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

net/publication/223353807

Annual thermal performance of greenhouse with an earth–air heat

exchanger: An experimental validation

Article  in  Renewable Energy · December 2006

DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2005.11.006

CITATIONS READS

56 603

4 authors, including:

G. N. Tiwari Ashish Shukla

Bag Energy Research Society Loughborough University
701 PUBLICATIONS   22,978 CITATIONS    75 PUBLICATIONS   2,002 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Mohd. Emran Khan

Jamia Millia Islamia
43 PUBLICATIONS   823 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Ph. D Project View project

Smarter hhouseholder proejct View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ashish Shukla on 11 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS

Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446

www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Annual thermal performance of greenhouse with an

earth–air heat exchanger: An experimental validation
G.N. Tiwaria,, M.A. Akhtarb, Ashish Shuklaa, M. Emran Khanc
a
Centre for Energy Studies, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi-110016, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sant Lngowal Institute of Engineering and Technology,
Longowal, Sangrur– 148106, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Jamia Millia Islamia,
New Delhi-110025, India
Received 5 August 2005; accepted 29 November 2005
Available online 24 January 2006

Abstract

In this paper the thermal model given by Ghoshal and Tiwari has been validated by round-the-year
experimental work at IIT Delhi, New Delhi (281 350 N, 771 120 E), India. The correlation coefficient
and root-mean-square percentage deviation have been computed for each month for validation of the
thermal model. The values are 0.99% and 4.24% for the greenhouse temperature with an earth–air
heat exchanger (EAHE) in the month of January. Statistical analysis shows that there is fair
agreement between predicted and experimental values. An effort has also been made to optimize the
working hours of an EAHE to obtain maximum heating/cooling potential. The non-operational
hours of an EAHE are 252 and 279 for February and March months, respectively. The maximum
value of heating potential (11.55 MJ) and cooling potential (18.87 MJ) has been found during off
sunshine (8 pm–8 am) hours and peak sunshine hours (8 am–8 pm), for a typical day in the month of
January and June.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Earth–air heat exchanger; Heating/cooling potential; Thermal load leveling

Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 11 2659 1258; fax: +91 11 2659 2208.
E-mail address: gntiwari@ces.iitd.ernet.in (G.N. Tiwari).

0960-1481/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2005.11.006
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446 2433

Nomenclature

A area (m2)
Ca specific heat of air (J/kg 1C)
Fn fraction of solar radiation falling on north wall, decimal
FR heat removal factor for earth–air heat exchanger (EAHE) from under ground
earth surface
hi heat-transfer coefficient from the greenhouse cover to inside greenhouse air
(W/m2 1C)
ho heat-transfer coefficient from the greenhouse cover to ambient (W/m2 1C)
hgf convective heat-transfer coefficient from under ground earth’s surface to
flowing air inside the buried pipes (W/m2 1C)
hgN heat-transfer coefficient from floor to larger depth of the ground (W/m2 1C)
hna heat-transfer coefficient from north brick wall to ambient (W/m2 1C)
hnr heat-transfer coefficient from surface of north wall to the greenhouse air (W/m2 1C)
hgr heat-transfer coefficient from the floor to greenhouse air (W/m2 1C)
I solar radiation falling on inclined surface or greenhouse cover (W/m2)
K thermal conductivity (W/m2 1C)
Kg thermal conductivity (W/m2 1C)
L thickness (m)
L0 total length of buried pipes (m)
m_a mass flow rate of air entering into the buried pipes (kg/s)
Ma total mass of air in the greenhouse enclosure (kg)
N number of air changes per hour
Qh/c heating potential offered by EAHE for greenhouse (J)
Q_ u Useful thermal energy obtained from EAHE (W)
r reflectivity from the greenhouse cover ,decimal
rg reflectivity from the greenhouse floor ,decimal
rn reflectivity from the north wall, decimal
r1 radius of buried pipe in EAHE
t time (s)
Dt time interval (s)
T temperature (1C)
Tin inlet temperature of EAHE (1C)
Tout outlet temperature of EAHE (1C)
To surface temperature of the pipe at ground (1C)
U overall heat-transfer coefficient for greenhouse cover (W/m2 1C)
Ug overall heat-transfer coefficient from greenhouse air to floor (W/m2 1C)
UA overall heat loss from greenhouse (W/1C)
n Velocity of air (m/s)
V volume of the greenhouse (m3)
Greek letters
a absorptivity
t transmissivity
N infinity (at larger depth)
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2434 G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446

