The Use of Numerical Heat Transfer Techniques to Analyze Thermal Comparator Conductivity Measurements

  • James N. Sweet
  • Marvin Moss
  • Carlton E. Sisson


In the comparative conductivity measurement technique, a uniform axial heat flow is assumed to exist in a stack composed of two reference disks with a sample disk sandwiched between them. The sample conductivity is found from measured temperature drops across and thicknesses of the stack elements. In practice, the heat flow in the stack is non-uniform and corrections must be made for this effect. We have made a detailed numerical heat transfer analysis of the commercially available Dynatech TCFCM comparator with the aid of a finite difference numerical heat transfer code (SINDA). The goal of this study has been to determine the effect of non-uniform axial heat flux on the measured conductivity and to define the magnitude of the errors likely to be observed in various experimental situations. Correction factors are given for correcting the measured conductivities of samples with true conductivities in the range ≈0.05–1 W/m-K when measured against Pyrex or Pyroceram. Estimated errors are given for measurements with various combinations of Pyrex and Pyroceram references and samples. Results are also given to show the utility of numerical calculations in situations where the sample diameter is significantly less than the reference diameter. Various approximate methods of correcting for nonuniform heat flow are compared to the numerical predictions for selected cases.


Numerical Heat Transfer Uniform Heat Flux Auxiliary Heater Insulation Region Centerline Temperature 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    The Dynatech Model TCFCM comparative thermal conductivity instrument is manufactured by Dynatech R/D CO., Cambridge, MA. Reference to a particular product or company implies neither a recommendation nor an endorsement by Sandia National Laboratories or the U. S. Department of Energy, nor a lack of suitable substitutes.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Powell, R. W.; Ho, C. Y.; Liley, P. E.; “Thermal Conductivity of Selected Materials,” NBS publication NSRDS-NBS8, 1966.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moss, M; Koski, J. A.; Haseman, G. M.; “Measurement of Thermal Conductivity by the Comparative Technique,” Sandia National Laboratories report SAND82-0109, 1982.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Laubitz, M. J., “Measurement of the Thermal Conductivity of Solids at High Temperatures by Using Steady State Linear and Quasi-Linear Heat Flow,” in Thermal Conductivity Vol. I, R. P. Tye, Ed(Academic Press, NY, 1969) Chap. 3. See especially pp. 174–182.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sisson, C. E., “An Automated 2-D Thermal Mode to Predict Tem-peratures in the Material Stack of a Thermal Comparator Test Device,” Sandia National Laboratories report SAND83-1900, 1983.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    TRW Report, 14690-H001-RO-00, SINDA User’s Manual,11 prepared under NASA Contract 9-10435, April, 1971.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    TRW Report, I4690-H002-R0-C)0, “SINDA Engineering-Program Manual,” prepared under NASA Contract 9-10435, June 1971.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Touloukian, Y. S., Ed, “TPRC Data Series - Vol. I, Thermal Conductivity of Metallic Solids,” IFI/Plenum, NY, 1970; p. 1017, 1174.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Flynn, D. R., “Thermal Conductivity of Ceramics,” in “Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Ceramics,” Ed by J. B. Wachtman Jr., NBS Special Publication 303, May 1969, pp. 63–123.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Didion, D. A., “An Analysis and Design of a Linear Guarded Cut-Bar Apparatus for Thermal Conductivity Measurements,” Tech Report No. 2 prepared under Contract NONR 2249(12) for ONR, Catholic Univ. of America, Wash., DC, 1968.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kennedy, D. P., “Spreading Resistance in Cylindrical Semiconductor Devices,” J. Appl. Phys. 31 1490 (1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mirkovich, V. V., “Comparative Method and Choice of Standards for Thermal Conductivity Determinations,” J. Am. Ceramic Soc. 48 387 (1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sweet, J. N.; McCreight, J. E.; “Thermal Conductivity of Rock-salt and Other Geologic Materials from the Site of the Proposed Waste Isolation Power Plant,” Thermal Conductivity 16, Ed by D. C. Larson, Plenum, NY, 1983, pp. 61–78.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moss, M; Koski, J. A.; Lappin, A. R.; “Thermal Conductivity of Tuff: the Effects of Composition, Porosity, Bedding Plane Orientation, Water Content and a Joint,” Proc. of ASME/JSME Thermal Engineering Joint Conference, Vol. II, Honolulu, March, 1983, p. 199.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Purdue Research Foundation 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • James N. Sweet
    • 1
  • Marvin Moss
    • 1
  • Carlton E. Sisson
    • 1
  1. 1.Sandia National LaboratoriesAlbuquerqueUSA

Personalised recommendations