Active Sidewalk Weather Management

Heat Transfer Final Project

Joseph Cooper, Tyler Ludwig, Stephen Wess

Abstract We are looking to analyze a system to which will prevent snow accumulation on a given surface. In our system the surface of analysis consists of a concrete sidewalk with insulating base structure (CEMATRIX insulating cement, gravel, and soil). Two main options to consider are heating the system using buried electrical wires or we may utilize a working fluid that flows through internal pipes. Due to the high cost of electricity, we elected to analyze a system consisting of hydronic fluid and buried pipes. The goal of our analysis is to find the amount of heat flux needed to operate in Rochester winter conditions, as well as identifying the fluid temperature, depth, and spacing of the pipes. Problem Statement During winter, snow accumulation brings along hassles as well as danger. Snow and ice can cause people to slip and hurt themselves on a number of different levels. Removal of snow and the melting of ice becomes time consuming, labor intensive, and also costly due to the need to own a shovel or snow blower, and maintain a stock of salt to keep the walkway of ice and snow buildup. The downfall of salt is that it creates a mess, is harsh on the environment, and becomes ineffective at temperatures below - 9C. Our proposed solution to the problem at hand is a heated sidewalk comprised of working fluid flowing through pipes that lay within the concrete. The working fluid is to be heated, and pumped through the pipes with the goal of maintaining a sidewalk surface temperature above 0C, and running at steady state with a given snowfall rate. We will not consider melting a certain depth of accumulated snow as our analysis will focus on an active system.

System Model Below is a figure depicting the cross-section of the system followed by a table of thermal conductivity values used in our analysis.

Material Cement Cematrix Gravel Soil Assumptions:

Thermal Conductivity (W/mK) 0.72 0.10 2.40 0.52

Steady State. Negligible contact resistances in substrate Constant properties No heat loss through sides of sidewalk section (symmetry) Assume known temperature at frost line (0C). Heat loss through surface includes convection, radiation, and heat flux to melt the snow at given rate Non-uniform surface temperature Working fluid temperature drop is negligible Pipe wall temperature = working fluid temperature

Theory Before the heat required from our system to melt snow can be determined, the conditions for which the system is designed to successfully handle must be set forth. Ideally, the system will be able to effectively meet the demands of a severe winter storm in Rochester. Conditions were chosen based on a heavy snowfall during the coldest period of the year. Meteorological data shows that Rochester experiences its coldest temperatures during January, with an average low temperature of -7.5C. The average wind speed in January is 5.2m/s. The National Weather Service defines a snowfall rate of 1.3cm/hr as a heavy snowfall rate that garners a winter storm warning. Our analysis will take place under these conditions. The heat flux required by the system consists of the flux necessary to prevent snowfall accumulation and the flux lost to surroundings through conduction, convection, and radiation. The total heat flux is represented by the following expression:

S is the snowfall rate in equivalent depth of water.

S = sRate (

H 2O snow

An expression used for determining the density of snow, given the ambient temperature is great than -13C is:
snow = 500{1 0.951exp[1.4(278.15 Ta ) 1.15 0.008U 1.7 ]}

Where Ta is the ambient air temperature, and U is the wind velocity. The density of snow at our defined condition: 114.02 kg/m3. This results in a snowfall rate in equivalent depth of water (S) = 4.118e-07 m/s. Assuming constant specific heats ( C P ,ice = 2100 J/kgK, of water (1000 kg/m3), q "s = 7.46 W/m2.

CP , H 2O = 4217 J/kgK) and constant density

q "m is the heat flux required to melt the snow.

q "m = H 2O Shs
Where hs is the heat of fusion of snow (334 kJ/kg). For the conditions specified, q "m = 137.53 W/m2.

q "Tot = q "s + q "m + q "h + q "e + q "b

The first term, q "s ,is the heat flux required raise the temperature of the falling snow from -7.5C to 0C, plus the heat flux required to raise the temperature of the melted snow from 0C to 0.56C (a generally accepted as the film temperature at which the liquid must be before evaporation occurs).

q "s = H 2O S[CP ,ice (ts ta ) + CP , H 2O (t f ta )]

Where ts is the melting temperature of snow, ta is the ambient air temperature, and tf = 0.56C.