Subscripts

a ambient
e east wall
g floor of greenhouse
i different wall and roofs
n north wall
r greenhouse
s south
nr north roof
sr south roof
ww west wall

1. Introduction

Heating/cooling of greenhouses are most important activities during winter/summer

seasons and it is an essential requirement for proper growth and development of crops [1].
The heating and cooling of the greenhouses by exploiting energy stored inside the ground is
getting tremendous response in the last decade [2–4]. The heating and cooling of greenhouse
is studied by various researchers [5–8]. The coupling of the greenhouse with ground by using
buried pipes is an effective approach of heating and cooling of the greenhouse during winter
and summer, respectively. The ground may be viewed as an easily accessible heat source or
heat sink for the year-round-use. The greenhouse air temperature exceeding 45 1C in summer
and dropping down to 6 1C in winter are common for the climatic condition of Delhi [9].
Large fluctuation in temperature between the day and night, both in summer and winter
causes the adverse effect on the quality of the crop produced in the greenhouses. To
overcome this, it is of prime importance to utilize nearly constant stored thermal energy of
the earth [10–13]. The effect of various parameters (length, radius of buried pipes, velocity of
working fluid, depth of soil) on the thermal performance of an EAHE [14] has also been
investigated. Greenhouse heating/cooling can be obtained by

(1) Active methods,

(2) Passive methods.

For active heating of greenhouse, there are several option e.g. ground collector, warm
water, an EAHE and ground geothermal water; whereas for active cooling an EAHE, air-
conditioning and evaporative cooling are better option. The study of greenhouse heating/
cooling by the passive method [15,16] has also been made by many scientists. The passive
methods include water storage, rock bed storage, presence of north wall, mulching, phase-
changing material, shading, ventilation, infiltration earth shelters and wind towers.
The recirculation-type EAHE system under the study consist of pipes buried in the ground
and a portable blower capacity 335 W used as circulation system, which forces
the air at the rate of 150 kg/h through pipes and finally mixes it with the indoor air of the
greenhouse. The performance of the system has been evaluated in terms of thermal potential,
coefficient of performance (COP) and thermal load leveling (TLL) for each month of the
year, and the thermal model developed by Ghoshal and Tiwari has been validated. The
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446 2435

present work is also an effort to optimize the working hours of an EAHE to obtain maximum
heating /cooling potential while operating with an EAHE under different duration.

2. Experimental set-up

The EAHE was integrated with greenhouse with a floor area 8.58
4 m and oriented
from east to west direction located at IIT Delhi, India. The northern side of the greenhouse
is made up of 0.275 m thick brick wall for thermal storage and reduction of heat losses
from the greenhouse. The central height and height of north and south walls are 3 and 2 m,
respectively.
The climate of the place is the representative of a composite climate with three distinct
seasons i.e., the hot dry period (March–June), monsoon humid period (July–September)
and winter period (November–February). The absolute minimum temperatures of ambient
air are close to 4 1C in the winter period, and the absolute maximum temperature of
ambient air during summer period is around 45 1C.
The EAHE consists of PVC pipe of 39 m length and 0.06 m diameter. The pipes are
spread under the ground (at the depth of 1 m) in a serpentine manner. The length and
spacing between serpentine pipes are 4.8 and 0.5 m, respectively, with 8 numbers of turns.
A portable blower of 335 W, 150 kg/h capacity has been fitted with the suction end of the
pipe positioned in the south–west corner of the greenhouse. The delivery end, positioned in
the north–west corner of the greenhouse is opposite and far away from the suction end.
The opening of suction and delivery end, inside the greenhouse is covered with metal wire
mesh to prevent the entry of insects and foreign matters. Air-tight tarpaulin cloth is used to
connect the buried pipes with the blower. The isometric view of the experimental
greenhouse with integrated EAHE is shown in Fig. 1. Experiments are conducted
continuously for the whole day once in a week in clear and sunny day throughout the year
2004 in the following manner:

(1) without EAHE (1st day),

(2) with EAHE (2nd day).

