Mục 5.5 đến Mục 5.7

1355Ch05Frame Page 217 Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:20 PM
AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 217
mesh points. Brooker (1961) developed a finite difference solution for the partial differential
equation that describes the pressure field when air velocity is assumed to be proportional to the
pressure gradient raised to an exponent. Predicted and measured pressures were in good agreement
in a rectangular bin containing wheat. Brooker (1969) extended his work to numerically predict
the pressure patterns in a rectangular bin containing maize. Using maize, the predicted pressures
did not compare well with measured values.
Jindal and Thompson (1972) followed Brooker’s approach to predict two-dimensional pressure
patterns and airflow paths in a three-dimensional triangular cross-section-shaped pile of sorghum.
Pierce and Thompson (1975) modified the model of Jindal and Thompson (1972) to predict pressure
patterns for conical shaped piles of grain. Lai (1980) calculated three-dimensional pressure patterns
and velocity distributions in a circular grain bin using a method of lines, which is similar to the
finite difference method.
5.4.3.3 Finite Element Models
A more powerful numerical method, the finite element method, is advantageous over the finite
difference method when the problem is non-linear (Segerlind, 1976; 1984). Marchant (1976),
Segerlind (1982), Miketinac et al. (1986), and Miketinac and Sokhansanj (1985) solved the math-
ematical model for two-dimensional non-linear airflow using the finite element method. Khompis
et al. (1984) predicted pressure patterns and velocity distributions in circular grain bins using the
finite element method. Smith (1982) applied the two-dimensional model of Marchant (1976) to deter-
mine the pressure patterns and velocity distribution for a three-dimensional rectangular grain bulk.
Most of the previous studies were done with clean grains. Haque et al. (1981) considered the
effect of distribution of fines in the bin in their prediction model. Jayas et al. (1990) developed an
axisymmetric model using the finite element method to predict pressure patterns in bins of canola.
They considered the effect of foreign material distribution, moisture content, direction of airflow,
and filling method on the predicted pressure patterns. Alagusundaram et al. (1989) solved the
governing differential equation of flow of air for predicting three-dimensional pressure patterns in
a grain bed using the finite element method.
5.5 DESIGN OF AERATION SYSTEMS
5.5.1 Design Criteria
One of the main critera for aeration system design is to select the proper fan for a given bin,
set of bins, silos, or other storage units. The size (capacity) of an aeration fan is selected to move
a temperature front through the bulk within the design time. The lowest powered fan that can
accomplish this objective is usually selected because it normally requires the lowest capital and
electrical energy costs. A larger capacity fan may be necessary if the number of available hours of
cool ambient air is a limiting factor or if several bins are to be aerated with one fan.
5.5.2 Fan Characteristics
Fan performance is measured by several variables: the rate of airflow supplied against a specified
airflow resistance, rate of decrease in airflow as airflow resistance increases, maximum static
pressure developed by the fan, energy efficiency of the fan, energy efficiency of the fan motor,
temperature rise of the air as it passes through the fan, noise level from fan and motor, and projected
working life of the fan and motor.
The performance of fans is graphically represented by plotting airflow rate on the ordinate and
static pressure on the abscissa. Fan performance curves for various fans sold for commercial elevator
1355Ch05Frame Page 218 Monday, August 6, 2001 12:17 PM
218 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT
Figure 5.14 Measured performances of three 2.2 kW, 450 mm diameter axial flow fans superimposed with the
calculated system curve (dashed line) for ventilating 105 m3 of wheat, 3 m deep in a bin with 35
m2 floor area. (From Metzger, J.F., P.D. Terry, and W.E. Muir. [1981]. Performance of several axial-
flow fans for grain bin ventilation, Can. Agric. Eng., 23, 11–16.)
or farm storage use can be obtained from the fan suppliers or can be measured in the laboratory
using standard procedures (e.g., Metzger et al., 1981). Some curves supplied by manufacturers tend
to indicate higher airflow rates than independently measured fan performance curves at a given
static pressure (Metzger et al., 1981). A few fan manufacturers use certified laboratories for fan
testing (Sukup, 1994). Therefore, if possible, measured fan performance curves should be used for
designing grain ventilation systems. The performance of similarly sized fans from different manufac-
turers can vary widely (Figure 5.14). For example, against a resistance of 600 Pa, fan A provides a
measured flow rate of 800 L/s; fan B provides 1300 L/s; and fan C provides 2600 L/s, which at this
airflow resistance is more than three times higher than the airflow rate of fan A (2600/800 = 3.25).
Total resistance to airflow increases as the rate of airflow through grain increases. The graph
of this relationship between airflow rate and airflow resistance for a specific bin is called the system
curve. The system curve for the ventilation of 105 m3 of wheat at a depth of 3 m in a bin having
a floor area of 35 m2 is superimposed onto the performance curves for the three 2.2 kW fans
(Figure 5.14). The intersection of the system curve and the fan performance curve indicates how
the fan will perform on the specified bin. Fan A provides an airflow of 1300 L/s, fan B provides
1400, and fan C provides 1800 L/s. Thus, on this particular bin, fan C supplies about 40% more
air than fan A (1800/1300 = 1.38). For a specific bin of grain, the differences among the three fans
are not as great as indicated by comparing airflows at the same airflow resistance due to static
pressure increasing with increased airflow. The differences between these three fans, however, are
large enough to result in significantly different aeration rates for the bin of wheat.
Measured fan performances of different types of fans from one manufacturer are given in
Figure 5.15 (Metzger et al., 1981). The performance of axial fans depends on their design and
Figure 5.15 Comparison of the measured performances of different types of fans from one manufacturer. (From
Metzger, J.F., P.D. Terry, and W.E. Muir. [1981]. Performance of several axial-flow fans for grain
bin ventilation, Can. Agric. Eng., 23, 11–16.)
construction. Tube-axial fans may be the best selection for high airflows operating against relatively
low airflow resistance or static pressure (Figure 5.15). They usually have the lowest cost but also
tend to have the lowest efficiency and produce the loudest noise.
Axial fans are easily connected to circular ducts. Vane-axial fans have vanes attached to the
inside of the fan tube on the downstream side of the fan to straighten the airflow as it leaves the
fan blades. The vanes reduce the turbulence in the air and convert velocity energy into static pressure.
Because of this conversion, vane-axial fans maintain higher airflows at higher static pressures than
tube-axial fans of the same size and power (Figure 5.15).
Centrifugal fans usually maintain moderate to high airflows against high static pressures
(Figure 5.15). Compared with axial fans, centrifugal fans typically deliver lower airflow at low
static pressures. However, performance of axial fans drops off rapidly at high static pressures. The
airflow delivery for centrifugal fans may be 50 to 75% as much at medium to high static pressures
as at low pressures (Figure 5.15). If a fan has to handle many different grain types or different
depths of grain in a bin or silo, then a centrifugal fan is often the best selection.
5.5.2.1 Fan Sound Levels
Centrifugal fans tend to be quieter and more efficient than axial fans, but they are usually more
expensive at the same performance level. Sound levels produced by fans are a function of tip speed
or the peripheral velocity of the wheel.
While slow-speed (1100 to 1800 rpm) direct-drive fans are relatively quiet, high-speed (3000
to 3600 rpm) fans are very loud, especially axial blowers with diameters of 600 to 750 mm. Anyone
working near such fans for an extended period should wear ear protectors. Larger centrifugal fans
use belt drives that reduce the wheel blade speed. They are, therefore, not as loud as axial blowers
even at much higher power inputs.
Around a grain elevator with many tall curved structures, sound waves can bounce off structural
sidewalls and may be redirected or focused toward sensitive areas, such as a residential housing
area. Fan noise control in aeration systems is discussed in Section 7.4.4.
5.5.2.2 Fan Efficiency
Because the efficiencies of centrifugal fans are usually higher and their direct drive motors are
usually not mounted in the air stream, the temperature rise of the air passing through the fan is
Figure 5.16 Total energy efficiencies of the three 2.2 kW fans of Figure 5.14. (From Metzger, J.F., P.D. Terry,
and W.E. Muir. [1981]. Performance of several axial-flow fans for grain bin ventilation, Can. Agric.
Eng., 23, 11–16.)
less than for axial fans at the same static pressure level. But for centrifugal fans operated at high
static pressures, the heat of compression is higher than for axial fans operated at low static pressures,
even with the higher fan efficiencies of centrifugal fans.
Total efficiency of the fan and motor combination is the amount of power in the air leaving the
fan divided by the amount of electrical power entering the electric motor connected to the fan,
multiplied by 100%. Efficiencies increase from 0% at zero airflow to a peak of about 70% at
maximum airflow and then decrease at higher static pressures with reduced airflow rates. Metzger
et al. (1981) measured the total efficiencies of 11 small fans. The peak efficiencies for each of the
11 fans varied from 50% for a 1.1 kW fan to 25% for a 0.25 kW fan. Peak efficiencies of the three
fans in Figure 5.14 were 33% for fan B, 42% for fan A, and 45% for fan C (Figure 5.16). When
operating at the conditions of the bin of wheat of Figure 5.14, fans A and B would have efficiencies
of 28%; and fan C would have an efficiency of 40%.
5.5.2.3 Fan Power Requirement and Temperature Rise
Peak power demands measured by Metzger et al. (1981) were greater than the rated power. The
average ratio of maximum operating power to rated power ranged from 2.0 for 300 mm diameter
