Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads
Evaporative cooling systems using a combination of evaporative pads and extractor fans require greenhouses to be hermetic. The greatest concentration of greenhouses in the world is located in southeast Spain, but these tend not to be hermetic structures and consequently can only rely on fogging syst...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10835/7384 |
| _version_ | 1789406390078406656 |
|---|---|
| author | Franco Salas, Antonio Valera Martínez, Diego Luis Peña Fernández, Ana Araceli |
| author_facet | Franco Salas, Antonio Valera Martínez, Diego Luis Peña Fernández, Ana Araceli |
| author_sort | Franco Salas, Antonio |
| collection | DSpace |
| description | Evaporative cooling systems using a combination of evaporative pads and extractor fans require greenhouses to be hermetic. The greatest concentration of greenhouses in the world is located in southeast Spain, but these tend not to be hermetic structures and consequently can only rely on fogging systems as evaporative cooling techniques. Evaporative cooling boxes provide an alternative to such systems. Using a low-speed wind tunnel, the present work has compared the performance of this system with four pads of differing geometry and thickness manufactured by two different companies. The results obtained show that the plastic packing in the cooling unit produces a pressure drop of 11.05 Pa at 2 m·s−1, which is between 51.27% and 94.87% lower than that produced by the cellulose pads. This pressure drop was not influenced by increases in the water flow. The evaporative cooling boxes presented greater saturation efficiency at the same flow, namely 82.63%, as opposed to an average figure of 65% for the cellulose pads; and also had a lower specific consumption of water, at around 3.05 L·h−1·m−2·°C−1. Consequently, we conclude that evaporative cooling boxes are a good option for cooling non-hermetic greenhouses such as those most frequently used in the Mediterranean basin. |
| format | info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| id | oai:repositorio.ual.es:10835-7384 |
| institution | Universidad de Cuenca |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| publisher | MDPI |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oai:repositorio.ual.es:10835-73842023-04-12T19:29:31Z Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads Franco Salas, Antonio Valera Martínez, Diego Luis Peña Fernández, Ana Araceli greenhouse evaporative cooling pressure drop heat and mass transfer coefficients specific water consumption saturation efficiency Evaporative cooling systems using a combination of evaporative pads and extractor fans require greenhouses to be hermetic. The greatest concentration of greenhouses in the world is located in southeast Spain, but these tend not to be hermetic structures and consequently can only rely on fogging systems as evaporative cooling techniques. Evaporative cooling boxes provide an alternative to such systems. Using a low-speed wind tunnel, the present work has compared the performance of this system with four pads of differing geometry and thickness manufactured by two different companies. The results obtained show that the plastic packing in the cooling unit produces a pressure drop of 11.05 Pa at 2 m·s−1, which is between 51.27% and 94.87% lower than that produced by the cellulose pads. This pressure drop was not influenced by increases in the water flow. The evaporative cooling boxes presented greater saturation efficiency at the same flow, namely 82.63%, as opposed to an average figure of 65% for the cellulose pads; and also had a lower specific consumption of water, at around 3.05 L·h−1·m−2·°C−1. Consequently, we conclude that evaporative cooling boxes are a good option for cooling non-hermetic greenhouses such as those most frequently used in the Mediterranean basin. 2020-01-16T11:33:14Z 2020-01-16T11:33:14Z 2014-03-07 info:eu-repo/semantics/article 1996-1073 http://hdl.handle.net/10835/7384 en https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/7/3/1427 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess MDPI |
| spellingShingle | greenhouse evaporative cooling pressure drop heat and mass transfer coefficients specific water consumption saturation efficiency Franco Salas, Antonio Valera Martínez, Diego Luis Peña Fernández, Ana Araceli Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads |
| title | Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads |
| title_full | Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads |
| title_fullStr | Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads |
| title_full_unstemmed | Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads |
| title_short | Energy Efficiency in Greenhouse Evaporative Cooling Techniques: Cooling Boxes versus Cellulose Pads |
| title_sort | energy efficiency in greenhouse evaporative cooling techniques: cooling boxes versus cellulose pads |
| topic | greenhouse evaporative cooling pressure drop heat and mass transfer coefficients specific water consumption saturation efficiency |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/10835/7384 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT francosalasantonio energyefficiencyingreenhouseevaporativecoolingtechniquescoolingboxesversuscellulosepads AT valeramartinezdiegoluis energyefficiencyingreenhouseevaporativecoolingtechniquescoolingboxesversuscellulosepads AT penafernandezanaaraceli energyefficiencyingreenhouseevaporativecoolingtechniquescoolingboxesversuscellulosepads |