Modelling Indoor Environmental Conditions in a Commercial Broiler House

Abstract

Turkey’s poultry industry has experienced significant growth in recent years, resulting in the construction of many new production facilities. It is important to maintain optimum environmental conditions for a profitable production. In this study, temperature, relative humidity and air velocity distribution inside a broiler house were analysed. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations (numerical method) and direct measurements (experimental method) were used to determine the appropriate indoor environmental conditions. Simulated values were validated by comparison with the measured values using the normalised mean square error (NMSE). The measured and predicted parameters of temperature, relative humidity and air velocity at birds’ height, human height, and roof height upon comparison gave average NMSE values of 0.139, 0.181 and 0.090, respectively. The results showed a good agreement between simulated and measured values as obtained NMSE values were less than 0.25. In conclusion, CFD simulation can be used as an alternative method for the analysis of poultry house indoor environment. A better understanding of indoor environment conditions in poultry house provides useful information for manufacturers and end users for better management decisions.

Keywords

• Broiler house; CFD modelling; Temperature; Relative humidity; Air velocity

References

1. ASHRAE (2009). Fundamentals, SI ed. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers. Atlanta, GA, USA
2. ASTM (2002). Guide for statistical evaluation of indoor air quality models. In ASTM Standards on Indoor Air Quality, West Conshohocken.
3. Awbi H B (2003). Ventilation Systems, Design and Performance. Taylor & Francis, London and New York.
4. Bates P D, Lane S N & Ferguson R I (2005) Computational fluid dynamics. Applications in Environmental Hydraulics. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, West Sussex.
5. Blanes-Vidal V, Guijarro E, Balasch S, Torres A (2008). Application of computational fluid dynamics to the prediction of airflow in a mechanically ventilated commercial poultry building. Biosystems Engineering 100(1):105-116.
6. Bustamante E, García Diego F J, Calvet S, Estellés F, Beltrán P, Hospitaler A & Torres A G (2013). Exploring ventilation efficiency in poultry buildings: The validation of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) in a cross-mechanically ventilated broiler farm. Energies 6(5):2605-2623.
7. Bustamante E, García Diego F J, Calvet S, Torres A G & Hospitaler A (2015). Measurement and numerical simulation of air velocity in a tunnel-ventilated broiler house. Sustainability 7(2):2066-2085.
8. Czarick M & Fairchild B (2012) Relative humidity... the best measure of overall poultry house air quality. Poultry Housing Tips, February.

9. Deep A, Schwean Lardner K, Crowe T, Fancher B, & Classen H (2010). Effect of light intensity on broiler production, processing characteristics, and welfare. Poultry Science 89(11):2326-2333.
10. Dozier W, Lott B & Branton S (2005) Growth responses of male broilers subjected to increasing air velocities at high ambient temperatures and a high dew point. Poultry Science 84(6):962-966.
11. Eymard R, Gallouët T & Herbin R (2000). Finite volume methods. Handbook of Numerical Analysis 7:713-1018.
12. Ferziger J H & Peric M. (2012). Computational methods for fluid dynamics. Springer Science & Business Media.
13. Furlan R L, Macari M, Secato E, Guerreiro J & Malheiros E (2000). Air velocity and exposure time to ventilation affect body surface and rectal temperature of broiler chickens. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 9(1):1-5.
14. Gao Y, Ramirez B C & Hoff S J (2016) Omnidirectional thermal anemometer for low airspeed and multi-point measurement applications. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 127:439-450.
15. Launder B E & Spalding D (1974). The numerical computation of turbulent flows. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 3(2):269-289.
16. Leeson S & Summers J D (2010). Broiler breeder production. Nottingham University Press, Ontario.
17. Lindley J A & Whitaker J H (1996) Agricultural buildings and structures. American Society of Agricultural Engineers (ASAE).
18. Reece F & Lott B (1982). Heat and moisture production of broiler chickens during brooding. Poultry Science 61(4):661-666.
19. Rojano F, Bournet P E, Hassouna M, Robin P, Kacira M & Choi C Y (2015). Modelling heat and mass transfer of a broiler house using computational fluid dynamics. Biosystems Engineering 136:25-38.
20. Ruiz M E, Vicente S P & Ruiz F R (2010). Statistical inference: Hypothesis testing. Allergologia et Immunopathologia 38(5):266-277.
21. Saraz J A O, Martins M A, Marin O L Z, Damasceno F A & Velasquez H J C (2012). A review about the use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) in broiler house. Dyna-Colombia 79(175):142-149.
22. Song D & King A (2015). Effects of heat stress on broiler meat quality. World's Poultry Science Journal 71(04):701-709.
23. USDA 2016. Livestocks and poultry: World markets and trade, United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign agricultural service. In: F. A. S. United States Department of Agriculture (ed.), Washington, DC, USA.
24. Versteeg H K & Malalasekera W (2007). An introduction to computational fluid dynamics: the finite volume method. Pearson Education.
25. Vizzier Thaxton Y, Christensen K D, Mench J A, Rumley E R, Daugherty, C., Feinberg, B., ... & Scanes C G (2016). Symposium: Animal welfare challenges for today and tomorrow. Poultry science, 95(9), 2198-2207.
26. Wheeler E F & Botcher R (1995). Evaluating Mechanical Ventilation Systems, Evaluating Livestock Housing Environments. G-82 Fact Sheet. Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, University Park, Pa
27. Xin H, Berry I L, Tabler G T & Barton T L (1994). Temperature and humidity profiles of broiler houses with experimental conventional and tunnel ventilation systems. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 10(4):535-542.
28. Xiong Y, Meng Q S, Gao J, Tang X F & Zhang H F (2017). Effects of relative humidity on animal health and welfare. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 16(8):1653-1658.