See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328017659

Ventilation rate formula for mechanically ventilated broiler houses

considering aerodynamics and ventilation operating conditions

Article  in  Biosystems Engineering · October 2018

DOI: 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2018.09.002

CITATIONS READS

4 1,207

6 authors, including:

Gwanyong Park I.-B. Lee

Seoul National University Seoul National University
4 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS    176 PUBLICATIONS   1,768 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ukhyeon Yeo Taehwan Ha

Seoul National University Seoul National University
18 PUBLICATIONS   47 CITATIONS    15 PUBLICATIONS   87 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

aerosol dispersion modeling View project

Development of educational program for aerodynamics and HVAC of greenhouses using virtual reality techology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by I.-B. Lee on 02 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/issn/15375110

Research Paper

Ventilation rate formula for mechanically

ventilated broiler houses considering
aerodynamics and ventilation operating conditions

Gwanyong Park a, In-bok Lee a,b,*, Uk-hyeon Yeo a, Taehwan Ha a,

Rack-woo Kim a, Sang-yeon Lee a
a
Department of Rural Systems Engineering, Research Institute for Agriculture and Life Sciences, College of
Agriculture and Life Sciences, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea
b
Center for Green Eco Engineering, Institute of Green Bio Science and Technology, Seoul National University, 1447
Pyeongchang-daero, Pyeongchang-gun, Gangwon-do, 25354, Republic of Korea

article info
Precise ventilation control of broiler houses is essential to effectively exhaust pollutants
Article history: and attain the required breeding environment. However, the ventilation rate used in
Received 13 June 2018 practise is always lower than the desired or designed value because of difficulties in
Received in revised form measuring the pressure difference between the indoor and outdoor pressure of the facility.
28 August 2018 In this study, a new formula was developed to estimate the total ventilation rate for me-
Accepted 6 September 2018 chanically ventilated broiler houses using the number of operating fans and the slot
opening rate, both of which are relatively easy to measure in practice. The proposed for-
mula was derived from the in-situ fan performance curve and the discharge coefficient,
Keywords: which represent the ventilation characteristics of the exhaust fans and slot openings
Broiler house respectively. This was evaluated through a field experiment and a computational fluid
Computational fluid dynamics dynamics (CFD) simulation. The measured ventilation rate was 24.1e26.6% lower than the
Discharge coefficient desired ventilation rate showing that the in-situ fan performance curve was 33.7 Pa lower
Fan performance curve on average than the designed fan performance curve provided by the manufacturer. The
Mechanical ventilation distribution of static pressure in the broiler house was analysed using CFD models and it
Orifice equation was found that the new formula could be applied to broiler houses having difference
lengths.
© 2018 IAgrE. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

In particular, consumption of chicken has increased from

1. Introduction
The Korean livestock and poultry industry has been growing
steadily, and its total production amounted to 17.8 billion $ US
in 2016 (Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, 2017).
8.6 kg per capita in 2006 to 13.8 kg per capita in 2016 (Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, 2017). In response to
increasing demand, broiler houses have increasingly adopted
concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO) with

* Corresponding author. 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea. Fax: þ82 2 873 2087.
E-mail address: iblee@snu.ac.kr (I.-b. Lee).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2018.09.002
1537-5110/© 2018 IAgrE. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5
mechanical ventilation systems (Kwon, Jo, Lee, Ha, & Hong,
2014). However, CAFO places a burden on the control of in-
ternal environment, causing accumulation of heat, moisture,
dust, and hazardous gases within the facility. Consequently,
the importance of ventilation, which is the key environmental
control mechanism in broiler houses, has recently been
emphasised.
Mechanically ventilated broiler houses have the advantage
of controlling ventilation rate by adjusting the operating
number and cycle of the exhaust fans. This is commonly
based on the maximum airflow rate of the fans. However, inlet
opening size is controlled to maintain the static pressure dif-
ference between inside and outside of the broiler house
separately from the ventilation rate setting. By keeping the
static pressure difference high, particularly in the winter, the
incoming cold air can be prevented from direct contact with
the animal occupied zone (Kwon, Lee, Zhang, & Ha, 2015). The
ventilation rate of a mechanically ventilated broiler house
varies depending mainly on the static pressure difference
(Morello et al., 2014). The ventilation rate can be estimated
using the fan performance curve provided by the manufac-
turer, but it has been reported that the actual ventilation rate
is not exactly the same as the designed one and is degraded
with continued use in the field (Casey et al., 2008).
The actual ventilation rate is the volumetric or mass flow
rate through exhaust fans as an outlet or openings as an inlet,
where the flow rates through the outlets and inlets must be
equal. Therefore, accurate measurement of the flow rate, at
either the outlet or inlet can provide the ventilation rate.
However, the ventilation rate depends considerably on the
interaction between inlets and outlets. Inlets that are not large
enough or not properly positioned will increase the negative
pressure near the exhaust fans and hinder the ventilation.
Therefore, the airflows through the exhaust fans and inlet
vents require a comprehensive understanding of both the
operational fan performance curve and orifice theory.
A number of studies have evaluated the fan performance
curve of mechanically ventilated broiler houses using an
averaging Pitot tube (Lakenman, Segura, Atkins, Ben-Zvi, &
Feddes, 2004; Segura, Feddes, Ouellette, & Ben-Zvi, 2005) and a
fan assessment numeration system (FANS) (Gates, Casey, Xin,
Wheeler, & Simmons, 2004; Liang, Bautista, Dabhadkar, &
Costello, 2013). However, a direct measurement of the fan
performance is not suitable for long-term monitoring in terms
of cost and time. While many studies have evaluated the fan
performance curves of livestock houses, only few studies
considered orifice theory to estimate the ventilation rate
through the inlets. Bottcher, Singletary, & Baughman (1992)
assumed the discharge coefficient (the coefficient in the
orifice equation) as 0.6 or 1.0 for estimating the ventilation rate
of mechanically ventilated broiler houses. Studies on other
livestock houses also did not consider the variability of
discharge coefficient (Timmons, Irish & Toleman, 1986;
Hatem, Abdelbary, Mohamed, & Haddy Ahmed, 2011; Kiwan
et al., 2013). However, the influence of both the fan perfor-
mance and the inlet orifice are rarely considered simulta-
neously when estimating ventilation rate.
Meanwhile, the complex aerodynamics induced by exhaust
fans and inlet vents in livestock facilities has been studied
using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). CFD simulations
83
have shown advantages when analysing aerodynamic envi-
ronments in relation to complex operating conditions and
meteorological conditions. In particular, CFD simulations can
help understand the pressure distribution inside a facility
resulting from the complex interactions between inlets and
outlets. However, many studies have set the airflow rate of
exhaust fans to a constant value (Kwon et al., 2015; Mostafa
et al., 2012), which means that changes in ventilation rate ac-
cording to the operating conditions have not been considered.
In order to improve the accuracy of computational ap-
proaches, it is necessary to simulate the variable ventilation
rate according to the operating condition of the facility by
applying the fan performance curve and orifice theory.
This study proposed a formula for estimating the actual
overall ventilation rate of target mechanically ventilated ani-
mal house considering the aerodynamic performance of the
exhaust fans and inlet vents. The in-situ fan performance
curve of the exhaust fans and the discharge coefficient of the
inlet vents were measured and statistically analysed through
field measurements in a selected broiler house. The formula
developed for the broiler house was evaluated for its appli-
cability through a field experiment and CFD simulation.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Theory
2.1.1. Fan performance curve
The capacity of a fan is commonly expressed as its maximum
airflow rate. However, the airflow rate achieved in practice by
an exhaust fan decreases depending on the static pressure
difference between the inside of the facility and the atmo-
sphere. The performance of a fan is also affected by structural
factors such as ducts and dampers. When a fan is operating,
the static pressure on the outlet of the fan is higher than the
inside, whereas the dynamic pressure is the same. An exces-
sive static pressure difference represents a resistance to the
airflow and causes a decrease in the airflow rate. A fan per-
formance curve indicates the relationship between volumetric
airflow and static pressure difference of the fan (Fig. 1). Fan
performance curves show the inherent characteristics of in-
dividual fans that are constant in shape, power consumption,
Fig. 1 e Graphical representation of ventilation rate and
static pressure difference (Q e DP plot) in mechanically
ventilated facility.
84 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5
and rotational speed. The fan manufacturer generally provides
the designed fan performance curves according to a test
standard. However, the performance of the fan achieved in
practise can degrade compared to the designed performance
for various reasons such as accumulation of dust, aging of the
fan belt, structural obstacles, and location of the static pres-
sure measurement, particularly when the pressure distribu-
tion in the system is not homogenous.
The fan performance curve at maximum rotation speed
can be approximated by a second-order polynomial of airflow
rate and static pressure difference:
DP ¼ c0 þ c1 Q þ c2 Q 2
where, DP is the static pressure difference (Pa), Q is the volu-
metric airflow rate of fan (m3 s1), and c0 , c1 , and c2 are the
coefficients of the fan performance curve.
The designed fan performance curve shows the fan per-
formance in standard atmospheric conditions (air at 20  C,
50% relative humidity, and 101.325 kPa barometric pressure)
(ANSI/AMCA 210). Fan performance affected by the density of
air can be corrected using the following equation (Liu & Liu,
2012):
r

