Was Energy Balance Overlooked When Examining Evaporation from Solids?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the energy balance associated with evaporation from solids, particularly in the context of heat loss from pavement surfaces during rain events. Participants explore whether the energy balance should focus on the liquid undergoing evaporation rather than the solid substrate.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether evaporation acts on the liquid rather than directly on the solid substrate, suggesting that energy loss due to evaporation should be analyzed in the context of the liquid.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about the characterization of evaporation as energy loss from the solid, asking for examples of articles that support this view.
  • A participant provides an example from an article discussing energy balance during rain events, detailing how various energy terms contribute to the overall balance on pavement surfaces.
  • Some participants argue that including an energy balance on the liquid would provide a more comprehensive analysis, as evaporation could lead to increased convective heat loss from the pavement.
  • One participant distinguishes between heat transfer and heat transport, asserting that heat energy is not transferred from the liquid to the vapor during evaporation.
  • Another participant notes that unless there are significant puddles, the energy content of the water is likely much less than that of the pavement surface.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express confusion and differing views on the treatment of energy loss due to evaporation, with no consensus reached on the appropriate approach to energy balance in this context.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of heat transfer and energy content in the context of evaporation and its effects on the solid substrate.

rkguy
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I am curious. Maybe I don't understand something, but many articles I come across perform an energy balance on a solid and on a liquid.

**I assume evaporation acts on the remaining liquid and not directly on the substrate. Correct?**

They always include heat loss due to evaporation as energy loss from the solid but not the liquid. Would it be more proper to perform a balance on the liquid wherein evaporation removes heat (watts per square meter of surface area? simply KJ?) from the water surface, which would then increase convection from the solid substrate to the water itself?

THere must be a good reason I haven't once seen it described that way (other than laziness).
 
Engineering news on Phys.org


Hi rkguy, welcome to PF. I'm a little confused by your comment about "evaporation as energy loss from the solid." Can you give a couple examples of the articles you're looking at?
 


Mapes said:
Hi rkguy, welcome to PF. I'm a little confused by your comment about "evaporation as energy loss from the solid." Can you give a couple examples of the articles you're looking at?

Mostly heat loss from pavement surfaces into water runoff.
For example, an article says that during a rain event

the balance on the pavement is change in energy = Rsolar net + Rlong net + Convection to water + Evaporation + Sensible heat + ground conduction

generally, R solar and ground conduction are positive (heating pavement), and Convection, Evaporation, Sensible heat, and Conduction are negative. Rlong varies. (all in W/m2)
 


I agree that this seems confusing. The convection and evaporation terms seem to be double counting energy losses, as liquid evaporation would effectively cool the liquid and thus increase convective heat loss from the pavement. I concur that adding an energy balance on the liquid would make for a more complete (though also more complex) analysis.
 


I think your confusing heat transfer with heat transport. In your parking lot analogy, when water is evaporating from the puddle the water vapor takes heat energy with it. Heat is not transferred from the liquid water to the water vapor.

Under your average parking lot conditions water exists in the liquid or vapor form. It is not phase changing from liquid to gas form.
 


Also, unless you are talking about actual puddles - and decent depth ones - the energy content of the water is probably a whole lot less than the energy content of the parking lot.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K