Dispersion of Gas Pollutant in a Fan-Filter-Unit (FFU) Cleanroom
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ARTICLE IN PRESS Building and Environment 42 (2007) 1902–1912 www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv Dispersion of gas pollutant in a fan-filter-unit (FFU) cleanroom Sheng-Chieh Chena, Chuen-Jinn Tsaia,Ã, Shou-Nan Lib, Hui-Ya Shihb aInstitute of Environmental Engineering, National Chiao Tung University, No. 75 Poai St., Hsin Chu, Taiwan, ROC bCenter for Environmental, Safety and Health Technology, Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI), Hsinchu, Taiwan, ROC Received 7 July 2005; received in revised form 18 October 2005; accepted 28 February 2006 Abstract Numerical simulation and experimental measurement of flow and concentration fields in a working fan-filter-unit (FFU) cleanroom have been conducted in this study. The purpose of the study is to find out the unsteady concentration distribution of a leaking gas pollutant. The standard K–e model was used for the simulation of the flow field. To obtain the gas concentration field, SF6 gas with a certain concentration was released as a simulated leaking source from a valve manifold box (VMB) for 5 or 10 min, respectively. Three Fourier transform infrared spectrometers (FTIRs) were simultaneously used to measure the spatial and temporal distributions of SF6 concentrations. The measured data were then compared with the numerical results and the agreement is seen to be quite good. From the numerical results, the pollutant hot spots, peak pollutant concentration at the end of leaking, and time taken for the concentration to reduce to near background level are obtained. r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Standard K–e Model; Pollutant dispersion; Working cleanroom 1. Introduction which has many existing process tools, partitions, ducts, exhaust gas abatement systems, workers, etc. Numerous numerical and experimental studies on the To further understand the gas dispersion patterns inside flow field and pollutant dispersion in cleanrooms have been a working cleanroom, in this study, a SF6 flow of conducted. For example, Murakami et al. [1] found that 10,000 ppm was continuously released for 5 or 10 min turbulence is produced by physical obstructions in the around a valve manifold box (VMB) and its concentration cleanroom. Ljungqvist [2] pointed out that even at a low variations were measured by three FTIRs. The on-site speed of 0.2 m/s, turbulence is still produced in the measurement data were then applied to compare with the cleanroom and plays an important role in the diffusion of numerical simulation results calculated by the standard K–e gases and particles. Thus, turbulence models should be model, which latter was used to estimate the spatial and applied to calculate the flow field of the cleanroom. Among temporal SF6 concentration distributions inside the clean- various turbulent models, the standard K–e two-equation room and to locate the potential hot spots of high SF6 model is the most widely used one, such as in [1,3–12]. concentrations. Besides, Rouand and Havet [9] compared the Renormali- zation Group (RNG) K–e model with the standard K–e model and found that both models can predict the main 2. Experimental method features of the flow well. However, these researchers merely used simplified or pilot-scale cleanrooms to conduct their The experiments were conducted in the furnace area studies. Very few numerical studies investigate the airflow (width 30 m  height 16 m  length 32 m) of a class 1, FFU and pollutant dispersion in an actual working cleanroom, type, semiconductor-manufacturing cleanroom, which is located in Hsin-Chu, Taiwan. Figs. 1(a) and (b) show the 2- D and 3-D schematic diagrams of the three-floor clean- ÃCorresponding author. Tel.: +886 3 5731880; fax: +886 3 5727835. room, respectively, where the positions of the inlets, E-mail address: [email protected] (C.-J. Tsai). outlets, FFUs, and SF6 leaking points are indicated. The 0360-1323/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.02.023 ARTICLE IN PRESS S.-C. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 42 (2007) 1902–1912 1903 Nomenclature a, b empirical coefficient DP airflow resistances (N/m2) C Courant number Dt iteration time step (s) 2 3 Cm, Ce1, Ce2 turbulence constants e turbulence energy dissipation rate (m /s ) 2 Fs diffusion flux component m dynamic viscosity (N s/m ) 2 2 2 k turbulent kinetic energy (m /s ) mt turbulent dynamic viscosity (N s/m ) 2 l turbulent mixing length (m) meff m+mt (N s/m ) ‘ characteristic dimension (m) r density (kg/m3) ms mass fraction of the species (%) sk, se turbulence constants 2 2 p static pressure (N/m ) tij stress tensor components (N/m ) u fluid velocity (m/s) Vn superficial velocity normal to the surface of Subscripts porous media i, j, k index of Cartesian components jV~j a characteristic velocity (m/s) s species x, y, z Cartesian coordinates (m) c 1, 2, 3 for x, y, z directions, respectively first floor is the sub-Fab area, the second is the Fab area, zones, machines, partitions, two SF6 leak points, and and the third is the supply air plenum. The airflow is moved doors. The top of the figure is adjacent to the central by the FFUs, which are located at the ceiling of the Fab. corridor while the bottom is adjacent to the recirculation For the working zones, 100% of the area is covered by the duct. There are 695 FFUs on the ceiling of the Fab. For FFUs; for the machine maintenance zones, only 60% is convenience, these FFUs were grouped into 16 square covered by the FFUs. regions in our study. The FFUs in the working zones have Fig. 2 shows the floor plan of the Fab area in the smaller flow rate than that in the maintenance zones. The cleanroom, which includes working zones, maintenance gas velocity at 0.3 m below the FFUs was measured by Fig. 1. (a) 2-D schematic diagram and airflow pattern in the FFU type cleanroom (width 30 m  height 16 m) (length is 32 m); (b) 3-D schematic diagram of the positions of the inlets, outlets, 16 FFUs, and the SF6 emission points. ARTICLE IN PRESS 1904 S.-C. Chen et al. / Building and Environment 42 (2007) 1902–1912 9 6 8 1 5 1 2 6 2 7 4 3 5 4 Leaking Leaking point 1 point 2 3 Fig. 3. Monitoring locations of SF6 in the cleanroom: (n) leaking point 1, and (&) leaking point 2. Fig. 2. The floor plan of the cleanroom, Fab area at the second floor. WZ: rate through each door was then determined. According to working zone, MZ: maintenance zone, and ( ): Machines (top of the the experimental data, the recirculation and make-up air figure: adjacent to the central corridor, bottom of the figure: adjacent to 3 the recirculation duct). flow rates are about 900,000 and 85,000 CMH (m /h), respectively. Table 1 Two SF6 leaking locations adjacent to the VMBs in the Fab Two different SF releasing locations, concentrations and durations 6 are shown in Fig 2.ASF6 flow of 10,000 ppm at 10 L/min was released horizontally into the Fab from point 1 or Flow rate Concentration Releasing (leaking) 00 (L/min) (ppm) time (min) point 2 via a 1/4 Teflon tube for 10 or 5 min, as summarized in Table 1. Three FTIR spectrometers (Model Leaking point 1 10 10,000 10 Work IR-104, ABB Bomem Inc., Quebec, Canada) with a Leaking point 2 10 10,000 5 detection limit of 10 ppb were located at three monitoring locations (10 cm above the perforated floor) to continu- using a TSI Model 8330 anemometer (TSI, Inc., St. Paul, ously measure the SF6 concentrations for 50 min. SF6 MN, USA). The flow within 0.6–1 m below the FFU is concentration is recorded every 5 s by the FTIRs. As shown unidirectional and perpendicular to the FFU when there is in Fig. 3, for leaking point 1, nine locations (indicated as no obstruction underneath [12]. In this study, gas velocities triangle symbols) were tested to obtain the SF6 concentra- were measured at 0.3 m below 10 different FFUs in each of tion variations; for leaking point 2, six locations (indicated the 16 regions. The averages of the 10 values were used to as square symbols) were tested. To cover all monitoring calculate the flow rate of each region by multiplying the locations, the three FTIRs were moved to three different area of the region and the percentage of area covered of the locations to repeat the same experiment. The experiment FFUs. The flow rates were used as the source momentums was repeated three times for each monitoring location. in the numerical simulation. In a typical cleanroom flow, the make-up air is needed to 3. Numerical method maintain the air freshness in the cleanroom. For the cleanroom used in this study, the make-up air comes from Steady state, incompressible flow is assumed in this the doors in the Fab (second floor) and the sub-Fab (first study. The governing equations are the continuity and the floor) areas. The original make-up air located in the sub- Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations expressed as Fab does not function as initially planned because of air follows [13]: flow imbalance at different zones of the plant. On the other q hand, the used air flow is exhausted directly through some ðrujÞ¼0, (1) doors and via two exhaust ducts connecting the equipments qxj in the Fab and sub-Fab. The air flow rate through the q qp exhaust ducts and doors were measured by the techniques ðru u À t Þ¼ , (2) qx j i ij qx similar to those used in the FFUs.