DP ¼ c0 þ c1 Q þ c2 Q 2
rd
where, r is the standard air density (kg m3), and rd is the field
air density (kg m3).
2.1.2. Orifice equation
The orifice equation is commonly used to estimate the volu-
metric flow rate of fluids at inlet slot openings (Fig. 1). The
orifice equation can be derived from Bernoulli's equation and
continuity equation under the assumption of incompressible,
steady flow conditions (Karava, Stathopoulos, & Athienitis,
2004). For varying sectional area of orifice, the following
equation is established:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2DP
Q ¼ CD A
r
where, Q is the volumetric airflow rate through the orifice (m3
s1), CD is the discharge coefficient (dimensionless), A is the
total area of orifice (m2), DP is the static pressure difference
across the orifice (Pa), and r is the density of fluid (kg m3).
The discharge coefficient is generally estimated as 0.6e0.65
for square openings (American Society of Heating, Refriger-
ating Air-Conditioning Engineers, 2001) and 0.9e0.95 for cir-
cular openings (Andersen, 2002). However, the discharge
coefficient varies with numerous factors, such as shape and
roughness of the opening, flow rate, density, and viscosity of
fluid (Heiselberg & Sandberg, 2006). Reynolds number (Re) also
affects the discharge coefficient when the flow of fluid
through the ventilation opening is not fully developed (Karava
et al., 2004).
2.1.3. Ventilation rate formula
The airflow rates through exhaust fans and inlet slot openings
can be estimated using the fan performance curve (Eq. (1)) and
the orifice equation (Eq. (3)), respectively, assuming standard
air conditions. The airflow rate through the exhaust fans must
be equal to that through the inlet slot openings based on
continuity. Therefore, by combining those two equations, the
ventilation rate (Q) and the static pressure difference (DP) can
be solved. When the fan performance curve and orifice
equation are plotted in a Q e DP relation graph, the point
where the two curves intersect indicates the ventilation rate
and static pressure difference of the facility (Fig. 1).
Letting Q be the total ventilation rate of the mechanically
ventilated facility, and n be the number of operating exhaust
fans. Assuming the same performance for all fans, the airflow
through one exhaust fan is equal to Q/n. Therefore, the fan
performance curve can be expressed as follows:
(1)

Q 
Q 2
DP ¼ c0 þ c1 =
n þ c2 =
n (4)
The orifice equation can be transformed into a formula for
static pressure difference (DP) as follows
r
DP ¼ Q2 (5)
2C2D A2
Assuming that the pressure differences from Eqs. (4) and
(5) are equal (Chatterjee, Zhang, & Xia, 2015; Parker,
Sherwin, Raustad, & Shirey, 1997), a second-order poly-
nomial defining the airflow can be derived by combining the
(2)
two equations:
!
rn2
c0 n þ c1 nQ þ
2
c2  2 Q2 ¼ 0 (6)
2CD A2
Letting c02 be the coefficient of Q 2 (c02 ¼ c2  rn2 C2 2
D A =2);
then the ventilation rate Q can be obtained by solving the
second-order equation as follows
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
c1 þ c21  4c0 c02
Q¼ n (7)
2c02
Therefore, the ventilation rate of a mechanically ventilated
facility can be calculated according to the number of operating
exhaust fans (n), the total slot opening size (A), the coefficients
(3) of the fan performance curve (c0, c1, and c2), and the discharge
coefficient of the slot openings (CD).
2.2. Study procedures
The proposed formula was used to estimate the actual venti-
lation rate of target mechanically ventilated broiler house
using the following procedures (Fig. 2). Firstly, a field experi-
ment was conducted to evaluate some assumption of the
ventilation characteristics of the building and then determine
the in-situ fan performance curve and the discharge coeffi-
cient of the slot openings. Then, the coefficients of the fan
performance curve, discharge coefficient, and other operating
variables were used to develop the ventilation rate formula
(Eq. (7)). The CFD model of the selected broiler house was also
designed to verify the assumptions of the proposed formula. It
was validated by comparing the simulated and measured
airflow rates of the exhaust fans. The model was used to
analyse the effects of internal pressure distribution on the
result of the formula, which assumed that the pressure
measured at a single point represented the indoor pressure.
Finally, the developed formula for estimating the ventilation
 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5 85