fans to 1.2 for 600 mm diameter fans. The design and selection of the electric components supplying
power to such fans must allow for the higher power.
For axial fans the electrical power that is not used to move air (electric resistance heat in the
motor’s wiring, friction in motor and fan bearings, and air turbulence) is given off as heat that
warms the air as it passes by the direct drive motor mounted in the air stream and through the
fan. The amount of heat given off by the fan and motor increases as efficiency decreases. The
temperature rise, however, also depends on the airflow rate, decreasing as airflow rate increases.
Temperature rises for vane-axial fans can vary from about 0.5°C to as high as 5°C. For centrifugal
fans, the temperature rise will be slightly lower at the same static pressure. At high static pressures,
the temperature rise can be up to10°C. When high-pressure fans exceed their high-pressure
operating limits and stall, with very little air movement, temperatures as high as 18°C have been
observed. For some axial fans that have the motor mounted outside the air stream, the temperature
rise will be less because the motor heat is lost to the surroundings. In-line centrifugal fans have
their motors installed in the fan housing; consequently, temperature rises include motor heat like
axial fans.
5.5.3 Design of Aeration Ducts
5.5.3.1 Air Velocity in Supply and Aeration Ducts
The American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
recommends that air velocities in ducts should be equal to or less than 7.5 m/s (7500 (L/s)/m2) to
minimize friction losses and noise (Agric. Can., 1990; Holman, 1960). Agric. Can. (1990) recom-
mends that air velocities in ducts for grain ventilation should follow this recommendation. Other
factors such as storage type may also affect the design of grain aeration ducts. If the ducts are
short, friction losses may be small or negligible compared with the pressure losses in the grain.
5.5.3.2 Design of Aeration Duct Systems
The equation for airflow along the duct has to be solved together with the equation for flow
through the grain. To solve the equations they must be simplified, and therefore the results are only
approximately correct. Probably the most accurate method for aeration duct design is the finite
element method that was used by Marchant and Nellist (1977) and Burrell et al. (1982). Simulated
results are sensitive to the coefficient for pressure regain in the duct as well as the grain resistance
(Burrell et al., 1982).
When air is sucked down through shallow grain bulks into an on-floor duct and the air velocities
at the fan end are high, the static pressure in the duct close to the fan can be up to 20 times that
at the distant end (Burrell et al., 1982). Consequently, large differences in airflow through the grain
along the duct can occur. Airflow distribution through the grain bulk is much better if the air is
blown into the duct, although a regain of static pressure occurs at the distant end of the duct of up
to 4 times that at the fan end (Burrell et al., 1982; Fick et al., 1990).
Distribution is further improved by reducing the diameter of the duct in stages along its length
(similar to reducing cross-section areas of air-conditioning ducts when air passes into lateral ducts,
and air volume is thus reduced in the main duct); by increasing the grain depth; by decreasing the
fan end velocity; by increasing the friction loss along the duct; and by inserting constrictions in
the duct (Burrell et al., 1982). To deliver the same mass of air per unit of time, the required fan
pressure is much larger if the air is sucked through rather than blown into the ducts.
Many of the recommendations on the design and operation of ducts for grain aeration systems
are empirical rules for duct spacing and air velocities in the ducts (Holman, 1960; Burrell, 1974;
Foster and Tuite, 1982; and Hellevang, 1997). There are several ways to lay out an aeration duct
system. Often more than one duct is required.
The aim is to keep the air paths through the grain as nearly equal in length as possible. If a
path is significantly shorter than the others, an excessive amount of the air will flow in that direction.
The longest path should be less than 1.5 times the length of the shortest path (Holman, 1960),
though larger variations in path lengths may be used with satisfactory results in small stores of dry
grain (Burrell, 1974).
Multiple ducts should not be farther apart than the depth of the grain bed, and the distance
from the wall to the nearest duct should not exceed half of the grain depth. Resistance to airflow
in grain is less in the horizontal direction than in the vertical direction. The air that flows horizontally
out of the ducts provides a more uniform airflow distribution than could be expected if air resistance
were the same in both directions.
5.5.4 Design of Long-Perforated Ducts and Manifolds
Long-perforated ducts and branching manifolds can be designed using the static pressure regain
method. If a constant depth of grain covers a long-perforated duct, then to obtain the same airflow
through all the grain, the static pressure along the ducts should be kept constant. If the duct diameter
is constant, as air flows out of the duct into the grain, the velocity of the air in the duct decreases. As
air velocity (or velocity pressure) decreases, the velocity energy is partially converted to static pressure.
Therefore, to maintain the same static pressure throughout the duct, the duct diameter must be
reduced to increase the velocity. If there were no friction losses in the pipe and in the conversion
from velocity energy to static pressure energy, then the duct diameter would be designed to maintain
a constant air velocity. In aeration systems, however, energy is lost in the conversion from velocity
to pressure energy and there are friction losses along the duct. The system is therefore designed
so that the pressure regain is equal to the friction losses along the duct. Although a gradual reduction
in duct cross-sectional area should provide the most uniform airflow, step decreases are usually
more practical. The static pressure regain can be calculated by:
(
∆P = ( R 2) v12 − v22 ) (5.13)
where:
∆P = regain in static pressure, Pa
R = regain coefficient
v1 = initial velocity, m/s
v2 = reduced velocity, m/s
The coefficient R can range between 0.9 for smooth ducts to 0.5 or less in rough, poorly
constructed systems. In aeration systems, however, approximately 75% of the velocity energy is
converted to static pressure energy, and an R of 0.75 may be used (Brooker et al., 1974).
5.5.5 Computerized Aeration System Models
Computerized models can be classified into two groups:
1. The heat and mass transfer models that simulate the aeration process for linear or nonlinear airflow
and can be used for system evaluation and optimization
2. The models that can be used in designing physical systems — for example, selecting a fan for a
bin filled with a certain grain
Many different models of the first type have been reported in the literature, and their usefulness
has been demonstrated (e.g., Sharp, 1982; Morey et al., 1979; and Metzger and Muir, 1983). Such
models have been used to assess the uniformity of cooling and to compare different control
strategies. The models of the second type are scarce in the literature. This is probably because the
fan characteristics data are localized in nature and can change frequently as new fans become
available on the market.
5.6 PLANNING AN AERATION SYSTEM
Quantities of different types of grains to be stored, geographic location and associated weather
conditions, segregation of grain types and grades, drying method (if used), power supply limitations,
physical layout of facility, interface of grain storage with other business options, initial costs of
the bins or silos, grain handling system requirements, and speed of grain movement are the major
factors to be considered when selecting bins or silos. Because sanitation is such an important
component of integrated pest management, bins or silos should be designed for ease of internal
and external cleaning.
Large bins that require vertical structural wall stiffeners should have the stiffeners mounted on
the exterior of the bin wall, where they will collect less debris and will be accessible for cleaning.
Internal stiffeners are very difficult to keep clean and may rust out prematurely because of contact
with moist grain. The gaps between the corrugated wall metal and vertical interior stiffeners trap
grain, dust, and trash; and they harbor insects. Rusty stiffeners can create both a serious sanitation
problem and a major structural defect.
Aeration systems should be installed in most if not all bins or silos. To allow for as much
flexibility as economically possible, future uses of bins, such as for Dryeration and near-ambient
drying, should always be considered during the planning stage of grain storage facilities.
5.7 PRACTICAL AERATION SYSTEM DESIGNS AND PROCEDURES
In this section, procedures for designing aeration systems are presented. In the preparation of
this section, the handbook prepared by Hellevang et al. (1997) for Midwest Plan Service was
consulted, and selected materials were integrated with the information developed in the previous
sections of this chapter and with materials selected from other publications (e.g., Navarro and
Calderon, 1982).
The selected airflow rate and direction of airflow plays an important role in the design of an
aeration system (Chapters 6 and 7). The selected airflow rates given in this section are examples
of typical designs.
In the preparation of this section, medium (250 to 1000 tonnes) to large (3000 to 8000 tonnes
and higher capacity) aerated bins were considered. Because rapid temperature changes occur in
small bins, less emphasis was placed on their design. The background information in this
chapter should be sufficient to design aeration systems for all sizes and types of bulks (e.g., flat
storages, steel bins, and concrete silos).
5.7.1 Aeration System Design Recommendations
5.7.1.1 Airflow Rates
In temperate climates, airflow rates of 3 to 6 (m3/h)/tonne (0.05 to 0.10 cfm/bu) are typically used;
and for regions with limited cooling time, airflow rates of 12 to 15 (m3/h)/tonne (0.20 to 0.25 cfm/bu)
are typically used. For upright storages, airflow rates of 3 to 6 (m3/h)/tonne (0.05 to 0.10 cfm/bu) are
typically used; and for horizontal storages, airflow rates of 6 to 12 (m3/h)/tonne (0.10 to 0.20 cfm/bu)
are typically used. Higher airflow rates than these will cool grain faster but often are not economical.
