Two materials heated in vacuum

In summary, the problem at hand involves two joined disks of different areas and thicknesses being placed under a radiation heater in vacuum. The top disk is heated with a constant power and heat is only lost through radiation. The questions to be considered are: 1) Is there a temperature gradient in either of the materials? and 2) What is the steady-state temperature of the bottom disk/bottom surface? The solution involves treating radiation and absorption separately, considering the thickness and thermal conductivity of the disks, and assuming mirror sides in the tube containing them. The amount of energy absorbed by each disk can be determined using "ray tracing" and assuming a point source for the heater. The question of whether the amount of energy emitted by the radiation heater
  • #1
cc94
19
2

Homework Statement


This isn't a homework question but something I'm working on that I thought should be simple. Two disks (area ##A## and thickness ##d##) are joined together and placed under a radiation heater in vacuum, so that one side of the top disk is heated with a constant power. Assume heat is only lost out of the two-disk system by radiation. 1. Is there a temperature gradient in either of the materials? 2. What is the steady-state temperature of the bottom disk/bottom surface?

Homework Equations


For conduction between the two materials, I found this equation on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_contact_conductance#Thermal_boundary_conductance.

For radiation, we have the Stefan-Boltzmann law,

[tex] P = \epsilon\sigma AT^4 [/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm not sure what all I'm supposed to consider between these two bodies. My thinking is, first, we have some amount of heat ##Q_{in}## coming in. The top disk absorbs this as

[tex]Q_{abs} = \epsilon_{top} Q_{in}[/tex]

Now here's where I was confused. I know the top disk emits radiation out of the top face, but do I also include radiation emitted from the back face in contact with the bottom disk? Or does the conduction from Fourier's law actually include the fact that the disk is radiating? If we don't include a radiation term, then we have two equations for the top and bottom disks:

[tex]\epsilon_{top} Q_{in} = \epsilon_{top}\sigma AT_{top}^4 + \frac{T_{top}-T_{bot}}{d/(k_{top}A) + 1/(hA) + d/(k_{bot}A)}[/tex]
[tex]\frac{T_{top}-T_{bot}}{d/(k_{top}A) + 1/(hA) + d/(k_{bot}A)} = \epsilon_{bot}\sigma AT_{bot}^4[/tex]

where ##k## is the thermal conductivity and ##1/h## is the thermal contact resistance. If we include radiation, I should just add those terms to each equation. But then I have two more unknowns since I think there's 2 different temperatures at the interface between the disks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Treat radiation and absorption separately. If the disks have a finite thickness then there will be a separate question of their thermal conductivity and each side will have a different temperature. If so then at equilibrium the temperature will vary linearly between the surface temps with a slope inversely proportional to the conductivity. If you want to assume a high thermal conductivity and thin disks you can assume the temperature of both sides is constant.

The trick to determining the amount of energy absorbed by each disk is to do "ray tracing" of sorts. Start with your flat surface at temperature T within a large sphere also at temperature T. Then the amount of heat absorbed by the surface must equal the amount radiated since it must be at equilibrium since the temperatures are the same. Since this does not depend on the radius of the sphere it must only depend on the amount of spherical angle the surface sees which is one hemisphere (its sky) or [itex]2\pi[/itex] steradians.

You can then infer that the amount of energy absorbed by a surface from a distant thermal source is the amount of energy it would emit at that temperature times the proportion of the total hemisphere the surface sees as having that temperature. If the source object is close so that different points on the surface see different spherical angles then you will have to integrate an energy absorption density across the surface.

However as I re-read your post it would seem to me that your intent is that the disks be quite close together and wide relative to their thickness. You can treat that case and further simplify by assuming mirror sides in the tube containing them, and then the problem becomes 1-dimensional. For infinite thermal conductivity of the disks they will heat up until both are the same temperature all are radiating the same amount of energy out of each side, that being (for each side) the total energy coming from the heater. With finite thermal conductivity there will be a temperature drop within the disks but each face will have equal temperature to that of the one it faces across the vacuum... since with my added side mirrors each sees the other as covering the entire "sky".