q "h is the heat flux lost to surroundings through convection and radiation. Because we are not assuming the surface to be isothermal due to the spacing of the tubing, we must use a finite difference method to determine this heat loss. However, if we assume for now that the surface is in fact isothermal, we can arrive a baseline value for this heat flux. This value represents the heat flux lost if the tubing below the surface of the concrete had no spacing (impractical due to installation cost!) thus causing the entire surface to be at 0.56C. The convection coefficient calculated in order to evaluate this flux will be used as the

convection coefficient in the finite difference model. The expression for q "h is:

q "h = hc (t f ta ) + s (Tf 4 Ta 4 )
The convection coefficient hc must be determined by applying an appropriate correlation function. In order to select the correct correlation function, it is necessary to first determine the Reynolds number.

coefficient of 9.45 W/m2K. This is the value that will be used in the finite difference model. The baseline flux due to convection is simply hc(0.56 - -7.5) = 76.17 W/m2. The contribution of radiation to q "h is

ReL =

UL air

Where U is the wind speed (5.2m/s), L is the width of the sidewalk (1.5m), and air is the air kinematic viscosity (13.17e-6 m2/s). This gives a Reynolds number of 5.92e5 (turbulent) with the transition from laminar to turbulent flow occurring near 1.27m across the sidewalk surface. Because the airflow over the sidewalk is not entirely laminar or turbulent, the correlation function used will be for a mixed condition. In our finite difference analysis, we expect to see a varying temperature across the surface of the sidewalk. However, the correlation function we will use to determine hc is valid for an isothermal plate. In reality, the temperature differences over the surface will affect the heat flux, but we will assume that the temperature difference is not significant enough to invalidate the correlation function. The correlation function used is:

s (Tf 4 Ta 4 ) , where the emissivity of concrete ( s ) = 0.88. The temperature of the surrounding (Ta) can be assumed equal to the ambient air temperature while precipitation is occurring. The baseline heat flux due to radiation = 31.56 W/m2. With the radiation and convection losses combined, q "h = 107.73. We expect the results from the finite difference model to exceed this value due to points on the surface of the sidewalk at temperatures greater than 0.56C.
The fourth heat flux term contributing to the total heat flux is q "e , the heat flux necessary to evaporate the melted snow. The following expression can be used to calculate this flux.

q "e = air hm (W f Wa )hw

In this expression, hw is the heat of vaporization for water (2502 kJ/kg). The mass transfer coefficient, hm for the water evaporating into the air.

Pr hm = Sc

2/3

hc air c p ,air

NuL = (0.037 ReL 4/5 871) Pr1/3

Pr is the Prandtl number for air (0.715). The average Nusselt number = 594.35.

Sc is the Schmidt number, a dimensionless parameter that depends on the kinematic viscosity of the air and the mass diffusion coefficient of water vapor into air.

Sc =

hc =

kair NuL L

air D

The conductivity of the surrounding air = 0.02385 W/mK. This results in a convection

The mass diffusion coefficient can be plotted as a function of temperature. For air at a temperature of -7.5C, D 2.0e-5 m2/s. Therefore, Sc = 0.6583.

The density of air at -7.5C = 1.3042 kg/m3, the specific heat of the air = 1006.4 J/kgK. Recalling that the Prandtl number = 0.715 and hc = 9.45 W/m2K, we calculate hm to be 0.0076 m/s. Wf and Wa represent the humidity ratios at the surface of the evaporating water and the surrounding air, respectively.

Finite Difference Derivation & Modeling To analyze the temperature distribution in the system, a finite difference model was created. The analysis of the system was done at a steady state condition as our interest in the characteristic behavior of the system occurs at steady state. To perform this analysis, a small section of the overall system was selected taking advantage of symmetry to simplify and expedite the solution algorithm. The simplified section bisected one pipe in the vertical plane and extended to the midpoint between two pipes, thus symmetry can be used on both the right and left edges of the grid. The Y surveyed section was divided into a grid consisting of equally spaced x and y indices. Due to the scale of our system, a grid size of 5 units/cm was used. It must be noted that the number of grid points in the x direction was X dependent on the spacing between the pipes, and was accounted for when writing the finite difference algorithm. An energy balance was performed to derive equations representing the steady state temperature at each node. Special considerations were employed when encountering symmetry and material junctions where a more complex equation was required. The following displays the progression and derivation of each of the foundational equations used in our analysis.

