Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906

www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv

An experimental investigation of a solar chimney model with uniform

wall heat %ux
Z.D. Chena;∗ , P. Bandopadhayaya , J. Halldorssonb , C. Byrjalsenb , P. Heiselbergb , Y. Lic
a Energy and Thermo uids Engineering, CSIRO Manufacturing and Infrastructure Technology, PO Box 56, Highett, Vic., 3190, Australia
b Indoor Environmental Engineering, Aalborg University, Sohngaardsholmsvej 57, DK-9000 Aalborg, Denmark
c Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China

Received 16 October 2002; received in revised form 1 February 2003; accepted 11 March 2003

Abstract

Experiments were carried out using an experimental solar chimney model with uniform heat %ux on one chimney wall with a variable
chimney gap-to-height ratio between 1:15 and 2:5 and di9erent heat %ux and inclination angles. Results showed that a maximum air%ow
rate was achieved at an inclination angle around 45◦ for a 200 mm gap and 1:5 m high chimney, and the air%ow rate is about 45% higher
than that for a vertical chimney at otherwise identical conditions. It was found that the prediction method available in the literature can
substantially overpredict the air%ow rate for the chimney geometry investigated in this work, especially for vertical chimneys with large
gaps. The main reason for the overprediction of air%ow rate was shown due to the underestimation of the pressure losses at the chimney
outlet by using loss coe?cients obtained for normal forced %ows.
? 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Natural ventilation; Solar chimney; Experimental study; Temperature measurement; Velocity measurement

1. Introduction devices driven by natural forces such as solar energy and

A solar chimney is a natural draft device, which utilizes
solar radiation energy to build up stack pressure, thereby
driving air%ow through the chimney channel. By converting
thermal energy into the kinetic energy of air movement, solar
chimneys have a number of di9erent applications such as
ventilation, passive solar heating and cooling of buildings
[1–23], solar-energy drying [24,25], and power generation
[26,27]. In a broad sense, the Trombe wall [28], in which
the sun-facing wall of a channel is glazed, may also be
considered as a special type of solar chimney.
The use of solar chimneys as ventilation devices can be
found in some historical buildings, such as the so-called
“Scirocco rooms” in Italy, which dated back to at least
the 16th century, where the solar chimneys were used in
conjunction with underground corridors and water features
to provide ventilation and cooling [2]. Due to the general
availability of electric power in the early 20th century and
the expansion of air-conditioning in the 1930s, ventilation
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +61-3-9252-6335; fax: +61-3-9252-
6251.
E-mail address: dong.chen@csiro.au (Z.D. Chen).
wind force became obsolete [29]. As a consequence, in con-
trast to the dramatic developments in mechanical ventila-
tion systems, research and development of solar chimneys
is relatively limited up to 1980s.
During the last two decades, increasing awareness
of greenhouse gas emissions and the need for e9ective,
e?cient and ecologically sound building ventilation have
led to renewed interest in solar chimneys. In recent years,
a number of experimental, numerical and theoretical inves-
tigations have contributed to the current understanding of
solar chimneys.
1.1. Experimental investigations
Bouchair et al. [1] and Bouchair [8] reported investiga-
tions on a full-scale experimental solar chimney with both
front and back walls maintained at the same uniform tem-
perature by heating elements. It was shown that properly
designed solar chimneys can be used for daytime ventilation
as well as night cooling in hot climates by driving cooler
outdoor air into buildings using the thermal energy stored
during the daytime. By inducing air movement across the

0360-1323/03/$ - see front matter ? 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0360-1323(03)00057-X
894 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906
Nomenclature
A channel cross-sectional area (m2 )
Ain chimney inlet area (m2 )
Aout chimney outlet area (m2 )
B buoyancy %ux (m4 =s−3 )
cin inlet pressure loss coe?cient
cout outlet pressure loss coe?cient
Cp air speciNc heat capacity at ambient temperature
(J=kg ·◦ C)
Dh hydraulic diameter of the chimney channel (m)
f friction factor for the channel wall
g gravitational acceleration rate (m=s2 )
Gr ∗ modiNed Grashof number
H chimney height (m)
h height along the chimney (m)
Pr Prandtl number of air
Q air%ow rate in the chimney (m3 =s)
q heat %ux (W=m2 )
T local temperature (◦ C)
Tamb ambient temperature (◦ C)
room or by evaporative cooling of the incoming air, thermal
comfort in buildings may be achieved using solar chimneys
in buildings.
It was also shown by Bouchair et al. [1] and Bouchair [8]
that there is an optimum chimney width (about one-tenth of
the chimney height) at which a maximum ventilation %ow
rate can be achieved. Further increase in the chimney gap
results in a decrease in the air%ow rate due to the occurrence
of back %ow at the outlet of the chimney. Numerical mod-
eling by Gan and Ri9at [13] conNrmed the existence of the
optimum chimney gap-to-height ratio. Recently, small-scale
modeling by Spencer et al. [30] and numerical simulations
by Chen and Li [31] for solar chimneys with uniform wall
heat %ux also demonstrated the existence of an optimum
chimney gap-to-height ratio. It is also shown that the op-
timum gap-to-height ratio is dependent on the chimney
inlet design. A large inlet size can result in a large optimum
gap-to-height ratio due to the delay of the occurrence of
reverse %ow.
Di9erent designs of roof solar collectors were studied by
Khedari et al. [10]. The roof solar collectors acted as solar
chimneys to induce natural ventilation into houses. It was
shown that to achieve the maximum ventilation %ow rate,
the optimum dimension of the collector is 1 m long, tilted
at 30◦ and with a collector gap of 140 mm. Khedari et al.
[19] and Hirunlabh et al. [23] implemented di9erent roof
solar collector designs and found that when using roof so-
lar collectors alone, there is little potential to induce su?-
cient airspeed to satisfy occupant comfort in hot climates.
In order to increase airspeed in a test room, two roof so-
lar collectors together with three di9erent types of solar
Tave average air temperature (◦ C)
Taverage average air temperature inside the chimney
(◦ C)
Tw wall surface temperature (◦ C)
u local airspeed (m/s)
u1 characteristic air velocity
w chimney width (m)
y distance from the heated wall (m)
Greek symbols
 chimney inclination angle
 air expansion coe?cient (1= ◦ C)
 momentum boundary layer thickness (m)
t thermal boundary layer thickness (m)
QPL total pressure loss (Pa)
QPS stack pressure (Pa)
 air kinetic viscosity (m2 =s)
 air density at ambient temperature (kg=m3 )
chimneys were installed and tested by Khedari et al. [20]
in the same building. Although the resulting air change rate
per hour in the test room was high (8–15), the air movement
induced by these solar chimneys was still too low (average
0:04 m=s) for thermal comfort of occupants with an indoor
temperature of about 35 –37◦ C. This conclusion appears to
be in agreement with the observations of Barozzi et al. [3]
who investigated a solar-chimney-based ventilation system
for buildings using a 1:12 small-scale model in which the
roof performs as a solar chimney.
Moshfegh and Sandberg [15] investigated buoyancy-
driven air movement behind photovoltaic panels in order
to cool down the photovoltaic cells. The system has the
same principle as a solar chimney with uniform heat on
the sun-facing wall, while the other walls remain unheated.
Experimental results revealed that for input heat %ux equal
to or greater than 200 W=m2 , dependent on the surround-
ing wall emissivity, up to 30% of the heat input may be
transferred to the otherwise unheated wall via radiation. It
was also found that an increase in the surrounding surface
emissivity increases the air%ow rate due to the increased
proportion of heat transferred to the unheated wall. By vary-
ing the inclination angle of the chimney channel, Sandberg
and Moshfegh [16] showed that inclination of the chimney
decreases ventilation %ow rate with the same heat %ux.
Kumar et al. [14] studied indoor air quality in a prototype
house with a solar chimney system, and showed that pas-
sive outdoor air ventilation is e9ective in reducing indoor
air contaminants. By comparing the performance of a con-
ventional brick solar chimney and a solar chimney with the
sun-facing wall replaced by glazing, Afonso and Oliveira
 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906 895

