0
Research Papers

Measurement of Air Flow Rate Through Perforated Floor Tiles in a Raised Floor Data Center

[+] Author and Article Information
Vaibhav K. Arghode

George W. Woodruff School of
Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332
e-mail: vaibhav.arghode@gmail.com

Taegyu Kang, Yogendra Joshi

George W. Woodruff School of
Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332

Wally Phelps, Murray Michaels

Degree Controls Inc.,
Milford, NH 03055

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Electronic and Photonic Packaging Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ELECTRONIC PACKAGING. Manuscript received October 16, 2015; final manuscript received November 16, 2016; published online January 10, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Pradip Dutta.

J. Electron. Packag 139(1), 011007 (Jan 10, 2017) (8 pages) Paper No: EP-15-1115; doi: 10.1115/1.4035596 History: Received October 16, 2015; Revised November 16, 2016

In a raised floor data center, cold air from a pressurized subfloor plenum reaches the data center room space through perforated floor tiles. Presently, commercial tool “Flow Hood” is used to measure the tile air flow rate. Here, we will discuss the operating principle and the shortcomings of the commercial tool and introduce two other tile air flow rate measurement tools. The first tool has an array of thermal anemometers (named as “Anemometric Tool”), and the second tool uses the principle of temperature rise across a known heat load to measure the tile air flow rate (named as “Calorimetric Tool”). The performance of the tools is discussed for different types of tiles for a wide range of tile air flow rates. It is found that the proposed tools result in lower uncertainty and work better for high porosity tiles, as compared to the commercial tool.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Test setup at the Data Center Laboratory, Georgia Institute of Technology: (a) Representation of the Data Center Laboratory at Georgia-Tech and (b) test setup (all racks are powered off)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Different tiles investigated

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Commercial tile air flow rate measurement tool Flow Hood: (a) Photograph of the Flow Hood and (b) schematic of the Flow Hood

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Operating principle for Flow Hood: (a) Representation of air flow system for three different flow resistances. Knowns: Qt&o (displayed), Qt&c (not displayed), Ko (9.5 [17]), Kc (19.9 (Appendix)). Unknowns: Qt (displayed), (Pp − Pm), Kt; (b) formulation of the air flow system for three different flow resistances; and (c) variables associated with the tile air flow rate measurement system.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Tool resistance compensation required for the commercial tool. Ko taken from Ref. [17]. (a) Tool resistance compensation variation (Ko measured in Ref. [17]) and (b) tile pressure loss factor versus tile porosity [18].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Tool resistance compensation sensitivity with measured flow ratio: (a) Measured flow ratio variation and (b) tool resistance compensation versus measured flow ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Anemometric tile air flow rate measurement tool: (a) Photograph of the Anemometric Tool and (b) schematic of the Anemometric Tool

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Tool resistance compensation required for Anemometric Tool

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Experimental evaluation of the Anemometric Tool: (a) Measured tile air flow rates and (b) measurement uncertainty

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Air flow rate measurement for high porosity tile: (a) Measured tile air flow rates and (b) uncertainty for high porosity tile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Experimental evaluation of the Anemometric Tool: (a) Photograph of the Calorimetric Tool and (b) schematic of the Calorimetric Tool

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Tool resistance compensation for the Calorimetric Tool

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Experimental evaluation of the Calorimetric Tool: (a) Measured tile air flow rates and (b) uncertainty estimation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Estimation of Kc (Qt&c and Qt&o were measured using the Anemometric Tool, Ko = 9.5 [17] and Kt = 24.7 [17]): (a) Setup to estimate Kc and (b) formula to obtain Kc

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