본 연구에서는 온실의 온풍식 난방시스템 연통에 장착할 수 있는 폐열 회수기의 성능을 개선하기 위하여 각각 상이하게 설계된 3개의 열교환 장치에 대해 열회수 성능을 실험적으로 비교 분석하였다. A형 열회수시스템의 경우, 초기 투자비용과 현재의 농용 전력요금 하에서 대체로 1년을 전후하여 투자에 대한 보상이 충분한 것으로 판단된다. B형 및 C형 열회수시스템의 경우, 열 회수용 공기 흐름방향이 180˚굴절로 저항이 크게 발생되어 송풍팬의 전압 증가에 따른 유속 증가가 미미하며 동일한 열 교환면적에서는 송풍팬의 공기저항 증대로 열 회수 성능이 현저히 개선되지는 못했지만, 직선형보다 B형의 경우 약 5%. C형의 경우 약 13%정도 높은 열 회수효율을 보였다. 송풍팬의 용량은 A형에 사용된 용량인 25m3/min전후가 적절할 것으로 판단되며, 적정 송풍팬 용량 하에서 열회수성능은 헤어핀형이 직선형보다 효과적인 것으로 나타났다. 다만, 헤어핀형은 물론 직선형에서도 열교환 파이프의 배치밀도, 파이프 길이 및 두께 등의 변화에 따른 최적화 연구가 수반되어야 할 것으로 판단된다.

This study was carried out to improve the performance of heat recovery device attached to exhaust gas flue connected to combustion chamber of greenhouse heating system. Three different units were prepared far the comparison of heat recovery performance; A-type is exactly the same with the typical one fabricated for previous study of analyzing heat recovery performance in greenhouse heating system, other two types (B-type and C-type) modified from the control unit are different in the aspects of airflow direction (U-turn airflow) and pipe arrangement. The results are summarized as follows ; 1. In the case of Type-A, when considering the initial cost and current electricity fee required for system operation, it was expected that one or two years at most would be enough to return the whole cost invested. 2. Type-B and Type-C, basically different with Type-A in the aspect of airflow pattern, are not sensitive to the change of blower capacity with higher than 25m3.min-1 . Therefore, heat recovery performance was not improved so significantly with the increment of blower capacity. This was assumed to be that air flow resistance in high air capacity reduced the heat exchange rate as well. Never the less, compared with control unit, resultant heat recovery rate of Type-B and Type-C was improved by about 5％ and 13％, respectively 3. Desirable blower capacity of these heat recovery units experimented were expected to be about 25m3.min-1 , and at the proper blower capacity, U-turn airflow units showed better heat recovery performance than control unit. But, without regard to the type of heat recovery unit, it was recommended that comprehensive consideration of system's physical factors such as pipe arrangement density, unit pipe length and pipe thickness, etc., was required for the optimization of heat recovery system in the aspects of not only energy conservation but economic system design.

• 윤용철
• 강종국
• 서원명