[21] showed that the glazed solar chimney drew about %ow rate and the experimental results reported by Bouchair
10 –20% more air through the chimney. [8]. Bansal et al. [5,7], AboulNaga [11], and AboulNaga
and Abdrabboth [22] used an essentially similar approach
for %ow rate predictions induced by a solar chimney with
1.2. Numerical modeling
uniform wall temperature.
Considering heat balance, Sandberg [17] obtained an ex-
Barozzi et al. [3] used a two-dimensional computational
pression for the air%ow rate through a rectangular channel
%uid dynamics (CFD) method in the investigation of the
with uniform wall heat %ux. It was shown that the predicted
air movement inside their 1:12 building model. Although
air%ow rate was in good agreement with the experimental
the CFD model used was considered to be primitive (it did
results for a rectangular channel with one wall heated at uni-
not account for turbulence and three-dimensional e9ects),
form heat %ux and a channel gap-to-height ratio of 1:28. A
reasonable agreement was reported between experimental
similar approach was also used by Fath [6] for the design
temperature and velocity measurements and numerical pre-
of a natural draft solar fan with uniform wall heat %ux.
dictions.
It is noted that the above %ow rate prediction methods
A three-dimensional CFD program with a standard k–
are based on the assumption of uniform temperature distri-
turbulence model was used by Awbi and Gan [4] for mod-
butions across the same vertical height. As proved by Awbi
eling air movement in solar chimneys. Good agreement was
[9] and Sandberg [17], these prediction methods are appli-
achieved for the air%ow rate between numerical predictions
cable to chimneys with a small gap-to-height ratio of less
and the experimental results obtained by Bouchair [8]. A
than or close to 1:10. For wide chimneys, the assumption
similar approach has been used by Gan [12] and Gan and
of uniform temperature distribution may no longer be valid.
Ri9at [13] for numerical simulation of air movement in so-
Furthermore, the occurrence of reverse %ows near the chim-
lar chimneys.
ney outlets for wide chimneys may also make these theoret-
Moshfegh and Sandberg [15] investigated air movement
ical predictions inadequate. Another embedded assumption
behind photovoltaic panels. Their two-dimensional numeri-
of these prediction methods is that the pressure loss coef-
cal model adopted a standard k– turbulence model and wall
Ncients at the chimney inlet, outlet and along the chimney
function. In addition, radiation e9ects were also considered
channel can be evaluated with the corresponding data for
in their numerical model. Predicted air velocity and tem-
forced %ows. To date, no study has been undertaken to ver-
perature distributions were shown to be in good agreement
ify this assumption. Consequently, further investigations are
with their experimental results. Rodrigues et al. [18] inves-
necessary to clarify the conditions under which these pre-
tigated a two-dimensional solar chimney numerically with a
diction methods can be conNdently applied.
standard k– turbulence model and wall function. Details of
In this work, experiments were carried out using a sim-
the velocity and temperature Neld inside the solar chimney
ple solar chimney experimental model with a uniform heat
were reported.
%ux on one chimney wall. Air temperature and air%ow rates
In these previous numerical investigations, simulations
for di9erent chimney gaps, heat %uxes and di9erent chim-
were carried out with a computational domain deNned by
ney inclination angles were measured to provide further
the two solar chimney walls and the chimney inlet (or the
understanding of the ventilation performance of solar
room inlet) and outlet in order to minimize the computa-
chimneys. Experimental results are compared with the pre-
tion e9orts. In reality, contraction and expansion and thus
dictions based on heat balance analysis, and discrepancies
pressure losses occur at the chimney inlet and outlet, respec-
between the theoretical assumptions and the experimental
tively. In order to account for chimney inlet pressure loss,
results are discussed.
Awbi and Gan [4] applied an e9ective discharge coe?cient
at the chimney inlet. The e9ect of this departure from real-
ity on the overall air%ow rate prediction is still not clear and
further investigation is needed. 2. Analysis

It is one of the major tasks for solar chimney designers to

1.3. Analytical investigations
For solar chimneys with uniform wall temperature, Awbi
and Gan [4] and Awbi [9] obtained air temperature distri-
bution along the chimney channel by considering the heat
transfer coe?cient along the heated surface and assuming
uniform temperature distributions across the same vertical
height. By balancing the stack pressure and the total pres-
sure loss along the air%ow path, the air%ow rate induced
by a solar chimney with uniform wall temperature was ob-
tained. Good agreement was reported between the predicted
predict the air%ow rates under given solar radiation intensity.
In order to facilitate the interpretation of the experimental
results obtained in this work, an analysis is included here
for a solar chimney with a uniform wall heat %ux.
As discussed above, all prediction methods available in
the literature are based on the assumption of uniform air
temperature across chimney gaps [4–7,9,11,17]. Assuming
uniform air temperature at the same height inside the chim-
ney, energy balance yields
qhw = QCp (Taverage − Tamb ); (1)
896 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906

where h is the height along the chimney, w is the chimney correct evaluations of the average air temperature and the
width, q is the heat %ux, Q is the air%ow rate in the chim- pressure loss coe?cients are essential for an accurate pre-
ney,  and Cp are air density and speciNc heat capacity at diction of the air%ow rate induced by solar chimneys.
ambient temperature, respectively, Taverage is the average air
temperature inside the chimney at the height of h, and Tamb
is the ambient temperature. 3. Experiment
Then, the stack pressure, QPS , can be obtained by the
following integration: Fig. 1 shows the schematic view of the experimental sys-

H tem. The experimental solar chimney has internal dimen-
(Taverage − Tamb )g cos 
QPS = dh sions of 1:5 m high, 0:62 m wide and a variable chimney
0 Tamb
gap from 100 to 600 mm. The chimney was heated with a

