Calculating Power at the Focal Point with Temperature Measurements

  • Thread starter Thread starter Z0rb
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Temperature
Click For Summary
A user seeks to determine the actual power output of a small Fresnel lens, initially calculating about 9 watts based on solar energy assumptions. They plan to use a K-Type thermocouple to measure temperature at the focal point, which is approximately 1 cm in diameter. Responses suggest that while the initial assumption is reasonable, a thermocouple may not provide accurate results due to its size and direct exposure to concentrated light. Instead, it is recommended to focus the light into a known volume of water for more stable and accurate measurements. Conducting the experiment under varying atmospheric conditions can yield valuable insights into the actual wattage at the focal point.
Z0rb
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello All,

I am new to this forum, and right up front I will say I know very little about physics in general. That does not however limit my ability to question and ask for help from people in the know.

Here is my dilemma. I have a small Fresnel lens approx. 6 cm X 15 cm. Or 90 square centimeters. I would like to know how much power in Watts this is really focusing.

I did a little math under the assumption of each square meter receiving 1000 Watts of solar energy on a sunny day at the equator and came up with about 9 watts of calculated power at the focal point.

This of course is a figure that assumes there is no loss in the system. So to get a better idea of how much power is REALLY at the focal point, I want to make some measurements.

I have a K-Type thermocouple hooked into a meter that can read up to 750 degrees Celsius with moderate accuracy. I’ll place the thermocouple at the focal point. The focal point appears to be about 1 cm in diameter. The diameter of the thermocouple is about half of that.

Is it possible (and if so can I have it explained to me), to calculate how much wattage is at the focal point, by taking a temperature reading over time?

Any help or explanation would be great.

Thanks
 
Science news on Phys.org
Your initial assumption is reasonable- 9 watts. For more accuracy, you need the right tools, and a thermocouple is not it.

Even so, you have the beginnings of an interesting experiment- the power will depend on the atmospheric conditions (air absorption), and since you have some tools, why not do the experiment and see what happens?

However, I would instead focus the light into a (known) volume of water into which the thermocouple is inserted, rather than directly onto the thermocouple. That will give you better stability and accuracy.
 
Thread 'Can somebody explain this: Planck's Law in action'
Plotted is the Irradiance over Wavelength. Please check for logarithmic scaling. As you can see, there are 4 curves. Blue AM 0 as measured yellow Planck for 5777 K green Planck for, 5777 K after free space expansion red Planck for 1.000.000 K To me the idea of a gamma-Ray-source on earth, below the magnetic field, which protects life on earth from solar radiation, in an intensity, which is way way way outer hand, makes no sense to me. If they really get these high temperatures realized in...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
45
Views
16K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
30K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K