CHEMICAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY VII (EP329)

NO. OF EXPERIMENT: 5
TITLE OF EXPERIMENT: Fourier’s Law study for linear conduction of heat along
homogeneous bar.
NAME ID
Mohsen Khaled 1001644699
Ebrahim Khaled 1001643008
Mahendran Sithamparam 1001438347
GROUP: Wednesday
DATE OF EXPERIMENT: 26/02/2020
DATE OF SUBMISSION: 4/03/2020
TUTOR: NURUL HUDA BINTI M. ALI

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING, TECHNOLOGY & BUILT

ENVIRONMENT

2020

Table of Contents

Cover Page 1
 Table of Contents 2
1.0 Objectives 3
2.0 Introduction 3
3.0 Materials and Methodology 5
4.0 Results and Calculation 7
5.0 Discussion11
6.0 Limitation of Report 12
7.0 Conclusion 12
8.0 References 13

Experiment 5:Fourier’s Law For Linear Conduction

Page 2 of 13
1.0 Objectives
 To investigate Fourier’s Law for the linear conduction of heat along a homogenous
bar.
 To study the conduction of heat along a composite bar and evaluate the overall heat
transfer coefficient.
 To understand how cross-sectional area and material type affect the heat conduction.
 To understand on how to select different material and sizes for heat transfer in real
world applications.
 Illustrate the transfer of heat by conduction in solid materials while varying the
parameter affecting conduction.

2.0 Introduction

Thermal conduction is a mode of heat transfer which occurs in a material due to the
presence of temperature gradient. It is a transfer of energy from the more energetic particles
to the adjacent less energetic particles.

There are three modes of heat transfer, which are conduction, convection and
radiation. The transfer of heat is normally from high temperature object to a lower
temperature object. The transfer of heat or electric current from one substance to another by
direct contact are formerly known as conduction. The process of heat conduction depends on
four basic factors: the temperature gradient, the cross section of the material, the path length,
and the properties of the material. A temperature gradient is a physical quantity that describes
in which direction and at what rate the temperature changes in a specific location.
Temperature always flows from the hottest to the coldest source. Cross-section and path
length are also important factors. The greater the size of the material involved in the transfer;
the more heat is needed to warm it. Also, the more surface area that is exposed to open air,
the greater likelihood for heat loss.

The heat conduction process is modelled by Fourier’s Law and thermodynamics of energy
conservation. The resulting mathematical descriptions can be written as ordinary of partial
differential equations.

Page 3 of 13
For Linear Conduction of Heat Transfer, Fourier’s Law states that:

dT
Q=−kA
dX

Where, Q = heat flow rate [W]

k = thermal conductivity of the material [W/m. K]

A = cross-sectional area of the conduction [m2]

dT = changes of temperature between 2 points [K]

dX = changes of displacement between 2 points [m]

The amount of heat (Q), which is conducted across the cylinder wall per unit time, is:

−2 π Lk (Ti−¿)
Q=
Ro
ln
Ri

Where, Q = heat flow rate [W]

L = thickness of the material [m]

k = thermal conductivity of the material [W/m. K]

Ti = inner section temperature [K]

To = outer section temperature [K]

Ro = outer radius [m]

Ri = inner radius [m]

Page 4 of 13
3.0 Materials and Methodology

3.0.1 Materials

1. Brass Conductor
2. Stainless Steel Conductor
3. SOLTEQ® Heat Conduction Study Bench (Model : HE105)
4. Ruler

3.0.2 Methodology

(A) LINEAR CONDUCTION OF HEAT ALONG HOMOGENOUS BAR

1. Initially, the main was switched off. Then, a Brass conductor (25mm) intermediate

section was inserted into the linear module and clamped together.

2. The water supply was turned on and ensured the water flow was flowing from the free

end of the water pipe to drain. It was checked during the intervals.

3. The heater power control knob control panel was turned on to the fully anticlockwise

position and the sensor leads were connected.

4. The power supply and main switch was switch on ; the digital readouts were

illuminated.

Page 5 of 13
 5. The heater power control was switched on. The heater power between 0 – 50 watts

was regulated. After each change, sufficient time were allowed to achieve steady state

conditions.

6. The temperature reading from T1 until T9 was taken.

7. The temperature, T versus distance, x was plotted. The theoretical and actual thermal

conductivity was calculated.