Experimental validations have been shown for January and June month. Hourly
observations of solar radiations and temperatures of air for the ambient conditions,
greenhouse enclosure, suction end as well as delivery end have been measured during the
experimentation with the help of calibrated solarimeter and mercury thermometer,
respectively. The velocity of air is measured by anemometer. There are four sets of
observations collected for each month, and the monthly average values of each parameter
are used for the calculation.

3. Thermal analysis

The energy balance equation for various components of greenhouse combined with
EAHE can be written on the basis of following assumptions.

(i) Analysis is based on quasi-steady-state conditions.

(ii) There is no radiative exchange between the walls and roofs of greenhouse due to
negligible temperature differences.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2436 G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446

Ground surface N
50 W E
480
ground S
600

100
T2
North Wall
Outlet
T3
Buried pipe T1
(dia-6 cm) South wall
Blower
(inlet to buried pipe)
Fan 400
T1 Temperature at inlet All dimensions in cm.
T2 Temperature at outlet
T3 Temperature at greenhouse enclosure

Fig. 1. Isometric view of experimental greenhouse integrated with an EAHE.

(iii) Flow of air is uniform along the length of buried pipes.

(iv) Reflection from north wall is negligible.

Energy balance equation for north wall, floor and room air of greenhouse integrated
with EAHE are as follows:
(a) North Wall
an ð1  rn ÞF n ð1  rÞfSAi I i ti g ¼ hnr ðTjy¼0  T r ÞAn
þ hna ðTjy¼0  T a ÞAn . ð1Þ

(b) Floor
ag ð1  rg Þð1  F n Þð1  rÞfSAi I i ti g
(2)
¼ hgr ðTjx¼0  T r ÞAg þ hg1 ðTjx¼0  T 1 ÞA:

(c) At larger depth, the temperature of ground is assumed to be equal to the ambient air
temperature, TN ¼ Ta then Eq. (2) becomes

ag ð1  rg Þð1  F n Þð1  rÞfSAi I i ti g

(3)
¼ hgr ðTjx¼0  T r ÞAg þ hg1 ðTjx¼0  T a ÞAg :

(d) Greenhouse air

ð1  an ÞF n ð1  rÞfSAi I i ti g þ ð1  ag Þð1  rÞfSAi I i ti gð1  F n Þ

þhgr ðTjx¼0  T r ÞAg þ hnr ðTjy¼0  T r ÞAn þ Q_ u (4)
P
¼ 0:33NV ðT r  T a Þ þ M a C a dT r
dt þ Ai U i ðT r  T a Þ:
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446 2437

The term Q_ u in Eq. (4) is useful thermal energy obtained from EAHE
Q_ u ¼ F R m
_ a C a ðT o  T in Þ, (5)
where
0
F R ¼ 1  eð2pr1 hgf =m_ a C a ÞL .
Outlet temperature of EAHE can expressed as
0 0
T out ¼ T o ð1  eð2pr1 hgf =m_ a C a ÞL Þ þ T in eð2pr1 hgf =m_ a C a ÞL . (6)
The solution for greenhouse air temperature is evaluated by using thermal model
developed by Ghoshal and Tiwari (2005). The greenhouse air temperature is given by

B̄ðtÞ
Tr ¼ ð1  e-at Þ þ T ro e-at , (7)
a
where

F ðtÞ þ ðUAÞeff T a
BðtÞ ¼ ,
M aCa
P
_ aCa
0:33NV þ U n An þ U g Ag þ Ai U i þ F R m
a¼ ,
M aCa
where Tro is the greenhouse air temperature at t ¼ 0, B̄ðtÞ is the average of BðtÞ for the
time interval 0 and t, and a is the constant during the time. From Eq. (7) , the temperature
of greenhouse, integrated with EAHE can be determined.
The performance of EAHE integrated with greenhouse has been calculated in terms of
thermal load leveling [17], as per the following equations:

