International Symposium on Multiphase flow and Transport Phenomena

April 22-25, 2012, Agadir, Morocco

SIMULATION OF NATURAL CONVECTION INSIDE A GREENHOUSE

MONO CHAPEL

A.Boukhriss, R. Mir§, Y. El Hammami, M. Feddaoui

Laboratoire de Mécanique, Procédés de l'Energie et de l’Environnement (LMP2E)
National School of Applied Sciences, Ibn Zohr University, Agadir, Morocco
§
Correspondence author. Email: rachid_mir@ensa-agadir.ac.ma

ABSTRACT
Greenhouses are a favorable environment for the development of different cultures. The
mastery of internal climatic conditions is the principal concern of farmers.
The aim of this work is to study numerically, in tridimensional, the free convective heat
transfer in a greenhouse culture and heated from below and cooled from above. For solving the
Navier-Stokes governing the flow of air inside the field, the finite volume method is used. The
influence of Rayleigh number on the dynamic and thermal fields is studied.

Keywords - Natural convection, greenhouse, modeling and numerical simulation

NOMENCLATURE

u, v, w : dimensionless velocity components

P: dimensionless pressure
 : dimensionless temperature
Pr : Prindtl number
Gr : grashoff number
Ra : rayleigh number
x, y, z : dimensionless coordinate
 : mass density
g: gravitational acceleration
 : coefficient of thermal expansion
 : thermal diffusivity
 : kinematic viscosity

INTRODUCTION

Greenhouse crops are developing important to address a market for increasingly competitive
and conditioned by quality standards more stringent. Production systems become considerably
sophisticated and expensive. Therefore, greenhouse growers who want to remain competitive
must maximize their investment by a great control of production conditions. Improving the
climate control can be achieved by taking proper account of existing linkages between the
various components of energy balance and water balance. This consideration requires the
development of simple and realistic models that faithfully reproduce the physical phenomena
involved. Greenhouses are a favorable environment for the development of different cultures. The
mastery of internal climatic conditions is the principal concern of farmers.
The study of Berroug et al. [2010], consists in introducing geometry into an energy balance model
and to quantify its effect on the temperature inside the greenhouses. Draoui et al. [2005] studied
the influence of the form factor in natural convection transient in greenhouse mono chapel.
El hammami et al. [2007] they conducted a study of simulation and they showed that in the case
where we have openings situated the exchanges of heat below are better and by consequence one
encourages the circulation of air better.
Majdoubi et al. [2007] studied the fields of climate variables in a large greenhouse submitted to a
forced convection. Wang et al. [2007] studied the experimental air speed profiles in the centre of a
naturally ventilated greenhouse
The aim of this paper is to propose tridimensional numerical solutions related to natural
convection in enclosure in the form of greenhouse mono chapel heated from below, cooled
from above and adiabatic in lateral sides. The fluid under consideration is air and the Rayleigh
number is taken in the range from Ra= 103 to 105.

PYSICAL MODEL

The physical model studied, with the boundary conditions, is shown at the figure 1:

Figure. 1 Physical model

We considered the simplifying assumptions:

o The fluid is Newtonian and viscous.
o The physical properties of the air inside the greenhouse are assumed to be constant
except the density ρ whose variation is a function of temperature.
o The air is considered as an incompressible fluid.
o The dissipated power density is negligible.
o The flow of viscous dissipation of heat is negligible.
o The fluid is completely transparent.
 o The energy change due to the compressibility is negligible due to low speeds.
o The problem is solved according to the Boussinesq approximation.
o Laminar flow.

The non-dimensional governing equations for the thermal convection problem are conservation
of mass, the momentums equations, and the energy equation:

o Mass conservation:

u v w
  0 (1)
x y z

o Equation of momentum along x, y and z axis:

u u u u P 1   2u  2u  2u 
u v w    2 2 2 (2)
τ x y z x Gr  x y z 
v v v v P 1  2v 2v 2v 
u v w    2 2 2 (3)
τ x y z y Gr  x y z 
w w w w P 1   2w  2w  2w 
u v w    2  2  2  (4)
τ x y z z Gr  x y z 

o Energy equation:

θ θ θ θ 1   2θ  2θ  2θ 
u v w   2 2 2 (5)
τ x y z Pr Ra  x y z 

These non-dimensional equations were obtained using the characteristic length H , velocity
scale U 0  gHT  , time scale   H U 0 , and pressure scale P0  U 02 . The non-
12

dimensional temperature is defined in terms of the wall temperature difference and a reference
temperature as:

T  Tr
 and Tr  0.5TH  TC 
TH  TC

TH is the temperature of the hot wall, and TC is that of the cold wall. The Rayleigh number and
Prandtl number are, respectively:

g  T L3 
Ra  Pr Gr Gr  Pr 
 2
a

The enclosure boundary conditions consist of no-slip and no penetration walls, i.e,
u  v  w  0 on all four walls.
The thermal boundary conditions on the bottom and top walls are:
 Y 0   H  1 2 and Y 1   C  1 2
The vertical walls are adiabatic as shown in Figure 1.
At each instant, the heat flux averaged over the hot wall is defined by:

1 1 θ
Nu H     dx dz (6)
0 0 y y 0

The finite volume method is used for solving the coupled equations by adopting the simpler
algorithm of Patankar [1980].

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Average Nusselt number Table. 1 shows the evolution of the average Nusselt number Numoy
at the hot wall as a function of Rayleigh number

Table. 1 Average Nusselt

103 104 105

1,1156 1,9798 3,8496

Evolution of Nusselt number Nu = f (x) The curves of Nu = f (x) are made in the median
plane z=0.5 at the hot wall (i.e. at y = 0), Figure 2 show the evolution of Nux as a function of
Rayleigh number.
(XY)  30 Jun 2011 NUSSELT I: NU 2D

Nu=f(x)
7
Ra=1E+3
Ra=1E+4
6
Ra=1E+5

4
Nux

0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
x

Figure 2. evolution of Nux=f(x) in the plane z=0.5 for Ra=103 ; Ra=104 and Ra=105

Figure 2 illustrates the variation of Nusselt number in the plane z=0.5 for different Rayleigh
We can note that exchanges become important increasing the Rayleigh number.

Curves of isotherms The isotherms are traced along several transverse and longitudinal
planes for various values of Rayleigh number: z=0.25 ; z=0.5 ; z=0.75 ; x=0.25 ; x=0.5 and
x=0.75
 (2D)  30 Jun 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D
(2D)  30 Jun 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D (2D)  30 Jun 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D

Plan z=0.25 Ra=1E+3 Plan z=0.5 Ra=1E+3 Plan z=0.75 Ra=1E+3

1 1 1
375 -0.4
375 -0.4 375
-0.4
0.9 0.9 0.9
-0.3
75

5
0.8 -0.312 -0.312
5
0.8 0.8
-0.25

0.7 0.7 -0.18

75 0.7 -0.18
75

-0.12
0.6
5
0.6 0.6
5
-0.062 -0.062
5

Y
0.5
Y

0.5

Y
0
0
0.5
0.0625
0.0625

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.125

0.1875
0.3 0.3 0.3
0.25 0.240636

0.2 0.2 0.3125 0.2

0.375
0.1 0.1 0.1
0.4375
0.4375 0.442647

0 0 0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
X X X
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 3. isotherms for Ra=103 at planes (a) z=0.25; (b) z=0.5 and (c) z=0.75
(2D)  30 Jun 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D (2D)  30 Jun 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D (2D)  30 Jun 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D

Plan z=0.25 Ra=1E+5 Plan z=0.5 Ra=1E+5 Plan z=0.75 Ra=1E+5

1 1 1
375 375
-0.4 -0.4
125
-0.3
5 -0.25
0.9 -0.12 -0.4
375 0.9 0.9 -0.12
5
-0.0625
0
-0.1 0
87
5
0.8 0.8 0.8

