| Summary: | 碩士 === 高苑科技大學 === 建築研究所 === 101 === High-density of urban development in Taiwan causes poor ventilation and raising indoor temperature. Domestic production of windows is often designed to be high-tight, and generally lead to poor ventilation, and poor heat dissipation. That seriously affects the health of the occupants and comfort. Therefore, this research solves this problem, focusing on building ventilation effectiveness of double windows.
Trials were conducted in an energy-saving laboratory to measure the ventilated performance of horizontal wind deflector when used in double windows. The specimen was installed at the southern opening. Instruments such as anemometer, wind sensor, and data logger were involved, recording results once every 5 minutes for a duration of ten hours from 7:00 to 17:00, resulting in a total of 120 samples. The experiment is designed to measure the double windows specimen’s external opening, internal opening, and its center measuring point under the influence of the horizontal wind deflector.
In this study, two double window types of ventilation ducts tries are designed, both are upper intake and down outlet and down intake and upper outlet, the study also install horizontal wind baffle at the opening and install blower fan in air layer to enhance the efficiency of the intake air and ventilation. Besides, to change three kinds of angles (30 degree, 45 degree , 90 degree) and two kinds of depth (10 cm, 20 cm) and analyze the pros and cons of ventilation effectiveness, to explore ventilation performance of the horizontal wind baffle used in double windows.
Conclusions:
1. Using an upper intake / down outlet with 10cm wind deflector, the best to worse air intake and intake rate are in the following order: 30 degrees, 45 degrees, and 90 degrees.
2. Using an upper intake / down outlet with 20cm wind deflector, the best to worse air intake and intake rate are in the following order: 45 degrees, 30 degrees, and 90 degrees.
3. After experimenting with different depth or angle with the upper intake / down outlet with wind deflector, regardless of the air intake and intake rate exhibited by the 10 and 20cm upper intake / down outlet horizontal wind deflectors, their ventilation performances are comparable. Therefore, thicker horizontal wind deflectors present no significant improvement in ventilation due to deeper paths.
4. Using a down intake / upper outlet with 10cm wind deflector, the best to worse air intake and intake rate are in the following order: 90 degrees, 45 degrees, and 30 degrees.
5. Using a down intake / upper outlet with 20cm wind deflector, the best to worse air intake and intake rate are in the following order: 45 degrees, 30 degrees, and 90 degrees.
6. After experimenting with different depth or angle with the down intake / upper outlet wind deflector, ventilation performances in air intake and intake rate at 30 degrees in 10 and 20 cm wind deflectors are comparable and stable. However, performance in air intake and intake rate of other types are relatively poor. At 45 and 90 degrees, the 10cm horizontal wind deflector performance shows significant improvement. On the other hand, at 45 and 90 degrees, the 20cm horizontal wind deflector shows significant deterioration. Therefore, thicker horizontal wind deflectors present no significant improvement in ventilation.
7. Experimental results show superior performance from the down intake / upper outlet at 90 degrees in 10cm horizontal wind deflector compared to other types.
8. Experimental results show a significant decline in performance from the down intake / upper outlet at 90 degrees in 20cm horizontal wind deflector compared to other types.
|
|---|
