Validate the Stefan Boltzmann equation

AI Thread Summary
To validate the Stefan Boltzmann equation at a temperature of 109°C with an emissivity of 0.81, the correct approach involves calculating the correction factor and the measured irradiance. The initial calculation mistakenly assumed emissivity of 1 for the blackbody, leading to confusion about the correction factor's application. The measured irradiance should be adjusted by subtracting the correction factor, as the thermopile measures 0 W/m² at 27°C. Ultimately, the measured irradiance must reflect a decrease from the actual value due to the correction factor. Understanding these adjustments is crucial for accurate validation of the equation.
tomadevil
Messages
11
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


You are performing an experiment to validate the Stefan Boltzmann equation. What irradiance would you measure at a temperature of 109C? The emissivity of your thermal heat source is 0.81 and your thermopile measures 0 W/m2 at 27 C when directed towards a blackbody. Submit your answer in units of W/m2, do not include the units in your answer.

Answer tolerance is +/- 0.2%.

Homework Equations


E=σeT^4

3. The Attempt at a Solution

I presume I have to work out a correction factor like this:
Ec=081*5.67E-8*300^4=372 W/m2
Then calculate measured irradiance:
E=5.67E-8*382^4*1=1207
Then I have to add the correction factor Ec to E to get the measured irradiance (Em):
Em=Ec+E=1579 w/m2

Am I doing it right?

Thanks for your answers.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello,

1. Why do you assume the emissivity to be 1 when the temperature is 382 K?
2. Why do you add (and not subtract) the correction factor? Just think that your zero is at 372 W/m2.
 
1. Ohh, I get it know. I used 1 because of the blackbody, but I know now that is irrelevant. :)
2.I added the correction factor because the thermopile should measure 0 at 0 Kelvin. Therefore, the measured irradiance is always less by 372 W/m2.
 
  • Like
Likes DoItForYourself
Exactly, the measured E must be less than the real by 372 W/m2. So, Emeasured=Ereal-Ecorrection.

Your equation implies that the measured E is bigger than the real E (by 372 W/m2).
 
Ohh, yes. I understand it know. Thank you! :-)
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top