0.7 625
0.7 0.7 0.06
25

0.0

0.6 0.6 0.6

Y

0.5

Y
0.5
Y

0.5

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.062
5
0

0.3 0.3

0.06
0.3

25
0.1

0.1
0.1

87

0.2 0.2

87
0.2
25

5
0.2
95
0.2 09
95 0.378359 2
09
0.1
2 0.1 0.1
0.240636

0 0 0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
X X X
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 4. isotherms for Ra=105 at planes (a) z=0.25;(b) z=0.5 and (c) z=0.75
(2D)  11 Jul 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D
(2D)  11 Jul 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D (2D)  11 Jul 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D

0.9 1 0.9
-0.4375 -0.4375
-0.4375

0.9 0.8
0.8 -0.1875 -0.25

-0.0625
0 0.8 -0.0625
0.7 0.7 -0.25

0.7 0
-0.1875
0.6 0.6
0.6
0.5 0.5
Y

0.5
Y
Y

0.4 0.4
0.4
0.3 0.1875 0.3
0.3 0
-0.125

0.2 0.2
0.2 0
0.0625
0.1875
0.1 0.375 0.1 0.1
0.375 0.375

0 0 0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
X X X
(a) (b) (c)
4
Figure 5. isotherms for Ra=10 at planes (a)x=0.25;(b) x=0.5 and (c) x=0.75
(2D)  11 Jul 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D

(2D)  11 Jul 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D

(2D)  11 Jul 2011 TEMPERATURE: T 3D

1
0.9 -0.4375 -0.4375
0.9
-0.4375
-0.1875
-0.0625 0.9
0.8 0.0625 0.8 -0.25
0
0.8 -0.125
0.7 0.7
0.0625 0.7
0.6 0.6
0.6 0

0.5 0.5
Y

0.5
Y

0
Y

0.4 0.4
0.4
0.3 0.3
0.3 -0.0625

0.2 0.2
0.2
0.1875 0

0.1 0.1 0.1 0

0.1875 0.0625
0.375

0 0 0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
X X X
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 6. isotherms for Ra=105 at planes (a) x=0.25; (b) x=0.5 and (c) x=0.75
Interpretation: For Ra = 103, the isotherms are almost parallel, they follow the shape of the
chapel, in fact, the conduction term is dominant.
For Ra = 104 and 105, hot air rises from the left side (plane x = 0) and cold air down the right
side (plane x = 1).
By increasing the Rayleigh number, the temperature gradient becomes very small at the center
of the greenhouse.

Velocity curve: The velocity curves are plotted in different planes as shown in the figures
below. The curves u= f (y) figure 7 and v=f(x) figure 8 retain the same form for different plans,
and its intensity increases in median plane.
(XY)  29 Jun 2011 VITESS U I: U 2D
(XY)  30 Jun 2011 VITESSE: V 2D

Ra=1E+4 u=f(y) Ra=1E+5

0.25
Z=0.25 0.3 z=0.25
0.2 z=0.5
Z=0.5
Z=0.75 (a) z=0.75 (b)
0.15 0.2

0.1
0.1
0.05
u
0
U

-0.05
-0.1
-0.1

-0.15 -0.2

-0.2
-0.3
-0.25
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Y y

Figure 7. velocity u=f(y) for : (a) Ra=104 ; (b) Ra=105

(XY)  01 Jul 2011 VITESSE: V 2D (XY)  01 Jul 2011 VITESSE: V 2D

v=f(x) Ra=1E+4 v=f(x) Ra=1E+5

0.2 0.3
Y=0.25 Y=0.25
(a) Y=0.5 0.25 (b) Y=0.5
0.15
Y=0.75 Y=0.75
0.2
0.1 0.15

0.1
0.05
0.05
V

0
V

0
-0.05
-0.05
-0.1

-0.1 -0.15

-0.2
-0.15
-0.25

-0.3
-0.2
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
X X

Figure 8. velocity v=f(x) for : (a) Ra=104 ; (b) Ra=105

Velocities vector The figures 9, 10 and 11 represents the velocities vector uv and uw at
different planes (z=0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and y=0.5). We see the formation of a single cell for
Ra = 104 (fig. 10), and a dominant cell with two micro cells at the corners for Ra = 10 5 (fig.
11). The plane y = 0.5, we have four quadratic cells for Ra = 105.
(2D)  29 Jun 2011 VITESSE: UV 2D (2D)  29 Jun 2011 VITESSE: UV 2D (2D)  29 Jun 2011 VITESSE: UV 2D

vecteur UV plan Z=0.25 Ra=1E+4 vecteur UV plan Z=0.5 Ra=1E+4 vecteur UV plan Z=0.75 Ra=1E+4
1 1 1

