Field measurement of natural ventilation rate in an idealised full-scale building located in a staggered urban array: comparison between tracer gas and pressure-based methods

[thumbnail of Open Access]
Preview
Text (Open Access) - Published Version
· Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.
| Preview
Available under license: Creative Commons Attribution
[thumbnail of Ventilation_rev_nothighlighted.pdf]
Text - Accepted Version
· Restricted to Repository staff only
· Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Restricted to Repository staff only

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Gough, H. L., Luo, Z. orcid id iconORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2082-3958, Halios, C. H. orcid id iconORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8301-8449, King, M.-F., Noakes, C. J., Grimmond, C. S. B. orcid id iconORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3166-9415, Barlow, J. F., Hoxey, R. and Quinn, A. D. (2018) Field measurement of natural ventilation rate in an idealised full-scale building located in a staggered urban array: comparison between tracer gas and pressure-based methods. Building and Environment, 137. pp. 246-256. ISSN 0360-1323 doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.03.055

Abstract/Summary

Currently, no clear standards exist for determining urban building natural ventilation rates, especially under varying realistic meteorological conditions. In this study, ventilation rates are determined using tracer gas decay and pressure-based measurements for a full-scale (6 m tall) cube. The cube was either isolated (2 months of observations) or sheltered within a staggered array (7 months), for both single-sided and cross ventilation (openings 0.4 x 1 m). Wind speeds at cube height ranged between 0.04 m s-1 and 13.1 m s-1. Errors for both ventilation methods are carefully assessed. There is no discernible linear relation between normalised ventilation rates from the two methods, except for cross ventilation in the array case. The ratio of tracer gas and pressure derived ventilation rates is assessed with wind direction. For single-sided (leeward opening) cases it approached 1. For cross ventilation the ratio was closer to 1 but with more scatter. One explanation is that agreement is better when internal mixing is less jet-dominated, i.e. for oblique directions in the isolated case and for all directions for unsteady array flows. Sheltering may reduce the flushing rate of the tracer gas from the cube relative to internal mixing rate. This new dataset provides an extensive range of conditions for numerical model evaluation and for understanding uncertainty of ventilation rates. Knowledge of the latter is critical in building

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/76381
Identification Number/DOI 10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.03.055
Refereed Yes
Divisions Science > School of Mathematical, Physical and Computational Sciences > Department of Meteorology
Science > School of the Built Environment > Urban Living group
Science > School of the Built Environment > Energy and Environmental Engineering group
Uncontrolled Keywords Natural ventilation, ventilation rate, tracer gas, full-scale, pressure, wind direction
Publisher Elsevier
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar