0
Research Papers

Numerical Study of Carbon Dioxide Gas Emission From an Urban Residential Kitchen in Developing Countries

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Hamidur Rahman, A. K. M. Sadrul Islam

Department of Mechanical and
Chemical Engineering,
Islamic University of Technology,
Board Bazar,
Gazipur 1704, Bangladesh

M. Ruhul Amin

Department of Mechanical and
Industrial Engineering,
Montana State University,
Bozeman, MT 59717

Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF THERMAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS. Manuscript received July 10, 2014; final manuscript received May 06, 2015; published online June 30, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Samuel Sami.

J. Thermal Sci. Eng. Appl 7(4), 041010 (Dec 01, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: TSEA-14-1233; doi: 10.1115/1.4030814 History: Received October 07, 2014; Revised June 05, 2015; Online June 30, 2015

Lack of proper ventilation of exhaust fumes from gas fired stoves in residential kitchens is a major health concern for some populations. It could even cause destruction of property, and reduce quality of life and lifespan. In this study, a typical kitchen having a standard dimension of 2.13 m × 2.43 m × 3.05 m was modeled with single open door exit. Two heat sources were used for modeling the kitchen that resembles the double burner gas stove of an urban residential kitchen in developing countries. Steady-state simulations were performed using a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics (cfd) code with appropriate boundary conditions. The present numerical method was validated by comparing with the experimental data reported by Posner et al. (2003, “Measurement and Prediction of Indoor Air Flow in a Model Room,” J. Energy Build., 35(5), pp. 515–526). The comparison showed very reasonable agreement. A grid independence test was also performed to determine the optimum grid resolution reflecting the accuracy of the numerical solution. The results are presented for carbon dioxide (CO2) gas emission from the stove exhaust and dispersion within the kitchen space. A comparative analysis between the ventilation (natural and forced) and no ventilation conditions is also reported in this study. The location of the breathing zone was at a height of 73 cm and at a distance of 33 cm from the center of the two burners. Very high concentration (above 5000 ppm) of CO2 gas was observed at the plane passing the breathing zone. Exposure to this environment for longer time may cause serious health damage of the occupants (http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/eh/chemfs/fs/carbondioxide.htm). As per the Wisconsin Department of Health Services of USA, over 5000 ppm exposures to CO2 lead to serious oxygen deficit resulting in permanent brain damage, coma, and even death.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

(a) Computational model with two burners and (b) typical kitchen layout (dimensions are in cm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Computational grid of the model at two sectional planes A and B, respectively

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Computational grids of two burners

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison between numerical results and experiment data for axial velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Comparison between numerical results and experiment data for v-velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Pressure distribution for grid independency test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Temperature distribution for grid independency test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Locations of the investigated plane and lines

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Wall temperature distributions and (b) velocity of flow close to wall surface, for case 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Velocity distributions at the investigated plane for (a) case 1, (b) case 2, and (c) case 4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Temperature variations at X–Y and Z breath lines: (a) X-distance (m), (b) Y-distance (m), and (c) Z-distance (m)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

CO2 concentration contour at Y-breath plane: (a) close vent (case 1), (b) open vent (case 2), (c) 0.5 m/s (case 3), and (d) 1.5 m/s (case 4)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

CO2 concentration at the breathing zone

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

CO2 concentration at X–Y and Z breath lines: (a) X-distance (m), (b) Y-distance (m), and (c) Z-distance (m)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In