Windbreak Wall-vegetative Strip System to Reduce Air Emissions from Mechanically-Ventilated Livestock Barns – Part 1: CFD Modeling
2019
ʻAjamī, ʻAlī | Shah, Sanjay B. | Stikeleather, Larry F.
The adverse effects of air emissions from animal feeding operations (AFOs) on public health, environment, and quality-of-life have been well-documented. Regulations or lawsuits may force AFOs to reduce their air emissions. Since livestock barn particulate matter (PM) has relatively high particle density and diameter and many gasses adsorb onto PM, its filtration might reduce air emissions. A porous windbreak wall that imposes acceptable backpressure (< 12.5 Pa) and covers the fan could be a promising option. Seventy-two different porous windbreak wall scenarios were modeled to compare their backpressure on the fan as well as average airspeed over the ground. These scenarios were combinations of shape (box, chamfered, curved), size (lengths of 2, 2.5, and 3 fan diameters), presence or absence of an opening (opened and closed), screen porosity (mosquito screen or clean screen, SunBlocker 70% or clogged screen), and fan angle and height. Backpressure and airspeed decreased with increasing windbreak wall length. Generally, the box-shaped windbreak wall had lower backpressure and airspeeds than the other shapes. The increased backpressure with clogged screen even at two fan diameters (2d) was acceptable. The tilted fan commonly used in poultry houses had higher backpressure and airspeed over the ground than the non-tilted fan used in swine houses due to the former’s lower surface area and tilt towards the ground. Overall, taking into account cost considerations and footprint size (for retrofittability), despite its higher airspeed over the ground (vs. larger footprints) and modest reduction in airflow rate, the 2d, open box model seems the most promising option.
Показать больше [+] Меньше [-]Ключевые слова АГРОВОК
Библиографическая информация
Эту запись предоставил National Agricultural Library