H
qhwg cos  qwgH 2 cos  uniform heat %ux on one wall only. The experiments were
= dh = carried out inside a 5 m wide ×7 m long ×3:9 m high exper-
0 QCp Tamb 2QCp Tamb
imental bay which is part of a large air-conditioned space.
BH cos  Two sides of the bay were the solid brick walls of the large
= ; (2)
2Q space and the experimental bay was separated from the re-
where  is the chimney inclination angle from vertical, H maining by heavy curtains to avoid the in%uence of any air
is the chimney height, and B is the buoyancy %ux: movement caused by ventilation openings outside the bay.
gqwH There were no ventilation openings arranged inside the ex-
B= : perimental bay. The inlet of the chimney was 1 m above the
Cp Tamb
%oor.
The pressure loss along the air path, QPL , may be expressed As shown in Figs. 2 and 3, the heated surface of the so-
as lar chimney was composed of two 0:12 mm thick, 305 mm
(Q=Ain )2 (Q=Aout )2 wide and 1:46 m long stainless-steel shims connected in se-
QPL = cin + cout ries at the bottom of the two shims by a 20 × 20 × 615 mm3
2 2
copper bar. A Hewlett Packard 6671A System DC power
H (Q=A)2 supplier was used to apply a constant low voltage (¡ 8 V)
+f ; (3)
Dh 2 on the shims to simulate uniform solar radiation on the
where A is the channel cross-sectional area, Ain and Aout heated wall. In order to avoid direct contact, a 5 mm gap was
are the inlet and outlet areas, f is the friction factor for the left between the two shims. The heated surface was insu-
channel wall, cin and cout are the inlet and outlet pressure lated with 100 mm Nberglass to reduce the heat loss through
loss coe?cients, and Dh is the hydraulic diameter of the the heated wall to the ambient air.
chimney channel. The two side walls of the chimney were made of 1500 mm
By balancing the stack pressure (Eq. (2)) and the pres- high, 850 mm wide and 6 mm thick plexiglas. The surface
sure losses along the air path (Eq. (3)), the ventilation %ow opposite the heated shims (the front wall) was 1500 mm
rate, Q, for a chimney with a uniform wall heat %ux can be high, 620 mm wide and 3 mm thick plexiglas. This front
obtained as follows: wall facing the heated surface is movable to achieve di9erent
 1=3 chimney gaps. The two side walls as well as the front wall
B cos 
Q=A ; (4) were insulated with 50 mm expanded polystyrene to reduce
2
heat losses. As shown in Fig. 2, the chimney channel can
where be tilted anticlockwise, which is similar to a solar chimney
     2 
A H 1 A
2
A with the sun-facing wall replaced by glazing.
= f + cin + cout : (5) As shown in Fig. 3, 13 T-type thermocouples were di-
H 2Dh 2 Ain Aout
rectly soldered onto the back of the stainless-steel shims to
For the pressure loss coe?cients, a general approach is to measure the local temperatures of the heated surface. The air
resort to the available data for normal forced %ows. For the temperature inside the chimney channel was measured by
case of a rectangular channel with both ends open and heated 7 T-type thermocouples arranged on a stretched bicycle
on a single wall, Sandberg [17] used cin = 1:5, cout = 1:0 brake wire which can be placed at any position inside the
and f = 0:056, respectively. Eq. (4) has been validated by chimney. Temperatures of the insulation materials behind
Sandberg [17] using a rectangular channel with one wall the heated shims and the unheated front wall were also mea-
heated at a uniform heat %ux and a chimney gap-to-height sured to estimate the heat losses through the chimney walls,
ratio of 1:28. as well as the radiation heat transferred from the heated
From the above analysis, it is seen that the air%ow rate shims to the unheated front wall.
is mainly determined by two aspects: (a) the stack pressure Thermocouples were calibrated to within ±0:2◦ C at
built up in the chimney and (b) the pressure losses at the 0 C, 40◦ C and 80◦ C before being soldered onto the
◦

inlet, outlet and along the chimney channel. Consequently, shims, while all the other thermocouples were calibrated
 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906 897

Computer
controlled rail TSI8455 air
velocimeter
Heavy
curtains
Thermocouples

Computer

Solar chimney + –
Computer controlled HP 6671A DC
data logger power supplier

Fig. 1. Schematic view of the solar chimney experimental system.

Stainless temperatures were obtained over half an hour with a log-

steel shims
Chimney ging speed of one measurement per 7 s. The uncertainty of
symmetrical plane
Gap the temperature measurements is estimated to be less than
±0:4◦ C. The temperature di9erences for the same point
Width
with repeat experiments are normally within 1–2◦ C.
The airspeeds inside the chimney were measured by a
Height
TSI8455 air velocimeter probe with a calibrated accuracy
of ±5% at 0:05 m=s. It should be noted that the velocity
probe does not give velocity direction. In order to minimize
the error due to the velocity not in parallel with the chimney
Inclination angle walls, the probe was placed in the chimney channel 1:1 m
above the chimney inlet. Observations by Drager smoke tube
Fig. 2. Illustration of the chimney dimensions and the inclination angle. showed that at this position, the in%uence of disturbances
from the chimney inlet as well as the reverse %ow from the
202.5
615
305
chimney outlet were small, and the air movements are essen-
50 152.5 tially parallel to the chimney walls, especially for chimney
gaps up to 400 mm. For chimney gaps larger than 400 mm,
the reverse %ow from the chimney outlet was observed to
almost reach the velocity probe and the measured air%ow
1430 Copper bar

rate may be higher than the real value. Fortunately, the re-
verse %ow velocity at the probe position was very small and
1203

Thermocouple the error caused by this reverse %ow e9ect is believed to be

977
small.
1500
In order to obtain the total air%ow rate through the
Stainless steel
750
shim chimney, the probe was positioned at 110 –187 points at
the chimney cross-section 1:1 m above the chimney inlet
523 by a computer-controlled rail. The velocity measurements
Bicycle brake were logged by an HP 3852A data acquisition/control unit.
wire
297
Considering the turbulent nature of the air%ow Neld inside
70 the chimney, an average velocity was obtained with 120
measurements over 90 s for each point. The uncertainty
Fig. 3. Illustration of the heated surface and locations of thermocouples of the velocity measurements for a solar chimney gap up
(all units are in mm). to 400 mm was estimated to be around 15%, and 20%
for chimney gaps larger than 400 mm. The di9erence in
to within ±0:2◦ C at 0◦ C and 40◦ C. A computer-controlled the measured average airspeed for repeated experiments is
100-channel DORIC Digitrend 235 data logger was used generally within 10% of the airspeed. In order to study the
for the temperature logging. After the solar chimney system air%ow patterns inside the chimney channel, a Drager tube
reached thermal equilibrium, which took about 4 h, average was used for smoke visualization.
898 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906

4. Experimental results and discussions 100

90 2
143cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap
Experiments were carried out for a 200 mm chimney gap 80 2
143cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap

with uniform heat %ux at 200, 300, 400, 500 and 600 W=m2 .
2
70 143cm, 600W/m , 20cm Gap
2

With a 400 W=m2 uniform heat %ux, experiments were 60 143cm, 600W/m , 40cm Gap

(T - Tamb )
also performed with chimney gaps of 100, 200, 300, 400 50

and 600 mm to investigate the e9ect of chimney gaps on 40

the air%ow and temperature distributions. The in%uence 30

of the inclination angle was investigated with a heat %ux 20

of 400 W=m2 and a 200 mm chimney gap at 15◦ , 30◦ , 10

45◦ and 60◦ relative to the vertical position, as shown in 0

0 10 20 30 40 50
Fig. 2. If not speciNed otherwise, temperatures were mea- Distance from heated wall (cm)
sured 50 mm away from the chimney symmetrical plane
(refer to Fig. 2) and the airspeed was measured across the Fig. 5. Temperature distributions across chimney gaps at 1430 mm above
chimney width and chimney gap 1:1 m above the chimney the chimney inlet for vertical chimney at di9erent heat inputs and chimney
gaps.
inlet.