P W = 0.622 V V PP
Where P is the atmospheric pressure and PV is the saturation pressure of air a given temperature. Wa is to be evaluated at the dew point temperature of the ambient air. For the calculation, the average dew point in Rochester during January was used (-7.3C). Wf is evaluated at the liquid film temperature, 0.56C. PV at -7.3C = 381.3 N/m2, and PV at 0.56C = 639.9 N/m2. This gives Wf = 0.003953 & Wa = 0.002350. Collecting these terms and solving for q "e gives a heat flux required to evaporate the melted snow equal to 47.9 W/m2. The final term adding to the total heat flux is the back loss, q "b . This is the loss through the concrete down to the ground below. There is no standard method for calculating this value. Generally, this heat flux is between 5% and 20% for a well insulated system. This will be verified with the finite difference model. Summing all of the heat flux terms (excluding q "b ), we arrive at a total heat flux of 300.6 W/m2. Once again, this is a baseline, preliminary heat flux calculation. We expect the actual heat flux found using the finite difference model to be greater than this value.

Foundational Equations (1) E = E in out

Material Junction Nodes

k1 (Tm,n+1 + Tm1,n + Tm+1,n ) +k2 (Tm,n1 ) (3k1 + k2 )Tm,n = 0

(12) (2)

q
i=1

(i )(m,n)

+ q(x y) = 0

(3) q(node)(m,n) = k() (4) x = y Surface Nodes

Tnode Tm,n

Where k1, k2 are the conduction coefficients for the two materials at the junction. Pipe Boundary For the pipe boundary, the actual known pipe temperatures (the nodes represented at a constant temperature, Tpipe) were subtracted from the solution matrix and were re-infused in their original location after the surrounding node temperatures were derived. This allowed the final contour plot to represent the known pipe temperature as well as the resulting surrounding temperatures. To infuse the presence of the pipe into the finite difference matrix, the numerical pipe temperature was added to the right hand side of the finite difference equation for the node equations that bordered the pipe, thus allowing for a boundary condition that represented the actual pipe temperature. This entire process was automated using an algorithm based upon the pipe geometry and location. The Matlab Solution The implementation of the finite difference method in Matlab provided an efficient solution and sufficient parameter variation capabilities. The solution script utilized Matlabs matrix expertise to intelligently sort through each nodal location and apply the correct nodal formula. This was accomplished by writing nodal equations based upon the matrix indices and a position algorithm. The subtraction of the pipe temperatures mentioned above were then employed and the resulting matrix was simplified with a solver function. Due to the

x q = 0 k 4 (6) q = qsnow + h(T Tm,n ) + (T T 4 ) m,n

(5) Tm,n1 + Tm+1,n + Tm1,n 3Tm,n + To facilitate the linear solver used in this analysis, the radiation term was reduced to a linear approximation with Tm,n approximated as the film temperature of water before it evaporates, 0.56C.
q = qsnow + h(T Tm,n )
2 + (T T 4 )(T Tm,n )(T Tm,n ) m,n

(7)

(8) q = qsnow + h(T Tm,n ) + hrad (T Tm,n ) (9) q = qsnow + U(T Tm,n ) Interior Nodes
(10) q = 0

(11) Tm,n+1 + Tm,n1 + Tm+1,n + Tm1,n 4Tm,n = 0 * For symmetry, nodes at left or right boundary account for symmetry by multiplying the temperature of the node opposite the symmetry line by a factor of 2. This approach applies to all symmetry nodes, including the top surface.