Fig. 2 e Schematic diagram of research procedure.

rate was validated through field measurements in the selected
broiler house.
2.2.1. Experimental broiler house
The field experiment for measuring fan performance and
static pressure differences was conducted at a mechanically
ventilated broiler house located in Gimje, Jeollabuk-do, Re-
public of Korea (35 450 43.0200 N, 126 580 12.9600 E), as shown in
Fig. 3. The selected broiler house was 123 m in length, 15 m in
width, 5.5 m in ridge height, and 3.5 m in eave height and had
a mechanical ventilation system. In the cold season, cross
ventilation using four sidewall fans (Euroemme EM36; Munt-
ers, Sweden) on the sidewall and slot openings on the opposite
sidewall was applied. Tunnel ventilation using 14 tunnel fans
(Euroemme EM50; Munters, Sweden) on the end wall and slot
openings or cooling pads on the sidewalls was applied in hot
season. All the exhaust fans are operated at maximum flow
rate and are not variable speed fans. On each sidewall, 41 slot
openings were located evenly (1.13 m  0.34 m). Each slot
opening was curved to maintain a constant angle of incoming
flow regardless of opening size. Cooling pads (30 m  1.5 m)
were located on each sidewall near the entrance.
The internal environment of the broiler house was
controlled by an automatic control system called Chore-
Tronics 2 Controls (Chore-Time, A Division of CTB Inc., USA).
The automatic control system included sensors for air tem-
perature, relative humidity, and static pressure difference
between the inside and outside of the broiler house, as well as
software for automatic control of exhaust fans, heaters, and
inlet openings. The sidewall fans and tunnel fans were
controlled automatically based on internal air temperature
setting. The fans could be controlled individually if necessary.
The slot openings were controlled based on the static pressure
difference between the inside and outside of broiler house. A
static pressure sensor (Setra model 265; Setra Systems, Inc.,
USA) was installed at the end wall opposite to the tunnel fans
near the control room. All slot openings were controlled
simultaneously to change the opening size as they could not
be controlled individually.
2.2.2. Instrumentation
The airflow rate of exhaust fans was directly measured by
manometer (DP-CALC Micromanometer 5815; TSI Inc., USA)
and an airflow station (Fig. 4), which measured overall airflow
rate of each fan generated by rotation speed, number and
shape of the blade. The airflow station is a circular duct with a
diameter of 1 m and length of 0.5 m (Fig. 4). Pitot tubes are
located on the traverse plane of airflow station for measuring

Fig. 3 e Experimental mechanically ventilated broiler house in Gimje, Jeollabuk-do, Republic of Korea.
86 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5
Fig. 4 e Measuring airflow rate of target exhaust fan using
an airflow station.
the dynamic pressure. The pressure measurement accuracy of
the manometer is ±1 Pa, which corresponds to ±1.5% of air
speed. An air temperature and humidity data logger (HOBO
UX100-003; Onset Computer Co., USA) was also used for
monitoring the air properties during the experiment. The
static pressure difference between the inside and outside of
the broiler house was measured using a differential pressure
sensor deployed in the facility (Setra model 265; Setra Systems
Inc., USA). The differential pressure sensor can measure a
range of 0e99.6 Pa with an accuracy of ±1.0% and a resolution
of 2.49 Pa.
2.2.3. Field measurement of ventilation characteristics
Because the broilers can be stressed during this kind of
experiment, the field experiment was conducted when the
broiler house was empty of birds on September 12e30, 2017, to
collect dataset of ventilation rate according to various opera-
tional conditions and to evaluate in-situ fan performance
curve and discharge coefficient. An airflow station was
installed at the outlet of the tunnel exhaust fan to measure the
Fig. 5 e Schematic of the ventilation system and
measurement locations.
Fig. 6 e Controlling the number of operating exhaust fans.
airflow rate. A fabric duct (1.5 m long) connected the airflow
station and outlet of the target exhaust fan (Fig. 4).
The entrance and evaporative cooling pads were closed
during the measurements to maintain constant airflow rates
and static pressure differences. The static pressure difference
between the inside and outside of the broiler house was
measured by two tubes installed at both internal and external
walls near the control room (Fig. 5). To control the static
pressure difference, the number of operating exhaust fans (1,
2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14) and slot opening rate (15, 29, 44, 59, and
100%) were adjusted as shown in Figs. 6 and 7. Table 1 pre-
sents the cases used for conducted the experiment. Some
cases that could have excessive static pressure differences
(>40 Pa) were excluded from the list to prevent any damage to
the facility (Li et al., 2005; Xin et al., 2009). The field experiment
was conducted while minimising the influence of turbulence
as much as possible. Measurements for each case were con-
ducted after 15 min of airflow stabilisation inside the broiler
house. In case of the dynamic pressure, it was measured for
1 min by with the measurement repeated 3 times for each
case. The experiment was conducted only when external
wind conditions were stable to prevent error in the static
pressure difference measurement.
The air temperature and relative humidity near the airflow
monitoring station were monitored simultaneously at 5-min
intervals. The atmospheric pressure data provided by Korea
Meteorological Administration were used for calculating air
density.
2.2.4. Computational fluid dynamics model design and
simulation
CFD numerically analyses the behaviour of a fluid using a
computer. The numerical solution is obtained through a so-
lution of the NaviereStokes equation discretised using the
finite volume method. Although complicated model designs
and validation process are required for accurate simulation,
CFD can be applied in various fields owing to its efficient
analysis of results for diverse conditions. The numerical
analysis process through CFD can be divided into pre-
processing, main module, and post-processing. ANSYS
DesignModeler and Meshing (Release 16.1, ANSYS Inc., USA)
were used for pre-processing, design of model geometry and
mesh, and ANSYS Fluent (Release 16.1, ANSYS Inc., USA) was
used for the main module.
The CFD model of broiler house was designed to comple-
ment the limitations of the field experiment, because the field
experiment could not measure the pressure at multiple points
simultaneously. CFD simulations were also used to analyse
 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5 87

Fig. 7 e Controlling the slot opening rate.

the influence of building size, especially the length, on the to contain at least 3  5 meshes to accurately simulate
results of the proposed formula. incoming flows. The SST k-u turbulence model used in the
The dimensions of the CFD model were the same as those previous studies on livestock facilities was applied (Shen,
of the selected broiler house and except that the ventilation Zhang, & Bjerg, 2012).
facilities were simplified for computational efficiency (Fig. 8). The boundary condition of the slot openings was set as
The 14 exhaust fans were designed with circular surface pressure-inlet or inlet-vent. The pressure-inlet boundary condi-
(1.4 m diameter) and located at the end wall, which was the tion is commonly used to simulate a free inlet. The pressure-
same location as in the broiler house. The 41 slot openings inlet assumes a resistance-free opening, whereas the inlet-vent
were located on each sidewall at regular intervals. Five models boundary condition considers a loss coefficient. By applying a
were designed with different slot opening rates (15%, 29%, loss coefficient, the inlet-vent simulates the static pressure
44%, 59%, and 100%). Meshes were designed as a hybrid of difference of openings as follows:
tetra, pyramid, and hex grids. The total number of meshes
r
ranged from 2.2 to 4.7 million. Each slot opening was designed DP ¼ kL v2 (8)
2
where, DP is the static pressure difference between the inside
and outside of the model (Pa), kL is the loss coefficient
Table 1 e Experimental conditions according to slot
(dimensionless), r is the density of fluid (kg m3), and v is the
opening rate and number of operating fans.
velocity of inlet flow (m s1).
Slot opening rate Number of operating The orifice equation also represents the relationship be-
(opening height) exhaust fans
tween the airflow rate and static pressure difference, and it
100% (0.34 m) 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 can be transformed into similar forms. Two equations are
59% (0.20 m) 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 used to derive the loss coefficient kL as a function of the
44% (0.15 m) 1, 2, 4, 6, 8
measured discharge coefficient as follows:
29% (0.10 m) 1, 2, 4, 6
15% (0.05 m) 1, 2, 4 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
v ¼ Q=A ¼ CD 2DP=r (10)

r 1 r
DP ¼ kL v2 ¼ 2  v2 (11)
2 CD 2


kL ¼ 1 C2D (12)

where, Q is the airflow through the inlet (m3 s1), and A is the
inlet opening size (m2).
The boundary condition of the exhaust fans was set as
exhaust fan or fan. The exhaust fan is for the outer boundary of
the computational domain, whereas fan is for a plane inside
the computational domain. Therefore, an external zone of
broiler house was designed additionally when the fan
Fig. 8 e Part of CFD model mesh for the experimental boundary condition was applied. The fan performance curve
broiler house. can be applied to exhaust fan and fan boundary conditions by
88 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5
setting the pressure jump as a function of velocity. Both in-
situ and designed fan performance curves were applied to
the model. The designed fan performance curve provided by
the manufacturer is shown as a function of the airflow ve-
locity (Eq. (13)). The designed fan performance curve of the
target fan was provided only in a limited range (static pressure
difference of 0e50 Pa and airflow rate over 9  10⁷ m3 s1).
Therefore, the equation within the range was applied to the
CFD model.
DP ¼ 7:668 þ 36:619$v  5:419$v2
where, DP is the static pressure difference between the inlet
and outlet of the fan (Pa), and v is the velocity of airflow
through the fan (m s1).
The CFD model was validated by comparing the simulated
and measured airflow rates of exhaust fans. A regression
analysis of the fan performance curve with the data acquisi-
tion method (field measured or CFD simulated) was conduct-
ed. The p-value of the data acquisition method was used to
test the significance between measured and simulated airflow
rates.
The dimensions of a standard broiler house was similar
with the broiler house used in the experiments (14 m in width,
3.3 m and 5.6 m in eave and ridge height), while the length of
the broiler house was different because it can be varied ac-
cording on the land area owned by farmer (Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, 2016). Considering that,
additional three models with different lengths of building
were designed to analyse the change of ventilation charac-
teristics with the dimension and volume of the building. The
lengths of the broiler house for the additional models were 60,
80, and 100 m, and other specifications were the same as those
of the original model. Slot openings were designed as fully
opened condition (0.34  1.13 m) and the number of slot
openings was adjusted according to the length of the model. A
multiple regression analysis was conducted to determine
whether the fan performance curve changes with the length
of broiler house.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Field experiment
The field experiment was conducted for evaluating the in-situ
fan performance curve and discharge coefficient of the target
Table 2 e Measured ventilation rate and static pressure difference according to the operating condition.
Number of Minimum slot Flow rate of target exhaust fan (107 m3 s1)
operating fans opening rate
Minimum
1 15% 9.175
2 15% 8.658
4 15% 8.311
6 29% 8.795
8 44% 8.723
10 59% 8.517
12 59% 7.919
14 100% 7.280
broiler house. During the experiment, the measured average
air temperature during the experiment was 22.4  C (lowest
20.5  C and highest 25.2  C), relative humidity was 76.4%
(56.9%e87.1%), and the atmospheric pressure was 999.96 hPa
(997.10e1004.00 hPa). The average air density was calculated
as 1.1696 kg m3 (1.1633e1.1761 kg m3).
Table 2 presents the measured airflow rate of the target
exhaust fan and the static pressure difference. All exhaust
fans installed in the broiler house were assumed to have the
same performance. While they were of the same model and
(13) installed at the same time two years ago, the field measured
results showed that the measured flow rate of exhaust fan
located at next to the sidewall was only 6.8% in maximum
lower than that of exhaust fan located at the centre. Czarick,
Fairchild, & Daghir (2008) also insisted that there was almost
no difference in performance according to the position of the
fan. The flow rates at the inlet slots were measured along the
length of the broiler house, and the measured results showed
that the maximum deviation of flow rates at the inlet slots
along the length of the broiler house was only 5.7% compared
to the averaged. It was also validated from the CFD-computed
results shown in section 3.2.2 showing that internal static
pressure was very uniform except for the area next to the
exhaust fans.
The airflow rate showed a tendency to decrease according
to the number of operating fans and static pressure difference,
which was theoretically expected. When all fans were oper-
ating, the airflow rate was 21.8% lower than that when a single
fan was operating.
Under some conditions where single or two fans were
operated and the slot opening rate was only 15%, the static
pressure difference was measured as a negative value. When
performing mechanical ventilation with exhaust fans, the
static pressure inside a building is theoretically lower than
that outside. Therefore, the negative static pressure difference
might be caused by the dynamic pressure around the
measuring unit. In order to minimise the error, the experi-
ment was conducted with the conditions where the static
pressure difference was relatively high and the outside wind
was not too strong to interfere with the measurement.
3.1.1. In-situ fan performance curve
The in-situ fan performance curve was calculated by a
regression analysis of the measured volumetric airflow rate
and static pressure difference in accordance with Eq. (1). The
data with static pressure differences over 10 Pa were used for
Static pressure difference (Pa)
Maximum Minimum Maximum
9.867 2.5 0.0
9.805 2.5 10.0
9.926 0.0 32.4
9.761 5.0 27.4
9.344 12.5 24.9
8.834 19.9 27.4
8.142 27.4 34.9
7.374 37.4 37.4
 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5 89

Under that range, the ventilation rate calculated using the in-
situ fan performance curve was 24.1e26.6% lower than the
ventilation rate calculated using the designed fan perfor-
mance curve. Table 4 presents the airflow reduction rate ac-
cording to the static pressure difference. Considering that the
ventilation setting of the broiler house was based on the
maximum airflow rate specified by the manufacturer
(1.302  10⁸ m3 s1), the field ventilation rate operated in
practice would be much lower. Similarly, the minimum
ventilation rate of livestock houses is generally set as the
required ventilation rate for removal of heat, moisture, and
pollutant emissions. A deteriorated fan performance would
cause accumulation of moisture, organic dust, and hazardous
gases inside the broiler house.

3.1.2. Discharge coefficient of inlet slot openings

Fig. 9 e In-situ and designed fan performance curve of The discharge coefficient of slot openings was estimated by a
target exhaust fan. regression analysis with the measured static pressure differ-
ence and the airflow rate through a slot opening in accordance
with Eq. (3). For the analysis, it was assumed that the airflow
the regression analysis to improve the accuracy. The results
rates of all slot openings were equal, and this was confirmed
are shown in Fig. 9 and Table 3, where DP is the static pressure
through a subsequent CFD analysis (see section 3.2.2). As the
difference between inside and outside of the broiler house (Pa),
discharge coefficient was affected by the geometry and size of
and Q is the volumetric airflow rate through the fan (m3 s1).
inlet opening, it was calculated for various slot opening sizes
The regression model was considered reliable because the
measured during the field experiment using a second-order
adjusted R2 was 0.9 and all variables significantly affected the
polynomial regression model of the orifice equation. The re-
dependent variable. As shown in Fig. 9, the in-situ fan per-
sults are presented in Table 5 and Fig. 10.
formance curve was positioned below the manufacturer-
All of the regression results were considered acceptable
provided designed fan performance curve. The reason for
because the adjusted R2 was over 0.96 for all slot opening
the deviation might be the performance degradation of the
sizes. The regression analysis showed that the calculated
fans by aging or the difference in DP measurement between
discharge coefficient had a significant effect on the static
the standard performance test method and the field mea-
pressure difference for all slot opening sizes. The discharge
surement environment. The designed fan performance curve
coefficient decreased as the slot opening size increased, and
was measured following the standard fan performance test,
this tendency was consistent with the previous study on
which measures the static pressure difference between the
bottom-hung windows, which are similar in structure to the
inlet and outlet of the fan under fully controlled conditions.
slot opening. Heiselberg and Sandberg (2006) found that the
On the other hand, the static pressure difference of the broiler
house was measured in the field condition where the internal
static pressure distribution was not uniform and uncontrol-
lable disturbances existed. The cause of the static pressure
deviation was analysed through the subsequent CFD Table 4 e Airflow reduction of in-situ fan performance
simulations. compared to designed fan performance.
The deviation of the static pressure difference between the Static pressure Airflow of target Reduction
in-situ fan performance curve and the designed one averaged difference (Pa) exhaust fan (m3 s1) ratio
33.7 Pa (minimum 28.2 Pa and maximum 39.2 Pa) according to Designed In-situ
the ventilation rate of exhaust fan (Fig. 9). The typical static
0 1.302  108 9.816  107 24.6%
pressure difference between the inside and outside of tunnel- 10 1.244  108 9.432  107 24.2%
ventilated broiler houses is 2.5e30 Pa (Casey et al., 2008). 20 1.175  108 8.965  107 23.7%
30 1.096  108 8.320  107 24.1%

Table 3 e Regression analysis of in-situ fan performance

curve.
Table 5 e Result of regression analysis according to slot
Multiple R2 Adjusted R2 F-statistic p-Value opening size for evaluating the discharge coefficient.
0.9063 0.9006 159.6 <2.2e-16 Slot opening rate Adjusted R2 p-Value Discharge
Estimate Standard error p-Value (opening size) coefficient (CD )

(intercept) 241.665 82.080 5.891e-03** 15% (0.0565 m2) 0.9988 1.06e-08 0.743
Q 100.215 25.398 3.920e-04*** 29% (0.1130 m2) 0.9976 5.49e-12 0.650
Q2 9.019 1.957 5.820e-05*** 44% (0.1695 m2) 0.9893 2.28e-09 0.605
59% (0.2260 m2) 0.9960 <2e-16 0.526
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. 100% (0.3842 m2) 0.9643 9.75e-12 0.344
90 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5

Table 6 e Regression analysis of discharge coefficient

with slot opening size.
Multiple R2 Adjusted R2 F-statistic p-Value
0.8540 0.8512 304.2 <2.2e-16

Estimate Standard error p-Value

(intercept) 0.80867 0.01592 <2e-16***

Slot opening size (m2) 1.11129 0.06372 <2e-16***

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

Fig. 10 e Regression analysis of static pressure difference

with airflow of slot opening according to slot opening rate.

discharge coefficient of a bottom-hung window tended to

decrease with increasing opening size (Fig. 11).
The calculated discharge coefficient was linearly related to
the slot opening size with the adjusted R2 of 0.8512 as pre-
sented in Table 6 and Fig. 12. The discharge coefficient was
significantly decreased by the slot opening size (p-value < 2e-
16). The regression analysis showed that the minimum
discharge coefficient of the target slot opening was 0.382,
which is 59% of the commonly used reference value (0.65). Fig. 12 e Regression analysis of discharge coefficient with
Therefore, the ventilation rate of a mechanically ventilated slot opening size.
broiler house could be overestimated considerably if the
variation of discharge coefficient with the opening size is not
considered. rate according to the operating conditions. The simulation
was conducted on the same condition as the field experiment,
3.2. Computational fluid dynamics simulation result and the CFD-computed airflow rate of exhaust fan and static
pressure difference were compared with the measured values.
3.2.1. Computational fluid dynamics model design and The accuracy of the models were evaluated by root-mean-
validation square error (RMSE) of the static pressure difference from
It is challenging to measure the spatial distribution of aero- the CFD models and calculated from in-situ fan performance
dynamic characteristics such as pressure due to the difficulty curve at the same ventilation rate (Table 7).
of measuring multiple points simultaneously. The CFD For the first model, the in-situ fan performance curve and
models of the broiler house were designed through trial and the exhaust fan boundary condition were applied on the
error in order to precisely simulate the changes in ventilation exhaust fans, and pressure inlet boundary condition on slot