4.1. Temperature distributions across the chimney gap

80
Figs. 4 and 5 show the temperature proNles across the
70
chimney gaps at a height of 523 and 1430 mm above the
chimney inlet for vertical chimneys with 200 and 400 mm 60 2
29.7cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap, 45 degree inclination angle
2
gaps and 400 and 600 W=m2 uniform heat input, respec- 50
75cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap, 45 degree inclination angle
2
(T - Tamb )

143cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap, 45 degree inclination angle

tively. Fig. 6 shows the temperature distributions across the 40
chimney gap at a height of 297, 750 and 1430 mm above 30
the chimney inlet for a 45◦ inclined chimney with a 200 mm
chimney gap and 400 W=m2 heat input. It is seen that the 20

temperature distributions across the chimney gaps, even near 10

the outlet of the chimney, are not uniform, with higher air 0
temperatures near the heated surface. 0 5 10 15 20 25

It was also observed that the temperature rose when ap- Distance from heated wall (cm)

proaching the opposite surface of the heated shims. This Fig. 6. Temperature distributions across chimney gaps at 297, 750 and
temperature rise is caused by the radiation from the heated 1430 mm above the chimney inlet for a 45◦ inclined chimney with
shims. From the measured surface temperature of the front 200 mm gap and 400 W=m2 heat input.
wall opposite the heated shims, the radiation is estimated to
be less than 10% of the heat input on the heated shims and
decreases with a decrease in the heat input.
4.2. Temperature distributions across the chimney width

Fig. 7 compares the temperature distributions at 297, 750

100 and 1430 mm above the chimney inlet obtained 50 mm
90
52.3cm, 400W/m 2, 20cm Gap away from the chimney symmetrical plane, 50 mm away
80 52.3cm, 400W/m 2, 40cm Gap from the side wall and 155 mm away from the side wall,
52.3cm, 600W/m 2, 20cm Gap
70
52.3cm, 600W/m 2, 40cm Gap respectively, for a vertical chimney with a 400 mm gap and
60
400 W=m2 heat input. It is seen that the air temperatures in-
(T - Tamb )

50
side the chimney as well as on the unheated front wall are
40
reasonably uniform across the chimney width. During the
30
experiments, up to 4:4◦ C di9erence was observed for the
20
10
temperature measurements on the heated shims at the same
0
height. However, compared with the temperature di9erence
0 10 20 30 40 50 between the heated shims and the ambient air, which is be-
Distance from heated wall (cm) tween 55◦ C and 75◦ C for the chimney with a 400 mm gap
Fig. 4. Temperature distributions across chimney gaps at 523 mm above
and 400 W=m2 heat input, the variation in temperatures on
the chimney inlet for vertical chimney at di9erent heat inputs and chimney the heated wall across the chimney width is still relatively
gaps. small.
 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906 899

80 1500

Distance From Chimney Inlet (mm)

2
70 29.7cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap, 50 mm from the symmetrical plane
2
29.7cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap, 50 mm from the symmetrical plane 1200
60 2
29.7cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap, 155 mm from the side wall
2 On the heated surface
75cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap, 50 mm from the symmetrical plane 1cm from the heated surface
50 2 900
(T - Tamb )

75cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap, 50 mm from the side wall 2cm from the heated surface
40 75cm, 400W/m2, 40cm Gap, 155 mm from the side wall 6cm from the heated surface
143cm, 400W/m2, 40cm Gap, 50 mm from the symmetrical plane 600 16cm from the heated surface
30 2 38cm from the heated surface
143cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap, 50 mm from the side wall
2
On the wall opposite the heated surface
20 143cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap, 155 mm from the side wall
300
10
0
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0 10 20 30 40 50
(T - Tam b)
Distance from heated wall (cm)

Fig. 7. Temperature distributions across chimney gaps at 297, 750 and Fig. 9. Vertical temperature distributions at 1, 2, 6, 16, 38 cm from the
1430 mm above the chimney inlet, 50 mm away from the chimney heated surface and wall temperatures for vertical chimney at 400 mm
symmetrical plane, 50 mm away from one side wall and 155 mm away gap and 400 W=m2 heat input.
from the other side wall, respectively, for vertical chimney at 400 mm
gap and 400 W=m2 heat input.
1500

Distance From Chimney Inlet (mm)

1500
1200
Distance From Chimney Inlet (mm)

2
1200 400W/m , 20cm Gap
2
900 400W/m , 40cm Gap
On the heated surface 2
600W/m , 20cm Gap
1cm from the heated surface 2
900 600W/m , 40cm Gap
2cm from the heated surface 600
6cm from the heated surface
12cm from the heated surface
600
16cm from the heated surface 300
On the wall opposite the heated surface
300
0
0 5 10 15 20
0
(Tave - Tam b)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
(T - Tam b)
Fig. 10. Average air temperature along the chimney height for di9erent
heat inputs and chimney gaps.
Fig. 8. Vertical temperature distributions at 1, 2, 6, 12, 16 cm from the
heated surface and wall temperatures for vertical chimney at 200 mm
gap and 400 W=m2 heat input.
higher than that away from the walls. This increase in the
airspeed near the heated wall along the chimney height may
4.3. Temperature distributions along the chimney height enhance the heat transfer near the top of the chimney.
Another possible reason for the increase in the local heat
Figs. 8 and 9 show the temperature distributions along transfer coe?cient along the heated surface may be due
a vertical chimney with a 200 mm chimney gap and to the transition between laminar %ow and turbulent %ow.
400 W=m2 uniform heat input, and a 400 mm chimney For a vertical plate heated by a uniform heat %ux, this
gap and 400 W=m2 uniform heat input, respectively. It is transition occurs at 2 × 1013 ¡ Gr ∗ Pr ¡ 1 × 1014 , where
seen that the air temperatures inside the chimney generally Gr ∗ = gqh4 =k2 . For the heat %ux between 200 and 600 W,
increase along the chimney height. However, the tempera- the transition starts at the height of around 2 m. For a solar
tures on the shims and on the surface opposite the shims do chimney channel investigated in this work, this transition is
not increase linearly and even drop above the middle of the likely to be earlier due to the air disturbances in the chimney
chimney height. Similar vertical temperature distributions inlet. It is possible that both facts may exist, which results
have also been reported by Sandberg and Moshfegh [32]. in the high heat transfer coe?cient at the top of the chimney
Considering the gradual increase in the temperature of the channel.
air inside the channel along the chimney height, this de- Fig. 10 shows the average air temperature along the chim-
crease in the heated surface temperature can only be caused ney height for four di9erent chimney gaps and heat inputs.
by an increase in the local heat transfer coe?cient along The average is taken according to Eq. (6) across the same
the heated surface. chimney height:
Smoke visualizations showed that, near the top of the 
chimney, the air at the center moves towards the heated (T − Tamb ) ds
Tave = A + Tamb : (6)
walls, and the air velocity near the heated walls is much A
900 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906

1 1
0.9 2 0.9 2
52.3cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap 143cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap
0.8 52.3cm, 400W/m2, 40cm Gap 0.8 2
143cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap

(T - Tamb )/(Twall - Tamb )

52.3cm, 600W/m2, 20cm Gap
(T - Tamb )/(Tw - Tamb )

2
0.7 0.7 143cm, 600W/m , 20cm Gap
2
52.3cm, 600W/m , 40cm Gap 2
0.6 0.6 143cm, 600W/m , 40cm Gap
2
0.5 0.5 Boundary Theory, Eq. (8), 400W/m

0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance from heated wall (cm) Distance from heated wall (cm)

Fig. 11. Dimensionless temperature distributions across the chimney gap Fig. 12. Dimensionless temperature distributions across the chimney gap
at 523 mm above the chimney inlet for vertical chimneys at di9erent heat at 1430 mm above the chimney inlet for vertical chimneys at di9erent
inputs and chimney gaps. heat inputs and chimney gaps.