small grid size, the variable count of our system reached upwards of 12,000, yet Matlab was able to provide a solution that averaged a 5-minute run time. It must be mentioned that during this analysis, an initial assumption was made concerning the frost line temperature. We chose to assume that the temperature at the frost line was known, thus completing our boundary conditions. After successful solutions were performed, we investigated the veracity of this assumption by varying the analysis depth and comparing the resulting change in temperature at the baseline. After several trials, we determined that any extension past the 0.8 m frost line yielded approximately a 0.01% change in temperature at the baseline. Thus, we validated our assumption and focused our efforts on other areas of our analysis. After a final solution was reached, creating a contour plot of the system temperature profile was quite simple. The pipe temperatures that were removed earlier were re-inserted to the temperature matrix and the simplified system was propagated to construct the entire system. Results We ran several configurations of our system, varying depth, pipe, separation and fluid temperature. Our primary goal was to achieve a minimum temperature of 0.56C at the surface, which occurs at the surface midpoint between two pipes. To begin narrowing our result, the depth was decidedly fixed to 6 cm, while the depth and fluid temperature were varied. As expected, the farther the pipe separation, the more heat flux was lost to the surroundings. This is caused by an increased temperature gradient across the surface as the minimum surface temperature is maintained. The results of several trials can be seen in Figure 3 in the Figures & Plots section of this report.

While many configurations exist for this system, our final solution was taken at a depth of 5cm, pipe separation of 12 cm, and fluid temperature of 28.5C. The resulting heat flux lost through the surface and ground were 315.85 W/m2K and 16.77 W/m2K respectively. Studies have shown that similar systems expect approximately 5-20 % loss through the ground; our wellinsulated system loses 5.04 % and corroborates this benchmark. Taking into account the earlier derived value of 192.89 W/m2K of heat flux required to melt the snow, the total heat flux lost via convection and radiation in our system amounts to 122.96 W/m2K. This correlates to our earlier baseline calculation of 107.7 W/m2K, and is reasonably higher given the existing temperature gradient along the surface. The graphical results of our final solution are plotted below in figure 1. With our analysis complete, we can estimate the heat loss in any given length of sidewalk. Our total heat flux lost, through the surface and the ground is 332.62 W/m2K.

Qlost = 1.5L * 332.62

Just for good measure, let us consider a sidewalk of length 9 meters and 1.5 meters wide. Our heat lost would be:

Qlost = 1.5(9)* 332.62 = 4490.37 Watts

Figures & Plots

Figure 1 Contour of 1m Sidewalk Section

Figure 2 Averaged Isotherms of 1m Sidewalk Section

Figure 3 Pipe Spacing vs Q

Discussion of Results, Possible Improvements Improvements of our analysis would involve solving for the heat, energy, and time required to get the system up and running at steady state from a starting point of ground temperature. Another large case would be to start from ground temperature with an accumulation already standing on the sidewalk surface, which may increase start up to steady state time and energy exponentially. Conclusion In conclusion, our resulting values from the analysis discussed, compare favorably to realistic values estimated by printed articles and informational sources. A system such as the one analyzed is a real world possibility and is already implemented for various circumstances requiring heating. For example, the heating of floors in some upscale homes are done using a heated working fluid flow through piping imbedded into the floor.

Citations Cematrix.com. Edited by Cematrix Corporation. Accessed 10/27/11. http://www.cematrix.com/docs/techn ical/physical_properties2009mar04.p df Diffusion Coefficient for Air-Water Vapor Mixtures Web. 02 Nov. 2011 <http://www.cambridge.org/us/engin eering/author/nellisandklein/downloa ds/examples/EXAMPLE_9.2-1.pdf>. Galloway, Kevin; Landolt, Scott; Rasmussen, Roy. Using liquidequivalent snow gauge measurements to determine snow depth - Preliminary Results Nov. 2006 Incropera, Frank P., David P. Dewitt, Theodore L. Bergman, and Adrienne D. Lavine. Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer. 6th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2007. Ramsey, James W. Development of Snow Melting Load Design Algorithms and Data for Locations Around the World Vol. 1,ASHRAE1999 "Water Vapor and Vapor Pressure." Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu /hbase/kinetic/watvap.html>.