T r;max  T r;min
TLL ¼ . (8)
T r;max þ T r;min
TLL gives an idea about the fluctuation of temperatures inside the greenhouse. The less
the fluctuations, better is the environment for plants inside the greenhouse.
Similarly, the heating/cooling potential obtained from EAHE is expressed by
X
Qh=c ¼ m_ a ca ðT in  T out ÞDt (9)
and the coefficient of performance of the system can be determined by the following
relation:
Qh=c
C:O:P ¼ . (10)
W in
The coefficient of correlation among the predicted and experimental values is as follows:
P P P
N 0 X i Y i  ð X i Þð Y i Þ
cr ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P Pffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P P ffi , (11)
N 0 X 2i  ð X i Þ2 N 0 Y 2i  ð Y i Þ2

where N0 is the number of observations. Xi and Yi are predicted and experimental values,
respectively.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2438 G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446

Root mean square of percent of deviation is as follows:

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P 2
ðei Þ
er ¼ , (12)
N0
where ei ¼ ðX preðiÞ  X expðiÞ Þ=X preðiÞ
100, X preðiÞ and X expðiÞ are the predicted and
experimental values for N0 the number of observations.

4. Result and discussion

The outlet air temperature and heating/cooling potential of an EAHE has been solved
using Eqs. (6) and (9). The greenhouse air temperatures has also been predicted (Eq. (7)).
The design and operating parameters given in the Table 1; have been used as input
parameter for the model used. The calculations have been done for the whole year whereas
results are shown for January and June 2004. The closeness of predicted and experimental
values has been presented with coefficient of correlation (cr) and root mean square of
percent deviation (er). The values of coefficient of correlation (cr) and root mean square
of percent deviation are given in respective figures. It is seen that the values of coefficient of
correlation (cr) and root mean square of percent deviation for greenhouse air with an
EAHE are coming 0.99%, 4.24% and 0.993%, 5.29% for the month of January and June,
respectively. For outlet temperature of EAHE, values of coefficient of correlation (cr) and
root mean square of percent deviation are found to be 0.99%, 3.4% and 0.99%, 5.6% for
the month of January and June, respectively. The heating/cooling potential has also been
predicted. The values of coefficient of correlation (cr) and root mean square of percent
deviation have been found as 0.99% and 13%. This shows that the thermal model given by
Ghoshal and Tiwari is in fair agreement with the experimental work for composite climate
of New Delhi.
The average hourly variation of temperature for ambient air, greenhouse temperatures
with EAHE and without EAHE (Table 2a and b) are shown in Fig. 2(a) and (b) for
January and June 2004. From the Fig. 2(a), the minimum as well as maximum temperature
for ambient air, greenhouse with EAHE and without EAHE is varied between 8 and 18 1C,
11–28 1C, and 9–27 1C, respectively. It is seen that greenhouse temperature is increased by

Table 1
Design parameters used for computation

Parameter Values Parameter Values Parameter Values

2 2
Ae (m ) 8.3 hi (W/m 1C) 5.7 N 1–550
Af (m2) 24 ho (W/m2 1C) 9.5 r1 (m) 0.03
An (m2) 12 hgr (W/m2 1C) 5.7 U (W/m2 1C) 3.5
As (m2) 12 hna (W/m2 1C) 2.3 n 0.5–1.5
Anr (m2) 13.8 hnr (W/m2 1C) 5.7 V 60
Asr (m2) 13.8 Kn (W/m 1C) 0.84 rg 0.1
Aww (m2) 10 Kg (W/m 1C) 0.52 rn 0.1
Ca (J/Kg 1C) 1012 Lg (m) 1 r 0.2
Fn 0.08–0.45 L0 (m) 39 ag 0.4
FR 0.72 Ma (kg) 72 an 0.6
hgf(W/m2 1C) 28 m_ a (kg/s) 0.042 t 0.5
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446 2439

Table 2
Hourly variation of experimentally measured temperatures

Time (h) Ambient Inlet temperature of Outlet temperature Greenhouse air temperature
temperature the EAHE of the EAHE with the EAHE