1500
The average air temperature, Tave , obtained by Eq. (6) is
Distance From Chimney Inlet (mm)
responsible for the buildup of stack pressure inside a so- 1200
lar chimney. It should be noted that the average tempera-
ture deNned by Eq. (6) is di9erent from that obtained from 900
2
2cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap
2
heat balance analysis, i.e. Taverage in Eq. (1), which can be 2cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap
2
2cm, 600W/m , 20cm Gap
demonstrated by the following equation: 600 2
2cm, 600W/m , 40cm Gap

qhw (T − Tamb )u ds
Taverage = + Tamb = A + Tamb ; (7) 300
QCp Q
where u is the local airspeed parallel to the chimney wall. 0
From Eqs. (6) and (7), it is seen that when either the 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

airspeed or the temperature is uniform across the chimney (T - Tam b)/(Tw all - Tam b)

gap, the average air temperature obtained from heat balance
analysis is the same as the average air temperature across
the chimney height obtained from Eq. (6). Consequently,
although the assumption of uniform temperature across the
chimney gap may not be valid for certain chimneys, the
Fig. 13. Dimensionless air temperature distributions along the chimney
height at 20 mm away from the heated surface for chimneys with di9erent
heat inputs and chimney gaps.
1500

average air temperature and thus the stack pressure predic-

Distance From Chimney Inlet (mm)

tions using heat balance analysis may still be appropriate if 1200 2

6cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap
the airspeed is reasonably uniform across the chimney gap. 6cm, 400W/m2, 40cm Gap

However, if both the temperature and velocity distributions 900 6cm, 600W/m2, 20cm Gap
2
6cm, 600W/m , 40cm Gap
are highly non-uniform across the chimney gap, the heat
balance analysis may not properly predict the stack pressure 600

inside the chimney.

In Fig. 10, it is seen that the average air temperature 300

increases along the chimney height. With an increase in the

0
chimney width, the average temperature decreases, which 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
results in a relatively smaller stack pressure compared with (T - Tam b)/(Tw all - Tam b)
narrower chimneys.
Fig. 14. Dimensionless air temperature distributions along the chimney
height at 60 mm away from the heated surface for chimneys with di9erent
4.4. Dimensionless temperature distributions heat inputs and chimney gaps.

Figs. 11 and 12 show the dimensionless temperature pro-

Nles at 523 and 1430 mm above the chimney inlet for ver-
from the heated surface. The dimensionless temperature is
tical chimneys with 200 and 400 mm gaps and 400 and
deNned as
600 W=m2 uniform heat input, respectively. Figs. 13 and
14 show the corresponding dimensionless temperature dis- T − Tamb
;
tributions along the chimney height at 20 and 60 mm away Tw − Tamb
 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906 901

where T is the local air temperature and Tw is the wall 0.8

surface temperature. 0.7

110cm, 200W/m2, 20cm Gap
It is seen that the dimensionless temperature distributions 0.6
2
110cm, 300W/m , 20cm Gap
for di9erent heat %uxes and di9erent chimney gaps remain 2

Velocity (m/s)
110cm, 600W/m , 20cm Gap
0.5
essentially identical at the same position inside the chim-
ney, especially within 100 mm from the heated surface. For 0.4

natural convection along a vertical plate with uniform heat 0.3

%ux, Eckert and Jackson [33] showed that for fully devel- 0.2
oped turbulent %ow, the dimensionless temperature and 0.1
velocity distributions depend on the thermal boundary
layer thickness only. Based on their analysis, the following 0.0
0 5 10 15 20
equations can be obtained [34]: Distance from heated wall (cm)
  1=7 
T − Tw y Fig. 15. Velocity distributions across the chimney gap for vertical chim-
= 1− ; (8)
Tw − Tamb t neys with 200 mm gap and 200, 300 and 600 W=m2 heat input.

u y 1=7 y 4
= 1− (9)
u1  
0.7
and
0.6 110cm, 400W/m2, 10cm Gap

t = F(Pr); (10)
2
110cm, 400W/m , 20cm Gap
2
0.5 110cm, 400W/m , 30cm Gap
2
Velocity (m/s)
110cm, 400W/m , 40cm Gap
∗−1=14
2
−1=2 2=3 1=14
 = 0:505Gr Pr (1 + 0:445Pr ) h; (11) 0.4 110cm, 400W/m , 60cm Gap
Boundary Theory, Eq. (9)
0.3
 5=14
u1 = 4:35 Gr ∗ Pr −1=6 (1 + 0:445Pr 2=3 )−5=14 ; (12)
h 0.2

gqh4 0.1
Gr ∗ = ; (13)
k2 0.0

where t is the thermal boundary layer thickness, which is 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

related to the momentum boundary layer thickness  by a
function F of the Prandtl number only, u is the local air ve-
locity and u1 is the characteristic air velocity in the boundary
layer,  is the air expansion coe?cient,  is the air kinetic
viscosity, y is the distance from the heated wall, Gr ∗ is the
modiNed Grashof number, Pr is the Prandtl number of air,
and q is the heat %ux. Consequently, the thermal boundary
layer thickness t and the dimensionless air temperature dis-
tribution are weak functions of the heat %ux for a vertical
%at plate. Figs. 11–14 show that dimensionless temperature
proNles inside solar chimneys are also similar in the thermal
boundary layer for di9erent heat inputs and chimney gaps,
especially in the region close to the heated wall. A compar-
ison between the dimensionless temperatures obtained for a
vertical plate from Eq. (8) and those from the solar chim-
neys shown in Fig. 12 found that close to the heated wall
the temperature proNles for a vertical plate and for solar
chimneys are very close to each other. However, away from
the heated wall, the air temperatures in the solar chimney
are higher, while the air temperature rapidly diminishes to
the ambient temperature outside the boundary layer for the
uniformly heated vertical plate.
4.5. Velocity distributions across the chimney gap
Fig. 15 shows the velocity distributions across the chim-
ney gap for chimneys with di9erent heat %uxes and the same
Distance from heated wall (cm)
Fig. 16. Velocity distributions across the chimney gap for vertical chim-
neys with 100, 200, 300, 400, 600 mm gaps and 400 W=m2 heat input.
chimney gap of 200 mm. Fig. 16 shows the velocity dis-
tribution for chimneys with di9erent chimney gaps at the
same heat input of 400 W=m2 . Each point in Figs. 15 and
16 is the average velocity across the chimney width. It is
seen that the air velocity is highly uneven, with the velocity
near the heated wall about 2–5 times that at the center of
the chimney. This uneven airspeed distribution occurs even
for the narrow chimney gap of 100 mm, although it is rela-
tively uniform compared with wider chimneys. The increase
in the airspeed towards the wall opposite the heated shims
is due to radiation e9ects.
Fig. 16 shows that with an increase in the chimney gap, the
airspeed decreases to a small value in the regions away from
the heated surface. The velocity decrease in the boundary
layer close to the heated surface appears to be not signiNcant,
especially for chimney gaps larger than 300 mm. Fig. 16
suggests that for large chimney gaps, the regions away from
the boundary layer have a relatively small contribution to
the air%ow rate. In Fig. 16, the theoretical velocity proNle at
the same height for a vertical plate heated by a uniform heat
%ux, i.e. Eq. (9), is also included for comparison. It is seen
that the air velocity for a vertical plate, which has an inNnite
902 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906

