4.8 Article

Thermal performance of an active-passive ventilation wall with phase change material in solar greenhouses

期刊

APPLIED ENERGY
卷 216, 期 -, 页码 602-612

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.02.130

关键词

Solar greenhouse; Phase change material; Ventilation wall; Thermal performance; Experimental study

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51578012]
  2. National key research and development program of China [2016YFC0700206]
  3. Beijing Natural Science Foundation [8184095]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using phase change material (PCM) in the north wall of solar greenhouses has been recommended as an efficient solution for promoting their indoor thermal environment. In this type of walls, however, there is always a thermal-stable layer, which would greatly decrease their heat storage capacity. To solve this problem, an active passive ventilation wall with PCM has been developed in this study, and a comparative study was carried out using both experimental and numerical methods to justify its advantages over conventional walls. Several important parameters have been monitored or calculated to reflect the contribution of the newly proposed method to the performance of the middle layer of the wall, the indoor thermal environment and the plants' growth. The obtained results confirmed the great effectiveness of the proposed wall in promoting the temperature of its middle layer and irradiated surface. In the newly proposed wall, there was no thermal-stable layer observed, resulting in a minimum temperature rise of 1.34 degrees C. The proposed solution also enhanced the wall's heat storage capacity by 35.27-47.89% and the heat release capacity by 49.93-60.21%, resulting in an average increase of indoor air temperature, daily effective accumulative temperature and soil temperature by 1.58-4.16 degrees C, 33.33-55.06% and 0.53-1.09 degrees C, respectively. The plant height, stem diameter and fruit yield have been increased by 30%, 25% and 28%, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据