Because airflow and power requirements for grain depths exceeding 30 m (100 ft) become exces-
sive, reduced airflow rates of 2 to 3 (m3/h)/tonne (0.03 to 0.05 cfm/bu) should be considered. Doubling
the airflow rate triples the required static pressure, while fan power is increased by over four times.
For wheat and other small grains, airflow rates of 3 to 6 (m3/h)/tonne (0.05 to 0.10 cfm/bu) are
used; and for corn and soybeans, airflow rates of 6 to 12 (m3/h)/tonne (0.10 to 0.20 cfm/bu) are
common for medium (15 to 30 m) grain depths.
5.7.1.2 Air Velocities in Ducts
To minimize friction loss in a duct, a compromise between the duct diameter and air velocity has
to be made. In an aeration duct, maximum velocity should be at or below 600 m/min (2000 fpm). For
transition and supply ducts up to 6 m (20 ft) long, velocity could be 750 m/min (2500 fpm).
Transition duct taper should be 20° or less. Right-angle elbows should be assembled from two
pieces of 45° elbows with a short, straight section between them (Figure 5.6) instead of one 90°
elbow. Their radius of curvature should be at least 1.5 times and preferably 2.0 times the duct
diameter.
5.7.1.3 Air Distribution Systems
The ratio of the length of the longest airflow path to the length of the shortest airflow path
should be 1.5:1. Positive pressure systems have a more uniform airflow distribution and are preferred
over negative pressure systems in horizontal storages. The exit velocity from the perforations should
not exceed 9 m/min (30 fpm).
5.7.1.4 Intakes and Exhaust
In general, roof vents should be equally spaced around the circumference of the roof at about
⅓ to ½ the distance up the slope from the lower edge. One or more vents should be located near
the peak to minimize moist air condensation in downspouts used for filling the storage. The vent
cross-section area should be sized preferably for an air velocity of 300 m/min (1000 ft/min) with
a maximum velocity of 450 m/min (1500 ft/min). The pressure difference between the head-space
of a storage bin or silo and outside should not exceed 30 Pa (⅛ of an inch water column) during
either pressure or suction aeration. Higher pressure differences may cause structural damage and
are indicative of an inadequate exhaust area.
Louvered exhaust fans (mounted in the end wall near the roof peak) — capable of moving six
to eight head-space (with the structure filled) air changes per hour — should be used in horizontal
storages. Screened inlet louvers should be mounted at the opposite end of the flat storage to provide
adequate inlet air entry. Design velocity for the louvered area should be the same as for roof vents
(i.e., 300 to 450 m/min).
End wall exhaust fans help minimize buildup of humid air above the grain mass by providing
movement of ambient air through the head-space at selected times. This humid air may cause roof
condensation and dripping of moisture from roof trusses onto the grain surface. The exhaust fans
should generally operate during the night, when roof temperatures drop below the head-space air
dew point. A 24-hour timer can be set to operate exhaust fans from late evening until sunrise.
Nighttime operation will help keep surface grain relatively cool by removing the daily buildup of
head-space heat as well as humid air from under the roof. Although end wall fans supplement roof
vents, roof vents should be sized to vent the aeration airflow.
Example
If a 30 m (100 ft) by 100 m (330 ft) flat storage had a head-space air volume of 6000 m3
(211,888 ft3), one or more end wall exhaust fans that can deliver 36,000 to 48,000 m3/h, or 600 to
800 m3/min (21,000 to 28,000 ft3/min) should be used. An inlet louver area of 2.0 to 3.0 m2 (22 to
32 ft2) should be used.
5.7.2 Aeration System Design Procedures and Examples
The following procedure is recommended for aeration system design.
5.7.2.1 Calculate the Amount of Grain to be Aerated
Vertical (upright) storage is defined as any structure where grain depth is greater than the
structure diameter or width; otherwise, the structure is known as horizontal or flat storage. In
calculating the amount of grain, do not ignore sloped floors, grain surfaces, and walls.
In most parts of the world, the grain mass is often a more readily available unit of measure
than the volume of the bulk because when filling a storage, the mass of each load is recorded. The
capacity of the storage in these regions is referred to on a mass basis rather than on a volume basis.
At full capacity, the same storage can hold different weights of different commodities because their
bulk densities differ. This can create confusion.
In the U.S. storage system, bushel is used to define the amount of the commodity in storage.
Although the bushel is a volume unit, it is calculated by measuring mass and dividing it by a
standard bulk density — which differs for each commodity. In this system, it is difficult to estimate
the actual grain mass in storage because the depth of grain, drop height, and length of the storage
time affect bulk density. The U.S. grain elevators use a compaction factor based on stored grain
depth to account for consolidation in storages.
The storage volume of a cylindrical bin is calculated by using the following equation:
2
Volume ft 3 or m3 = π ×   × h
( ) D
(5.14)
 2
where D = diameter, and h = height. In the U.S. storage system,
1 ft 3 = 0.80 bu
For rectangular stores (warehouses) in U.S. storage systems, the total storage volume (TSV) is
calculated as:
( )
Total Storage Volume (TSV) ft 3 = ( ft length × ft width × grain depth in ft ) (5.15)
To obtain capacity in bu:
Capacity in bu = TSV × (0.8 bu/ft3)
5.7.2.2 Select the Airflow Rate and Determine the Air Volume
Airflow rates are discussed in detail in Chapters 7 and 8; but as a general rule, apply information
given above in Section 5.7.1, Aeration System Design Recommendations.
5.7.2.3 Estimate Static Pressure Requirements
To select the proper aeration fan for the system to be operated at a certain airflow rate
[(m3/h)/tonne], knowledge of static pressure requirements is essential (refer to Section 5.3).
Figures 5.17 to 5.21 provide static pressure (Pa) and power requirements (kW/100 tonne) vs. depth
(m) for wheat, maize (shelled corn), sorghum, soybeans, and cottonseed (delinted), respectively.
The airflow rates given in Figures 5.17 to 5.21 are based on the bulk densities mentioned in these
figures. The same data, static pressure (inches of water), and power requirements (hp/1000 bu) vs.
depth (ft) are given in Figures 5.22 to 5.26 for the U.S. system.
For wheat, maize, sorghum, and soybeans, relationships are based on data from Shedd (1953)
for loose grain modified for packed fill. Basic values for loose grain were increased as follows:
wheat 30%, maize 34%, and sorghum and soybeans 41%. For delinted cottonseed, relationships
are from Smith (1975) based on field observations and laboratory studies.
Figure 5.17 Static pressure developed at different airflow rates and fan power requirements for aerating wheat
(bulk density 0.830 tonnes/m3, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the calculation of
fan power). (Adapted from Navarro, S. and Calderon, M. [1982]. Aeration of Grain in Subtropical
Climates, FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 52, Rome. With permission.)
To compensate for pressure losses inside the aeration duct, static pressure values were further
increased based on recommended maximum velocities of 600 m/min (2000 ft/min) for vertical
storages, and on lower velocities as shown in Table 5.4 (Table 5.5 in the U.S. system) for horizontal
storages.
Basic pressures were increased also for supply ducts for a maximum velocity of 750 m/min
(2500 ft/min) having lengths of 3 m (10 ft). For longer supply ducts with elbows and increased
velocities, Figure 5.27 and Table 5.6 (Table 5.7 in the U.S. system) will serve as guides for calcu-
lating additional pressure.
Calculations based on the method proposed by Henderson (1958) show that curves given in
Figures 5.17 to 5.26 are applicable for vertical storages when the maximum velocity in the grain
near the duct surface is 9 m/min (30 ft/min). For horizontal storages where the longest air path is
close to l.5 times the shortest path, the maximum velocity in the grain near the duct surface should
be 6 m/min (20 ft/min).
Figures 5.17 to 5.26 provide only estimates of static pressure and fan power for selected depths.
For many storage conditions — such as grain and seeds stored over long periods, stored near
railroads where vibrations may cause consolidation, for grain with high levels of fine material, or
excessive lint in cottonseed — static pressure and power requirements would exceed the values
Figure 5.18 Static pressure developed at different airflow rates and fan power requirements for aerating maize
(shelled corn) (bulk density 0.764 tonnes/m3, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the
calculation of fan power). (Adapted from Navarro, S. and Calderon, M. [1982]. Aeration of Grain
in Subtropical Climates, FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 52, Rome. With permission.)
given in Figures 5.17 to 5.26. In these cases, additional resistance factors need to be estimated and
applied (refer to Section 5.3).
The static pressure values given in Figures 5.17 to 5.26, calculated based on the above assump-
tions, compared favorably with observations under field conditions. These graphs simplify compu-
tations and minimize the possibility of calculation errors. For design purposes, any inaccuracies
caused by the above assumptions are negligible. Static pressures for other seeds or grains that are
similar in size, shape, density, and surface texture to one of these five seeds can also be approximated
from respective charts (Figures 5.17 to 5.26). Pea beans are very close to soybeans. Barley, oats,
popcorn, and rough rice static pressures are close to each other and fall approximately halfway
between wheat and corn. Where these assumptions are not applicable, more detailed calculations
can be made using Section 5.3.
Example
Estimate the static pressure that will develop in an aeration system: 1000 tonnes of wheat, grain
depth of 10 m, airflow rate of 6 (m3/h)/tonne, supply duct of 300 mm diameter, 20 m long with
one 90° (3-piece) elbow (with a centerline radius of 1.5 times the duct diameter) (Figure 5.6).
Figure 5.19 Static pressure developed at different airflow rates and fan power requirements for aerating grain
sorghum (bulk density 0.800 tonnes/m3, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the
The estimated static pressure (Pa) to move the specified volume of air will be the sum of:
Basic aeration system (Figure 5.17) 814

