Heat Transfer Problem - Radiation missing Emissivity value

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a heat transfer problem involving a cartridge electrical heater exposed to different cooling flows (water and air). Participants explore how to determine the surface temperature of the heater under these conditions, considering the effects of convection and radiation. The conversation includes aspects of theoretical modeling and practical implications of emissivity values.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Student A claims the surface temperature will be larger in air flow (CASE 2) than in water flow (CASE 1), while Student B disagrees.
  • One participant suggests assuming emissivity (ϵ) equals 1 initially to assess the significance of radiation heat transfer.
  • Another participant notes that the emissivity can be determined based on the material of the cartridge heater's outer sheath, which is typically stainless steel or Incoloy.
  • A participant expresses confusion about determining the significance of radiation heat transfer without knowing the surface temperature.
  • One participant calculates a surface temperature of 1294.3 K using ϵ = 1, questioning the reasonableness of this value compared to a convection-only solution yielding 325 K.
  • Another participant advises using both convection and radiation terms simultaneously to find a consistent solution for the total heat transfer.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the significance of radiation heat transfer or the correct approach to solving the problem. Multiple competing views on the assumptions regarding emissivity and the resulting surface temperatures remain evident.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the lack of a specified emissivity value, which complicates the analysis. The discussion also highlights the dependence on material properties and the need for numerical or iterative methods to solve the equations accurately.

jake222
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Two students, A and B, are discussing a heat transfer problem regarding what the surface temperature of a cartridge electrical heater would be when exposed to a water flow (CASE 1) and an air flow (CASE 2).

Case 1:

hw = 5000 W / (m2 * K); Tsurr = 20ºC

Case 2:

ha = 50 W / (m2 * K); Tsurr = 20ºC

Student A insists that the surface temperature of the cartridge will be larger in CASE 2 than in CASE 1, while student B states the opposite.
The cartridge is shaped as a solid cylinder of length L=200 mm and diameter D=20 mm, which is known to dissipate 2 kW irrespective of the case. Find the surface temperature of the cartridge in each case to find out if student A is right or wrong.


Homework Equations



qtot = qconv + qrad

qtot = A * q''conv + A * q''rad

I assumed that since \alpha wasn't mentioned, \epsilon = \alpha and I could use this form:

qtot = 2\piRL * h(Ts-Tsurr) + 2\piRL * \epsilon \sigma (Ts4 - Tsurr4)

The Attempt at a Solution



So really, given the above equations, this should be a "plug and chug" problem by saying that qtot = 2 kW and solving the equation for Ts. However, I cannot do that because the surface emissivity (or absorption) is not given. So I started to think whether or not the cartridge had any radiation at all. I looked through my notes and the textbook and could not find a way to quantify \epsilon using the given information. That's when I came here. Am I wrong to assume that there is any radiation? Or am I doing something completely wrong?

Thanks for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There will be radiation heat transfer. However, it may (or may not) be small compared to the convection. First, assume ϵ =1 and see if radiation heat transfer is significant.

If it is, then you can do a practical treatment of the emissivity as follows. Most cartridge heaters have an interior heated element insulated by magnesium oxide. Then the outside surface sheath is usually either 304 or 316 stainless steel or Incoloy for temperatures above about 450 F. The outside sheath material will apply to your emissivity. You can look up the emissivity for these materials. State your reasoning in your solution.
 
But how can I see if the radiation heat transfer is significant if I don't know a surface temperature?
 
jake222 said:
But how can I see if the radiation heat transfer is significant if I don't know a surface temperature?
You had the idea in your original post: "qtot = 2 kW and solving the equation for Ts"

You will now need an numerical or trial and error solution.
 
Alright, so I solved this equation (using \epsilon = 1):

qtot = \epsilon\sigma(Ts4 - Tsurr4)*2\piRL

using 2 kW for qtot and I got Ts = 1294.3 K. So... what does that mean?

I guess I'm confused on where you can draw the line of whether or not there is significant heat transfer due to radiation or not. When I solve the problem for just convection, I get Ts = 325 K, which seems a whole lot more reasonable than 1294.3 K.

What do you think?
 
Jake222,

You want to do both terms at the same time as you had in your first post:

qtot = qconv + qrad = 2 kW

qconv = 2 Pi R L * h(Ts-Tsurr)
qrad = 2 Pi R L * ϵ σ (Ts^4 - Tsurr^4)

You can pick a value of Ts, compute qconv, compute qrad, then add together and see if they equal 2 kW. When they do, figure qrad / qconv.

The 1293 K surface temperature you figured would only apply in a vacuum (no convection).
 
Oh, okay. I see now.

Thanks so much!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K