...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Applied Engineering in Agriculture >Energy use analysis of open-curtain vs. totally enclosed broiler houses in Northwest Arkansas.
【24h】

Energy use analysis of open-curtain vs. totally enclosed broiler houses in Northwest Arkansas.

机译：阿肯色州西北部开放式幕帘鸡舍与全封闭式肉鸡舍的能耗分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Seventeen years of electricity and propane fuel use data collected from broiler production houses at the University of Arkansas Applied Broiler Research Farm (ABRF) in Northwest Arkansas were analyzed to quantify the relative effect of open-curtain versus totally enclosed housing systems on energy use. The ABRF consists of four commercial-scale 12- x 121-m (40- x 400-ft) houses and raises broilers under standard production contracts. After the first 15 years of production with open-curtain system, all houses were converted to the solid-wall enclosed system with drop ceiling, tunnel ventilation, and cooling pads in early 2006. The renovations led to reduction of the overall building heat loss factor (W.K-1) from 1389 to 586 for the two steel-frame houses and from 1022 to 428 for the two wooden-truss houses. Mean outside temperature (ranging from 14.7 degrees C to 17.5 degrees C or 58.5 degrees F to 63.5 degrees F in annual mean temperature during the 17-year period) and bird age were found to be the major factors affecting propane fuel usage and ventilation fan electricity usage. Electricity for ventilation and lighting comprised about 87% of the total electricity usage. Annual electricity usage was 27% higher with the enclosed system than with the open-curtain system (102 vs. 80 kWh per 1000-kg market bird weight or 46.4 vs. 36.4 kWh/1000 lb), due to loss of natural daylight and increased mechanical ventilation in the enclosed system. Propane use was comparable between curtain-sided and solid-wall housing schemes, averaging 76- and 65-L/1000 kg market bird weight (9.1 vs. 7.8 gal/1000 lb) before and after renovation, respectively. Higher fuel cost resulted in higher fuel expenditure for winter heating than electricity expenditure for summer cooling in this region. With increasing energy costs, analysis of energy use, as conducted in this study, will assist the decision making of growers to improve energy efficiency or explore alternative energy application.
机译：从阿肯色州西北部阿肯色大学应用肉鸡研究农场（ABRF）的肉鸡生产企业收集的十七年电力和丙烷燃料使用数据进行了分析，以量化开放式幕墙与全封闭式住房系统对能源使用的相对影响。 ABRF由四座商业规模的12 x 121米（40 x 400英尺）房屋组成，并根据标准生产合同饲养肉鸡。在生产开放式幕帘系统的前15年后，所有房屋均于2006年初转换为具有吊顶，隧道通风和冷却垫的实心墙封闭系统。整修导致降低了建筑物的整体热损失系数（WK -1 ）对于两个钢结构房屋从1389年到586，对于两个木结构房屋从1022年到428。平均外部温度（在17年内的年平均温度范围从14.7摄氏度到17.5摄氏度，或58.5摄氏度到63.5摄氏度）和禽鸟年龄是影响丙烷燃料使用和通风扇电力的主要因素用法。通风和照明用电约占总用电量的87％。封闭式系统的年用电量比开放式幕帘系统高27％（每1000公斤禽类重量102 VS. 80 kWh，或每千磅46.4 vs. 36.4 kWh / 1000 lb），这是由于自然光的损失和增加封闭系统中的机械通风。在幕帘式和实心壁式住房方案之间，丙烷的使用相当，翻新前后的平均家禽体重为76升和65升/ 1000公斤（9.1加7.8加仑/ 1000磅）。在该地区，较高的燃料成本导致用于冬季取暖的燃料支出高于用于夏季制冷的电力支出。随着能源成本的增加，本研究中进行的能源使用分析将有助于种植者的决策，以提高能源效率或探索替代能源的应用。

著录项

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