Simulation comparison of evaporative pads and fogging on air temperatures inside a growing swine building

dc.contributor.author	Παναγάκης, Παναγιώτης	el
dc.contributor.author	Αξαόπουλος, Πέτρος Ι.	el
dc.date.accessioned	2015-01-08T15:23:40Z
dc.date.available	2015-01-08T15:23:40Z
dc.date.issued	2015-01-08
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/11400/3550
dc.rights	Αναφορά Δημιουργού-Μη Εμπορική Χρήση-Όχι Παράγωγα Έργα 3.0 Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες	*
dc.rights.uri	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/	*
dc.source	American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers	en
dc.subject	Swine housing
dc.subject	Heat stress
dc.subject	Χοιροστάσιο
dc.subject	Θερμική πίεση
dc.title	Simulation comparison of evaporative pads and fogging on air temperatures inside a growing swine building	en
heal.type	journalArticle
heal.classification	Agriculture
heal.classification	Livestock
heal.classification	Γεωργία
heal.classification	Κτηνοτροφία
heal.classificationURI	http://skos.um.es/unescothes/C00112
heal.classificationURI	http://skos.um.es/unescothes/C02327
heal.classificationURI	N/A-Γεωργία
heal.classificationURI	N/A-Κτηνοτροφία
heal.keywordURI	http://lod.nal.usda.gov/9258
heal.keywordURI	http://lod.nal.usda.gov/1731
heal.identifier.secondary	ISSN 0001−2351
heal.language	en
heal.access	free
heal.recordProvider	Τ.Ε.Ι. Αθήνας. Σχολή Τεχνολογικών Εφαρμογών. Τμήμα Μηχανικών Ενεργειακής Τεχνολογίας Τ.Ε.	el
heal.publicationDate	2006
heal.bibliographicCitation	Panagakis, P. and Axaopoulos, P. (2006). Simulation comparison of evaporative pads and fogging on air temperatures inside a growing swine building. Transactions of the ASABE. 49(1). pp. 209-215. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. Available from: http://www.prairieswine.com	en
heal.abstract	Evaporative pads and fogging were compared with regards to resulting air temperatures inside a growing swine building and reduction of apparent growing swine heat stress. Four strategies were studied via simulation, namely: strategy ‘a’ = no cooling, strategy ‘b’ = use of evaporative pads, strategy ‘c’ = use of fogging with the same amount of water evaporating as within the evaporative pads, and strategy ‘d’ = use of fogging with the necessary water evaporating so as to result in the same intensity of heat stress as strategy ‘b’. Indices such as the THI, the number of hours that the THI was above 85, and the duration and intensity of heat stress were used. Among all, strategy ‘b’ was considered the most effective, because it resulted in smaller daily inside dry−bulb temperature variation, maximum reduction of apparent heat stress intensity, and lower total consumption of water.	en
heal.publisher	American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers	en
heal.journalName	Transactions of the ASABE	en
heal.journalType	peer-reviewed
heal.fullTextAvailability	true