Supply duct (Figure 5.27) 392
Elbow (Table 5.6) 118
Total Pressure 1324
5.7.2.4 Estimate Fan Power Requirements
Once the static pressure and the air volume required to aerate the grain bulk are determined,
the fan power (kW or hp) required can be estimated using the methods described in this section.
Since the minimum theoretical power (W) required to move any amount of air (m3/s) against
any resistance, (Pa) can be determined as:
( )
Air power (W ) = Air volume m 3 s × pressure ( Pa ) (5.16)
Figure 5.20 Static pressure developed at different airflow rates and fan power requirements for aerating
soybeans (bulk density 0.800 tonnes/m3, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the
Using Equation 5.16 and the definition of fan efficiency (Section 5.5.2.2), actual fan power is:
Fan power (W ) =
( )
Air volume m 3 s × pressure ( Pa )
(5.17)
Fan static efficiency
where Fan static efficiency is given in decimal.

Basic aeration system static pressure and fan power requirements can be determined from graphs
given in Figures 5.17 to 5.26. A static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the calculation of fan
power. However, these values should be adjusted when the operating static efficiencies of fans are
significantly different than 50%. In such cases, the fan powers given in Figures 5.17 to 5.26 should
be adjusted according to Equation 5.18 where static efficiency is given in decimal:
Adjusted kW 100 tonnes

kW 100 tonnes ( Figures 5.17 to 5.21) × 0.50 (Static efficiency) (5.18)
=
Static efficiency of selected fan
Figure 5.21 Static pressure developed at different airflow rates and fan power requirements for aerating cotton-
seed (delinted) (bulk density 0.471 tonnes/m3, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the
For example, if the aeration system requires 0.28 kW per 100 tonnes of wheat (Figure 5.17)
and the fan has a static efficiency of 60%, the adjusted power requirement of the selected fan is
computed as:
0.28 × 0.50
Adjusted kW 100 tonnes = = 0.23 kW 100 tonnes
0.60
For the given example of aerating 1000 tonnes of wheat, the estimated fan power is 2.3 kW.
Where long supply ducts with high air velocities result in pressure losses greater than the
allowances incorporated in Figures 5.17 to 5.26, the additional pressure loss should be added to
the values read from Figures 5.17 to 5.26.
Example
Using the example given in the previous Section 5.3, for the basic aeration system at a static pressure
of 814 Pa at 6000 m3/h ≈ 1.66 m3/s and for a fan having a static efficiency of 60%, fan power is:
Figure 5.22 Static pressure developed at different airflow rates and fan power requirements for aerating wheat
(bulk density 60 lb/bu, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the calculation of fan power).
(Adapted from Navarro, S. and Calderon, M. [1982]. Aeration of Grain in Subtropical Climates,
FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 52, Rome. With permission.)
Fan power (W ) =
( )
1.66 m 3 s × 814 ( Pa )
= 2, 252 W ≅ 2.3 kW
0.60
When the static pressure is increased due to friction loss in the supply duct and the elbow as
in the previous example to 1324 Pa, the fan power is:
Fan power (W ) =
( )
1.66 m 3 s × 1, 324 ( Pa )
= 3, 663 W ≅ 3.7 kW
0.60
5.7.2.5 Choose the Aeration Fan
The aeration fan is an important component of the system. Details related to fan characteristics
were given in Section 5.5.2. If static pressure and airflow rate are known, an appropriate fan can
Figure 5.23 Static pressure developed at different airflow rates and fan power requirements for aerating maize
(shelled corn) (bulk density 56 lb/bu, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the calculation
of fan power). (Adapted from Navarro, S. and Calderon, M. [1982]. Aeration of Grain in Subtropical
be selected using fan performance data for available fans. Typical fan performance data are given
in Tables 5.8 and 5.9, which can be used for selecting the size of fan.
5.7.2.6 Choose the Aeration System Type
Basic considerations in choosing the air distribution system are:
1. Should permit periodic cleaning of the enclosed duct or underfloor space to remove foreign
material, grain, and insect or rodent debris
2. Should have sufficiently large duct area to properly carry the design airflow without exceeding the
maximum design air velocities
3. Should be located in areas that create the least obstacle for machinery movement in and around
the grain storage facility
The reader should check Section 5.1 for more details on designing storage facilities and aeration
systems.
Figure 5.24 Static pressure developed at different airflow rates and fan power requirements for aerating grain
sorghum (bulk density 56 lb/bu, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the calculation of
5.7.2.7 Decide How Many Ducts are Required and Where to Locate Them
Duct location and spacing is an important step in designing an aeration system. The layout of
the duct system should facilitate the ease of operation, especially in flat storages where the floor
is used as a working area for grain transfer equipment during unloading grain from the storage.
Above-floor ducts may require dismantling when unloading equipment is operated.
Determine the air distribution duct system that meets the required 1.5:1 airflow path ratio. The
distance from the wall to the beginning of the perforated section of the ducts is determined by
centering the perforated portion of the duct in the bin. The number of duct locations needed and
the spaces between ducts are calculated using the following equations:
Building width or bin diameter ( m)

Number of ducts = (5.19)
Grain depth ( m)
soybeans (bulk density 60 lb/bu, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the calculation of
Building width or bin diameter ( m)

Duct spacing ( m) = Grain depth ( m) = (5.20)
Number of ducts
Duct spacing ( m)
Distance from sidewall to duct wall ( m) = (5.21)
2
Example
Design the duct spacing layout pattern for a 30 m wide by 70 m long flat storage with a sidewall
grain depth of 8 m; the surface of the grain bulk is leveled; the estimated size of half-round ducts
is width of 1.0 m and height of 0.5 m.
From Equation 5.19:
Number of ducts = 30/8 = 3.75 ≈ 4 ducts

cottonseed (delinted) (bulk density 32/lb/bu, a fan static efficiency of 50% was assumed in the
Table 5.4 Recommended Maximum Allowable Air Velocities (m/min)

within Aeration Ducts of Up to 15 m in Length
to be Used in Suction Systems
Airflow Rate Corn and Soybeans Wheat and Sorghum

[(m3/h)/tonne] 3 6 12 15 3 6 12 15
Grain 4 230 230 270 280 350 390 440 470
depth 6 260 270 320 340 400 460 560 600
(m) 8 270 310 380 420 450 540 600 600
10 290 350 450 500 500 600 600 600
15 360 460 600 600 600 600 600 600
From Equation 5.20:
Duct spacing = 30/4 = 7.5 m
From Equation 5.21:
Distance from sidewall to duct centerline = 7.5/2 = 3.75 m

100
00
30 00
28 0
0
26 0
0
50 24 0
0
Du
22
00
ct
20
D
30
00
i am
17
20 00
15 0
ete
0
14 0
r, (
15 0
13 0
0
12 0
m
0
m)
10 11
00
10
0
90
0
80
5
0
4 70
0
3 60
0
50
44
ec)
2
40
0
AIRFLOW (m3 / sec)
45
/s
34
, (m
1.5 0
30
40 y
i t
26
0 lo c
35
Ve
22
1.0
Air
20
18
0
16
30
14
0
26
.5 24 12
0
10
0
22
9
.4
8
0
20
7
.3 0
18
6
5
0
16
.2
4
0
14
3
0
12
.1
2
0
10
1.5
90
80
.05
70
.04
.03 60
50
.02
40
.01
.01 .015 .02 .03 .04 .05 .07 .1 .15 .2 .25 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8.9 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 4 5 6 7 8 910
FRICTION LOSS mm W.C. PER m DUCT LENGTH

Figure 5.27 Friction loss due to airflow in round ducts (based on standard air of 1.2 kg/m3 density flowing
through round galvanized metal ducts having approximately one joint each 80 cm duct length).
(Adapted from Navarro, S. and Calderon, M. [1982] Aeration of Grain in Subtropical Climates,
FAO, Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 52. With permission.)
Lengthwise ducts are used, with the perforated metal starting about 4 m (13.1 ft) from the end
wall and the centerline of the first duct placed 3.75 m (12.3 ft) from the building sidewall. Then
ducts 2, 3, and 4 are spaced 7.5 m (24.6 ft) apart, from centerline across the building width, leaving
3.75 m from the centerline of duct 4 to the far sidewall.
Check the air path length ratio for 1.5:1: The longest path from duct 1, 3.75 m –0.5 m (half
duct width) + 8 m height = 11.25 m. Shortest distance to the grain surface is 8 m – 0.5 m = 7.5 m.
Air path length ratio 11.25/7.5 = 1.5 meets the design guideline.
Table 5.5 Recommended Maximum Allowable Air Velocities (ft/min)

within Aeration Ducts of Up to 50 ft in Length to be Used
in Suction Systems
Airflow rate Corn and Soybean Wheat and Sorghum

(ft3/min/bu) 0.05 0.09 0.19 0.23 0.05 0.09 0.19 0.23
Grain 13 755 755 886 919 1148 1280 1444 1542
depth 20 853 886 1050 1115 1312 1509 1837 1969
(ft) 26 886 1017 1247 1378 1476 1772 1969 1969
33 951 1148 1476 1640 1640 1969 1969 1969
49 1181 1509 1969 1969 1969 1969 1969 1969
Table 5.6 Pressure Loss (Pa) in Accordance with Air Velocity (m/min)
and Duct Diameter (mm) in 3-Piece Round Cross-Section
Elbows (90°) Where Centerline Radius Is Equal to 1.5 Times
the Duct Diameter
Duct Diameter (mm)
Airflow 200 300 400 500
(m3/h) m/min Pa m/min Pa m/min Pa m/min Pa
1000 531 20
1500 796 39
2000 1061 59 472 10
3000 1592 147 707 29 398 10
4000 2122 255 943 49 531 20
5000 2653 392 1179 78 663 29 424 10
6000 1415 118 796 39 509 20
8000 1886 196 1061 59 679 29
10000 2358 314 1326 98 849 39
15000 1989 226 1273 88
20000 2653 392 1698 167
25000 2122 255
30000 2546 363
Compiled from data from ASHRAE, 1997. Fundamentals Handbook, ASHRAE
Inc., New York.
Table 5.7 Pressure Loss (Inches of Water) in Accordance with Air Velocity (ft/min)
and Duct Diameter (inch) in 3-Piece Round Cross-Section Elbows (90°)
Where Centerline Radius Is Equal to 1.5 Times the Duct Diameter
Duct Diameter (inch)
Airflow 8 12 16 20
(ft3/min) ft/min in w.c. ft/min in w.c. ft/min in w.c. ft/min in w.c.
589 1742 0.079
883 2612 0.157
1177 3481 0.236 1549 0.039
1766 5223 0.591 2320 0.118 1306 0.039
2354 6962 1.024 3094 0.197 1742 0.079
2943 8704 1.575 3868 0.315 2175 0.118 1391 0.039
3531 4642 0.472 2612 0.157 1670 0.079
4709 6188 0.787 3481 0.236 2228 0.118
5886 7736 1.260 4350 0.394 2785 0.157
8829 6526 0.906 4177 0.354
11772 8704 1.575 5571 0.669
14715 6962 1.024
17657 8353 1.457
Compiled from data from ASHRAE, 1997. Fundamentals Handbook, ASHRAE Inc., New
York.
Table 5.8 Example of Fan Performance Data