Fig. 11 e Schematic and discharge coefficient according to the opening size of bottom-hung window (Heiselberg & Sandberg,
2006).
 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5
Table 7 e Comparison of design methodology and accuracy of CFD models.
Fan performance curve
1st model In-situ
2nd model Designed
3rd model Designed
openings. However, the static pressure difference of the first
model was consistently smaller than that calculated from the
in-situ fan performance curve. The designed fan performance
was applied to the 2nd model and the inlet-vent on slot open-
ings to consider the resistance of the inlet. The results of the
second model were generally more reasonable, but the static
pressure difference of several cases was extremely low,
increasing the RMSE of static pressure to 25.70 Pa. In the third
model, an external zone was additionally designed to apply
the fan boundary condition to accurately simulate the static
pressure distribution near the exhaust fans. Moreover, the
pressure jump of the exhaust fan was set as piecewise-linear
to limit the range of airflow and static pressure difference
within the designed fan performance curve. The RMSE of
the static pressure difference was calculated to be 2.88 Pa,
which indicates that the accuracy of the model was greatly
improved.
For statistical validation, a multiple regression analysis was
used to test the difference between the in-situ fan perfor-
mance curves and those simulated using the 3rd model (Table
8). It was found that the method variable did not significantly
affect the fan performance curve (p-value ¼ 0.2388), while the
p-values of the other variables were less than 0.05. Therefore,
the CFD model was considered to simulate well the ventilation
rate of the target broiler house. It was possible to simulate
changes in the ventilation rate according to the operating
conditions of the mechanically ventilated building by applying
the fan and inlet-vent boundary conditions.
3.2.2. Static pressure distribution
It was assumed that the non-uniform distribution of static
pressure caused the deviation between the in-situ and
designed fan performance curves. The distribution of static
pressure was analysed using the CFD-computed results. The
average static pressure difference was approximately 30 Pa
lower than that of the designed fan performance curve, even
Table 8 e Regression analysis of static pressure
difference with airflow and data acquisition method for
CFD model validation where Method is the categorical
variable indicating the data acquisition method (field
measurement or CFD simulation).
Multiple R2 Adjusted R2 F-statistic
0.9905 0.9889 625.3
Estimate Standard error
(intercept) 71.1485 32.4505
Q 42.1024 10.5609
Q2 4.2478 0.8550
Method 0.9641 0.7912
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
91
Boundary condition RMSE of DP (Pa)
Exhaust fan Slot opening
Exhaust fan Pressure inlet 20.30
Exhaust fan Inlet-vent 25.70
Fan with external zone Inlet-vent 2.88
though the designed fan performance curve was applied to
the CFD model. Figure 13(a) shows an example of static pres-
sure distribution computed by the CFD model, in which six
exhaust fans were operated and the slot opening rate was
59%. Figure 13(b) shows the static pressure distribution on the
horizontal plane of the target exhaust fan height at the same
condition. The static pressure outside the broiler house was
positive because of the pressure rise of the airflow passing
through the exhaust fans. However, a negative static pressure
existed inside the broiler house. The static pressure difference
was the largest near the operating exhaust fans. The
maximum static pressure in the external area was 19.1 Pa, and
the minimum static pressure in the broiler house was
37.5 Pa. However, the static pressure difference tended to
decrease with distance from the exhaust fans. The static
pressure at most locations away from the exhaust fans was
constant at 14.0 Pa, and the static pressure outside the
building was equal to 0 Pa. Thus, the static pressure difference
was approximately 14.0 Pa, and a similar static pressure dis-
tribution was observed in all simulation cases. The static
pressure, and thus the airflow rate, of each slot opening were
nearly equal. In the case where the static pressure difference
of the broiler house was the largest (14 exhaust fans operated
and slots fully opened), the maximum difference of the airflow
rate between slot openings was only 3.66%.
The deviation of static pressure on the fan and the average
static pressure inside the broiler house was caused by the
difference in area between the fan and cross-section of the
broiler house. The exhaust fan installed on the wall of the
house corresponds to a free inletefree outlet type without
duct. As a result, the velocity of air decreases along the
streamline due to the change in cross-sectional area.
Comparing the sections of exhaust fan and slot opening, the
following equations are established by using the Bernoulli and
continuity equations.
1 1
Pslot þ rv2slot þ rghslot ¼ Pfan þ rv2fan þ rghfan þ Presistance (14)
2 2
Q ¼ Aslot vslot ¼ Afan vfan (15)
where, P is the static pressure (Pa), r is the density of air
(kg m3), v is the air velocity (m s1), g is the gravitational
acceleration (m s2), h is the height (m), Q is the total volu-
p-Value metric ventilation rate (m3 s1), Presistance is the static pressure
<2.2e-16 drop due to resistance (Pa), and A is the total area of the sec-
tion (m2).
p-Value
Because the total slot opening size was larger than the area
0.0417*
of the exhaust fans (Afan < Aslot ) in all experimental conditions,
8.65e-04***
9.94e-05***
the average air velocity at the exhaust fans was greater than
0.2388 that at the slot openings (vfan > vslot ). Ignoring the small dif-
ference in height, the static pressure difference between the
two locations is as follows:
92 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5

Fig. 13 e Static pressure distribution of target broiler house (6 exhaust fans operated at slot opening rate of 59%).

1   building length (Table 9). Here, DP is the static pressure differ-

Pslot  Pfan ¼ r v2fan  v2slot þ Presistance > 0
2 ence between the inside and outside of the broiler house (Pa),
In general, the static pressure difference of a mechanically
ventilated broiler house is measured near the control room, as
performed in the facility used in this study. The static pres-
sure near the control room was not significantly different
from that at most of indoor locations, and therefore, it can be
considered to represent the static pressure inside the building
(Fig. 13(b)). However, it is still difficult to measure the static
pressure in practice because the pressure can vary across time
and space. In addition, dust and noxious gases generated in-
side the broiler house may cause failure of the pressure sensor
due to long-term operation. Therefore, it is important to un-
derstand that the in-situ fan performance curve (the rela-
tionship between fan airflow rate and static pressure
difference near the control room) is different from the
designed fan performance curve.
3.2.3. In-situ fan performance curve according to length of
broiler house
The in-situ fan performance curve was analysed according to
the length and volume of broiler house using three additional
models with different lengths of building. The airflow rate of the
exhaust fan and static pressure difference near the control
room are shown in Fig. 14 according to the building length. A
multiple regression analysis was performed in the same way as
that of the fan performance curve for testing the influence of
(16)
and Q is the volumetric airflow rate through the fan (m3 s1).
The linear model of the static pressure difference with the
second-order polynomial of airflow and the model length was
analysed, and the p-value of the Length variable was 0.123.
Therefore, the effect of length (60, 80, 100, and 123 m) on the
simulated in-situ fan performance curve was not significant.
The in-situ fan performance curve was considered as an
inherent characteristic of the target exhaust fan and can be
applied to estimate the ventilation rate regardless of the vol-
ume of the facility. With the computed results of the original
model, the high static pressure difference appeared only close
to the exhaust fans and the static pressure difference and air
velocity were kept constant in most areas within the broiler
house. It was found that the ventilation rate of the mechani-
cally ventilated broiler house was dependent on the aero-
dynamic characteristics of the inlet (slot opening) and outlet
(exhaust fan) but was barely affected by the structural and
boundary conditions.
3.3. Ventilation rate formula and its validation
The formula for calculating the ventilation rate according to
the operating condition was derived from the in-situ fan
performance curve, orifice equation, and the regression
equation of discharge coefficient. The in-situ fan performance
curve is expressed as follows according to the number of
operating fans:

