Views

53

Downloads

6

Crossref

N/A

Web of Science

5

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 24 May 2020
Accepted: 16 September 2020
Published: 07 November 2020
© The Author(s) 2020

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/