Air Flow Rates (ft3/min) at Indicated Static Pressure
Power Diameter Speed Static Pressure (Inches of Water Column)
(hp) (in) (RPM) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Axial
0.50 12 3,450 1,500 630
0.75 12 3,450 1,700 750
1 14 3,450 2,880 1,050
1.5 12 3,450 2,200 950
1.5 14 3,450 2,800 1,300
1.5 16 3,450 3,500 2,400 1,300
1.5 18 3,450 4,350 3,000 1,400
3 18 3,500 5,700 4,600 2,650 1,400
5 24 3,500 10,500 9,000 7,000 4,600 2,900
7.5 24 3,500 12,500 11,100 9,450 6,550 3,900
10 26 3,500 15,500 14,000 12,250 9,500 5,800 3,400
Low-Speed Centrifugal
3 — 1,750 4,580 4,320 3,820 3,350 2,550
5 — 1,750 7,800 7,000 6,250 5,550 4,600 3,300
7.5 — 1,750 10,500 9,750 8,950 8,000 7,400 6,100
10 — 1,750 13,300 12,400 11,500 10,500 9,550 8,500 7,300
High-Speed Centrifugal
3 — 3,500 — 2,950 — 2,550 — 2,120 — 1,650 — 1,000
5 — 3,500 — 4,350 — 3,850 — 3,200 — 2,200 — 1,800
7.5 — 3,500 — 5,700 — 5,100 — 4,500 — 3,800 — 2,900
10 — 3,500 — 6,800 — 6,300 — 5,750 — 5,100 — 4,450
In-line Centrifugal
3 18 3,500 3,800 3,600 3,400 3,000 2,500 1,900
5 24 3,500 5,500 5,000 4,400 4,100 3,900 3,600 2,800 1,800
7.5 28 3,500 6,200 6,000 5,700 5,500 5,200 4,800 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000
10 28 3,500 7,700 7,300 6,800 6,500 6,300 6,000 5,400 5,100 4,800 4,400
Note: Data presented are a composite from several manufacturers. Consult a comparable table or performance
curve for the actual fans compared.
From Hellevang et al. (1997). Dry Grain Aeration Systems Design Handbook, 1st ed., Midwest Plan Service,
Ames, IA.
5.7.2.8 Determine Aeration Duct Length
Duct length is based on the longer of the two criteria: (1) getting air to the ends of the bulk,
and (2) providing enough perforated surface area for reasonable exit velocity. For bulks exceeding
30 m (100 ft) length, place a fan on both ends of the duct, split the ducts with a gap between ducts
at the center and fans on both ends, or use a manifold at the midpoint of the building. For dual fan
systems, such as the first and second options of separating the building length into halves with fans
on each end, size each fan and duct for half of the total required airflow.
Before calculating the perforated duct length (PDL), it is first necessary to calculate the distance
from end wall to the perforated duct (E):
E ( ft ) = (0.7) (Distance from sidewall to duct wall, ft ) (5.22)

Table 5.9 Example Fan Performance Data in Metric Units

Air Flow Rates (m3/h) at Indicated Static Pressure
Power Diameter Speed Static Pressure (kPa)
(kW) (cm) (RPM) 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50
Vane Axial
0.37 30.5 3,450 2549 1070
0.56 30.5 3,450 2888 1274
0.75 35.6 3,450 4893 1784
1.12 30.5 3,450 3738 1614
1.12 35.6 3,450 4757 2209
1.12 40.6 3,450 5947 4078 2209
1.12 45.7 3,450 7391 5097 2379
2.24 45.7 3,500 9684 7815 4502 2379
3.73 61 3,500 17840 15291 11893 7815 4927
5.59 61 3,500 21238 18859 16056 11128 6626
7.46 66 3,500 26335 23786 20813 16141 9854 5777
Low-Speed Centrifugal
2.24 — 1,750 7781 7340 6490 5692 4332
3.73 — 1,750 13252 11893 10619 9429 7815 5607
5.59 — 1,750 17840 16565 15206 13592 12573 10364
7.46 — 1,750 22597 21068 19539 17840 16225 14442 12403
High-Speed Centrifugal
2.24 — 3,500 — 5012 — 4332 — 3602 — 2803 — 1699
3.73 — 3,500 — 7391 — 6541 — 5437 — 3738 — 3058
5.59 — 3,500 — 9684 — 8665 — 7646 — 6456 — 4927
7.46 — 3,500 — 11553 — 10704 — 9769 — 8665 — 7561
In-line Centrifugal
2.24 45.7 3,500 6456 6116 5777 5097 4248 3228
3.73 61 3,500 9345 8495 7476 6966 6626 6116 4757 3058
5.59 71 3,500 10534 10194 9684 9345 8835 8155 7646 6796 5947 5097
7.46 71 3,500 13082 12403 11553 11044 10704 10194 9175 8665 8155 7476
Note: English to metric conversions at 1.699 m3/h = 1.0 ft3/min.
Data presented are a composite from several manufacturers. Consult a comparable table or performance
curve for the actual fans compared.
From Hellevang et al. (1997). Dry Grain Aeration Systems Design Handbook, 1st ed., Midwest Plan Service,
Ames, IA.
Maximum distance between the wall and end of the perforated duct, E, is 0.7 times the distance
between the outside duct and the sidewall (one half grain depth). The factor 0.7 is used for making
distances equal for an angle of repose of 25°, thus helping to preserve the airflow path ratio design.
Burrell (1974) and Foster and Tuite (1982, 1992) used a factor of 1.0. An analysis of grain volumes
served by the end of the duct indicates that a factor of 0.5 may be appropriate. The factor 0.7 is
used by Hellevang et al. (1997) in their design examples because this factor was judged most
appropriate.
Calculate the perforated duct length (PDL) using the following equation:
PDL = L – 2 ( E ) (5.23)
where:
PDL = Perforated duct length, ft or m
L = Building length, ft or m
E = Distance from end wall to perforated duct, ft or m
5.7.2.9 Calculate Duct Cross-Section Area
The minimum cross-section area (CSA) (m2) can be calculated by dividing airflow rate (Q)
(m3/min) by air velocity (V) (m/min) in the duct:
( )
CSA m 2 =
(
Q m3 min ) (5.24)
V ( m min)
Ducts should be large enough to carry the airflow without exceeding the maximum design air
velocity. High air velocities increase the fan power required. Size the CSA of aeration ducts in bins
for a maximum air velocity (V) (m/min) of 600 m/min (2000 fpm). Use reduced air velocity in ducts
placed in flat storage to improve the airflow uniformity. For further details, use Tables 5.4 and 5.5.
Example
Design the duct spacing layout pattern for a 30 m wide by 70 m long flat storage with a sidewall
grain depth of 8 m. This flat storage building contains 30 m × 70 m × 8 m = 16,800 m3 of grain
sorghum. Thus, the storage will hold 16,800 m3 × 0.75 tonne/m3 = 12,600 tonnes of sorghum.
Because of the relatively shallow, uneven grain depth and the fact that the site is near Browns-
ville, TX, 26° north latitude, 98° west longitude, in a coastal subtropic climate, a suction system
design airflow of 9 (m3/h)/tonne (0.15 cfm/bu) is selected. The total airflow needed is 12,600 tonnes
× 9 (m3/h)/tonne = 113,400 m3/h or 1890 m3/min (67,700 ft3/min).
Because of the building length and width, the ducts will be run in separate manifolds approx-
imately half the length of the building with blowers on each end. So the airflow for half of the
structure is 1890/2 = 945 m3/min, and each of the four ducts needs to handle 945/4 = 236 m3/min.
The CSA = Q/V = 236/600 = 0.393 m2. Since a half-round duct is used, the diameter is that of
a circular duct with an area of 0.393 × 2 = 0.786 m2. The area of a circle, Ac = 3.1416 D2/4 =
0.785 D2, then D2 = Ac/0.785, and D = (Ac/0.785)0.5. If Ac = 0.786, then D = (0.786/0.785)0.5 =
(1.00)0.5 = 1.00 m. So the half-round duct base width needed is 1.0 m; the duct height is 0.5 m.
5.7.2.10 Calculate Duct Surface Area
The maximum allowable velocity through the perforated surface should be 9 m/min (30 fpm).
Aeration ducts should have at least 10% of the surface area open (perforated). Perforations should
be as large as practical without allowing whole seeds or grain kernels to pass through. Perforations
of 2.0 to 2.4 mm (0.078 to 0.094 inch) diameter are an industry standard for wheat, maize, sorghum,
soybeans, and other cereal grains. For small seeds like flaxseed, canola, etc., perforations need to
be smaller; or a wire or cloth screen should be used over a duct with standard perforations.
For negative pressure systems, it is recommended to reduce this velocity to 6 m/min (20 fpm).
Duct surface area (SA) (m2) can be calculated using the following equation:
( )
SA m 2 =
(
Q m3 min ) (5.25)
V ( m min)
The surface area for a duct is the surface area per linear meter (linear foot) times the duct
length. About 80% of the total surface area of round ducts is considered usable when the duct sits
on the floor.
Example
For horizontal storages with shallow depth, long ducts, and suction aeration systems, the recom-
mended surface exit velocity is 6 m/min. The example given in the previous section with 30 m
wide by 70 m long flat storage is used. The distance from the perforated duct to the end wall is
3.75 – 0.5 = 3.25 m (11 ft). So the total perforated duct length is 70/2 – (3.25 × 2) = 35 – 6.5 =
28.5 m (93.5 ft).
From Equation 5.25:
(
SA = 236 m 3 min ) (6 m min) = 39.3 m 2
The surface area for the half-round duct is Ad = (3.14 D/2) × L = (3.14 × 1.0 m/2) × 28.5 m =
44.7 m2. Since this is slightly larger than the recommended 39.3 m2, it meets the guidelines. For
economic considerations the duct diameter may be slightly reduced.
Assuming uniform air discharge along the length of the duct, the average duct exit velocity is
(236 m3/min)/44.7 m2 = 5.3 m/min. This is lower than the suggested 6 m/min for suction systems,
which is acceptable.
Where perforated round ducts laid on the floor are used, it is recommended to reduce the duct
surface area to 80% to compensate for restriction caused by the floor. Therefore, the round duct
surface area (RDSA) is calculated as:
( )
RDSA ft 2 ft = (0.80 × ( D × π) × ft ) ft (5.26)
where D is the diameter in m or ft, and maximum air velocity through the perforated duct surface
is 9 m/min (30 ft/min).
Then, based on the airflow per duct (APD), the minimum perforated duct length (PDLmin) can
be determined:
APD
PDLmin = (5.27)
( RDSA)(30)
where:
PDLmin = Minimum perforated duct length, m or ft
RDSA = Surface area, m2/m (ft2/ft) length
APD = Airflow per duct, m3/min (ft3/min)
5.7.2.11 Determine Dimensions of the Supply Duct
Maximum air velocity in short supply ducts (5 to 7 m) should be maintained at 750 m/min
(2500 fpm). For long ducts, manifolds, and elbows, consult Figure 5.27 or Table 5.7.
Example
In the Brownsville, TX, flat storage warehouse, the length of the transition duct from the wall to
the perforated duct is 3.25 m inside and 1.5 m outside, including a wall thickness of 0.4 m (the
total length is 5.15 m). Each duct will handle 236 m3/min, so the supply duct area, As =
(236 m3/min)/(750 m/min) = 0.315 m2, or a supply duct of 0.63 m.
5.7.2.12 Size the Roof Vent Area
The velocity through the roof vents should not exceed 450 m/min (1500 ft/min), although
300 m/min (1000 ft/min) is preferred. The static pressure between the head-space of the storage
bin and the ambient should not exceed 30 Pa (one eighth inch water column), when the fan is
operated. The total cross-sectional area for the roof vents in the horizontal warehouse discussed
above is (1890 m3/min)/(300 m/min) = 6.3 m2.
5.7.3 Examples of Planning Aeration Systems
The examples given in this section are based on design procedures presented in Section 5.7.2
in a step-by-step process as described by Hellevang et al. (1997). To avoid confusion in using both
metric and U.S. units, the first two examples are in U.S. units and the third example is in metric units.
5.7.3.1 Example 1: Aeration System for a Cylindrical Bin in U.S. Units
Information on the system:
• Storage diameter (D): 30 ft

