4.7 Article

Experimental study of the effect of turbulence intensities on the maximum velocity decay of an attached plane jet

期刊

ENERGY AND BUILDINGS
卷 65, 期 -, 页码 127-136

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.05.041

关键词

Attached plane jet; Velocity decay; Turbulence intensity; Ventilation; Self-similarity

资金

  1. Academy of Finland
  2. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland through the post-doctoral project POWER-PAD [259678]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The turbulent airflow partner downstream jet slot is determined by the initial turbulent jet properties, including, turbulence intensity, initial momentum flux and velocity profile. The objective of this experimental study is trying to quantitatively discover the effect of turbulence intensity of supply airflow on the jet flow distribution of an attached plane jet. Our motivation proceeding our measurements is to achieve better understanding of room air flows and the influence of inlet diffusers (turbulence). Eleven conditions were measured in two test chambers where different types of slot diffusers were used to produce an attached air jet with different turbulence intensities. All measurements are under isothermal conditions. The turbulence intensity of the jet discharging from the slot was varying approximately from 1.0% to 14.0%. The results of this study reveal that turbulence intensity of the supplied air will affect significantly the maximum velocity decay of the attached plane jet. Measurement results show that the lower turbulence intensity of supply airflow will result in slower maximum velocity decay. A relatively stable turbulence level of the airflow at local maximum velocity has been found at relatively higher Reynolds numbers of 1333 and 2667, which is about 11% 4 in all measured cases. This study reveals a clear self-similarity characteristic of the turbulent airflow under conditions of different turbulence intensities and different Reynolds number. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据