What Is the Governing Equation for Heat Transfer in a Composting Pile?

AI Thread Summary
The governing equation for heat transfer in a composting pile is derived from the general heat equation, simplifying to d²T/dx² = -Q/k due to the absence of convection and storage. Boundary conditions are established with the bottom temperature at 20°C and the top surface heat flux equating conduction and convection. An integration attempt leads to confusion regarding the constant C1, with discrepancies in its units and values causing uncertainty in calculations. The maximum temperature occurs at x = 1.14 m, but there is debate over the correctness of C1's definition and its implications on the solution. Overall, the discussion highlights challenges in applying boundary conditions and integrating the governing equation correctly.
edge333
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



One dimensional system in vertical direction
2 meter high composting pile @ 65 \circC
Top of pile has wind @ 40 \circC and h = 50 W/m2*K
Bottom of pile at ground temperature of 20 \circC
Only conductive heat transfer WITHIN pile; no convection
Volumetric biochemical heat generation, Q = 7 W/m3
Compost has k = 0.1 W/m*K

a.) Setup the governing equation and boundary conditions
b.) Determine the temperature as a function of height from the ground
c.) Calculate the maximum temperature in the pile
d.) Calculate the top surface temperature of the pile

Homework Equations



General equation:​
\rho c_{p}\frac{\partial T}{\partial t} + \rho c_{p}\frac{\partial}{\partial x} ( uT ) = k ( \frac{\partial^{2}T}{\partial x^{2}} ) + Q​

Fourier's Law​
q_{x} = -k \frac{dT}{dx}​

Newton's Law of Cooling​
q_{x} = h ( T_{s} - T_{\infty} )​

The Attempt at a Solution



a.)
There is no storage and no convection within the pile, so the general equation reduces to:

\frac{d^{2}T}{dx^{2}} = -\frac{Q}{k}​

Boundary conditions:​
At x = 0, T = 20 \circC​
At \ x = L, -k \frac{dT}{dx} = h( T_{s} - T_{\infty} )​
Heat flux at the top surface due to conduction is equal to heat flux at the top surface due to wind convection​

b.)
Integrating once and using the second boundary condition gives:

\frac{dT}{dx} = - \frac{Q}{k} ( x + C_{1} )

C_{1}=\frac{h( T_{s} - T_{\infty})}{Q}-L​

C_{1}=\frac{(50 \ W/m^{2} \cdot K)(40^{\circ} C - 65^{\circ} C)}{(7 \ W/m^{3})}-(2 \ m)​

C_{1}=-177 \ m​

From what my professor said, this value for C(1) is incorrect (even the units). Haven't gotten to parts c.) and d.) yet. So I just need some using the boundary condition to find the first constant of integration.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is it possible your professor has defined C_1 as

\frac{dT}{dx}=-\frac{Q}{k}x+C_1

I would that's the more typical way to do the integration, though your way is fine too.
 
Yeah, that is the way some of my peers have done it (edit: tried to do it). However, the answer he gave us was 80.06 W/K which I can't figure out. Our my temperatures correct?
 
Last edited:
edge333 said:
Yeah, that is the way some of my peers have done it. However, the answer he gave us was 80.06 W/K which I can't figure out. Our my temperatures correct?

Sorry, the answer for what? C_1? C_1 can be defined multiple ways, so a number alone doesn't have any meaning without the definition.
 
I realize that C1 can be defined multiple ways but the units are in W/k. I have a feeling he made a typo on the units though because the value for C1 works numerically for the following equation in order to determine the maximum temperature in part c.), however, the units don't make sense:

T=-\frac{Q}{k}\frac{x^{2}}{2}+C_{1}x+C_{2}

where C2 = 20 degrees C found by using the first boundary condition.

Max Temperature:​
T_{max}, \ \frac{dT}{dx}=0​

0=-\frac{Q}{k}x+80.06​

x=1.14 \ m​

This answer, x, for Tmaxis another answer he gave us as being correct.

It seems to me that C1 should be in Kelvin per meter not watts per Kelvin[/INDENT][/INDENT] Then again that could just be a typo although I still cannot figure out how to solve for C1 regardless of method to find the correct solution.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top