Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Contents
Introduction
Nature of thermal radiation
Radiative heat transfer
Enclosure application
References
Introduction
Physiological effects
Heat strain
Circulatory failure or heat stroke
Pathological effects
3
Irradiance, kWm-2
4.2
13.0
5.2
10.0
6.3
8.0
8.4
5.5
14.5
3.0
Ref: Stoll, A.M. 1967, Heat transfer in biotechnology- the role of the skin in heat
Transfer , vol.4, p.115-114.
4
Irradiance, kWm-2
3.7
20.0
6.2
10.0
6.7
5.0
18.0
Ref: Buettner, K, 1957, Heat transfer and safe exposure times for man in extreme
Thermal environments, ASME paper no. 57-sa-20.
5
Conduction
Convection
Thermal Radiation (Radiative Heat Transfer)
Conduction
Solid
Conduction
Fouriers law
Temperature
T
q x k
x
Conducted heat flux
in x direction
Thermal
conductivity
8
Conduction
Convection
Similar to conduction
many of the molecules with raised kinetic energy
are carried away by the flow
are replaced by colder fluid (low kinetic energy
molecules) --> increased energy transfer rate
need the presence of a medium for energy transfer
10
Convection
q h(T T )
Convective heat
flux
Heat transfer
coefficient
Reference temperature
11
12
What is radiation ?
q (T T )
4
Higher
power
of
temperature
Radiative heat
flux
14
A long-range phenomenon
difficult to measure
complicated by the behaviour of the radiative
properties of material
15
16
17
mass transfer
(macro-discrete-scale)
mass transfer
(macro-discrete-scale)
mass transfer
(macro-discrete-scale)
mass transfer
(macro-discrete-scale)
24
c0
c
n
Speed of light
in the medium
Speed of light in
vacuum = 2.998 x 108m/s
Refractive index
of the medium
for vacuum n=1
for air at room
temperature n=1.00029
25
c
c
2
26
h
Amount of
energy
frequency
Plancks constant
6.626x10-34Js
Thermal radiation
29
Opaque
transparent
no attenuation
semi-transparent
attenuation is complete
no penetrating radiation reemerges
partial transparent
Monochromatic radiation
Total emissive
power
Spectral emissive
power
32
Plancks law
E bv (T, v)
Spectral blackbody
emissive power
frequency
2 hv n
2
0
c (e
hv
kT
1)
Refractive index
of the medium
Boltzmanns const.
k=1.3806 x 10-23 J/K
33
c
c
2
E b (T, )
Assume constant refractive
Index (n=1 for vaccuum)
(n~1 for ordinary gas)
2 h c 02
2
n (e
hc 0
n kT
1)
2
0
E b (T, )
2 hc
hc 0
3 5
nT
(n T) 5 (e n kT 1)
34
Surface Radiation
Concepts of Emission
Planck Function
Maximum emission from a surface of temperature
T
E b W / m 2
2C1
4
d
T
/
C
T
5
2
1
0 e
E b d
0
2C1
5 e C 2 / T 1
Surface Radiation
Concepts of Emission
Planck Function
Wiens displacement law: Wavelength at maximum
emission decreases with increasing temperature
maxT C3 2897.6 m-K
T (K)
max T 2897.8m K
max (m)
294
9.85
Infrared
1000
2.897
2000
1.449
3000
0.966
4000
0.724
(red)
5000
0.579
visible
6000
0.483
(violet)
Near
Infrared
E b (T, )
2 h c 02
2
n (e
hc 0
n kT
1)
37
E b (T) E b (T, ) d
0
2 hc n T
2
0
E b (T) n T
2
d(n T)
5
(n T) (e
hc0
n kT
1)
4 2 h c 02
Stefan-boltzmann const.