A1: Finite Difference Script

% Active Sidewalk Heating Finite Difference clc clear all close all tic Depth_of_Field=.8; radius=5; rad_vec=[2 3 4 5 5 5]; emissivity=.88; steff_boltz=5.67e-8; Pipe_Depth=5; Pipe_Separation=12; Delta_x=.002;

% m % grids

% cm % cm % m

Ysize=Depth_of_Field*500; Xsize=Pipe_Separation/2*5+1; Tpipe=28.5; Tpipe2=-Tpipe; TsurfC=-7.5; TsurfK=TsurfC+273.15; FrostLine=0; Hsurf=9.451; Rsurf=3.9153; Usurf=Hsurf+Rsurf; Qsnow=192.8894; kc=.72; kcm=.1; kgr=2.4; ks=.52; Dcematrix=15; Dgravel=Dcematrix+5; Dsoil=Dgravel+30; % % % % % % % % % C C C K C W/m^2K W/m^2K W/m^2K W/m^2K

% cm % cm % cm

% Allocate Memory FDM=zeros(Xsize*Ysize,Xsize*Ysize); Q=zeros(Xsize*Ysize,1);

% Write the Eqautions to a Matrix for j=1:Xsize for i=1:Ysize pos=(i+Ysize*(j-1)); % Top Left Node if i==1 && j==1 FDM(pos,pos)=-(3+(Delta_x*Usurf)/kc); FDM(pos,pos+Ysize)=2; FDM(pos,pos+1)=1; Q(pos)=(Qsnow -Usurf*TsurfC)*(Delta_x/kc);

% Top Right Node elseif i==1 && j==Xsize FDM(pos,pos)=-(3+(Delta_x*Usurf)/kc); FDM(pos,pos-Ysize)=2; FDM(pos,pos+1)=1; Q(pos)=(Qsnow -Usurf*TsurfC)*(Delta_x/kc); % Top Middle Nodes elseif i==1 FDM(pos,pos)=-(3+(Delta_x*Usurf)/kc); FDM(pos,pos+Ysize)=1; FDM(pos,pos-Ysize)=1; FDM(pos,pos+1)=1; Q(pos)=(Qsnow -Usurf*TsurfC)*(Delta_x/kc); % Top Left Node of Material Junction elseif (i==5*Dcematrix | i==5*Dgravel | i==5*Dsoil) & j==1 if rem(5*i,Dcematrix)==0 k1=kc; k2=kcm; elseif rem(5*i,Dgravel)==0 k1=kcm; k2=kgr; elseif rem(5*i,Dsoil)==0 k1=kgr; k2=ks; end

FDM(pos,pos)=-(3*k1+k2); FDM(pos,pos+Ysize)=2*k1; FDM(pos,pos+1)=k2; FDM(pos,pos-1)=k1; % Top Right Node of Material Junction elseif (i==5*Dcematrix | i==5*Dgravel | i==5*Dsoil) & j==Xsize if rem(5*i,Dcematrix)==0 k1=kc; k2=kcm; elseif rem(5*i,Dgravel)==0 k1=kcm; k2=kgr; elseif rem(5*i,Dsoil)==0 k1=kgr; k2=ks; end

FDM(pos,pos)=-(3*k1+k2); FDM(pos,pos-Ysize)=2*k1; FDM(pos,pos+1)=k2; FDM(pos,pos-1)=k1; % Top Middle Nodes of Material Junction elseif (i==5*Dcematrix | i==5*Dgravel | i==5*Dsoil) if rem(5*i,Dcematrix)==0 k1=kc; k2=kcm; elseif rem(5*i,Dgravel)==0 k1=kcm; k2=kgr; elseif rem(5*i,Dsoil)==0

k1=kgr; k2=ks; end FDM(pos,pos)=-(3*k1+k2); FDM(pos,pos+Ysize)=k1; FDM(pos,pos-Ysize)=k1; FDM(pos,pos+1)=k2; FDM(pos,pos-1)=k1; % Bottom Left Node elseif i==Ysize && j==1 FDM(pos,pos)=-4; FDM(pos,pos+Ysize)=2; FDM(pos,pos-1)=1; Q(pos)=-FrostLine; % Bottom Right Node elseif i==Ysize && j==Xsize FDM(pos,pos)=-4; FDM(pos,pos-Ysize)=2; FDM(pos,pos-1)=1; Q(pos)=-FrostLine; % Bottom Middle Nodes elseif i==Ysize FDM(pos,pos)=-4; FDM(pos,pos-1)=1; FDM(pos,pos-Ysize)=1; FDM(pos,pos+Ysize)=1; Q(pos)=-FrostLine; % Left Side Nodes elseif j==1 FDM(pos,pos)=-4; FDM(pos,pos+Ysize)=2; FDM(pos,pos-1)=1; FDM(pos,pos+1)=1; % Right Side Nodes elseif j==Xsize FDM(pos,pos)=-4; FDM(pos,pos-Ysize)=2; FDM(pos,pos-1)=1; FDM(pos,pos+1)=1; % Interior Nodes else FDM(pos,pos)=-4; FDM(pos,pos+1)=1; FDM(pos,pos-1)=1; FDM(pos,pos+Ysize)=1; FDM(pos,pos-Ysize)=1; end

rad_vec=[2,3,4,5,5,5];

