首页> 外文期刊>ASHRAE Transactions >Restroom Ventilation Schemes: Energy Implications
【24h】

Restroom Ventilation Schemes: Energy Implications

机译:洗手间通风方案:能源影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Restroom exhaust to control odors is a fundamental practice of ventilation. In this paper, a number of ventilation schemes for private restrooms are compared from an energy perspective. Energy demand models were created jor a single-user restroom, with 5 uses per day. 10 uses per day, and 15 uses per day. Multiple US climates were modeled. Exhaust scenarios included (a) continuous ventilation with minimum air 25 cfm (12.5 L/s), (b) continuous ventilation at 6 ACH, (c) continuous ventilation at 10 ACH (d) intermittent ventilation with minimum air 50 cfm (25 L/s), (e) intermittent ventilation at 6 ACH, (f) intermittnat ventilation, at 10 ACH, and (g) intermittent ventilation at 15 ACH. The models with 50 cfm (25 L/s) intermittent systems had an average of 77% less energy demand than the 25 cfm (12.5 L/s) continuous models. The models with 6 ACH or 10 ACH intermittent system had an average of 89% less energy demand than the 6 ACH or 10 ACH continuous models. The 15 ACH intermittent models had 14% less energy demand than the 25 cfm (12.5 L/s) continuous models.
机译:洗手间排气控制气味是通风的基本实践。在本文中,将许多用于私人洗手间的通风方案与能量观点进行比较。能量需求模型创建了一个单用户洗手间,每天用5个使用。 10每天使用,每天15个使用。多个美国气候被建模。包括的排气场景(a)连续通风,最小空气25 cfm(12.5l / s),(b)在6 ach连续通风,(c)10 ach(d)连续通风(d)间歇通气,最小空气50 cfm(25 l / s),(e)在6 ach,(f)中间歇通气,(f)在15 ach的10 ach和(g)间歇通气中的间歇通风。具有50个CFM(25L / s)间歇系统的模型平均比25 CFM(12.5L / s)连续模型更低的能源需求减少77%。具有6个ACH或10 ACH间歇系统的型号平均低于6 ACH或10 ACH连续模型的能源需求量减少89%。 15 ACH间歇模型比25 CFM(12.5L / s)连续模型减少14%。

著录项

  • 来源
    《ASHRAE Transactions》 |2020年第1期|448-455|共8页
  • 作者

    Travis R. English;

  • 作者单位

    Kaiser Permanente Orange County CA USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号