Advertisement

Heat and Mass Transfer

, Volume 54, Issue 5, pp 1415–1425 | Cite as

Comparative study of radiometric and calorimetric methods for total hemispherical emissivity measurements

  • Jean-Pierre Monchau
  • Jacques Hameury
  • Patrick Ausset
  • Bruno Hay
  • Laurent Ibos
  • Yves Candau
Original

Abstract

Accurate knowledge of infrared emissivity is important in applications such as surface temperature measurements by infrared thermography or thermal balance for building walls. A comparison of total hemispherical emissivity measurement was performed by two laboratories: the Laboratoire National de Métrologie et d’Essais (LNE) and the Centre d’Études et de Recherche en Thermique, Environnement et Systèmes (CERTES). Both laboratories performed emissivity measurements on four samples, chosen to cover a large range of emissivity values and angular reflectance behaviors. The samples were polished aluminum (highly specular, low emissivity), bulk PVC (slightly specular, high emissivity), sandblasted aluminum (diffuse surface, medium emissivity), and aluminum paint (slightly specular surface, medium emissivity). Results obtained using five measurement techniques were compared. LNE used a calorimetric method for direct total hemispherical emissivity measurement [1], an absolute reflectometric measurement method [2], and a relative reflectometric measurement method. CERTES used two total hemispherical directional reflectometric measurement methods [3, 4]. For indirect techniques by reflectance measurements, the total hemispherical emissivity values were calculated from directional hemispherical reflectance measurement results using spectral integration when required and directional to hemispherical extrapolation. Results were compared, taking into account measurement uncertainties; an added uncertainty was introduced to account for heterogeneity over the surfaces of the samples and between samples. All techniques gave large relative uncertainties for a low emissive and very specular material (polished aluminum), and results were quite scattered. All the indirect techniques by reflectance measurement gave results within ±0.01 for a high emissivity material. A commercial aluminum paint appears to be a good candidate for producing samples with medium level of emissivity (about 0.4) and with good uniformity of emissivity values (within ±0.015).

References

  1. 1.
    Hameury J, Hay B, Filtz JR (2007) Measurement of total hemispherical emissivity using a calorimetric technique. Int J Thermophys 28:1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hameury J, Hay B, Filtz JR (2005) Measurement of infrared spectral directional hemispherical reflectance and emissivity at BNM-LNE,Int J Thermophys 26Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ibos L, Marchetti M, Boudenne A, Datcu S, Livet J, Candau Y (2006) Infrared emissivity measurement device : principle and applications, Meas. Sci. Technology 17:2950Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Monchau J-P, Marchetti M, Ibos L, Dumoulin J, Feuillet V, Candau Y (2014) Infrared emissivity measurements of building and civil engineering materials: a new device for measuring emissivity. Int J Thermophys 35(9):1817–1831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maldague XP (2001) Theory and practice of infrared technology for non destructive testing, Ed. WileyGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Datcu S, Ibos L, Candau Y, Mattëi S (2005) Improvement of building wall surface temperature measurements by infrared thermography. Infrared Phys Technol 46:451–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Larbi youcef M, Feuillet V, Ibos L, Balcon P, Candau Y, Filloux A (1989) Quantitative diagnosis of insulated building walls of restored old constructions using active infrared thermography. QIRT Journal 8(1):65–87, 2011., ADD EditionCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sacadura JF (1990) Measurement techniques for thermal radiation properties, Proceedings of The Ninth International Heat Transfer Conference, Jerusalem, Israel P 207–222Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kauder L (2005) Spacecraft thermal control coatings references, NASA/TP–2005–212792Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fabron C, Meurat A (2001) Measurement of total hemispheric emissivity at low temperature, international symposium on Environnemental testing for space program. Liège, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Especel D, Matteï S (1996) Total emissivity measurement without use of an absolute reference. Infrared Phys Technol 37:777–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Del Campo L, Perez-Saez RB, Esquisabel X, Fernandez I, Tello MJ (2006) New experimental device for infrared spectral directional emissivity measurements in a controlled environment. Review of Scientific Instruments 77(113111):1–8Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tanaka H, Sawai S, Morimoto K, Hisano K (2000) Evaluation of hemispherical total emissivity for thermal radiation calorimetry, Int J Thermophys, 927Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vitkovskii V, Gorshenev VG, Potapov YF (2009) Measurement of spectral directional emissivity of materials and coatings in the infrared region of Spectrum, thermal engineer. Vol 245-248:56–53Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hanssen L, Mekhontsev S, Khromchenko V (2004) Infrared Spectral Emissivity Characterization Facility at NIST, Thermosense XXVI, edited by Douglas D. Burleigh, K. Elliott Cramer,G. Raymond Peacock, Proc. of SPIE Vol. 5405, SPIE, Bellingham, WAGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pantinakis A, Kortsalioudakis N (2001) A simple high-sensitivity radiometer in the infrared for measurements of the directional Total emissivity of opaque materials at near-ambient temperatures. International Journal of Thermophysics 22(6):1843–1854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hanssen LM, Kaplan S (1999) Infrared diffuse reflectance instrumentation and standards at NIST, Anal Chim Acta, 289Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    JCGM 100 (2008), Evaluation of measurement data — Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement, 1st ed. (BIPM, 2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Standard AN (1985) ASME/ANSI B46.1–1985, Surface Texture. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sabuga W, Todtenhaupt R (1999) Bilateral intercomparison of total hemispherical emissivity and normal spectral emissivity measurements at BNM-LNE and PTB - PTB results, technical reportGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Euromet final report n° 516 (2000) Intercomparison of total hemispherical and normal spectral emissivity measurements, BNM-LNEGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Monte C, Hollandt J (2010) The determination of the uncertainties of spectral emissivity measurements in air at the PTB. Metrologia 47:S172–S181CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CERTESUniversité Paris-EstCréteilFrance
  2. 2.THEMACS IngénierieChamps-sur-MarneFrance
  3. 3.Laboratoire National de Métrologie et d’Essais (LNE)TrappesFrance
  4. 4.Laboratoire Interuniversitaire des Systèmes Atmosphériques (LISA), UMR CNRS 7583Université Paris-Est Créteil et Université Paris-DiderotCréteilFrance

Personalised recommendations