There is also a slight potential for ambiguity in this question because one could interpret the "amount of energy emitted by the radiation heater" two ways. If it is emitting heat it can also absorb it and thence re-radiate it. Here configuration will become important. If you assume a point source then the question arises as to what happens to the heat emitted by the disk facing the heater. Is it reflected back or absorbed by an external heat sink. If the heater is not a point source then it will absorb energy from the disk it heats and the question is how do you figure the amount of energy emitted. Is it Net? or Gross? It is easy enough to resolve. One just has to be a wee bit more specific in describing how the heater is configured. I would suggest for example allowing it to be a similar disk which is heated to a temperature so that is face emits the specified energy as given by the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

To clarify on this last point, if you had a heater inside a mirrored sphere evacuated to vacuum, if you pump in 1 watt of energy then the heater will continue to increase in temperature (no way for it to leave the sphere) emitting a higher and higher gross amount of energy as the temperature goes up. But the net radiated energy will still be 1 watt, the 1 watt more than it absorbs due to the external input. The gross goes up because all the energy radiated earlier is returning to be reabsorbed.
 
  • #3
cc94 said:

Homework Statement


This isn't a homework question but something I'm working on that I thought should be simple. Two disks (area ##A## and thickness ##d##) are joined together and placed under a radiation heater in vacuum, so that one side of the top disk is heated with a constant power. Assume heat is only lost out of the two-disk system by radiation. 1. Is there a temperature gradient in either of the materials? 2. What is the steady-state temperature of the bottom disk/bottom surface?

Homework Equations


For conduction between the two materials, I found this equation on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_contact_conductance#Thermal_boundary_conductance.

For radiation, we have the Stefan-Boltzmann law,

[tex] P = \epsilon\sigma AT^4 [/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm not sure what all I'm supposed to consider between these two bodies. My thinking is, first, we have some amount of heat ##Q_{in}## coming in. The top disk absorbs this as

[tex]Q_{abs} = \epsilon_{top} Q_{in}[/tex]

Now here's where I was confused. I know the top disk emits radiation out of the top face, but do I also include radiation emitted from the back face in contact with the bottom disk? Or does the conduction from Fourier's law actually include the fact that the disk is radiating? If we don't include a radiation term, then we have two equations for the top and bottom disks:

[tex]\epsilon_{top} Q_{in} = \epsilon_{top}\sigma AT_{top}^4 + \frac{T_{top}-T_{bot}}{d/(k_{top}A) + 1/(hA) + d/(k_{bot}A)}[/tex]
[tex]\frac{T_{top}-T_{bot}}{d/(k_{top}A) + 1/(hA) + d/(k_{bot}A)} = \epsilon_{bot}\sigma AT_{bot}^4[/tex]

where ##k## is the thermal conductivity and ##1/h## is the thermal contact resistance. If we include radiation, I should just add those terms to each equation. But then I have two more unknowns since I think there's 2 different temperatures at the interface between the disks.
In my judgment, your formulation is correct as it is written.
 

What is the purpose of heating two materials in a vacuum?

The purpose of heating two materials in a vacuum is to eliminate any interference from surrounding gases or air molecules. This allows for more precise control over the heating process and prevents any contamination of the materials.

What are the benefits of heating materials in a vacuum?

Heating materials in a vacuum can result in a purer end product, as it eliminates impurities from the air and prevents oxidation. It can also allow for more precise control over the temperature and heating process, leading to more consistent and reliable results.

What types of materials are commonly heated in a vacuum?

Materials that are commonly heated in a vacuum include metals, ceramics, and semiconductors. These materials are often used in industrial processes, such as annealing, sintering, and crystal growth.

How does the heating process in a vacuum differ from heating in a regular atmosphere?

The main difference between heating in a vacuum and heating in a regular atmosphere is the absence of surrounding gases. In a vacuum, there is no transfer of heat through convection, as there are no air molecules to carry the heat. This results in a more direct transfer of heat through radiation and conduction.

Are there any safety concerns when heating materials in a vacuum?

There can be safety concerns when heating materials in a vacuum, as some materials may release toxic gases or fumes when heated. It is important to follow proper safety protocols and ensure that the vacuum system is properly sealed to prevent any potential hazards.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
838
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Thermodynamics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
841
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
34
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
228
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top