Determination of the Effects of Temperature, on Thermal Radiation

The main objective of the study was to observe the effects of different parameters on the emission of thermal
radiation. The three parameters tested were temperature, view factor, and shielding. Radiation has various
applications in various industries such as in the medicinal field, in pollution prevention, in and the food industry.
The experimental value for the Stefan-Boltzmann constant was determined to be 2 x 10-9 W/m2-K, which is a
96.31% deviation from the literature value. The geometric effects in the form of the view factor were also studied.
A graph of the experimental view factor against the width between the two apertures used in the test was
constructed in the study. Lastly, the emissivity of Styrofoam, aluminium foil, and car insulation were determined
using the corrected Stefan-Boltzmann equation for grey bodies. The magnitudes of the values were 0.15, 0.03, and
0.12, respectively. Hence, it is concluded that the aluminium emits the lowest amount of heat, followed by the
insulation, and the Styrofoam. The experimental data can be improved by addressing the conditions of testing.
Aside from this, other parameters such as distance and observation of other industrially relevant materials can
improve the understanding of the theory and application.

Keywords: Thermal Radiation, Radiometer, Aluminium Foil, Styrofoam, Car Insulation

1 Introduction
Heat exchangers are equipment used to transfer heat
from a hot phase to a cold phase. Chemical engineers
utilize a variety of heat exchangers and all of these
cannot characterized by one design. Heat Exchangers
can be classified according to the mechanism of heat
transfer used. Shell Heat exchangers use conduction
and convection while some heat exchangers use the
mechanism of thermal radiation.
Radiation heat transfer is the least understood
mechanism of heat transfer but it is explainable in
terms of the dualistic theory. Radiation, is the mode of
energy transfer due to emission of photons and
transmission through electromagnetic waves. This
mechanism of heat transfer does not require a medium
and can occur is vacuum conditions (Colorado State
University). Radiation interacts with matter and is
emitted and received as discrete particles called
photons. As energy is emitted through photons, the
energy of the body decreases. This energy is then
transmitted with radiation having the property of an
electromagnetic wave (Foust, 1980).
All matter receive and give off energy in the form of
electromagnetic waves in various forms (e.g. thermal,
light, radio waves, etc.) Thermal radiation falling on
an object will be partly absorbed, partly reflected and
partly transmitted. The proportions depend primarily
on the characteristic of the receiver but temperature
and wavelength of the radiation can also affect the
proportions to a lesser extent.
A black body is material assumed to absorb all
incident radiation. It also emits radiation at the
maximum rate possible for any object with the equal
size and shape subjected to the same temperature.
Black bodies do not naturally occur in nature but
some materials can be assumed to approach its perfect
behavior (Foust, 1980).
The heat transfer by radiation can be described by the
Stefan-Boltzmann law showed below:
qb = σ(Tr4 - Ts4) (1)
where qb is the rate of radiation emitted by a black
body per unit area, Tr and Ts are the temperatures of
the radiator and the surroundings, respectively. The
proportionality constant σ is called the Stefan-
Boltzmann constant with a value of 5.67 x 10-8
W/m2K4. As mentioned before, a variety of chemical process
equipment used in different industries use radiation as
For a non-black body, the rate of absorption and mechanism for heat transfer. Examples of these are
emission will not be the same. For a black body, Steam Boilers, Rotary Kilns, Petroleum Plant Stills
and Blast Furnaces, which are widely used in
obtaining valuable metals from ores. It is therefore
important to understand the mechanism of how these
qsurroundings to black body = qblack body to surroundings = (2)
equipment work.
eb
Additionally, the materials used to study the effects of
where eb is the rate at which thermal energy is shielding are used in real life for different insulation
transferred to and from the black body. applications. Automotive insulations are installed to
prevent the heat generated in the engines from
For a non-black body reaching more sensitive parts of the automobile like
qsurroundings to body =eb (3a) the electrical wirings (Moretti et. al., 2015). Extruded
polystyrene foams (XPS), on the other hand are
qabsorbed by body = αeb (3b) commonly used as building insulations (in the roof,
floor and walls). However, due to the low thermal
qreflected by body = (1-α)eb (3c) stability and flammability of XPS insulation materials,
they can pose serious fire risks and have caused major
fire disasters before (Jiao & Sun, 2014). Aluminium
where α is the fraction of radiation absorbed by the is also commonly used as an insulator. Aluminium-air
body. If we define e as the rate of absorption of a non systems are effective insulators against radiation
black body, because of air’s low thermal conductivity and bright
e = αeb= ϵeb (4) aluminium’s low emissivity (Mason, 1933). Thus, it
α=ϵ is important to study how these materials act when
exposed to thermal radiation.
Equation 4 is known as the Kirchoff’s law. This
defines ϵ, which accounts for the difference between a 2 Materials and Methodology
real body and a black body. Therefore, for a non-
black body, 2.1 Materials and Apparatus