(B) CONDUCTION OF HEAT AND OVERALL HEAT TRANSFER ALONG A

COMPOSITE BAR

1. The switch was made sure to be initially switched off. The stainless steel section or
any other metals (without sensor) was inserted into the linear module and clamped
together.
2. The water supply was turned on and ensured that water was flowing from the free end
of the water pipe to the drain. This was checked at the intervals.
3. The heater panel control knob control panel was turned on to the fully anticlockwise
position.
4. The power supply and main switch was switched ; the digital readouts were
illuminated.
5. The heater power control was switched on. The heater power was regulated to 0 – 40
watts.
After each change, sufficient time was allowed to achieve steady state conditions.
6. The temperature reading of T1,T2,T3,T7,T8,T9 was taken.
7. The temperature, T versus distance, x was plotted. The theoretical and actual thermal
conductivity was calculated.

Page 6 of 13
4.0 Results and Calculation

Material: Brass

Heater T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9
power,
(0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C)
Q(Watts)
0 28.2 28.4 28.1 27.9 27.9 28.1 27.7 27.7 27.8

10 29 33.8 31.1 29.2 29.2 29.2 27.8 27.8 28

20 46.8 45.6 37.4 33.8 33.4 34 28 27.9 28.0

30 67.8 65 49 48.7 47.2 46.7 28.4 28.1 28.2

40 89.6 90.1 61.6 66.9 44.5 67.1 29.2 28.5 28.7

Distance x 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 00.16
(m)

Table 1: Temperature Reading at Different Heater Watt

Page 7 of 13
 Temperature(degC) vs Distance(m)
100
90
80
70
Temperature (C)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16
Distance (m)

Q=0 Q=10 Q=20 Q=30 Q=40

Figure 1: Temperature against distance using Heater Watts’s power

Fourier’s equation:

Cross-sectional area, A = π r 2

2
25 mm 1m
=π ( 2
×
1000 mm )
= 4.909 × 10-4 m2

Power (W) Experimental value of k

0 ∆T
q=−k A
∆x ( )
0=¿ -k(4.909 × 10-4)(( 27.8-28.2)/(0.16-0.08))
k = 0 W/m.K
10 ∆T
q=−k A
∆x ( )
10=¿ -k(4.909 × 10-4)(( 28-24)/(0.16-0.08))
k = 187.2 W/m.K
20 k = 173.36 W/m.K
30 k = 145.5 W/m.K
40 k = 107.038W/m.K

Page 8 of 13
 Average Average value of k:
0+187.2+173.36+145.5+107.038
k average =
5
k average = 122.6196 W/m. K

Table 2: Calculation of experimental k of brass.

According to literature, the theoretical value of the thermal conductivity of brass is 109 W/m
∙ K at 25oC.

∴ Thus, percentage error, % error = |TheoreticalTheoretical

value−Experimental value
value |×100 %
= |109−122.6196
109 |×100 % = 12.5%

Material: Stainless Steel Data

Heater T1 T2 T3 T7 T8 T9
power,
(0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C)
Q(Watts)
0 91.2 85.2 63.9 28.5 28.2 28.5

10 85.1 78.4 61.4 29.2 28.8 29.0

20 102 91,9 70.5 29.5 29.0 29.1

30 102 91.9 70.5 29.8 29.3 29.5

40 120.2 107.3 80.9 30.5 29.7 30

Table 2: Temperature Reading at Different Heater Watt

Page 9 of 13
 Temperature(degC) vs Distance(m)
140

120

100
Temperature (C)

80

60

40

20

0
0.08 0.09 0.1 0.14 0.15 28.7
Distance (x)

Q=0 Q=10 Q=20 Q=30 Q=40

Figure 2: Temperature against distance using Heater Watts’s power

Cross-sectional area, A = π r 2

2
25 mm 1m
=π ( 2
×
1000 mm )
= 4.909 × 10-4 m2

Power (W) Experimental value of k

0 ∆T
q=−k A
∆x ( )
0=¿ -k(4.909 × 10-4)(( 28.5-91.2)/(0.14-0.1))
k = 0 W/m.K
10 ∆T
q=−k A
∆x ( )
10=¿ -k(4.909 × 10-4)(( 29.0-85.1)/(0.16-0.08))
k = 23.34 W/m.K
20 k = 51.08W/m.K
30 k = 60.06W/m.K
40 k = 64.69W/m.K
Average Average value of k:
0+23.34+51.08+ 60.06+64.69
k average =
5
k average = 39.834 W/m. K
Table 2: Calculation of experimental k of brass.

Page 10 of 13
According to literature, the theoretical value of the thermal conductivity of stainless steel is
16 W/m∙ K at 25oC.