15(h c 0 /k) 4
5.670x10-8 W/(m2K4)
38
Solid Angles
Solid Angles
Polar angle
Surface
normal
0 2
Azimuthal angle
40
Solid Angles
cos 0 dA
dA P
''
A
P
A S2 A S2
P
d (1 sin d )(1 d )
sin d d
2 2
sin d d 2
0 0
41
Radiative Intensity
I(r, s) I (r, s, )d
0
Position vector
wavelength
42
Radiative Intensity
The emitted energy from
dA into s and contained
within an infinitesimal
solid angle
dsinddis
E(r)
2 2
0 0
I(r, s) n.s d
43
+ve
-ve
Incoming flux
going into
Infinitesimal
heat flow rate
per wavelength
the surface
Total incoming heat flux
the surface
(q ) out
cos
I (s o )cos o d o
(q ) in
I (s i )cos i d i
cos i 0
o 0
44
I (s) cos d
45
q.n q n d
0
I (s) n s d d
n s cos
46
absorptivity ,
Transmissivity ,
47
+
If the medium is sufficiently to be opaque, then
and +
All 3 properties
nondimensional
may vary between 0 and 1
48
Emissivity
49
Emissivity
Non-metals have
relatively high
emissivities
50
vibrational
rotational energy state
e
Wave number
s
Absorption
coefficient
Thickness
of the gas
layer
52
1 1- e
53
scattering
54
e
Absorption
coefficient
( s )s
Scattering coefficient
Extinction coefficient
55
2 a
x
Effective radius
of the particle
56
58
59
60
61
62
Fd 1-2
cos 1cos 2
dA 2
2
A2
R
Area of surface 2
Separation distance
between the two surfaces
63
A1 A1
cos 1cos 2
A R 2 dA1dA2
2
When the radiant fluxes from both surfaces are uniformly and
diffusely distributed (assumption), a reciprocity for the
configuration factors can be obtained
A i Fi- j A jFj- i
The summation rule (enclosure rule) for calculating unknown
configuration factors
Fi- j 1
64
Fi , jk Fi , j Fi ,k
The crossed and uncrossed strings Method ( for 2-D geometries)
A1 F1, 2 A2 F2,1
Crossed
L uncrossed
2
Ref 8
65
radiosity
irradiation
66
Irradiation:
the radiative flux
reaching the ith surface
regardless of its origin
Surface radiosity
the total radiative flux
leaving the jth surface
J i i E bi i G i
emissivity
reflection
67
68
I
1 - e s
I b
Total emissivity
t
I d
4 b
T 0
70
I d
I d
4 b
T 0
Plank mean
for optically thin mediums
71
4V
Lo
A
Geometric mean
beam length
72
C H 2O H 2O C CO 2 CO 2
1
H 2O CO 2
2
t (1 - e
) ge
73
75
Tg4
g
I j (rij ) I j (0)(1 g )
(1)
dq0
I j (0) J j
dA j
(2)
Radiosity of surface Aj
80
J G T 4
(3)
J j
Tg4 cos i cos j dA j dAi
(1 g )
g
2
r
j 1
Ai A j
ij
q j i
Ai Fij A j F ji
Ai A j
rij2
(4)
(5)
82
q j i J j (1 g ) g T Ai Fij
4
g
j 1
(6)
q i j J i Ai Fij
(7)
j 1
Hence, the net outgoing energy rate per unit area from Ai
N
is
q q
q i
i j
j i
Ai
J
j 1
J j (1 g ) g Tg4 Fij
(8)
83
(9)
j 1
q i i Ebi (1 i )Gi Gi
(10)
q i i ( Ebi Gi )
and
(11a)
(11b)
84
(12)
q i
(1 i )
Equations (9) and (12) represent 2 N equations,
two for each surface area considered. For each
surface there are three variables, one of which
must be known: q i , Ji or Ti. Usually q i or Ti are
known in the problems.
85
86
Enclosure application
Quintiere and McCaffery conducted a comprehensive experimental
study of wood and plastic fires in an enclosure, where they compared
experimental data with calculated values for a number of environmental
values [4].
This section will first briefly discuss how the electrical circuit analogy
can be practically used for enclosure applications. We then give two
examples of how the previously derived equations for convective heat
transfer and radiative heat transfer can be applied to enclosure fires and
compare these to experimental data from Quintiere and McCaffrey. The
first example considers heat flux to a sensor at ceiling level. The second
example considers the similar case to a sensor at floor level.
87
Fij 1
(13)
j 1
q i q i Ai
1 i
1 i
Ai
Ai i
(14)
88
q i q i Ai
N
j 1
(J i J j )
1 ((1
g ) Fij Ai )
J i Tg4
(1 ( g Ai ))
(15)
resistor
q1
T14 T24
1
(1 g ) A1 F12
Similarly,
T14 Tg4
1
g A1
(16)
q 2 can be found.
92
First example:
heat flux to a sensor at ceiling level
The model used to compute radiation heat flux to a cooled sensor H1 at Ts from
a gas layer of thickness H-D and bounded by a cold surface 3 and hot walls 2
with temperature, Tw, based on measurements (Reference 4)
93
First example:
heat flux to a sensor at ceiling level
The subscript u corresponds to the measured average
properties of the upper smoke layer. The surfaces were
assumed to be black, so J E , and the result follows
i
bi
from Eq.(15).
Assuming an ambient lower region at Ta, the net radiative
flux at the sensor at Ts is given as follows:
F12 F13 1
(17)
F13 Fi
i 1
1
Fi
2
ai
La ,i
1 bi
tan
a ,i
bi
L
b.i
1 ai
tan
L
b ,i
94
First example:
heat flux to a sensor at ceiling level
where
4V
Lo
A
La ,i ai2 ( H D) 2
(17e)
Lb ,i bi2 ( H D) 2
(17f)
g ,u 1 exp( g ,u Lm )
(17g)
2 2WL( H D)
Lm
2 ( H D)(W L) WL
(17h)
95
First example:
heat flux to a sensor at ceiling level
The emissivity g ,u was computed empirically in this analysis,
but a more formal method is available from Modak that
account for CO2, H2O, and soot [6]. The empirical method
assumed that the smoke layer absorption coefficient g was
proportional to the flame absorption coefficient f by an
overall combustion product mass fraction Y p :
g f Yp
where
where
Yp
(1 r )m f
m a m f
(18)
(19)
96
hc C c p gH Q *1/ 3
Depends on r/H
qc" hc Tad Tw
Adiabatic wall
temperature
Temperature
Of cooling water
At the sensor
Q c
c pT
gH H 2
First example:
heat flux to a sensor at ceiling level
In these tests the smoke layer temperatures ranged from 200 oC to 800 oC
for the polyurethane crib fuels and roughly 150 oC to 500 oC for the wood
cribs. It is interesting that the ceiling sensor heat flux, despite varying the
crib fuel and the doorway to the room, is mostly dependent on the average
smoke layer temperature. These results are shown in the Figure.