100:215 9:019 2
DP ¼ 241:665 þ $Q  $Q (17)
n n2

Table 9 e Regression analysis of in-situ fan performance

curve with model length (Length is the length of the
broiler house model).
Multiple R2 Adjusted R2 F-statistic p-Value
0.9240 0.9133 72.94 2.879e-10

Estimate Standard error p-Value

(intercept) 216.9181 244.6905 0.387

Q 84.5400 67.2237 0.225
Fig. 14 e Simulated in-situ fan performance curve by CFD Q2 7.2005 4.6065 0.135
Length 0.0367 0.0227 0.123
models with different lengths of broiler houses.
 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5 93

where, DP is the static pressure difference (Pa), Q is total static pressure difference of the broiler house can be calcu-
ventilation rate (m3 s1), and n is the number of operating lated through a similar procedure.
fans. With the air density assumed to be 1.225 kg m⁻3, the
The regression equation of the discharge coefficient and ventilation rate and static pressure difference of the experi-
the number of slot openings (82) can be applied to the orifice mental broiler house were calculated according to the number
equation as follows: of operating fans (1e14) and slot opening rate as shown in
Figs. 16 and 17.
1 r
DP ¼ 2
 Q2 (18)
822 ð0:809  1:111AÞ A2 2

where, CD is the discharge coefficient of slot opening

(dimensionless), A is the slot opening size (m2), and r is the air
density (kg m⁻3).
Combining these two equations, the solution of the equa-
tion and the coefficients required were calculated as follows:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
c1 þ c21  4c0 c02
Q¼ n (19)
2c02

rn2
c02 ¼ c2  (20)
2$822 ð0:809  1:111AÞ2 A2

where, c0 ¼ 241.665 Pa, c1 ¼ 100.215 Pa s m⁻3, and

c2 ¼ 9.019 Pa s m⁻⁶. Fig. 16 e Estimated ventilation rate according to operating
The ventilation rate formula developed for the target condition of broiler house.
broiler house, given in Eqs. (19) and (20), was validated
through additional measurements at various operating con-
ditions. Figure 15 shows there was good agreement between
predictions and measurements with R2 of 0.990 and 0.909 for
the airflow rate and static pressure difference, respectively.
The errors tended to increase with more operating fans and
larger slot opening sizes, and the highest error was found
when 14 exhaust fans were operating with fully opened slot
openings. More fans and larger slot openings produced greater
total ventilation rate and static pressure differences. High air
velocity due to strong negative pressure inside the building
could result in complex aerodynamic disturbances and cause
errors, which need to be investigated in further studies.

3.4. Ventilation rate analysis

The actual ventilation rate can be calculated according to the Fig. 17 e Estimated static pressure difference according to
operating condition of the broiler house, especially the num- operating condition of broiler house.
ber of operating fans and size of slot openings (n and A). The