• Level Grain depth (h): 25 ft
• Grain type: wheat
• Design airflow rate: 0.20 cfm/bu
5.7.3.1.1 Step 1: Calculating the Storage Volume
The storage volume is calculated by using Equation 5.14:
2 2
Volume ft 3 = π ×   × h = 3.1416 ×   × 25 = 17, 672 ft 3
( ) D 30
 2  2
17, 672 ft 3 × 0.80 bu ft 3 = 14,138 bu
Calculate the total airflow required:
Total airflow = 14,138 bu × 0.2 cfm bu = 2,828 cfm
The estimated static pressure is determined using Figure 5.22:
for grain depth = 25 ft, static pressure = 3.5 inches of water
5.7.3.1.2 Step 2: Choosing a Fan
Choose a fan using fan manufacturers’ data such as in Table 5.8. From Table 5.8, for static
pressure = 3.5 in w.c., the 18-inch diameter, 3 hp axial fan, that delivers 2650 cfm at a static pressure
of 3 inches, does not deliver the capacity required at the design static pressure.
The 18-inch diameter, 3 hp in-line centrifugal fan, rated at 3000 cfm at 4 inch static pressure,
exceeds the design airflow by 6%, at a higher static pressure. This choice meets the aeration design
performance requirements. Design engineers should source vane-axial and centrifugal fans from
more than one supplier, unless one supplier covers the range of aeration airflow needs satisfactorily.
5.7.3.1.3 Step 3: Choosing the System Type
A perforated in-floor duct system will be designed. See Section 5.5.3.2 for design details of
alternative types of aeration floor ducts.
5.7.3.1.4 Step 4: Determining Duct Locations
Using the design criterion of 1.5:1 airflow path length ratio, the maximum allowable distance
between the wall and duct perforations is one half the grain depth, 12.5 ft. The minimum distance
between the perforated duct and the grain surface is the grain depth, 25 ft.
The distance from the wall to the beginning of the perforated duct is determined by centering
the perforated duct(s) in the bin (see Step 6).
5.7.3.1.5 Step 5: Calculating the Perforated Area
Determine the required perforated area using Equation 5.25:
(
Q ft 3 min ) = 2, 828 ft 3 min
( )
SA ft 2 =
V ( ft min) 30 ft min
= 94.3 ft 2
The layout of the duct system can now be determined based on the required perforated area of
94.3 ft2. A single duct will not meet the required 12.5 ft maximum distance between the wall and
the duct perforations because the bin radius is 15 ft. A parallel duct system with a manifold or
Y-shaped duct system could provide the required perforated area, meet the spacing criteria, and
use only a single fan. A Y-shaped duct system will be used in this example, Figure 5.7.
5.7.3.1.6 Step 6: Sizing the Ducts
Determine the perforated duct length and width to provide 94.3 ft2. Use a duct width of 2.5 ft,
a common width for perforated duct covers. The required length is calculated as 94.3 ft2/2.5 ft =
37.7 ft.
For the Y-shaped duct system, each leg would be half of the total length, 37.7 ft/2 = 18.8 ft.
The duct length is rounded to a whole number, 19 ft. The required distance from the wall to the
start of the perforated duct, Step 4, is determined by centering the perforated ducts in the bin, using
caution not to violate the 1.5:1 air path criteria in Step 4. (All points on the bin floor within 12.5ft
of the perforated duct.)
Determine the minimum duct cross-sectional area. Each leg will carry 1414 ft3/min, half of the
total required airflow. Using the maximum allowable duct air velocity of 2000 ft/min; A =
(1414 ft3/min)/(2000 ft/min) = 0.71ft2.
Using a duct width of 2.5 ft, the minimum duct depth = 0.71 ft2/2.5 ft = 0.28 ft ≈ 0.3 ft ≈ 4
inches. The dimensions of the two perforated ducts are 19 ft × 2.5 ft × 4 inches.
Determine the non-perforated supply duct cross-sectional area (CSA) to limit the maximum
allowable non-perforated supply duct air velocity to 2500 ft/min using Equation 5.24:
( )
CSA ft 2 =
(
Q ft 3 min ) = 2, 828 ft 3
min
= 1.1 ft 2
V ( ft min) 2, 500 ft min
The width is chosen to match the perforated duct width of 2.5 ft, and the minimum depth is
1.1 ft2/2.5 ft = 0.44 ft ≈ 6 inches.
The dimensions of the non-perforated supply duct are 2.5 ft × 6 inches.
To avoid errors during construction, the perforated and non-perforated supply ducts could have
the same depth. The non-perforated supply duct depth is greater and should be used. This reduces
the velocity in the perforated duct by increasing the cross-sectional area.
5.7.3.1.7 Step 7: Sizing the Roof Vent Area
The minimum roof vent area = (2828 ft3/min)/(1000 ft/min) = 2.8 ft2.
5.7.3.2 Example 2: Level-filled flat storage in U.S. units
• Grain depth (h): 11 ft

• Storage dimensions: 60 × 80 ft
• Grain type: Shelled Corn
• Design airflow rate: 0.10 cfm/bu
Because the building is 80 ft long, it is more economical to use lengthwise ducts. This is
temporary storage, so above-floor round ducts will be used.
5.7.3.2.1 Step 1: Calculating Duct Spacing
Using Equation 5.19, the number of ducts = building width/grain depth = 60 ft/11 ft = 5.5 ducts
(normally round the answer up to the next integer); so use 6 ducts. Using Equation 5.20, duct
spacing is 60 ft/6 = 10 ft. Using Equation 5.21, the distance from side wall to duct is 10 ft/2 = 5 ft.
Use Equation 5.22 to calculate the distance from end wall to the perforated duct (E): The
distance from end wall to the perforated duct = 0.7(5) = 3.5 ft.
Calculate the perforated duct length (PDL) using Equation 5.23:
PDL = L − 2 ( E )
i.e.:
PDL = 80 ft − (2(3.5 ft ))
= 73 ft
5.7.3.2.2 Step 2: Calculating the Storage Volume
Estimate the amount of grain in the storage, and the amount of grain served by each duct.
Total Storage Volume (TSV) = (length × width × grain depth) × 0.8 bu ft 3 ( )

= (80 ft × 60 ft × 11 ft ) × 0.80 = 42,240 bu
Volume of grain aerated by each duct is 42,240 ÷ 6 = 7040 bu.

