Calculating Insulation Thickness

AI Thread Summary
Calculating insulation thickness for a foundry involves determining the thermal resistance and heat flow through the insulation material. The user is working with Kast-O-Lite refractory, requiring a minimum of 10,440 BTU to melt aluminum at high temperatures. Key equations for heat transfer and thermal resistance are discussed, emphasizing the need to relate heat flow to insulation thickness. The outside temperature is suggested to be around 300K, considering ventilation and environmental factors. Clarifications on dimensions and calculations are provided to assist in finding the correct insulation thickness.
Voltux
Messages
29
Reaction score
3
I'm trying to calculate insulation thickness for a foundry, and can't figure it out after spending a few hours searching.

Refractory: Kast-O-Lite

Material Required: 1.44g/cm^3
Thermal Conductivity: 0.65 W/m*C

Maximum inside temperature is 1648*C

I figured there would be a minimum of 10,440 BTU/3057 Watts Required to melt 4.16L of Aluminum

Inside Dimensions "Empty Space" would be 16cm Diameter x 23cm Tall
Outside Dimensions: 31cm Diameter x 44.5cm Tall


The closest thing I found to this would be Insulation thickness calculation for a pipe - EngCyclopedia

However, I cannot figure out how to determine r2

Q=2*pi*k*N*((T1-T2)/ln(r2/r1)

T1=50*C
T2=1648*C
r1=0.1524m
r2=??
k=0.65 (W/m*C)
N=0.2032m

Q=2*pi*0.65*0.2032

Q=0.829883115*(-5198)/(ln(r2/0.1524)

Can anyone help me out, or point me in the right direction?

They say "Rule of Thumb" is 4inches/10cm of refractory. If I could just figure out what the outside temperature of that would be I think it would be helpful.

Thank you very much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's a cylindrical chamber?
The total area of the walls would be ##A=\pi hd^2/4##
You need to relate the heat flow through a thickness L of insulating material to the rate that you are supplying heat.

For walls thickness L and thermal conductivity ##k## .. the thermal resistance is $$R=\frac{L}{k A}=\frac{4L}{\pi k hd^2}$$... I think the equation you want is: $$T_{inside}-T_{outside}=\dot{Q}R$$...

The outside temperature would be whatever the working equilibrium temperature of the room should be - take a guess.
If it is just sitting in air, the room will probably get quite hot. With no other information, I'd guess 300K for the outside temperature - which would be uncomfortably warm, and hope there's some sort of ventilation. If you have experience of the kinds of workplaces that use these devices you may be able to make a better guess than that.
 
r1 is the internal radius, 16cm/2=0.08m, r2 is the external radius, 31cm/2=0.155m. Where did you get 0.1524 from? For the length of cylinder, use the internal height, 0.23m. Where did you get 0.2032m from?
What about the top and bottom of the cylinder?
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top