0.9 0.9 0.9

0.8 0.8 0.8

0.7 0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6 0.6

0.5

v
0.5 0.5

v
v

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1 0.1

0 0 0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
u u u

(a) (b) (c)

4
Figure 9. velocities vectors uv for Ra=10 at planes z=0.25 (a) ; z=0.5 (b) ; z=0.75 (c)
(2D)  30 Jun 2011 VITESSE: UV 2D

(2D)  30 Jun 2011 VITESSE: UV 2D

(2D)  30 Jun 2011 VITESSE: UV 2D

vecteur uv z=0.25 Ra=1E+5

vecteur uv z=0.5 Ra=1E+5 vecteur uv z=0.75 Ra=1E+5 1
1 1
0.9
0.9 0.9
0.8
0.8 0.8

0.7
0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6
0.6

0.5 v 0.5
v

0.5
v

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1 0.1

0 0 0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
u u u
(a) (b) (c)
5
Figure 10. velocities vectors uv for Ra=10 at planes z=0.25 (a) ; z=0.5 (b); z=0.75 (c)
(2D)  01 Jul 2011 VITESSE: UW 2D
(2D)  01 Jul 2011 VITESSE: UW 2D

vecteur uw Y=0.5 Ra=1E+5

vecteur uw Y=0.5 Ra=1E+4 1
1

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6
w
w

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
u u

(a) (b)
Figure 11. velocities vectors uw at plan y=0.5 for Ra=104 (a) and Ra=105 (b)
 CONCLUSION

For small values of Rayleigh, thermal exchanges are conductive; the temperature gradient is
not subject to wide variation across the field (that is the dominant effect of conduction). As
Rayleigh increases, the convective exchanges become important (the viscous terms prevail
over the terms of conduction). Whereas for high values of Rayleigh, the large temperature
gradients are observed near the horizontal walls, however, the region with low temperature
gradient is large and it is in the middle of the field. The intensity of velocities u and v is large
compared with w velocity.

REFERENCES

Berroug, F. Lakhal, E.K. El Omari, M. El Qarnia, H. Faraji, M [2010], Effet de la géométrie sur la
performance thermique d’une serre agricole. Revue des Energies Renouvelables Vol. 14 N°2
(2011) 249 – 266
DRAOUI, B. Benyamine, M. Boulard, T. [2005], Influence du facteur de forme sur la convection
naturelle en régime transitoire dans une serre mono chapelle chauffée par le bas (flux). 12èmes
Journées Internationales de Thermique. Tanger, Maroc du 15 au 17 Novembre 2005.
El hammami, Y. Feddaoui, M. Mediouni, T. Mir, A. Fatnassi, H. [2007]; influence de la position
d’ouvrant sur l’aération en régime laminaire dans une serre mono chapelle chauffée par le bas ;
Congrès Comples'2K7, Energie et Environnement, 19-20 Octobre 2007, ENSA-AGADIR (Maroc),
pp. 297-302
Majdoubi, H. Boulard, T. Fatnassi, H. Lekouch, K. Bouirden, L. [2007], Caractérisation et
modélisation numérique de l’écoulement de l’air et du microclimat diurne d’une serre canarienne
de grande surface. 13èmes Journées Internationales de Thermique. Albi, France du 28 au 30 Août
2007.
Wang, S. Boulard, T. Haxaire, R [2007], Measurement and analysis of air speed distribution in a
naturally ventilated greenhouse. Proc. Int. Conf. and British-Israeli Workshop on Greenhouse
Tech. towards 3rd Mill. Eds. M. Teitel, B.J. Bailey Acta Hort. 534, ISHS 2000.
PATANKAR,S. [1980], Numerical heat and transfer fluid flow. Hemisphere Publishing
Corporation