Study of Airflow around Occupants Seated in Desks Equipped with Upper and Lower Air Terminal Devices for Slightly Warm Environments
Study of Airflow around Occupants Seated in Desks Equipped with Upper and Lower Air Terminal Devices for Slightly Warm Environments
复制标题
微热环境下配备上下送风装置的办公桌上人员周围气流的研究
DOI：
10.1080/10789669.2010.10390912
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. J. Lúcio
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
E. Conceicao;S. P. Rosa;A. L. Custódio;R. L. Andrade;M. J. Meira;M. J. Lúcio
本文将讨论在微暖环境下，采用带有上下风终端装置的个性化通风系统，对出风终端装置的湍流气流和平均气流以及坐在教室课桌上的周围人员进行研究。在紊流分析中，计算了空气均方根、空气湍流强度和风速波动频率；在平均气流分析中，采用多节点热调节模型对两种不同气流速率下的平均风速和温度、人体皮肤温度以及热舒适指标进行了评价。在木室进行的实验测试中，使用了一个人体模型，一个通风桌和两个室内气候分析仪。测量了空气终端装置和人体周围15个人体部位的风速和温度波动，计算了实验室内空气相对湿度和平均辐射温度的平均值。空气终端设备内平均空气温度约为28℃（82.4°F），而职业区内平均辐射温度约为28℃（82.4°F），远离职业区的平均空气温度约为28℃（82.4°F），职业区内平均空气相对湿度约为50%。试验I和试验II的风量分别为25.75 m3/h （15.16 ft3/min）和48.04 m3/h （28.27 ft3/min）。试验一的平均气流速度、均方根和湍流强度在上部空气末端装置分别为0.59 m/s （1.94 ft/s）、0.13 m/s （0.43 ft/s）、22.4%，在下部空气末端装置分别为0.9 m/s （2.96 ft/s）、0.15 m/s （0.49 ft/s）、16.7%；试验ⅱ中，上部空气末端装置分别为1.72 m/s （5.64 ft/s）、0.16 m/s （0.52 ft/s）、9.4%，下部空气末端装置分别为1.06 m/s （3.48 ft/s）、0.16 m/s （0.52 ft/s）、14.9%。试验1中，下出口空气末端装置的平均风速和气流速率均高于上出口空气末端装置；而在测试II中，情况正好相反。测试II的皮肤温度也比测试I的皮肤温度略低，主要是在靠近空气终端设备的人体部位，如胸部、手臂和腿部。在测试一条件下，乘员感到热不舒服；然而，在测试II条件下，获得的结果接近舒适建议。
This paper will discuss the study of turbulent and mean airflow exiting air terminal devices and surrounding occupants seated in classroom desks for slightly warm environments equipped with personalized ventilation systems with upper and lower air terminal devices. In the turbulent airflow analysis the air root mean square, the air turbulence intensity, and the air velocity fluctuations frequencies are calculated, while in the mean airflow analysis the mean air velocity and temperature, the human body skin temperature, and the thermal comfort indexes are evaluated using a multi-node thermal regulation model for two different airflow rates. In the experimental tests made in a wood chamber a manikin, a ventilated desk, and two interior climate analyzers are used. The fluctuations of air velocity and temperature are measured in the air terminal devices and in 15 human body sections around the manikin, while the mean value of air relative humidity and mean radiant temperature are evaluated inside the experimental chamber. The mean air temperature in the air terminal devices is around 28°C (82.4°F), while the mean radiant temperature in the occupation area, the mean air temperature far from the occupation area, and the internal mean air relative humidity in the occupation area are around 28°C (82.4°F), 28°C (82.4°F), and 50%, respectively. The airflow rate in tests I and II are 25.75 m3/h (15.16 ft3/min) and 48.04 m3/h (28.27 ft3/min), respectively. The mean air velocity, root mean square, and turbulence intensity for test I are 0.59 m/s (1.94 ft/s), 0.13 m/s (0.43 ft/s), and 22.4%, in the upper air terminal device, and 0.9 m/s (2.96 ft/s), 0.15 m/s (0.49 ft/s), and 16.7%, in the lower air terminal device; while, for test II they are 1.72 m/s (5.64 ft/s), 0.16 m/s (0.52 ft/s), and 9.4%, in the upper air terminal device, and 1.06 m/s (3.48 ft/s), 0.16 m/s (0.52 ft/s), and 14.9%, in the lower air terminal device. In test I the mean air velocity and the airflow rate are higher in the lower exit air terminal device than in the upper exit air terminal device; while in test II, the opposite is true. It is also true that the skin temperature is slightly lower in test II than in test I, mainly in human body sections near the air terminal devices, such as the chest, arms, and legs. The occupant in test I conditions is thermally uncomfortable; however, in test II conditions, the obtained results are near the comfort recommendations.
影响因子：
6.7
作者：
Tanabe, S;Kobayashi, K;Konishi, M
通讯作者：
Konishi, M