Thermal Radiation: Calc Total Emitted Joules in Certain Temp Range

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the total emitted joules from an object undergoing thermal radiation, specifically using the formula P = σ ⋅ A ⋅ T4, where P is the emitted power in watts, σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant (5.67 × 10-8 W/m2K4), A is the area of the object in square meters, and T is the temperature in kelvins. Participants clarify that to find total emitted joules over a time interval with a non-constant temperature, one must integrate the power over time: E = ∫ σ A [T(t)]4 dt. The conversation highlights the importance of defining the system and conditions under which the calculations are made, particularly regarding surrounding temperatures and the presence of other objects.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thermal radiation principles
  • Familiarity with the Stefan-Boltzmann law
  • Basic calculus for integration
  • Knowledge of temperature and heat transfer concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Stefan-Boltzmann law in detail
  • Learn about integrating functions to calculate energy over time
  • Explore the effects of surrounding temperatures on thermal radiation
  • Investigate how to model temperature changes in physical systems
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, engineers working with thermal systems, and anyone involved in heat transfer analysis will benefit from this discussion.

  • #31
PeterDonis said:
Differentiation is not an algebraic operation; you can't just "divide by dt", you have to have functions of t on both sides that you are differentiating.

I have not done this - You can look at this in two ways - Q = m*c*ΔT and then I differentiate with respect to t ,
or , for small change in temperature , dQ = m*c*dT , and now I just simply divide both sides by dt .

PeterDonis said:
In the original equation, you don't; you have ΔT\Delta T on the RHS, not TT. ΔT\Delta T is not temperature as a function of time; it's the change in temperature between two states of the object that you happen to be interested in. That's not a function of time, and you can't differentiate it with respect to time.

Yes , I made a mistake here . You could use this only for small temperature difference in T and T0 . Sorry .
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #32
PytrTchaikovsky said:
It could be, where did you get that formula from? However, I think that the area of the object will matter, so I think that should be included.

A molecule of an object , loses heat on fall in temperature . So , greater number of molecules , greater heat lost .

Also , greater the loss in temperature , greater the loss of heat .

∴ heat lost depends on physical dimensions , density ,and temperature .

Physical dimensions and density together are replaced by m and ,
ΔQ ∝ m ;
ΔQ ∝ ΔT .

∴ΔQ = c*m*ΔT with c the constant of proportionality and equal to specific heat capacity .
 
  • #33
Qwertywerty said:
Q = m*c*ΔT and then I differentiate with respect to t

But, as you go on to note, you can't do this unless ##\Delta T## is infinitesimal, i.e., unless you really have ##dQ## and ##dT##. You can't differentiate ##\Delta T## by ##t## because it isn't a function of ##t## (##T## is, but ##\Delta T## is not).

Qwertywerty said:
for small change in temperature , dQ = m*c*dT , and now I just simply divide both sides by dt

This is the equivalent of differentiating by ##t##, because ##dQ## and ##dT## are both infinitesimals (strictly speaking, you would take the limit as ##dt \rightarrow 0##).

Also, this only works if both ##m## and ##c## are constant. Constant ##m## is no problem, but constant ##c## is; most substances have a heat capacity that changes with temperature. So the full formula would have to be

$$
\frac{dQ}{dt} = m c \frac{dT}{dt} + m T \frac{dc}{dT} \frac{dT}{dt} = m \frac{dT}{dt} \left( c + T \frac{dc}{dT} \right)
$$

Finally, as I said before, this formula doesn't help unless you already know ##T## as a function of ##t## (and ##c## as a function of ##T##, if it's not constant). In the scenario under discussion in this thread, we don't.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
793
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K