(a) For January 2004

8 9.4 12.5 17.9 10.7
9 10 14 18.4 12.4
10 11 15.8 18.5 15.8
11 13 20 19 20.6
12 14 23.5 19.8 25.2
1 16 24.8 20.3 27.3
2 18 25 20.3 27.8
3 18 23.8 20.3 26
4 17 22.5 20 22.6
5 16 19 19.5 18
6 13 16 19.5 14.3
7 12 14.8 19.1 13
8 11 14 18.8 12.1
9 10 13.5 18.4 11.6
10 9.8 13.3 18.4 11.5
11 9.3 13 18.4 11.1
12 8.8 12.5 18.4 11.1
1 8.8 12.5 18.3 10.9
2 8.8 12.3 18.3 10.8
3 8.6 12.5 18.3 10.8
4 8.4 12.5 18.3 10.8
5 8.4 12.5 18.3 10.8
6 8.6 12.8 18.3 10.8
7 9.3 13 18.3 11.2
(b) For June 2004
8 32 37 29.8 36.8
9 33 39.3 30.5 39.1
10 34 40.7 31 41.2
11 36 41.7 31.8 43.3
12 37 43.3 32.8 45
1 38 43.3 33.2 45.3
2 39 43.3 33 45
3 39 43 32.8 44.3
4 39 42.3 32.7 43.3
5 39 41 32 42
6 37 39.3 31.3 39.2
7 36 38.3 30.7 37.4
8 34 37 30.3 36.1
9 33 35.7 30 35
10 32 34.5 29.8 34.1
11 32 33.7 29.7 33.2
12 31 32.8 29.3 32.3
1 30 32.2 29.3 31.7
2 30 31.3 28.7 31.1
3 29 30.8 28.7 30.3
4 28 29.7 28.7 29.4
5 28 29.7 28.7 29.3
6 30 31 28.7 31.2
7 31 31.3 28.7 33.7
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2440 G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446

predicted experimental green house temp.with EAHE

experimental green house temp. with EAHE
experimental green house temp. without EAHE
30 ambient temp.

25
cr-0.990
er-4.24
Temperature (°C)

20

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(a) Time (hours)

60

55

50
Temperature (°C)

45 cr-0.993
er-5.19

40

35

30 predicted green house temp.with EAHE

experimental green house temp. with EAHE
25 green house temp. without EAHE
ambient temp
20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(b) Time (hours)

Fig. 2. (a) Hourly variation of ambient temperature that is predicted and experimental greenhouse temperature
with and without an EAHE, for January 2004. (b) Hourly variation of ambient temperature that is predicted and
experimental greenhouse temperature with and without an EAHE, for June 2004.

4 1C during night time (8 pm–8 am) when an EAHE is used. During the day time, the
difference of the suction and delivery temperature is very low, and this can make only small
temperature rise during day time by use of an EAHE. From Fig. 2(b), the minimum as well
as maximum temperature for ambient air, greenhouse with EAHE and without EAHE is
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446 2441

50

45

40
Temperature (°C)

35

30

25

20

15 predicted room temperature

experimental room temperature
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(a) Time (Hrs)

50

45

40
Temperature (°C)

35

30

25

20

15 predicted room temperature

experimental room temperature
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(b) Time (Hrs)

Fig. 3. (a) Hourly variation of outlet temperature of an EAHE for January 2004. (b) Hourly variation of outlet
temperature of an EAHE for June 2004.

varied between 28 and 40 1C, 29–45 1C, and 29–54 1C, respectively. The hourly variation of
outlet temperature of an EAHE is shown in Fig. 3(a) and (b). The outlet temperature of
EAHE is found to be 18–19 1C during winter, and 28–32 1C in summer in the greenhouse.
It has been found that outlet temperature of an EAHE is nearly constant.
The hourly variation of heating and cooling potential for a typical day of winter and
summer have been shown in the Fig. 4(a) and (b). The heating potential is useful above the
zero line, and cooling potential below the zero line. It is seen that for a typical day in winter
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2442 G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446

0.5

0.4
Heating potential (MJ)

0.3 0
-0.1

Cooling potential (MJ)