Fig. 15 e Validation of ventilation rate formula through measurements with various operating conditions.
94 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5
Table 10 e Slot opening rate range for adequate static
pressure difference according to the number of operating
fans.
Number of Slot opening Number of Slot opening
operating fans rate (%) operating fans rate (%)
1 5e7 8 43e100
2 9e15 9 51e100
3 14e24 10 61e100
4 19e34 11 75e100
5 24e47 12 e calculated by the regression model with the airflow through
6 30e64 13 e the exhaust fan and static pressure difference (R2 ¼ 0.900). On
7 36e100 14 e average, the static pressure difference of the in-situ fan per-
The grey area at the bottom right of the figures indicates
the condition where excessive static pressure differences,
which could cause fan failure to occur. The ventilation rate of
the target broiler house was mainly influenced by the number
of operating fans rather than the slot opening size. However,
the static pressure difference was primarily influenced by
both the number of operating fans and slot opening size.
When the slot opening rate was 59%, the ventilation rate was
91.23e99.97% of that at fully opened condition. On the other
hand, the static pressure difference increased to 112.8e135.4%
of that at fully opened condition.
Based on the field experiment, it was found that the slot
opening rate does not have a significant influence on the
ventilation rate when it is opened over 59%. On the other
hand, the jet drop distance has to be increased to prevent cold
stresses due to inlet air during cold seasons or night-time
(Kwon et al., 2015; Zhang & Strøm, 1999). For this purpose,
the static pressure difference should be maintained above a
certain level for high-velocity inlet flow. The typical static
pressure difference of mechanically ventilated broiler houses
is 10e25 Pa (Casey et al., 2008). Table 10 presents the slot
opening rate at the typical range of static pressure difference
in the target broiler house. The static pressure difference was
calculated to be at least 26.5 Pa, which exceeds the range,
when over 12 exhaust fans were operated.
Mechanically ventilated broiler houses commonly utilise
the measured static pressure difference only for controlling
the slot opening size. The ventilation rate is controlled by only
considering the designed maximum airflow and the number
of operating fans, and information on the actual amount of
ventilation rate is insufficient. Although the static pressure
difference is required for the evaluation of ventilation rate, the
measurement of static pressure difference has a high possi-
bility of error because of the flow around the sensor. It is ex-
pected that an accurate ventilation operation will be attained
by adjusting the number of operating fans and slot opening
size, through the formula suggested in this study.
4. Conclusions
In this study, field experiment and CFD simulation were con-
ducted to evaluate the ventilation characteristics of a me-
chanically ventilated broiler house and derive a ventilation
rate formula. The experiment was conducted to measure the
airflow rate of exhaust fans and the static pressure difference
between the inside and outside of the target broiler house. The
in-situ fan performance curve and discharge coefficient of slot
opening were evaluated through a statistical analysis. The
discharge coefficient was calculated by the airflow through the
slot opening and static pressure difference, and it showed a
large variability of 0.344e0.743. The discharge coefficient and
slot opening size showed a negative correlation, and the rela-
tionship between them was analysed by a linear regression
model (R2 ¼ 0.851). The in-situ fan performance curve was
formance curve was 33.7 Pa lower than that of the designed fan
performance curve provided by the manufacturer.
The CFD model of the target broiler house was designed to
overcome the limitation of the field experiment. The in-situ
fan performance curve was not significantly affected by the
length of the broiler house according to the CFD simulation (p-
value ¼ 0.189). The in-situ fan performance curve measured in
this study was considered applicable regardless of the
dimension and volume of the broiler house.
A ventilation rate formula was derived from the in-situ
fan performance curve, orifice equation, and regression
equation of the discharge coefficient. The total ventilation
rate and static pressure difference could be estimated by the
formula according to the number of operating exhaust fans
and slot opening size. This developed formula can be used
for most of mechanically ventilated broiler houses in Korea
following national structural standards. However, in the
case of that different characteristics of exhaust fans and
inlet slots are installed, the additional experiment should be
conducted by following the experimental procedures pre-
sented in this study. The methodology of this study was
expected to be applied to other mechanically ventilated
agricultural facilities, such as livestock houses and
greenhouses.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by Korea Institute of Planning and
Evaluation for Technology in Food, Agriculture, Forestry
(IPET), through Advanced Production Technology Develop-
ment Program, funded by Ministry of Agriculture, Food and
Rural Affairs (MAFRA) (316078e03).
references
Andersen, K. T. (2002). Friction and contraction by ventilation
openings with movable flaps. In Proceedings of Roomvent 2002,
Copenhagen, Denmark.
Bottcher, R., Singletary, I., & Baughman, G. (1992). Ventilation of
poultry buildings with exhaust fans at one end and
continuous slot inlets along the sidewalls. Transactions of the
ASAE, 35(5), 1673e1679.
Casey, K., Gates, R., Wheeler, E., Xin, H., Liang, Y., Pescatore, A.,
et al. (2008). On-farm ventilation fan performance evaluations
and implications. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 17(2),
283e295.
 b i o s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r i n g 1 7 5 ( 2 0 1 8 ) 8 2 e9 5
Chatterjee, A., Zhang, L., & Xia, X. (2015). Optimization of mine
ventilation fan speeds according to ventilation on demand
and time of use tariff. Applied Energy, 146, 65e73.
Czarick, M., III, Fairchild, B., & Daghir, N. (2008). Poultry housing
for hot climates. Poultry Production in Hot Climates, 80.
Gates, R. S., Casey, K. D., Xin, H., Wheeler, E. F., & Simmons, J. D.
(2004). Fan assessment numeration system (FANS) design and
calibration specifications. Transactions of the ASAE, 47(5), 1709.
Hatem, M. H., Abdelbary, K. M., Mohamed, B. A., & Haddy
Ahmed, N. A. (2011). The productive and reproductive
performance of rabbits in different housing systems. In Paper
presented at the 2011 Louisville, Kentucky, August 7e10, 2011.
Heiselberg, P., & Sandberg, M. (2006). Evaluation of discharge
coefficients for window openings in wind driven natural
ventilation. International Journal of Ventilation, 5(1), 43e52.
Karava, P., Stathopoulos, T., & Athienitis, A. (2004). Wind driven
flow through openingsea review of discharge coefficients.
International Journal of Ventilation, 3(3), 255e266.
Kiwan, A., Berg, W., Fiedler, M., Ammon, C., Gla € ser, M., Müller, H.-J.,
& Brunsch, R. (2013). Air exchange rate measurements in
naturally ventilated dairy buildings using the tracer gas decay
method with 85Kr, compared to CO2 mass balance and discharge
coefficient methods. Biosystems Engineering, 116(3), 286e296.
Kwon, K. S., Jo, Y. S., Lee, I. B., Ha, T. H., & Hong, S. W. (2014).
Measurement of dust concentration in a mechanically
ventilated broiler house and analysis of dust generation from
ground beds. Journal of the Korean Society of Agricultural
Engineers, 56(6), 31e43.
Kwon, K.-S., Lee, I.-B., Zhang, G. Q., & Ha, T. (2015). Computational
fluid dynamics analysis of the thermal distribution of animal
occupied zones using the jet-drop-distance concept in a
mechanically ventilated broiler house. Biosystems Engineering,
136, 51e68.
Lakenman, K., Segura, J., Atkins, R., Ben-Zvi, M., & Feddes, J.
(2004). Measuring ventilation rates in livestock buildings with
an averaging Pitot tube. In Paper presented at the 2004 ASAE
Annual Meeting.
Li, H., Xin, H., Liang, Y., Gates, R. S., Wheeler, E. F., & Heber, A. J.
(2005). Comparison of direct vs. indirect ventilation rate
determinations in layer barns using manure belts. Transactions
of the ASAE, 48(1), 367e372.
Liang, Y., Bautista, R., Dabhadkar, G., & Costello, T. A. (2013).
Validating an averaging pitot tube for measuring fan air flow
View publication stats
95
rates. In Paper presented at the 2013 Kansas City, Missouri, July
21eJuly 24, 2013.
Liu, G., & Liu, M. (2012). Development of simplified in-situ fan
curve measurement method using the manufacturers fan
curve. Building and Environment, 48, 77e83.
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. (2016). 2016
Livestock house standard design. Sejong: Ministry of Agriculture,
Food and Rural Affairs.
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. (2017). Agriculture,
food and rural affairs statistical yearbook. Sejong: Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.
Morello, G. M., Overhults, D. G., Gates, R. S., Day, G. B.,
Lopes, I. M., & Earnest, J. W. (2014). Using the Fan Assessment
Numeration System (FANS) in situ: A procedure for
minimizing errors during fan tests. Transactions of the ASABE,
57(1), 199e209.
Mostafa, E., Lee, I.-B., Song, S.-H., Kwon, K.-S., Seo, I.-H., Hong, S.-
W., et al. (2012). Computational fluid dynamics simulation of
air temperature distribution inside broiler building fitted with
duct ventilation system. Biosystems Engineering, 112(4),
293e303.
Parker, D., Sherwin, J., Raustad, R., & Shirey, D. (1997). Impact of
evaporator coil air flow in residential air conditioning systems.
In Presented at the 1997 ASHRAE Annual Meeting, June 28eJuly 2,
Boston, MA.
Segura, J., Feddes, J., Ouellette, C., & Ben-Zvi, M. (2005).
Development of a multi-port averaging pitot tube system for
measuring ventilation rates under field conditions. In Paper
presented at the 2003, 2004, 2005 Pacific Northwest Region Papers.
Shen, X., Zhang, G., & Bjerg, B. (2012). Comparison of different
methods for estimating ventilation rates through wind driven
ventilated buildings. Energy and Buildings, 54, 297e306.
Timmons, M., Irish, W., & Toleman, W. (1986). Temperature
variations within caged-layer housing as affected by inlet flow
characteristics. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 2(2), 153e157.
Xin, H., Li, H., Burns, R., Gates, R., Overhults, D., & Earnest, J.
(2009). Use of CO2 concentration difference or CO2 balance to
assess ventilation rate of broiler houses. Transactions of the
ASABE, 52(4), 1353e1361.
Zhang, G., & Strøm, J. S. (1999). Jet drop models for control of non-
isothermal free jets in a side-wall multi-inlet ventilation
system. Transactions of the ASAE, 42(4), 1121.