Comparison of Downdraught and Up Draft Passive Air Conduction Systems (PACS) in a Winery Building

Abstract

A huge portion of energy consumption in buildings comes from heating, ventilation, and air conditioning. Numerous previous works assessed the potential of natural ventilation compared to mechanical ventilation and proved their justification on the field. Nevertheless, it is a major difficulty to collect enough information from the literature to make decisions between different natural ventilation solutions with a given situation and boundary conditions. The current study tests the passive air conduction system (PACS) variations in the design phase of a medium-sized new winery’s cellar and production hall in Villány, Hungary. A computational fluid dynamics simulation based comparative analysis enabled to determine the differences in updraft (UD) and downdraught (DD) PACS, whereby the latter was found to be more efficient. While the DD PACS performed an air change range of 1.02 h−1 to 5.98 h−1, the UD PACS delivered −0.25 h−1 to 12.82 h−1 air change rate. The ventilation performance of the DD version possessed lower amplitudes, but the distribution was more balanced under different wind incident angles, thus this version was chosen for construction. It could be concluded that the DD PACS provides a more general applicability for natural ventilation in moderate climates and in small to medium scale industry hall domains with one in- and one outlet.

CFD Investigation of Enhancing Natural Ventilation in Attached Family House Buildings in Hungary

“…The inlet of the computational domain is defined as velocity inlet, and the outlet as pressure outlet, and the side and top boundaries as symmetry boundary condition. West wind direction is tested since it is the prevailing local wind direction with an annual wind average wind velocity of 2.73 m/s at a reference height of 10 m [26]. Fig.…”