0.2
-0.2 June
0.1 -0.3
-0.4
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 -0.5
-0.1
-0.6

-0.2 -0.7
-0.8
-0.3
-0.9
-0.4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
(a) Time of the day (hours) (b) Time of the day (hours)

600
effective heating hours
effective cooling hours
500
500
400
400
Hours

300
300
Hours

200
200

100 100

0 0
Jan Feb Mar Apl May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apl May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
(c) Month of year (d) Month of year

Fig. 4. (a) Hourly variation of heating potential for a typical day in January 2004. (b) Hourly variation of cooling
potential for a typical day in June 2004. (c) Monthly non-operational hours of an EAHE throughout the year
2004 for composite climate of New Delhi. (d) Monthly effective heating/cooling hours of an EAHE throughout
the year 2004 for composite climate of New Delhi.

and summer, an EAHE can be stopped (when in season of heating cooling is done by an
EAHE, and vice versa), for 6 h (Fig. 4(a)) and for 0 h (Fig. 4(b)). This analysis has been
carried out for whole year and results are shown in the Fig. 4(c). An optimization has also
been carried out by considering that when heating/cooling potential is less than 0.4 MJ, use
of an EAHE can be stopped (Fig. 4(d)). It is seen that by optimization of operating hours
of an EAHE, values of COP has also increased considerably. The variation of experimental
and predicted monthly heating and cooling potential has been shown in Fig. 5. It is seen
that an EAHE is more effective in harsh summer and harsh winter condition. Maximum
value of heating potential has been found to be 423 MJ in the month of November where
as maximum value of cooling potential has been found to be 566 MJ in the month of June.
It has also been found that cooling potential is 30% more than the heating potential
(Fig. 5). Thus it is seen that EAHE under study is more effective for cooling of greenhouse.
The heating and cooling potential of an EAHE has also been calculated for different
working hours e.g. 6, 12, 18 and 24 h. It is seen that (Fig. 5(b)) heating potential increases
with the increase in working hours. The values are found to be 5.02, 7.6, and 8.82 and
12.62 MJ, respectively, for a day in the month of January; it can be concluded that heating
potential increases by the value of 2.58 MJ in the next 6 h, in the next 6 h increase is of only
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446 2443

600

400

200
Thermal Energy (MJ)

0
Jan Feb March April May June Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-200

-400

-600
experimental
predicted
-800
(a) Month of Year

20
6Hr 12Hr
18Hr 24Hr
15

10

5
Thermal energy (MJ))

0
Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-5

-10

-15

-20

-25
(b) Month of Year

Fig. 5. (a) Experimental and predicted values of heating/cooling potential of an EAHE. (b) Variation of heating/
cooling potential for different working hours of an EAHE.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2444 G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446

1.22 MJ and in the last next 6 h heating potential increases by 3.8 MJ. This shows there is
no sharp increase in heating potential during 12 and 18 h of running EAHE, thus use of an
EAHE can be stopped during this period. It can be concluded the optimum heating has
been resulted nearly 11.55 MJ during night 8 pm–8 am. Similarly, the magnitudes of
cooling potential (Fig. 5(b)) are 1.65, 8.8, 18.3 and 21.8 MJ, respectively, for a day in the
month of June. The optimum cooling of 18.87 MJ has been obtained during the day
8 am–8 pm.

0.6

0.5 With EAHE

Without EAHE
Thermal load leveling

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
Jan Feb Mar Apl May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month of year

Fig. 6. Monthly variation of thermal load leveling with and without EAHE.

1.6

1.4 (COP)opt
(COP)exp

1.2

1
COP

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
Jan Feb Mar Apl May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month of year

Fig. 7. Monthly variation of coefficient of performance for optimum and experimental working hours for an
EAHE.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446 2445

Monthly variations in TLL with EAHE and without EAHE are shown in Fig. 6. The
values of TLL are become lower in case of greenhouse with EAHE than that of without
EAHE, proving the effectiveness of the system. Monthly variation of COP has also been
calculated (Fig. 7). It is found higher in summer, medium in winter and lower in monsoon.
The values of COP ranging 0.63–0.78 for winter, 0.457–0.0.95 for monsoon and 0.96–1.41
for summer. The values of COP (30% in November month) raises significantly (Fig. 7)
when working hours of an EAHE are optimized.