First example:
heat flux to a sensor at ceiling level
It is interesting to note that the convective heat flux
component at the ceiling heat flux is comparable to the
radiative estimations, and the comparison with the
measured values tends to confirm their accuracy.
For this temperature range of the developing fire, they are
both comparable to each other. Also, the convective heat
transfer coefficient can be as high as 55 W/m2 oC for the
highest case of 44 kW/m2 at approximately 800 oC for a
600 kW plastic crib fire. The high plume velocities
contributes to this.
99
Second example:
heat flux to a sensor at floor level
Second example:
heat flux to a sensor at floor level
The total flux measured by the sensor H2 (shown in the
Figure) can be considered as composed of several fluxes.
q sensor
q f ,r q e,r q c Ts4
(20)
Second example:
heat flux to a sensor at floor level
ai 1 bi bi 1 ai
tan
tan
L L
L
La ,i
a ,i b , i
b ,i
1 exp( g ,u Lm ,i ) Tg4,u exp( g ,u Lm ,i )Tc4
1
qi
2
1 ai
tan
bi
Tb4 1 bi
tan
2
ai
Ta4
ai 1 bi
tan
L
La ,i
a ,i
bi
L
b ,i
1 ai
tan
b ,i
(21b)
102
Second example:
heat flux to a sensor at floor level
La ,i ai2 H 12
Lb,i b H
2
i
Lm , i
2
1
2ai bi ( H 2 H 1 )
( H 2 H 1 )(ai bi ) ai bi
(21c)
(21d)
(21e)
Second example:
heat flux to a sensor at floor level
The lower gas layer is considered cool so that its emission is
negligible, but sufficiently smoky so that it attenuates. Its
transmissivity can be estimated as
g ,l exp( g ,l D )
(22a)
g ,l C k Y p ,l
Y p ,l
m e m a
1 m e m a
(22b)
Y p ,u
(22c)
where m e is the mixing rate at the vent that contaminates the lower
region with products, and Y p ,u is given by Eq.(19). For the case
considered, was found to be 0.93 or great.
g ,l
104
105
Second example:
heat flux to a sensor at floor level
Data compared for the 21 room crib fire experiments show
the accuracy of the analysis in the Figure.
The analysis shows that as the smoke layer gets hotter, the
radiation from the layer becomes much more significant
than the radiation from the flame.
Also, the computed smoke layer contribution appears too
high at the larger fire conditions, suggesting that the
estimates for g ,l may have been too high. Cold smoke
may be more significant in fire heat transfer than we think.
106
Second example:
heat flux to a sensor at floor level
An interesting result from this study shows that
the floor heat flux (to H2) is principally
dependent on the average smoke layer
temperature for the different fuels, fuel loads, and
ventilation conditions.
Hence, effects of emissivity appear to be
accounted for by the layer temperature.
107
Reference
1. Modest, M.F., Radiative Heat Transfer, McGraw-Hill, NJ, 1993.
2. Karlsson, B. and Quintiere, J.G., Enclosure Fire Dynamics, CRC Press,
New York, 2000, pp.154-180.
3. Tien, C.L., Lee, KY. and Stretton, A.J., Radiation Heat Transfer, SFPE
Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, 2nd ed., National Fire
Protection Association, Quincy, MA, 1995.
4. Quintiere, J.G. and McCaffrey, B.J., The Burning of Wood and Plastic
Cribs in an Enclosure: Volume I, NBSIR 80-2054. National Bureau of
Standards, Washington, DC, November 1980.
108
Reference
5. Cooper, L.Y, Heat Transfer from a Buoyant Plume to an Unconfined
Ceiling, Journal of Heat Transfer, Vol. 104, No 3, pp. 446-451, 1982.
6. Modak, A.T., Thermal Radiation from Pool Fires, Combustion and
Flame, Vol.29, p.177, 1977.
7. Drysdale, D., An Introduction to Fire Dynamics, 2nd Ed., Wiley and Sons,
New York, 1998.
8. Gregory Nellis and Sanford Klein, Heat Transfer, Cambridge University
Press, 2009
109
Exercise
110
n ui vj wk
u r 2
F1
( ) ( 2 0 sin 2 0 )
4 L
v r
F2
( ) ( 2 0 sin 2 0 )
2 L
w r
F3 ( ) cos 2 2 0
L
112
Suggested answer
tg 0 L /( H / 2 )
0 61 o
F 2 0 . 0429
Total view factor : 2 F 2 0 . 0858
113
114