Evaluation of the thermal potential of earth-air heat exchangers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X66949Keywords:
Earth-air heat exchangers, Finite differences, Thermal comfort, Energy efficiencyAbstract
Humanity has been looking for alternatives to the most diverse systems it uses in its day, aiming to achieve a more sustainable coexistence with the planet. Among such systems, we highlight the devices and systems used in order to meet the demands for thermal comfort in indoor building environments, such as homes, shops, hospitals. Earth-air heat exchangers (EAHE) are an option to be taken into account in this regard. In this work, a numerical model based on the Finite Differences method is developed to determine the thermal potential of a EAHE composed of a single duct. The model is validated with the data presented in the most recent literature in the area and used to assess the performance of a EAHE in a metropolis in southern Brazil. The results point to the efficiency of the system in Porto Alegre, highlighting a significant energy saving resulting from its use.
Downloads
References
ASCHER, U. M., GREIF, C. (2011). A First Course in Numerical Methods, 1º edn. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics.
BISONIYA, T. S. (2015). Design of earth-air heat exchanger system. Geoethermal Energy, 3(18), 1–10.
BRUM, L. M. L. S., R. S. (2019). Improving the performances of earth-air heat exchangers through constructal design. International Journal of Energy Research, 1, 1–12.
BRUM, R. S. (2013). Modelagem de computacional de trocadores de calor solo-ar. Dissertação de Mestrado, Instituto de Matemática, Estatística e Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Programa Modelagem Computacional, Rio Grande.
ESTRADA, L. M. L. S. R. L. A. O., E. (2018). The impact of latent heat exchanges of the design of earth-air heat exchangers. Applied Thermal Engineering, 129, 306–317.
MINAEI, S. H., A. (2021). A new transient analytical model for heat transfer of earth-to-air heat exchangers. Journal of Building Engineering, 33, 1–11.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Ciência e Natura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