5. Conclusions

On the basis of present study, the following conclusions can be made:

1. The experimental work validates the thermal model developed by Ghoshal and Tiwari.
2. The temperature of greenhouse increases and decreases by 8 and 4 1C in summer and
winter due to use of an EAHE.
3. EAHE is more effective in summer than in winter, because of higher temperature
prevailing in the greenhouse in summer.
4. Thermal load leveling is lower in case of greenhouse with EAHE than without EAHE.
5. Coefficient of performance increases by 138% and 110% in the months of October and
March when working hours of an EAHE are optimized.

Acknowledgement

The financial support for this research work from the Indian Council of Agricultural
Research (ICAR), New Delhi, is thankfully acknowledged.

References

[1] Tiwari GN. Greenhouse technology for controlled environment. India: Narosa Publishing House; 2003.
[2] Shukla A, Tiwari GN, Sodha MS. Thermal modeling for greenhouse heating by using thermal curtain and an
earth–air heat exchanger. Build Environ 2005 (in press).
[3] Santamouris M, Argiriou A, Vallindras M. Design and operation of a low energy consumption passive solar
agricultural greenhouse. Sol Energy 1994;52(5):371–8.
[4] Tiwari GN, Dhiman NK. Design and optimization of a winter greenhouse for the Leh-type climate. Energy
Conserv Manage 1986;26(11):71–8.
[5] Jain D, Tiwari GN. Modeling and optimal design of ground air collector for heating in controlled
environment greenhouse. Energy Conserv Manage 2003;44(8):1357–72.
[6] Connellan G. Solar greenhouse using liquid collectors. In: Proceedings of solar energy society, Atlanta, GA,
1986.
[7] Bargach MN, Tadili R, Dahman AS, Boukallouch M. Survey of thermal performances of a solar system used
for the heating of agricultural greenhouses in Morocco. Renew Energy 2000;20:415–33.
[8] Santamouris M, Mihalakakou G, Balaras CA, Lewis JO, Vallindras M, Argiriou A. Energy conservation in
greenhouse with buried pipes. Energy 1996;52(5):353–60.
[9] Tiwari GN, Sharma PK, Goyal RK, Sutar RF. Estimation of efficiency factor for green house: a numerical
and experimental study. Energy Build 1998;28:241–50.
[10] Abak K, Bascetincelik A, Baytorun N, Altuntas Q, Ozturk HH. Influence of double plastic cover and
thermal screens on greenhouse temperature, yield and quality of tomato. Acta Hort 1994;369:149–54.
[11] Coffin W. Design and testing of a cold climate greenhouse. Montreal: ISES Congress; 1985. p. 611.
[12] Sodha MS, Sharma AK, Bansal NK, Kumar A. Evaluation of an earth–air tunnel system for cooling /
heating of hospital complex. Build Environ 1985;20(2):115–22.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2446 G.N. Tiwari et al. / Renewable Energy 31 (2006) 2432–2446

[13] Thanu NM, Sawhney RL, Khare RN, Buddhi D. An experimental study of thermal performance of an earth
air pipe system in single pass mode. Sol Energy 2001;71(6):353–64.
[14] Ghosal MK, Tiwari GN, Das DK, Pandey KP. Modeling and comparative thermal performance of ground
air collector and earth air heat exchanger for heating of green house. Energy Build 2005;37:613–21.
[15] Santamouris M, Mihalakakou G, Balaras CA, Argirou A, Asimakopoulos D, Vallindras M. Use of buried
pipes for energy conservation in cooling of agricultural green houses. Sol Energy 1994;55(2):111–24.
[16] Santamouris M, Argiriou A, Vallindras M. Design and operation of a low energy consumption passive solar
agricultural greenhouse. Sol Energy 1994;52(5):371–8.
[17] Singh RD, Tiwari GN. Thermal heating of controlled environment greenhouse: a transient analysis. Energy
Conv Manage 2000;41:505–22.

View publication stats