| 本文已被：浏览 343次 下载 535次 |
码上扫一扫！ |
| 不同墙体材料的装配式日光温室的热性能对比分析 |
|
杨定伟1,荆海薇1*,景炜婷1,何斌1,邹志荣2,鲍恩财3,曹晏飞2
|
|
|
| (1.西北农林科技大学 水利与建筑工程学院, 陕西 杨凌 712100;2.西北农林科技大学 园艺学院, 陕西 杨凌 712100;3.江苏省农业科学院 农业设施与装备研究所/农业农村部长江中下游设施农业工程重点实验室, 南京 210014) |
|
| 摘要: |
| 针对日光温室后墙保温、蓄热能力不足的问题，选取装配式砾石模块日光温室(A)和装配式土模块日光温室(B)为试验温室，以当地传统的砖混结构温室(C)为对照，测试试验及对照温室的室内温度和试验温室A和B的墙体温度以及墙表面热流密度，分析试验温室和对照温室的环境温度差异以及2座试验温室的墙体传热特性。结果表明:试验温室后墙热工性能方面，B温室的总热阻和墙体总热惰性指标均大于A温室，温度波传至墙内表面的衰减倍数和延迟时间更大；室内温度方面，晴天B温室的夜间平均气温分别比A和C温室高0.6和2.7 ℃，阴天的夜间平均气温分别高0.9和3.3 ℃，雨天的夜间平均气温分别高1.9和4.3 ℃；墙体方面，晴天B温室的墙体蓄热层厚度为600~700 mm，墙体厚度>700 mm为稳定层，阴天蓄热层厚度为300~400 mm，墙体厚度>400 mm为稳定层，典型天气下A温室的墙体蓄热层厚度均>600 mm，蓄热层厚度的差异是A温室墙体的材料孔隙大，密闭性差造成；墙体传热特性方面，晴天整日蓄热量B温室比A温室高168.24 MJ，阴天高14.09 MJ。综上，试验温室A和B热性能优于对照温室C，B温室的保温、蓄热性能最优。 |
| 关键词: 日光温室 墙体 装配式 主动蓄热 |
| DOI：10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2023.10.17 |
| 投稿时间：2022-12-17 |
| 基金项目:陕西省重点研发计划项目(2022ZDLNY03-02)；陕西省技术创新引导专项(2021QFY08-01)；陕西省科技统筹创新工程项目(2016KTCL02-02) |
|
| Comparative analysis of thermal performance of fabricated solar greenhouses with different wall materials |
|
YANG Dingwei1,JING Haiwei1*,JING Weiting1,HE Bin1,ZOU Zhirong2,BAO Encai3,CAO Yanfei2
|
| (1.College of Water Resources and Architectural Engineering, Northwest A & F University, Yangling 712100, China;2.College of Horticulture, Northwest A & F University, Yangling 712100, China;3.Institute of Agricultural Facilities and Equipment, Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Science/Key Laboratory of Protected AgricultureEngineering in the Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Nanjing 210014, China) |
| Abstract: |
| In order to solve the problems of insufficient thermal insulation and heat storage capacity of the back wall of solar greenhouse, a assembled gravel module solar greenhouse(A)and a assembled earth module solar greenhouse(B)were constructed, and were compared with the local traditional brick and concrete greenhouse(C)as the control. In this study, the indoor temperature of three greenhouses, the wall temperature and wall surface heat flux of test greenhouses were tested, and the temperature environment difference between the test greenhouses and the control greenhouse and the heat transfer characteristics of the walls of the two experimental greenhouses were analyzed. The test results showed that: In terms of the thermal performance of the back walls of the test greenhouses, the total thermal resistance of greenhouse B and the total thermal inertness index of the walls were greater than those of greenhouse A, and the damping factor and heat lag of temperature wave to the inner surface of the wall were greater. In terms of indoor temperature, the average night temperature of greenhouse B was 0. 6 and 2. 7 ℃ higher than that of greenhouse A and C on the sunny day, 0. 9 and 3. 3 ℃ higher on the cloudy day, and 1. 9 and 4. 3 ℃ higher on the rainy day, respectively. In terms of the walls, the thickness of the wall heat storage layer of greenhouse B on the sunny day was 600-700 mm, and above 700 mm was the stable layer. On the cloudy day, the thickness of the wall heat storage layer was 300-400 mm, and above 400 mm was the stable layer, and in typical weather, the thickness of the wall heat storage layer of greenhouse A was not less than 600 mm. The difference in the thickness of the heat storage layer was caused by the large porosity and poor airtightness of the material on the wall of A greenhouse. In terms of wall heat transfer characteristics, the daily heat storage of greenhouse B was 168. 24 MJ higher than that of greenhouse A on the sunny day, and the daily heat storage was 14. 09 MJ higher on the cloudy day. In conclusion, the thermal performance of test greenhouse A and B is better than that of control greenhouse C, and the thermal insulation and heat storage performance of greenhouse B are the best. |
| Key words: solar greenhouse wall prefabricated active heat storage |