DfromTop=5*Pipe_Depth+1; LfromEdge=(Pipe_Separation/2)*5+1-radius; % Insert Pipe Temperatures if i==DfromTop-2 && j==(LfromEdge-1) Q(pos:(pos+2*rad_vec(1)))=-Tpipe; elseif i==(DfromTop-3) && j==(LfromEdge) Q(pos)=-2*Tpipe; Q(pos+2*rad_vec(2))=-2*Tpipe; elseif i==(DfromTop-4) && j==(LfromEdge+1) Q(pos)=-2*Tpipe; Q(pos+2*rad_vec(3))=-2*Tpipe; elseif i==(DfromTop-5) && j==(LfromEdge+2) Q(pos)=-2*Tpipe; Q(pos+2*rad_vec(4))=-2*Tpipe; elseif i==(DfromTop-6) && j==(LfromEdge+3) Q(pos)=-Tpipe; Q(pos+2*rad_vec(5)+2)=-Tpipe; elseif i==(DfromTop-6) && j==(LfromEdge+4) Q(pos)=-Tpipe; Q(pos+2*rad_vec(6)+2)=-Tpipe; elseif i==(DfromTop-6) && j==(LfromEdge+5) Q(pos)=-Tpipe; Q(pos+2*rad_vec(6)+2)=-Tpipe; end

end end % Subtract Known Temperatures for j=Xsize:-1:1 for i=Ysize:-1:1 pos=(i+Ysize*(j-1)); if i==(DfromTop-rad_vec(6)) && j==Xsize FDM(:,pos:(pos+2*rad_vec(6)))=[]; FDM(pos:(pos+2*rad_vec(6)),:)=[]; Q((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(6)))=[]; Qpos(6)=pos-1; elseif i==(DfromTop-rad_vec(5)) && j==(Xsize-1) FDM(((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(5))),:)=[]; FDM(:,((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(5))))=[]; Q((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(5)))=[]; Qpos(5)=pos-1; elseif i==(DfromTop-rad_vec(4)) && j==(Xsize-2) FDM(((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(4))),:)=[]; FDM(:,((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(4))))=[];

Q((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(4)))=[]; Qpos(4)=pos-1; elseif i==(DfromTop-rad_vec(3)) && j==(Xsize-3) FDM(((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(3))),:)=[]; FDM(:,((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(3))))=[]; Q((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(3)))=[]; Qpos(3)=pos-1; elseif i==(DfromTop-rad_vec(2)) && j==(Xsize-4) FDM(((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(2))),:)=[]; FDM(:,((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(2))))=[]; Q((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(2)))=[]; Qpos(2)=pos-1; elseif i==(DfromTop-rad_vec(1)) && j==(Xsize-5) FDM(((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(1))),:)=[]; FDM(:,(pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(1)))=[]; Q((pos):(pos+2*rad_vec(1)))=[]; Qpos(1)=pos-1; end end end %Solve Tmat=FDM\Q; T_pipe_ref=zeros(size(Tmat,1),1);

% Format the Results T_rem=54; for i=length(rad_vec):-1:1 Tadd=rad_vec(i)*2+1; Adjust=T_rem-Tadd; T_rem=T_rem-Tadd; Tmat1=[(Tmat((1:(Qpos(i)-Adjust)),1))']; Tmat2=[(Tpipe.*ones(1,2*rad_vec(i)+1))]; Tmat3=[(Tmat((Qpos(i)-Adjust+1):length(Tmat)))']; Tmat=[Tmat1 Tmat2 Tmat3]; Tmat=Tmat'; T_pipe_ref1=[(T_pipe_ref((1:(Qpos(i)-Adjust)),1))']; T_pipe_ref2=[(Tpipe2.*ones(1,2*rad_vec(i)+1))]; T_pipe_ref3=[(T_pipe_ref((Qpos(i)-Adjust+1):length(T_pipe_ref)))']; T_pipe_ref=[T_pipe_ref1 T_pipe_ref2 T_pipe_ref3]; T_pipe_ref=T_pipe_ref'; end