For this experiment, in order to facilitate the

qb = σϵ(Tr - Ts )
4 4
(5) conditions for proper observation of radiative effects,
the experiment was conducted inside a dark room. In
this room, a thermal radiation setup was prepared as
All the equations presented so far assumes that the shown in the figure below.
surface emitting heat sees only the surface receiving
heat (black/non-block body), all the radiation emitted
reached the receiving surface and none bounced back
to emitter. In real life, and in this experiment, this
condition cannot be assumed thus a geometric factor
which relates the energy that struck the receiver to the
total energy emitted (Foust, 1980).

This study was conducted observe the effects of the

source temperature, geometry (aperture width) and Figure 1: Thermal Radiation Setup
shielding (with aluminium foil, automotive insulation
and polystyrene foam) to the heat transfer by As can be seen, for the thermal radiation setup, a
radiation. transformer, heat source, black plate, radiometer, and
aperture plate were required. Aside from the thermal
radiation setup, 5x5 sheets of aluminium foil,
Styrofoam, and roof insulation were also used.
For radiometer setup, it must be noted that after every
voltage change and removal or reattachment of the
radiometer shield required approximately between 10-
15 minutes.
2.2 Methodology
A. Effect of Temperature
For the first part of the experiment, the effect of
temperature on thermal radiation was investigated.
Initially, with the radiometer shield firmly placed on
the radiometer, the voltage was set to ¼ of the
maximum voltage. Both temperature and radiometer
readings were then recorded and were set as the zero
offset. The radiometer shield was then removed with
the radiometer reading now read once again. The
radiometer shield was then returned and the entire
process was repeated for two more trials. The entire
procedure was then repeated for ½ of the maximum
voltage, ¾ of the maximum voltage, and finally for
the maximum voltage.
B. Effect of Aperture Width
For the second part of the experiment, the effect of
aperture width on thermal radiation was investigated.
Unlike with the earlier procedure, the radiometer
shield was first removed from the setup. The holder
was then moved to ensure that it was 250 mm away
from the heat source. The voltage level was then set to
its maximum values wherein both temperature and
radiometer readings were recorded. The aperture
plates were then attached and ensured to be upright
and secured. The aperture plates were then adjusted so
as to ensure no space or gap was situated between
them. The radiometer shield was then attached and the
corresponding radiometer reading was then recorded.
The radiometer shield was then removed and the
corresponding radiometer reading was then once again
recorded. This step of attaching and removing the
radiometer shield was then repeated for two more
trials. The aperture plates were then adjusted so that
they were 10 mm apart and the process of attaching
and removing the radiometer shield was repeated for
three trials. This adjusting of the aperture plates was
repeated two additional times, again in additional 10
mm increments, with the attachment and removal of
the radiometer shield being repeated for three trials
each.
C. Effect of Shielding
The final parameter that was tested for this experiment
was the effect of shielding. The voltage of the setup
was first set to its maximum value. The aperture plates
were then removed while the holder was ensured to be
250 mm away from the heat source. The radiometer
was then attached to the radiometer before placing
Styrofoam sheet on the aperture plate holder. The
radiometer reading was then recorded as the zero
offset. The radiometer shield was then removed and
the corresponding radiometer reading recorded. The
procedure was then repeated for two additional trials.
The entire procedure was then repeated for both the
aluminium foil sheet and the insulation sheet.
3 Results and Discussion
As will be analysed in this portion of the paper, the
the three parameters that were tested, temperature,
aperture width, and shielding, all have a profound
effect on the thermal radiation emitted by a body.
Using the setup shown in Figure 1, it is possible to
obtain radiometer readings for the various cases of
varying parameters. However, before using this data
to determine the effects of thermal radiation, it is
important that an offset value first be determined. This
is equivalent to calibrating the device in order to
lessen the effects of radiation readings due to other
unnoticed parameters. Thus, the corrected radiometer
reading can be determined as below:
𝑞𝑞 (??)
= 𝑞𝑞 − 𝑞𝑞
where qc is the corrected radiometer reading, qr is the
actual radiometer reading, and qo is the offset reading
obtained from reading the radiometer when attached
with the shield.
Using this corrected reading, it is now possible to
correlate experimental heat fluxes with the varying
parameters that were tested. As expected, and based
from the Stefan-Boltzmann law, temperature has a
substantial effect on the amount of radiation emitted.