5.7.3.2.3 Step 3: Calculating Airflow
Airflow per duct (APD) = airflow rate (AR) × amount of grain aerated per duct (GAD) =
0.10 cfm/bu × 7040 bu/duct = 704 cfm/duct.
Using depth of grain and design airflow, estimate the static pressure from Figure 5.23 as
0.5 inches of water.
5.7.3.2.4 Step 4: Choosing a Fan
Choose a fan based on fan performance data such as in Table 5.8.

An axial fan, 12 inch diameter, 0.5 hp, will provide 1500 cfm at a static pressure of 1 inch of
water. Each fan of this size can be connected to two ducts through a manifold.
5.7.3.2.5 Step 5: Choosing Ducts
Select the duct sizes from the information presented in Sections 5.1 and 5.7. To size the round
ducts, use the flow rate provided by the fan, i.e., 1500/2 = 750 (ft3/min)/duct.
The perforated duct area (DA) = airflow per duct (APD) duct velocity (DV)
(
= 750 ft 3 min ) (2000 ft min) = 0.38 ft 2
Which gives a duct diameter of 8.3 inches for a round duct. Because an 8.3-inch round duct is
not commonly available, use a 10-inch diameter duct.
Supply duct area = (1500 ft3/min)/(2500 ft/min) = 0.6 ft2, use a 12-inch round duct (0.79 ft2).
5.7.3.2.6 Step 6: Determining perforated duct length
Determine the minimum perforated duct length using the criterion for maximum velocity for
the perforated section of the ducts. It is recommended to reduce the duct surface area to 80% to
compensate for restriction caused by the floor when using round ducts. Therefore, using
Equation 5.26, the duct surface area per ft length (RDSA) is calculated as:
( )
RDSA ft 2 ft = (0.80 × ( D × π) × 1.0 ft ) ft = (0.80 × (1.0 ft × π) × 1.0 ft ft ) = 2.51 ft 2 ft (5.28)
where D is the diameter in ft and the maximum air velocity through the perforated duct surface is
30 ft/min.
Calculate the minimum Perforated Duct Length using:
APD 750 ft 3 min

PDLmin = = = 9.95 ft (5.29)
( )
( RDSA)(30) 2.51 ft 2 ft × 30 ft min
where:
PDLmin = Minimum perforated duct length, ft
RDSA = Surface area, ft2/ft length
APD = Airflow per duct, ft3/min
The minimum perforated duct length from Equation 5.27 is 10 ft. Note that the length for
perforated section calculated in Step 1, 73 ft, exceeds the design criterion.
Figure 5.28 Simple geometry of the values on duct distances and peak height of the bulk, less half duct
diameter.
5.7.3.2.7 Step 7: Calculating Total Airflow
Determine the total required airflow (RQ) as airflow per duct (APD) times number of ducts
(ND); i.e., RQ = 750 ft3/duct × 6 ducts = 4500 ft3/min.
5.7.3.2.8 Step 8: Calculating Roof Vent Area
The minimum roof vent area needed for the grain storage building = (4500 ft3/min)/(1000 ft/min) =
4.5 ft2.
5.7.3.3 Example 3: Peak-Filled Flat Storage in Metric Units
• Storage dimensions: 30 × 70 m
• Sidewall grain depth: 8 m
• Grain type: Sorghum
• Design airflow rate: 6 (m3/h)/tonne
Design the duct layout using half-round ducts having a diameter of 1 m — a base width of
1.0 m and a peak height of 0.5 m.
From Equation 5.19: number of ducts = 30/8 = 3.75 = 4 ducts.
From Equation 5.20: duct spacing = 30/4 = 7.5 m.
From Equation 5.21: distance from sidewall to the duct centerline = 7.5/2 = 3.75 m.
Lengthwise ducts will be used with the perforated metal starting at 4.0 m from the end wall
(half of the grain depth), and the centerline of the first duct placed 3.75 m from one building
sidewall. Then ducts 2, 3, and 4 are spaced 7.5 m apart across the building width, leaving 3.75 m
from the centerline of duct 4 to the far sidewall. Check that the air path length ratio does not exceed
1.5:1.
From duct 1, 3.75 m –0.5 m (half duct width) + 8 m = 11.25 m. Grain sorghum, with a surface
slope of 23°, is stored in the flat storage. The shortest distance to the sloped grain surface is a line
perpendicular to the grain surface through the center of duct 1 or duct 4 unless this line crosses
the sidewall. In this case, the shortest distance is the line between the center of the duct and the
corner where grain meets the sidewall. This distance is calculated based on the simple geometry
(Figure 5.28) of the values on duct distances and peak height of the bulk, less half duct diameter.
This configuration would result in a distance of 8.83 – 0.5 = 8.33 m. Thus, 11.25/8.33 = 1.35:1,
less than 1.5:1, which meets the design guideline.
The grain peak height at the center of the building is tan 23 × 15 m (half width) + sidewall
depth = 0.424 (15) + 8 = 6.37 + 8 = 14.37 m.
From duct 2, the longest path is 3.75 – 0.5 = 3.25 m to the center of the building, then 14.37 m
to the peak, or 17.62 m. The shortest distance from duct 2 to the grain surface is a line perpendicular
to the grain surface through the center of duct 2. This distance is calculated based on the simple
geometry (Figure 5.28) of the values on duct distances and peak height of the bulk, less half duct
diameter. This configuration would result in a distance of 11.76 – 0.5 = 11.26 m. Thus,
17.62/11.26 = 1.56:1, which slightly exceeds the 1.5:1 guideline; but since this is only an engi-
neering guideline, the design is acceptable.
Another consideration is that the static pressures on each duct vary based on how the air supply
is designed. If one fan supplies ducts 1 and 2, the airflow through duct 1 is greater than through
duct 2 by the ratio of the static pressure in each duct, which is based on the relative grain depth
for each duct.
The shortest distance to the surface of duct 2 is 11.26 m, compared to the perpendicular distance
from the grain surface to duct 1 of 8.33 m. This ratio is 11.26/8.33 = 1.352, so duct 1 has about
35% less static pressure than duct 2. Thus, one fan will deliver about 1.35/(1.0 + 1.35) = 1.35/2.35 =
0.574 or 57.4% of its airflow to duct 1, and 1.0/2.35 = 42.6% of its air to duct 2.
If each duct has a separate but equal capacity blower, fan 1 will deliver more airflow than fan
2 by about the same ratio.
REFERENCES
Agriculture Canada. (1990). Handling of Agricultural Materials: Storage and Conditioning of Grain and
Forage. Agriculture Canada, Ottawa.
Alagusundaram, K. and D.S. Jayas. (1990). Airflow resistance of grains and oilseeds, Postharvest News Inf.,
1, 279–283.
Alagusundaram, K., Jayas, D.S., Chotard, F., and White, N.D.G. (1992). Airflow pressure drop relationships
of some specialty seeds, Sciences des Aliments, 12, 101–116.
Alagusundaram, K., D.S. Jayas, O.H. Friesen, and N.D.G. White. (1989). A model to predict three-dimensional
air pressure patterns in grain beds. ASAE. Paper No. 89-4545, St. Joseph, MI.
Alagusundaram, K., D.S. Jayas, O.H. Friesen, and N.D.G. White. (1994). Airflow patterns through wheat,
barley, and canola in bins with partially perforated floors — an experimental investigation, Appl. Eng.
Agric., 10, 791–796.
ASAE (1997a). ASAE Standards 1997, Resistance to airflow of grains, seeds, other agricultural products, and
perforated metal sheets, Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., St. Joseph, MI.
ASAE (1997b). ASAE Standards 1997, Moisture relationships of grains, Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., St. Joseph, MI.
ASHRAE (1997). Fundamentals Handbook, Am. Soc. Heat. Refrig. Air. Cond. Eng. Inc., New York.
Barrowman, R. and D.S. Boyce. (1966). Air distribution from lateral ducts in barley, J. Agric. Eng. Res., 11,
243–247.
Boyce, D.S. and J.K. Davies. (1965). Air distribution from a lateral duct with different escape areas in barley,
J. Agric. Eng. Res., 10, 230–234.
Brooker, D.B. (1958). Lateral duct airflow patterns in grain drying bins, J. Agric. Eng. Res., 39, 348–351.
Brooker, D.B. (1961). Pressure patterns in grain drying systems established by numerical methods, Transac-
tions of the ASAE, 4, 72–74, 77.
Brooker, D.B. (1969). Computing air pressures and velocity distribution when air flows through a porous
medium and non-linear velocity pressure relationships exist, Transactions of the ASAE, 12, 118–120.
Brooker, D.B., F.W. Bakker-Arkema, and C.W. Hall. (1974). Drying cereal grains, AVI Publishing, Westport,
CT.
Burrell, N.J. (1974). Aeration, pp. 407–441, Storage of Cereal Grains and their Products, 2nd ed. (C.M.
Christensen, Ed.), Am. Assoc. Cereal Chem., St. Paul, MN.
Burrell, N.J., E.A. Smith, and D.M. Armitage. (1982). Air distribution from ventilation ducts under grain, J.
Agric. Eng. Res., 27, 337–354.
Collins, T. (1953). Flow patterns of air through grain during drying, Agric. Eng., 34, 759–760, 768.
Fick, R.J., R.V. Morey, and H.A. Cloud. (1990). Airflow distribution from corrugated aeration ducts, Trans-
actions of the ASAE, 33, 1319–1326.
Foster, G.H. (1982). Drying cereal grains, pp 79–116, in Storage of Cereal Grains and their Products, 3rd
ed. (C.M. Christensen, Ed.), Am. Assoc. Cereal Chem., St. Paul, MN.
Foster, G.H. and J. Tuite. (1992). Aeration and stored grain management, pp. 219–247, in Storage of Cereal
Grains and their Products, 4th ed. (D.B. Sauer, Ed.), Am. Assoc. Cereal Chem., St. Paul, MN.
Foster, G.H. and J. Tuite. (1982). Aeration and stored grain management, pp. 117–143, in Storage of Cereal
Grains and their Products, 3rd ed. (C.M. Christensen, Ed.), Am. Assoc. Cereal Chem., St. Paul, MN.
Friesen, O.H. and D.N. Huminicki. (1986). Evaluation of grain airflow resistance characteristics and air delivery
systems, Can. Agric. Eng., 28, 107–115.
Friesen, O.H. and D.N. Huminicki. (1987). Grain aeration and unheated air drying, Manitoba Agriculture,
Winnipeg, MB.
Haque, E., D.S. Chung, and G.H. Foster. (1981). Pressure and velocity field in airflow through packed bed of
corn mixed with fines under non-Darcy flow conditions, Transactions of the ASAE, 24, 1594–1599,
1604.
Hellevang, K., Backer, L., Brook, R., Harner, J., Jones, D., Maier, D., Peterson, B., and Wilcke, W. (1997).
Dry Grain Aeration Systems Design Handbook, 1st ed., MidWest Plan Service, Ames, IA.
Henderson, S.M. (1958). Air pressure requirements for tunnel-system deep-bed grain dryers, Trans. of the
ASAE, 1, 9–11.
Holman, L.E. (1960). Aeration of grain in commercial storages, Marketing Research Report No. 178, Agri-
cultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Hukill, W.V. (1954). Grain drying with unheated air, Agric. Eng., 35, 393–395, 405.
Hukill, W.V. and C.K. Shedd. (1955). Non-linear airflow in grain drying, Agric. Eng., 36, 462–466.
Hukill, W.V. and N.C. Ives. (1955). Radial airflow resistance of grain, Agric. Eng., 36, 332–335.
Hunter, A.J. (1983). Pressure difference across an aerated seed bulk for some common duct and store cross-
sections, J. Agric. Eng. Res., 28, 437–450.
Incropera, F.P. and D.P. DeWitt. (1990). Fundamentals of heat and mass transfer, 3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons,
New York.
Jayas, D.S. and S. Cenkowski. (2001). Grain property values and their measurement, in Handbook of Agri-
cultural Crop Drying and Storage, (F.W. Bakker-Arkema and D.E. Maier, Eds.), Marcel Dekker, New
York.
Jayas, D.S. and S. Sokhansanj. (1989). Design data on resistance of airflow through canola (rapeseed),
Transactions of the ASAE, 32, 295–296.
Jayas, D.S., K. Alagusundaram, and D.A. Irvine. (1991). Resistance to airflow through bulk flax seed as affected
by the moisture content, direction of airflow, and foreign material, Can. Agric. Eng., 33, 279–285.
Jayas, D.S., S. Sokhansanj, E.B. Moysey, and E.M. Barber. (1990). Predicting pressure patterns in canola
bins, Can. Agric. Eng., 32, 249–254.
Jindal, V.K. and T.L. Thompson. (1972). Air pressure patterns and flow paths in two-dimensional triangular
shaped piles of sorghum using forced convection, Transactions of the ASAE, 15, 737–741.
Khompis, V., L.J. Segerlind, and R.C. Brook. (1984). Pressure patterns in cylindrical grain storages, ASAE,
St. Joseph, MI.
Lai, F.S. (1980). Three-dimensional flow of air through nonuniform grain beds, Transactions of the ASAE,
23, 729–734.
Loewer, O.J., T.C. Bridges, and R.A. Bucklin. (1994). On-farm drying and storage systems, ASAE, St. Joseph,
MI.
Manitoba Agriculture. (1987). Transitions for delivering air to grain bins, Manitoba Agriculture, Winnipeg, MB.
Marchant, J.A. (1976). The prediction of airflows in crop drying systems by the finite element method, J.
Agric. Eng. Res., 21, 417–429.
Marchant, J.A. and M.E. Nellist. (1977). Air pressure and flow in ducted crop systems. 1. Single ducts, J.
Agric. Eng. Res., 22, 303–310.
Metzger, J.F. and W.E. Muir. (1983). Computer model of two-dimensional conduction and forced convection
in stored grain, Can. Agric. Eng., 25, 119–125.
Metzger, J.F., P.D. Terry, and W.E. Muir. (1981). Performance of several axial-flow fans for grain bin
ventilation, Can. Agric. Eng., 23, 11–16.
Miketinac, M.J. and S. Sokhansanj. (1985). Ventilation-pressure distribution in grain bins — Brooker’s model,
Int. J. for Num. Methods in Eng., 21, 1067–1075.
Miketinac, M.J., S. Sokhansanj, and D.S. Jayas. (1986). Graphical analysis of airflow distribution in grain
bins using finite element method, Can. Agric. Eng., 28, 23–30.
Moody, L.F. (1944). Friction factors for pipe flow, Transactions of the ASME, 66, 671–684.
Morey, R.V., H.A. Cloud, R.J. Gustafson, and D.W. Peterson. (1979). Evaluation of the feasibility of solar
energy grain drying, Transactions of the ASAE, 22, 409–417.
Navarro, S. and Calderon, M. (1982). Aeration of Grain in Subtropical Climates. FAO Agricultural Services
Bulletin No. 52, Rome.
Pabis, S., D.S. Jayas, and S. Cenkowski. (1998). Grain Drying: Theory and Practice, John Wiley & Sons,
New York.
Pierce, R.O. and T.L. Thompson. (1975). Airflow patterns in conical-shaped piles of grain, Transactions of
the ASAE, 18, 946–934, 938.
Segerlind, L.J. (1976). Applied Finite Element Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Segerlind, L.J. (1982). Solving the nonlinear airflow equation, Paper No. 82–3017, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI.
Segerlind, L.J. (1984). Applied Finite Element Analysis, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Segerlind. L.J. (1983). Presenting velocity-pressure gradient data for use in mathematical models, Transactions
of the ASAE, 26, 1245–1248.
Sharp, J.R. (1982). A review of low temperature drying simulation, J. Agric. Eng. Res., 27, 169–190.
Shedd, C.K. (1953). Resistance of grains and seeds to airflow, Agric. Eng., 34, 616–619.
Singh, R.P. and D.R. Heldman. (1984). Introduction to Food Engineering, Academic Press, New York.
Smith, E.A. (1982). Three-dimensional analysis of air velocity and pressure in beds of grain and hay, J. Agric.
Eng. Res., 27, 101–117.
Smith, G.D. (1985). Numerical Solution of Partial Differential Equations: Finite Difference Method, 3rd ed.,
Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Smith, L.L. (1975). Aeration of cottonseed in storage, Agric. Res. Serv. Marketing Res. Rep. No. 1020, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Spencer, H.B. (1969). Pressure drop in on-floor-duct drying systems, J. Agric. Eng. Res., 14, 165–172.
Sukup. (1994). Sukup Centrifugal Fans-Heaters, Drying or Aeration, 21101-94G, Sukup Manufacturing Com-
pany, P.O. Box 677, Sheffield, IA 50475.
Williamson, W.F. (1965). Pressure losses and drying rates in grain ventilated with various on-floor duct systems,
J. Agric. Eng. Res., 10, 271–276.