T_Plot1=[]; T_Plot2=[]; for i=1:Xsize T_Plot1(:,i)=Tmat(1+(i-1)*Ysize:i*Ysize); T_Plot2(:,i)=T_pipe_ref(1+(i-1)*Ysize:i*Ysize);

end T_Plot=T_Plot1; x=[T_Plot flipdim(T_Plot,2)]; x=[x x x x x x x x]; figure(1) contourf(flipdim(x,1)) colorbar set(gcf,'position',[13 611 1084 1295]) figure(2) imagesc(x) colorbar set(gcf,'position',[13 611 1084 1295]) toc % Heat Flux Through Top & Bottom Surfaces Q_Top=[]; Q_Bot=[]; for j=1:Xsize Q_Top=[Q_Top (Usurf*(x(1,j)-TsurfC)+Qsnow)]; Q_Bot=[Q_Bot ((T_Plot(70,j)T_Plot(400,j))/(.002*5/kc+.002*25/kcm+.002*150/kgr+.002*150/ks))]; end Q_Top=mean(Q_Top) Q_Bot=mean(Q_Bot) Q_Tot=Q_Top+Q_Bot; load gong sound(y,Fs)

A2: Misc. Calculations

% Heat Transfer Project script clc clear % finding the density of snow Ta = 273.15 - 7.5; % Kelvin U10 = 5.2; % m/s rhoSnow = 500*(1 - 0.951*exp(-1.4*(278.15 - Ta)^(-1.15) 0.008*U10^1.7)); % kg/m^3 % Finding equivalent rate of liquid precipitation. Snow_Rate = 0.013; % m/hr rhoH2O = 1000; % kg/m^3 s = Snow_Rate/(3600*(1000/rhoSnow)); %m/hr % Calculating CpIce = 2100; CpH2O = 4217; tf = 273.15 + ts = 273.15; % [J/kg*K] % [J/kg*K] .56; % liquid film temperature [K] for melted snow % melting temperature [K]

qs = rhoH2O*s*(CpIce*(ts - Ta) + CpH2O*(tf - ts)); % [W/m^2] hf = 334000; % heat of fusion for water [J/kg] % [W/m^2]

qm = rhoH2O*s*hf;

% calculating Convection coefficient % calculate Reynolds number based on worst case (wind across short edge of sidewalk.) kin_Visc = 13.1666e-06; % kinematic vis. @ walkway film temp (269.4K)[m^2/s] w = 1.5; % sidewalk width [m] ReL = U10*w/kin_Visc; % Reynolds Number Pr = 0.715; % Prandtl Number NuL = (0.037*ReL^(4/5) - 871)*Pr^(1/3); % Nusselt Number kair = 0.023852; % thermal conductivity of air [W/m*K] hc = kair*NuL/w; % convection coefficient CpAir = 1006.4; rhoAir = 1.3042; D = 2.0e-5; Sc = kin_Visc/D; % % % % [J/kgK] kg/m^3 mass diffusion coefficient of H2O into air Schmidt Number

hm = (Pr/Sc)^(2/3)*hc/(rhoAir*CpAir); % mass transfer coefficient [m/s] Wf = 0.00398; liquid Wa = 0.00205; hfg = 2501525; % Humidity ratio, air at 0.56 deg C assumed tf of % Humidity ratio, ambient air % Heat of vaporization at 0 deg C for H2O

qe = rhoAir*hm*(Wf - Wa)*hfg e = 0.88; % emissivity SB = 5.67e-8; % Stefan-Boltzman Constant % Radiation coefficient (estimation) hr = e*SB*(273.71^2 + Ta^2)*(273.71 + Ta); % Baseline heat lost through convection and coefficient qh = hc*(0.56 - -7.5) + SB*e*((273.15+0.56)^4 - Ta^4) % Baseline heat flux qtot = qs + qm + qe + qh % Baseline heat loss Q = qtot*1.5*9