Figure 1: Stefan-Boltzmann Fit of Trial 1
Figure 2: Stefan-Boltzmann Fit of Trial 2
Figure 3: Stefan-Boltzmann Fit of Trial 3
The data obtained shows that the radiative heat flux is
approximately proportional to the difference between
the temperature of the source with the temperature of
the surroundings when both are raised to the 4th
power. However, as can be seen, the linearity of all
three graphs are below the recommended threshold of
0.99. In fact, the obtained experimental value of
Stefan-Boltzmann obtained is approximately 2 x 10-9
W/m2-K. As such, this represents a 96.31% deviation
from the theoretical Stefan-Boltzmann constant value
of 5.67 x 10-8 W/m2-K. As such, experimental errors
introduced a huge effect on the experimental value of
the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
Possible sources of error for this experiment. thus
leading to a different value for the Stefan-Boltzmann
constant, are many. The first is that the dark room
itself could not be fully closed. This is due to the
socket being located outside of the room. As such, the
plug of the radiometer setup prevents the door from
fully closing. What this entails is that the stray light
from outside the room enters and therefore will affect
the radiation readings. In relation to this, the dark
room itself is not fully dark. This is due to the
windows not being fully sealed allowing for the entry
of stray light. These two factors become even more of
a factor as the experiment was conducted in the
morning. As such, as the experiment proceeds and
time goes on, the intensity of the light from the sun
also increases.
Radiation may also not have been the only heat
transfer that occurred during the experiment. Firstly, it
is possible that conduction contributed a significant
factor to the loss of heat as the black plate could have
easily conducted heat away from itself and onto the
setup instead. This effect is further magnified if the
black plate itself is highly conductive. Secondly,
convection may have been a significant factor as well.
Drafts, which may have entered the room either
through the open fan or through the slightly ajar door,
could have affected the heat flux and the readings
obtained.
Aside from the aforementioned sources of error, it is
also possible that the heat produced from the heat
source affected the ambient temperature as well. This
is to be expected as the experiment was conducted
over the course of five hours. Thus, even if the rate of
heat transfer between the air and heat source is to be
small, due to the amount of time the two were
exposed to one another, by thermal equilibrium, the
air will still receive a portion of heat and thus
experience an increase in temperature.
Another explanation for the errors in the fitting of the
data is that the view factor was not taken into account.
For an ideal radiative set-up wherein the black body is
completely surrounded by the absorbing body, then
this can be safely ignored as the view factor would
result in a value of one. However, this is not the case.
As the radiometer is only able to absorb a certain
amount of the radiation emitted, as dictated by the
geometric relationship between the two, the view
factor needs to be accounted for. However,
determining the view factor can be a tedious task and
may necessitate the use of graphs or geometric
derivations. Related to this, the emissivity of the
material also needs to be accounted for. Although
approximated as a black body, the black plate is not
an actual black body and so it is not a perfect emitter.
Therefore, for more accurate results, it is important
that the true emissivity of the body be determined.
For the 2nd part of the experiment, the effect of
aperture width on thermal radiation was determined.
During this portion of the experiment, aperture width
was varied for a specific temperature. Variations in
heat flux recorded were then read.
Figure 4: Corrected Heat Flux vs Aperture Width of
Trial 1
Figure 5: Corrected Heat Flux vs Aperture Width of
Trial 2
Figure 6: Corrected Heat Flux vs Aperture Width of
Trial 3
As can be seen, increasing aperture width correlates
with increasing heat flux due to radiation. This can be
explained simply as an effect of the mechanism of
heat transfer. As radiation travels and hits a particular
object, a portion of the radiation is absorbed,
transmitted, reflected. When the object itself comes to
emit a portion of the absorbed radiation, its emissivity
thus ensures the amount that will be received by the
succeeding body, in this case the radiometer.
A second perspective is to think of it in terms of view
factors. If an object is blocking the path of the
radiation, then less of the radiation will hit the desired
object. However, if one were to open an opening, an
aperture, then more of the radiation is able to reach
the radiometer. The view factor, as mentioned
previously, can be determined in many ways. One of
these ways is to use heat flux data obtained. Assuming
that the Stefan-Boltzmann law applies and that the
black plate is a perfect black body, then the following
expression can be obtained.
𝑞𝑞 = 𝑞𝑞(𝑞4𝑞 − 𝑞4𝑞 ) (??)
where qc is the corrected heat flux, F is the view
factor, 𝜎is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, Tr is the
recorded temperature of the black body and Ts is the
temperature of the surroundings. (Cengel and Ghajar,
2015)
It is then possible to obtain experimental values for
the view factor using the obtained experimental
Stefan-Boltzmann constant as shown below:

Figure 7: Average View Factor vs Aperture Width
Although seemingly linear, the lack of data points and
the many possible sources of error as stated previously
means that a linear trend cannot be completely
concluded. However, as a general trend based on
experimental information gathered, it would seem that
the aperture is linearly proportional to the radiative
heat flux up until a certain point, in this case 40 mm,
where it begins to taper off and begins to resemble a
more logarithmic trend. However, this must be proven
via further experimentation. Furthermore, the view
factor at 50 mm exceeds the limiting value of one so
errors and assumptions during experimentation, such
as assuming a perfect black body, cannot be neglected
and must be fixed in future iterations of the
experiment.
As the last part of the experiment, the relationship
between shielding and heat flux was determined.
Unlike with aperture width, the material type has no
effect on view factor as view factor is a purely
geometric parameter. However, what it does have an
effect on is the emissivity. Each material has its own
emissivity. By assuming that view factor is
approximately equal to one, this emissivity can be
determined in much the same way as with the
determination of view factor with the equation being
slightly modified to change view factor into
emissivity, 𝜖 .
𝑞𝑞 = 𝑞𝑞(𝑞4𝑞 − 𝑞4𝑞 ) (??)
Using the above equation and the experimental
Stefan-Boltzmann constant calculated, the emissivity
of the different materials were calculated as follows
Table 1: Experimentally Determined Emissivity
Material Experimental Theoretical
Emissivity Emissivity
Aluminum Foil 0.03 0.04
Car Insulation 0.12 0.10
Styrofoam 0.15 0.60
Theoretically, the emissivity of aluminium foil, car
insulation, and Styrofoam are approximately 0.04,
0.10, and 0.60 respectively. (Infrared-Thermography)
(The Engineering Toolbox) (Reflectix Inc.) Slight
deviations are present for aluminium foil and car
insulation theoretical values but the value for
Styrofoam is noticeably much different. The
assumption that view factor is equal to one may be a
faulty assumption in this case. Another possible
reason for the error is the difference in thicknesses of
the materials with Styrofoam being noticeably much
thicker than the other measured materials. Aside from
this, it is important to note that emissivity is a function
of material, manufacturing, and temperature and so
the same type of material may exhibit different
emissivity at different conditions.
4 Conclusion and Recommendation
The experiment was largely focused on observing the
varying parameters which affect the thermal radiation
emitted by a body. More specifically, the parameters
were effect of temperature, aperture width, and
shielding. The Stefan-Boltzmann constant was
calculated from the plot of the difference between the
temperature of the surroundings and the temperature
of the source, raised to the fourth power versus the
corrected thermal radiation. The value was determined
to be 2 x 10-9 W/m2-K, which is a 96.31% deviation
from the literature value.
The second part of the experiment was concerned with
the effect of the view factor on radiation. Essentially,
the apertures reduced the thermal radiation which
reached the radiometer because of its own interception
of the heat flux. Based on the version of the Stefan-
Boltzmann equation, which takes into account the
geometric quantity corresponding to the fraction of
radiation intercepted, the experimental view factor for
each system can be read from the graph produced.
Lastly, the emissivity of three materials were
compared against each other. Emissivity is the ratio of
the radiation emitted by a body over the radiation Mason, R. (1933). Thermal Insulation with
emitted by a black body at the same temperature. Aluminium Foil. Ind. Eng. Chem., 25 (3), 245–
Using the Stefan-Boltzmann law with the emissivity 255. doi: 10.1021/ie50279a002
correction factor for grey bodies, the experimental Moretti, J.P. et al. (2015). Recycling scrap automotive
value was determined for Styrofoam, aluminium foil, heat shield insulation material. doi:
and car insulation as 0.15, 0.03, and 0.12, 10.1007/s10163-013-0222-x
respectively. For aluminium foil and insulation, the The Engineering Toolbox. (n.d.). Emissivity
calculated magnitudes were relatively similar to the Coefficient of some Common Materials
literature data; however, the data Styrofoam resulted Reflectix Inc. (n.d.). Reflective Technology
in skewed values in comparison. This is likely due to Performance Information
the errors occurred during the trials along with the
different testing conditions.

For the most part, the experiment was able to describe

the effects of the different parameters on the thermal
radiation emission. However, for subsequent
experiments, it is important that the errors present
during this set-up be avoided. As such, a more
appropriate dark room is recommended to avoid stray
radiation from affecting the results. It is also
recommended that the room have proper non-
convective temperature control so as to prevent
changes in ambient temperature thus ensuring a better
quality set of trials. For further experimentation, it is
also recommended that different materials with
significant industrial and commercial applications,
such as glass panes for windows or textiles for
clothing apparel, be studied in order to develop newer
and better products in more diverse fields. Another
recommendation is to determine the effects of
distance on the radiation absorbed. This can help in
obtaining the heat and radiative properties of different
absorbers and emitters.

References
Cengel Y, Ghajar A. (2015). Heat and Mass Transfer:
Fundamentals & Applications. 5th ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Colorado State University, Walter Scott Jr. College of
Engineering. (n.d.). Heat Transfer Mechanisms.
https://www.engr.colostate.edu/~allan/heat_trans
/page4/page4f.html
Foust, A. S. (1980). Principles of unit operations. New
York: Wiley.
Infrared-Thermography (n.d.) Emissivity Values for
Common Materials
Jiao, L., & Sun, J. (2014). A Thermal Degradation
Study of Insulation Materials Extruded
Polystyrene. Procedia Engineering, 71, 622-
628.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.04.089