0.8 0.8

0.7 Vertical Chimney 0.7 1.5cm 2.5cm 7.5cm 13.5cm 17.5cm

15 Degree
0.6 30 Degree 0.6
45 Degree
Velocity (m/s)

Velocity (m/s)
0.5 60 Degree 0.5

0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.0
0 5 10 15 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Distance from heated wall (cm) Distance from the sidewall (cm)

Fig. 17. Velocity distributions across the chimney gap for vertical chim- Fig. 19. Velocity distributions across the chimney width at 15, 25, 75,
ney for a chimney with 200 mm gap and 400 W=m2 heat input at the 135 and 175 mm away from the heat surface for a vertical chimney with
inclination angles of 0◦ , 15◦ , 30◦ , 45◦ and 60◦ , respectively. 200 mm gap and 500 W=m2 heat input.

0.8 0.07
Experimental
0.7 0.06
Air Flow Rate (m3/s)
Predicted by Eq. (4)
0.6 0.05
Velocity (m/s)

0.5
0.04
0.4
0.03
0.3
0.02
0.2
0.01
0.1 1cm 1.5cm 2.5cm 7.5cm 9.5cm
0.00
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
2
Distance from the sidewall (cm) Heat Flux (W/m )

Fig. 18. Velocity distributions across the chimney width for a vertical Fig. 20. Comparison of predicted and experimental air%ow rate through
chimney with 100 mm gap and 400 W=m2 heat input. chimneys with 200 mm gap and 200, 300 400, 500 and 600 W=m2 heat
input.

unbounded surrounding, is larger compared with those for

solar chimneys near the heated surface, but decreases rapidly
to zero away from the boundary layer.
Fig. 17 shows the velocity distributions across the chim-
ney gaps for inclined chimneys. It is seen that with an
increase in the inclination angle, the airspeed becomes in-
creasingly uniform across the chimney gap. For inclined
chimneys, the hot air near the heated surface tends to rise
vertically. This vertical air movement and mixing e9ectively
reduces the airspeed along the heated surface and makes
the velocity distributions relatively uniform in inclined
chimneys.
4.6. Velocity distributions across the chimney width
Typical velocity distributions across the chimney width
are shown in Fig. 18 for a 100 mm chimney gap and
400 W=m2 heat input, and in Fig. 19 for a 200 mm chimney
gap and 500 W=m2 heat input. It was found that the airspeed
near the heated plate is slightly unsymmetrical, which may
be caused by the inevitable unsymmetrical arrangement
of the chimney surroundings. Compared with the velocity
distributions across chimney gaps, velocity distributions
across the chimney width are relatively uniform.
4.7. Air ow rate and predictions
Fig. 20 shows the air%ow rate through the chimneys with
di9erent heat inputs and the same chimney gap of 200 mm.
As expected, the air%ow rate increases with an increase in
heat %ux, since a higher heat input causes higher air tem-
peratures inside the chimney under otherwise identical con-
ditions to those shown in Fig. 10, and thus a higher stack
pressure for driving air%ow.
Fig. 21 shows the air%ow rate through the chimneys with
di9erent chimney gaps and the same heat %ux of 400 W=m2 .
It is seen that the air%ow rate appears to increase continu-
ously with an increase in the chimney gaps, and no optimum
chimney gap was found in the range of chimney gaps inves-
tigated. Smoke visualization shows that reverse %ow can be
observed at the chimney outlet starting at the chimney gap
of 300 mm. However, reverse %ow was found to be lim-
ited to near the chimney outlet. With a further increase in
 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906 903

0.10 1500

Distance From Chimney Inlet (mm)

Experimental

0.08 1200
Air Flow Rate (m /s)

Predicted by Eq. (4)

3

0.06 900
2
400W/m , 20cm Gap, vertical chimney
2
0.04 600 400W/m , 20cm Gap, 45 degree
Predicted, vertical chimney
Predicted, 45 Degree inclined chimney
0.02 300

0.00 0
0 20 40 60 80 0 5 10 15 20

Chimney Gap (cm) (Tave - Tam b)

Fig. 21. Comparison of predicted and experimental air%ow rate through Fig. 23. Comparison of the measured average air temperature along the
chimneys with 100, 200, 300, 400, 600 mm gaps and 400 W=m2 heat chimney height and the predicted average air temperature using heat
input. balance analysis for the vertical chimney and for the 45◦ inclination
chimney, both with 200 mm gap and 400 W=m2 heat input.

0.06
Fig. 23 compares the average air temperature along the
0.05
chimney height for the vertical chimney and the 45◦ in-
Air Flow Rate (m /s)

clined chimney with the same gap of 200 mm and heat input
3

0.04
0.03
0.02
Experimental
Predicted by Eq. (4)
0.01
0.00
0 20 40
Inclination Angle (Degree)
Fig. 22. Comparison of predicted and experimental air%ow rate through
chimneys with 200 mm gap and 400 W=m2 heat input at the inclination
angles of 0◦ , 15◦ , 30◦ , 45◦ and 60◦ , respectively.
the chimney gap, the reverse %ow enhanced and was further
down into the chimney channel. Due to the simultaneous in-
crease in the chimney inlet size and thus less pressure loss
at the chimney inlet, an increase in the chimney gap does
not result in a reduction in the air%ow rate, although reverse
%ow does increase. However, if the inlet size remains the
same when the chimney gap is increased, the air%ow rate
may be reduced and an optimum chimney gap may exist, as
reported by Bouchair [1] and other authors [13,30,31].
Fig. 22 shows the air%ow rate through the chimney with
di9erent inclination angles. It can be seen that the air%ow
rate peaks at around 45◦ which is about 45% higher than that
for the vertical chimney. Even at 60◦ , the air%ow rate is still
about 30% higher than that for the corresponding vertical
chimney.
Considering that the stack height is decreased for inclined
chimneys, the signiNcant increase in the air%ow rate for large
inclination angles is interesting. Flow rate increase can be
due by two reasons, i.e. increased stack pressure and reduced
pressure losses.
of 400 W=m2 . It is seen that the average air temperatures
inside the vertical chimney and the inclined chimney are
essentially the same. Considering the reduced stack height
of the inclined chimney, it is clear that the stack pressure for
the 45◦ inclined chimney should be much smaller than that
of the vertical chimney. Thus, the reduction of pressure loss
must be the main cause for %ow rate increase with inclined
60 80
chimneys. Compared with vertical chimneys, the velocity
distributions across the chimney gap in inclined chimneys
are much more uniform and this may signiNcantly reduce
the inlet and outlet pressure losses.
Experiments on the chimney tilted clockwise could not be
carried out in this work due to the limitation of the chimney
support frame. When a chimney is inclined clockwise, the
boundary layer may be more closely attached to the heated
surface. Combined with the reduction in the stack height,
a reduction in the air%ow rate is expected with clockwise
inclinations, as shown by Sandberg and Moshfegh [32].
Using Eq. (4), predictions were made for the air%ow rate
in chimneys investigated in this work. As shown in Fig. 21,
with a decrease in the chimney gap, the predicted air%ow rate
becomes close to the experimental result, and the predicted
%ow rate for the smallest chimney gap of 100 mm and heat
input of 400 W=m2 is quite acceptable. This conNrms that
the prediction method can be applied to narrow chimneys.
As shown in Fig. 22, for the 45◦ and 60◦ inclined chimneys
with a 200 mm gap, the predicted air%ow rates were also
found to be in reasonable agreement with the experimental
results.
From the temperature and airspeed measurements, it has
been shown that the temperature is reasonably uniform
across the chimney width, but is strongly non-uniform
across the chimney gap. For chimneys with a small gap
of 100 mm and for 45◦ and 60◦ inclined chimneys with a
904 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906
200 mm gap, the airspeed distributions in the chimney are
relatively uniform, as shown in Figs. 16 and 17. Conse-
quently, the average temperature across the chimney height
obtained from heat balance analysis (Eq. (1)) is close to
that obtained by Eq. (6), which is responsible for the stack
pressure inside the solar chimney. Further, the relatively
uniform air%ow inside the chimney may still approximately
resemble normal forced %ow. Consequently, reasonable
%ow rate predictions were obtained by Eq. (4) for the narrow
chimney and the chimneys with large inclination angles.
However, air%ow rates are substantially overpredicted by
Eq. (4) for vertical chimneys with large chimney gaps. Ex-
perimental results for vertical chimneys with large gaps
show that both air temperature and speed inside chimneys
are highly non-uniform and the velocity proNle has a maxi-
mum very close to the heated wall, as shown in Fig. 16. In
this situation, the average temperature predicted by the heat
balance analysis (Eq. (1)) is di9erent from that obtained by
Eq. (6). Further, highly non-uniform air velocity distribu-
tions inside the chimney channel suggest that the air%ow in
a wide chimney is essentially conNned to a narrow channel
close to the heated wall and thus results in high-pressure
losses through the air path compared to normal forced %ow
at the same air%ow rate inside an identical channel.
In Fig. 23, the predicted average air temperature by heat
balance analysis (with the measured air%ow rate and heat
input) for the vertical chimney and the 45◦ inclined chim-
ney, both with a 200 mm gap and 400 W=m2 heat input,
were included for comparison with the measured average air
temperature along the chimney height. It was found that for
the vertical chimney, the stack pressure is overpredicted by
around 30%. Due to the relatively uniform airspeed distri-
butions, the predicted average air temperatures for the 45◦
inclined chimney are much closer to the measured average
air temperatures compared to the predictions for the vertical
chimney.
Considering that the air%ow rate is proportional to the
square root of the stack pressure (refer to Eqs. (2) and(3)),
overpredicting the stack pressure by 30% for the vertical
chimney may overpredict the air%ow rate by 14%. Since the
%ow rate for the vertical chimney is actually overpredicted
by around 86% by Eq. (4), as shown in Fig. 20, pressure
losses through the air path may have been signiNcantly un-
derestimated. Since pressure loss along the chimney wall
is usually much smaller than those at the inlet and outlet,
underestimation of pressure losses should occur at the inlet
and outlet.
Considering that at the chimney outlet, hot air is rising
through cold surrounding ambient air, a closely related phe-
nomenon might be the air%ow through a sharp horizontal
opening dividing between two chambers with warm air in
the bottom chamber and cold air in the top one. For a sharp
horizontal opening dividing two air layers with di9erent air
temperatures, it has been shown that reverse %ow occurs
when the %ow rate reduces to a certain low level. The pres-
sure loss coe?cient when reverse %ow occurs was found
to be around 31 compared to 2.7 for normal forced %ow
through a sharp opening [34]. Consequently, it is believed
that the large pressure loss coe?cient compared to normal
forced %ow at the chimney outlet can be the main reason for
the overprediction of the air%ow rate by using Eq. (4) for
wide chimney designs. It is noted that no speciNc investiga-
tions have been reported on the pressure loss coe?cient for
%ows induced by natural convection along a heated channel
and further research is needed.
The present study suggests that the air%ow rate prediction
methods based on heat balance analysis and normal forced
%ow pressure loss coe?cients can be applied to chimneys
with the following two conditions:
• The airspeeds or the air temperature distributions in the
chimney are reasonably uniform, which ensures a correct
evaluation of the stack pressure by heat balance analysis.
• The airspeed distributions at the chimney inlet and
outlet resemble normal forced %ows, which ensures a
proper evaluation of pressure losses from normal forced
%ows.
These two conditions are normally fulNlled for narrow
chimneys and the air%ow rate can be reasonably predicted
using heat balance analysis and normal forced %ow pressure
loss coe?cients, as proved by Awbi [9] and Sandberg [17].
However, for wide chimneys, especially with small inlets
and large outlets, the above two conditions are no longer
fulNlled. At extreme situations, reverse %ow can occur, and
the velocity and temperature distribution inside the chimney
can be strongly non-uniform. Consequently, the %ow rate
prediction method based on heat balance analysis and nor-
mal pressure loss coe?cients can signiNcantly overpredict
the air%ow rate as demonstrated in this work. Further inves-
tigations are needed to develop a simple prediction method
for the air%ow rate induced by a solar chimney for which the
prediction method based on the heat balance analysis and
normal forced %ow pressure loss coe?cients are inadequate.
It should be noted that there are no clear lines between
narrow/wide chimneys and small/large chimney open-
ings. From Eq. (11), the boundary layer thickness for a
vertical plate of 2 m high with a uniform heat %ux of
400 W=m2 is around 1/15th of the plate height. As an indi-
cation, for single-wall-heated solar chimneys, those with a
gap-to-height ratio greater than 1:10 may be considered to
be wide, and for two wall-heated solar chimneys, those with
a gap-to-height ratio greater than 1:5 may be considered to
be wide.
5. Conclusions
Solar chimneys with a uniform heat %ux on a single
wall were investigated experimentally for di9erent chimney
gaps, heat %ux inputs and di9erent chimney inclinations. The
chimneys investigated in this work cover a gap-to-height
 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906
ratio from 1:15 to 2:5. It is shown that by changing the
chimney gap while maintaining all the other conditions, the
air%ow rate increases continuously with increasing chimney
gap, even up to the gap-to-height ratio of 2:5—no optimum
gap has been found. This might be caused by a decrease in
the inlet pressure loss due to the simultaneous increase of
the chimney inlet by extending the chimney gap.
Results also showed that the air%ow rate reached a max-
imum at a chimney inclination angle of around 45◦ for a
200 mm gap and 1.5 m high chimney, which is about 45%
higher than that for a vertical chimney under otherwise iden-
tical conditions. The reason for this %ow rate increase is
shown to be due to the relatively even airspeed inside the
chimney, which signiNcantly reduces the pressure loss at
the chimney inlet and outlet compared to the corresponding
vertical chimney.
With the chimney geometry investigated in this work,
temperature and velocity distributions are found to be es-
sentially uniform across the chimney width. However, the
temperature distributions, as well as the airspeed inside a
chimney, are highly non-uniform across the chimney gaps,
especially for vertical chimneys with large chimney gaps.
The air%ow rate prediction method available in the lit-
erature is based on two basic assumptions, i.e. heat bal-
ance analysis gives the correct stack pressure and normal
forced %ow pressure loss coe?cients can be applied to solar
chimneys. It is shown that this prediction method can sub-
stantially overpredict the air%ow rate for certain chimney
geometries, especially vertical chimneys with wide chim-
ney gaps. The validity of the two basic assumptions was
checked against the experimental velocity and temperature
measurements. It was found that for large chimney gaps, the
non-uniform temperature and airspeed caused certain devia-
tion between the predicted average air temperature, and thus
the stack pressure based on heat balance analysis and those
actually inside a solar chimney. However, the main reason
for the overprediction of the air%ow rate is the underestima-
tion of the pressure losses at the chimney outlet by using
loss coe?cients obtained for normal forced %ows. Further
investigations are needed for the better prediction of air%ow
rates in solar chimneys, for which the prediction method
based on heat balance analysis and forced %ow pressure loss
coe?cients are not adequate.
References
[1] Bouchair A, Fitzgerald D, Tinker JA. Moving air using stored
solar energy. In: Proceedings of the 13th National Passive Solar
Conference. Cambridge, MA: ASES, 1988. p. 33–8.
[2] Cristofalo SD, Orioli S, Silvestrini G, Alessandro S. Thermal
behavior of “Scirocco rooms” in ancient Sicilian villas. Tunneling
and Underground Space Technology 1989;4(4):471–3.
[3] Barozzi GS, Imbabi MSE, Nobile E, Sousa ACM. Physical and
numerical modelling of a solar chimney-based ventilation system for
buildings. Building and Environment 1992;27(4):433–45.
[4] Awbi HB, Gan G. Simulation of solar-induced ventilation. Renewable
Energy Technology and the Environment 1992;4:2016–30.
905
[5] Bansal NK, Mathur R, Bhandari MS. Solar chimney for enhanced
stack ventilation. Building and Environment 1993;28(3):373–7.
[6] Fath HES. Development of a natural draft solar fan for ventilation
of greenhouses in hot climates. International Journal of Solar Energy
1993;13:237–48.
[7] Bansal NK, Mathur R, Bhandari MS. A study of solar chimney
assisted wind tower system for natural ventilation in buildings.
Building and Environment 1994;29(4):495–500.
[8] Bouchair A. Solar chimney for promoting cooling ventilation
in southern Algeria. Building Service Engineering, Research and
Technology 1994;15(2):81–93.
[9] Awbi HB. Design consideration for natural ventilated buildings.
Renewable Energy 1994;5:1081–90.
[10] Khedari J, Hirunlabh J, Bunnag T. Experimental study of a roof
solar collector towards the natural ventilation of new houses. Energy
and Buildings 1997;26:159–64.
[11] AboulNaga MM. A roof solar chimney assisted by cooling cavity
for natural ventilation in buildings in hot arid climates: an
energy conservation approach in Al-Ain city. Renewable Energy
1998;14:357–63.
[12] Gan G. A parametic study of Trombe walls for passive cooling of
buildings. Energy and Buildings 1998;27:37–43.
[13] Gan G, Ri9at SB. A numerical study of solar chimney for
natural ventilation of buildings with heat recovery. Applied Thermal
Engineering 1998;18:1171–87.
[14] Kumar S, Sinha S, Kumar N. Experimental investigation of solar
chimney assisted bioclimatic architecture. Energy Conversion and
Management 1998;39(5/6):441–4.
[15] Moshfegh B, Sandberg M. Flow and heat transfer in the air gap
behind photovoltaic panels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 1998;2:287–301.
[16] Sandberg M, Moshfegh B. Ventilated solar roof air%ow and heat
transfer investigation. Renewable Energy 1998;15:287–92.
[17] Sandberg M. Cooling of building integrated photovoltaics by
ventilation air. In: Proceedings of HybVent Forum ’99, First
International One-day Forum on Natural and Hybrid Ventilation, The
University of Sydney, Darlington, New South Wales, Australia, 28
September 1999. p. 10 –8.
[18] Rodrigues AM, Canha da Piedade A, Lahellec A, Grandpeix JY.
Modelling natural convection in a heated vertical channel for room
ventilation. Building and Environment 2000;35:455–69.
[19] Khedari J, Boonsri B, Hirunlabh J. Ventilation impact of a solar
chimney on indoor temperature %uctuation and air change in a school
building. Energy and Buildings 2000;32:89–93.
[20] Khedari J, Mansirisub W, Chaima S, Pratinthong N, Hirunlabh J.
Field measurements of performance of roof solar collector. Energy
and Buildings 2000;31:171–8.
[21] Afonso C, Oliveira A. Solar chimneys: simulation and experiment.
Energy and Buildings 2000;32:71–9.
[22] AboulNaga MM, Abdrabboth SN. Improving night ventilation
into low-rise buildings in hot-arid climates exploring a combined
wall-roof solar chimney. Renewable Energy 2000;19:47–54.
[23] Hirunlabh J, Wachirapuwadon S, Pratinthong N, Khedari J.
New conNgurations of a roof solar collector maximizing natural
ventilation. Building and Environment 2001;36:383–91.
[24] Das SK, Kumar Y. Design and performance of a solar dryer with
vertical collector chimney suitable for rural application. Energy
Conversion and Management 1989;29(2):129–35.
[25] Ekechukwu OV, Norton B. Design and measured performance of a
solar chimney for natural-circulation solar-energy dryers. Renewable
Energy 1997;10(1):81–90.
[26] Pasumarthi N, Sherif SA. Experimental and theoretical performance
of a demonstration solar chimney model: Part I—Mathematical model
development. International Journal of Energy Research 1998;22:
277–88.
[27] Pasumarthi N, Sherif SA. Experimental and theoretical performance
of a demonstration solar chimney model: Part II—Experimental and
906 Z.D. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 38 (2003) 893 – 906
theoretical results and economic analysis. International Journal of
Energy Research 1998;22:443–61.
[28] Trombe F, Robert JF, Cabanat M, Sesolis B. Some performance
characteristics of C.N.R.S. solar house collectors. In: Proceedings of
the Passive Solar Heating and Cooling Conference and Workshop,
Alberquerque, New Mexico, 18–19 May 1976. p. 201–2.
[29] Janssen JE. The history of ventilation and temperature control.
ASHRAE Journal 1999;41(10):48–70.
[30] Spencer S, Chen ZD, Li Y, Haghighat F. Experimental
investigation of a solar chimney natural ventilation system. In:
Proceedings of RoomVent 2000, Seventh International Conference
on Air Distribution in Rooms, Reading, UK, 9 –12 July 2000.
p. 813–8.
[31] Chen ZD, Li Y. A numerical study of a solar chimney with uniform
wall heat %ux. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference
on Indoor Air Quality, Ventilation and Energy Conservation in
Buildings, Hunan, China, October 2001. p. 1447–54.
[32] Sandberg M, Moshfegh B. The investigation of %uid %ow and
heat transfer in a vertical channel heated from one side by PV
elements: Part II—Experimental study. In: Proceedings of the Fourth
Renewable Energy Congress, Denver, CO, 1996. p. 254 –8.
[33] Eckert E, Jackson T. Analysis of turbulent free-convection boundary
layer. NACA Technical Note No. 2207, 1950.
[34] Cooper LY. Combined buoyancy and pressure-driven %ow through
a shallow, horizontal, circular vent. Journal of Heat Transfer
1995;117:659–67.