∴ Thus, percentage error, % error = |T h eo reticalTheoretical

value− Experimental value
value |× 100 %
= |16−39.834
16 |× 100 % = 148.963 %
The overall heat transfer coefficient:
1
U=
X1 X2 X3
+ +
K 1 K2 K3

1
U=
0.08 0.09 0.1
+ +
122.6196 39.834 122.6196

U =268.2885

5.0 Discussion

This experiment Defines the thermal conductivity and explains its significance in the
heat transfer. When the heated and cooled surfaces are held closely together and are in decent
thermal contact, heat conductivity occurs. Formerly the two sections can consider as a
continuous homogenous or composite sample of uniform cross section and material.
According to Fourier’s law of heat conduction Q= kA dt/dx and based on table 1,2 of both
homogeneous bar(brass) and composite bar (brass + stainless steel), heat transfer will
become less, at T7,T8 and T9, which explain the theory that stated the conduction heat
transfer will occur when there is a temperature gradient . In this experiment, the higher the
temperature gradient is created by the heater and the lower gradient temperature is made by
the cooling water at the end part of the metal rod.

The power was set to 10 watts, 30 watts, and 40 watts with respect to the intervals that was
taken as 2 minutes each. In the increasing of the power supply the rate of heat transfer
increases. For part a, heat transferred through homogenous bar which was made out of brass.
The end part of the rod was connected to water stream to ensure equilibrium and flow of heat

Page 11 of 13
to the cool part. The calculated average thermal conductivity of brass was 122.6 W/m∙ K with
percentage error of 12.3% when compared to the theoretical value which is 109 W/m∙ K

While for composite rod, theoretically heat transfer should be less than brass homogenous
bar. However, table 2 shows that the heat transfer is high for composite which might be due
humans error by not allocating sufficient time for the rod to cool down to room temperature
before proceeding with part two of the experiment, that result in high temperature reading for
0 watts ,10 watts ,20 watts and 30 watts. As shown in the calculation above the obtained
average thermal conductivity of stainless steel was 39.834 W/m. K with percentage error of
148.963 % when compared to the therorerictal vaule which is 16 W/m∙ K.

6.0 Limitation of Report

During the experiment, there are few limitations that cause the results obtained vary from the
theoretical values such as. The first limitation encountered was the power supply of
SOLTEQ® Heat Conduction Study Bench was not stable and may have caused errors on the
temperature reading and the thermal conductivity when calculated. Next, while taking the
temperature readings mainly at T1, T2 and T3, the temperature was not in steady condition as
it kept increasing. Moreover, when conducting part B after part A due to human error,
insufficient time was given for the apparatus to cool down which affected the initial
temperature and eventually the results between theoretical thermal conductivity and
experimental results.

7.0 Conclusion

Thermal conductivity of brass and stainless steel were investigated in the first part of the
experiment while the overall heat transfer coefficient was investigated in the second part of
the experiment. Students was exposed to a study on Fourier’s law for linear conduction on
both homogenous and composite bar. Several experiments were performed on a heat
conduction bench to investigate Fourier’s linear conduction theory. The trends of each
experiment was studied and justified by the metals atomic behaviour. In summary, an
increase in temperature causes the free electrons to have higher average velocity which
results in higher heat transfer rate and higher thermal conductivity. However, too high of a
temperature may decrease the thermal conductivity of the metal due to the increase in

Page 12 of 13
molecular vibrations of the atoms which obstructs the free electrons from transferring heat,
thus reducing the heat transfer rate. The results however, were precise but not exactly
accurate. The results could have been improved by following the precautionary measures
mentioned above.

8.0 References
1. ResearchGate, (2001, May). Fourier’s law of heat conduction. Retrieved February 27, 2020
from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226052357_On_Fourier's_law_of_heat_conducti
on
2. ScienceDirect, (2017, June). Fourier Law. Retrieved February 27, 2020 form
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/fourier-law
3. Joseph, D. D. and Preziosi, L., Heat Waves, Rev. Modern Chemistry. 61, (1989) page
41- 73; Joseph, D. D. and Preziosi, L.,Addendum to the paper “Heat Waves”, Rev.
Modern Chemistry (1990) page 375-391.
4. Fourier, J. B. J., Analytical Theory of Heat, (Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., Chicago
IL, 1952).
5. An Introduction to Heat Transport by Conduction and Fourier's Law (May, 2013) by
Patrick Bruskiewich , Online book (page 5-16).

Page 13 of 13