Mục 5.5 đến Mục 5.7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mục 5.5 đến Mục 5.7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mục 5.5 đến Mục 5.7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1355Ch05Frame Page 217 Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:20 PM

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 217

5.4.3.3 Finite Element Models

5.5 DESIGN OF AERATION SYSTEMS

5.5.1 Design Criteria

5.5.2 Fan Characteristics

218 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 219

5.5.2.1 Fan Sound Levels

5.5.2.2 Fan Efficiency

220 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

5.5.2.3 Fan Power Requirement and Temperature Rise

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 221

5.5.3 Design of Aeration Ducts

5.5.3.1 Air Velocity in Supply and Aeration Ducts

5.5.3.2 Design of Aeration Duct Systems

5.5.4 Design of Long-Perforated Ducts and Manifolds

222 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

5.5.5 Computerized Aeration System Models

Computerized models can be classified into two groups:

5.6 PLANNING AN AERATION SYSTEM

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 223

5.7 PRACTICAL AERATION SYSTEM DESIGNS AND PROCEDURES

5.7.1 Aeration System Design Recommendations

5.7.1.1 Airflow Rates

5.7.1.2 Air Velocities in Ducts

224 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

5.7.1.3 Air Distribution Systems

5.7.1.4 Intakes and Exhaust

5.7.2 Aeration System Design Procedures and Examples

The following procedure is recommended for aeration system design.

5.7.2.1 Calculate the Amount of Grain to be Aerated

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 225

where D = diameter, and h = height. In the U.S. storage system,

To obtain capacity in bu:

Capacity in bu = TSV × (0.8 bu/ft3)

5.7.2.3 Estimate Static Pressure Requirements

226 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 227

228 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

Basic aeration system (Figure 5.17) 814

5.7.2.4 Estimate Fan Power Requirements

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 229

where Fan static efficiency is given in decimal.

Adjusted kW 100 tonnes

230 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 231

5.7.2.5 Choose the Aeration Fan

232 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

5.7.2.6 Choose the Aeration System Type

Basic considerations in choosing the air distribution system are:

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 233

Building width or bin diameter ( m)

234 THE MECHANICS AND PHYSICS OF MODERN GRAIN AERATION MANAGEMENT

Building width or bin diameter ( m)

Number of ducts = 30/8 = 3.75 ≈ 4 ducts

AERATION SYSTEMS DESIGN 235

Table 5.4 Recommended Maximum Allowable Air Velocities (m/min)

Airflow Rate Corn and Soybeans Wheat and Sorghum

From Equation 5.20: