2020Unpublished venueRequires access

Differences in calculation methods of effective emissivity of blackbody cavity

Yuxuan Ma, Guojin Feng

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

It is very difficult to directly measure the effective emissivity of a blackbody cavity, which is generally calculated by the indirect methods. Different calculation methods have certain differences. In this paper, the STEEP software, TRACEPRO software and approximation formula are used to calculate the effective emissivity of the blackbody cavity for the three commonly used blackbody models of integrating sphere, cylindrical and cylindrical-conical, and Compare the results of emissivity greater than 0.99. The results show that the consistency of the results of the three methods in calculating the cylindrical type and the integrating sphere type blackbody can be better than 0.03%. When calculating the conical black body, the difference between the results of the approximate formula and the other two schemes is less than 0.07%. The calculation results of the scheme tend to be consistent with the increase of the emissivity of the model.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

It is very difficult to directly measure the effective emissivity of a blackbody cavity, which is generally calculated by the indirect methods. Different calculation methods have certain differences. In this paper, the STEEP software, TRACEPRO software and approximation formula are used to calculate the effective emissivity of the blackbody cavity for the three commonly used blackbody models of integrating sphere, cylindrical and cylindrical-conical, and Compare the results of emissivity greater than 0.99. The results show that the consistency of the results of the three methods in calculating the cylindrical type and the integrating sphere type blackbody can be better than 0.03%. When calculating the conical black body, the difference between the results of the approximate formula and the other two schemes is less than 0.07%. The calculation results of the scheme tend to be consistent with the increase of the emissivity of the model.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

It is very difficult to directly measure the effective emissivity of a blackbody cavity, which is generally calculated by the indirect methods. Different calculation methods have certain differences. In this paper, the STEEP software, TRACEPRO software and approximation formula are used to calculate the effective emissivity of the blackbody cavity for the three commonly used blackbody models of integrating sphere, cylindrical and cylindrical-conical, and Compare the results of emissivity greater than 0.99. The results show that the consistency of the results of the three methods in calculating the cylindrical type and the integrating sphere type blackbody can be better than 0.03%. When calculating the conical black body, the difference between the results of the approximate formula and the other two schemes is less than 0.07%. The calculation results of the scheme tend to be consistent with the increase of the emissivity of the model.

Key concepts: Emissivity, Black-body radiation, Conical surface, Low emissivity, Physics, Optics, Consistency (knowledge bases), Computational physics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Differences in calculation methods of effective emissivity of blackbody cavity — Research Paper | ScholarLens