University of Arkansas
Mechanical Engineering Department
Heat Diffusion Plotting of Aluminum Rod
Victor Perez
Mechanical Engineering Department
ABSTRACT
This report consists of plotting the
diffusion of heat throughout the length of an 8in.
aluminum rod. Based on the results from
experimental values and from SolidWorks 3-D
model simulation of the same rod. ​The analytical
temperature was found using SolidWorks with
the heat transfer coefficient of 34 mW2 K , which
had more than three times of the theoretical heat
transfer coefficient value of 10.84 mW2 K .
NOMENCLATURE
● D - diameter, mm
● g - gravity constant, m/s​2
● h - heat transfer constant, W/m​2​*K
● k - thermal conductivity W/m*K
● Pr - Prandtl number
● Ra - Rayleigh number
● Nu- Nusselt number
● T - temperature, ℃ (celsius)
● x - Location of temperature reading,
mm
Subscripts:
● D - diameter
● s - surface
● ∞ - surrounding environment (room)
Greek:
● ⍺ - thermal diffusivity, m/s​2
● β - thermal expansion coefficient, K​-1
● 𝜈 - kinematic viscosity, m/s​2
INTRODUCTION
MEEG 3212 – Lab II
Monday Section 01
Heat energy transferred between a
surface and a moving fluid with different
temperatures is known as​ convection. T​ he
diffusion of heat is used to observe how a
material is affected by heat. The heat transfer
constant of the body is important to calculate the
diffusion. The heat transfer coefficient is
calculated along with measuring the temperature
differentials between the different points on the
body. [3]
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this experiment is to
heat an aluminum block and rod and plot the
heat diffusion. As well as creating a SolidWorks
model of the rod and create a heat study and
comparing results with experimental data.
THEORY
In this experiment the theoretical value
of heat transfer coefficient was calculated using
equation (1):
h = Dk N uD (1)[1]
Thermal conductivity (k) was equal to
0.0313W/mK and diameter of rod (D) was equal
to 0.0143m. Next, the following equation (2)
was used to find Nusselt number ( N uD ):
N uD = {0.6 + 0.378 Ra1/6
D
[1 + (0.559/P r)9/16 ] 8/27 } 2
(2)[1]
Prandtl number (Pr) was equal to 0.697. Next,
the following equation (3) was used to find
Rayleigh number ( RaD ):
gβ(T s − T ∞ ) D3
RaD = vα (3)[1]

Gravity (g) was equal to 9.86 m/ s2 , thermal

expansion coefficient (β) was equal to
0.002725K −1 , surface temperature ( T s ) was
equal to 480.15K, room temperature ( T ∞ ) was
equal to 295K, kinematic viscosity (v) was equal
to 22.8E −6 m2 /s , and thermal diffusivity (α)
was equal to 32.8E −6 m2 /s [1].
Percent error is calculated with
equation (4):
#experimental − #theoretical |
%Error = || #theoretical | * 100 (4)[2] Figure 2. Labjack and Thermocouple setup
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
To setup this experiment start by placing Connect Labjack to computer and open LogUD
the aluminum block with the rod coming out of software. Adjust scaling equation on LogUD
one of the side faces on top of the hot plate. with the following equation found in Labjack
Setup Labjack and thermocouples. Use Labjack website:
website and diagram below to setup Labjack and y=TCVoltsToTemp[K:(b-0.412)/51:a]-273.15
thermocouples.
Place both of the thermocouples on the center of
the aluminum block and check temperature of
block with thermometer. Calibrate the
thermocouples by adjusting the equation above
to match the measurement from the
thermometer. LogUD should look similar to
Figure 1. Thermocouple diagram Figure 10 in appendix A. The thermocouple, the
stand, the hot plate and aluminum block should
Thermocouples and Labjack connection should be set up like the image below.
look like image below.
 temperatures at different marks. Resistors were
used to ground the negative side of the
thermocouple. The thermometer was used to
compare temperature readings with
thermocouples. Tape measure was used to
measure dimensions of rod and marks on rod.
SolidWorks software was used to create a 3-D
model of rod and run a thermal study.
PROCEDURE
1. Turn on hot plate to 200 degrees celsius.
2. Place the thermocouple that is not in the
stand in the center of the block.
3. Place thermocouple that is on the stand
on the weld that connects the block with
the rod.
4. Check temperature of block. Once it
Figure 4. Complete experimental setup reaches 200 degrees celsius and
stabilizes the data collection can begin.
EQUIPMENT 5. Move the thermocouple on the rod 0.5
inches in the positive x-direction from
All found in MEEG 109E
the starting point. Wait for
thermocouple to stabilize and record
● Hot plate, Thermo Scientific, model
temperature of the point on the rod and
#HPA1915BQ, serial
the block center.
#C1705140726096
6. Repeat step 5 until the end of the rod.
● LabJack U3-HV #320067435
7. Experimental data is complete.
● 2x Thermocouple and stand
8. Measure dimension of aluminum rod
● LJ tick Amp
and create a SolidWorks model.
● Aluminum block and rod
9. Create .1 inch circle marks on the rod
● LJ LogUD software
representing marks on physical rod.
● 2x 10k resistors
10. Separate the circle every 0.5 inches.
● Thermometer, Extech Instruments
11. Should be a total of 16 points.
39420
12. Add sensors to each point.
● Tape measurer
13. Create thermal simulation.
● SolidWorks software
14. Add thermal load to x0 face of 208
degrees celsius.
Hot plate was used to heat up aluminum block.
15. Add convection load on the rest of the
LabJack was used to connect thermocouple and
exposed faces.
get a reading on LogUD. Thermocouples were
16. Convection coefficient equals 20
used to measure temperatures by using a scaling
W/m^2K.
equation on LogUD. LJ tick amp was used
17. Bulk ambient temperature is first
conjunction with LabJack. The aluminum rod
guessed to be 296K.
was used to measure the different heat
 18. Run the study. origin and location 1. Next, the analytical data of
19. After running the study check the results the temperature of the rod were determined
of each thermal sensor. using SolidWorks. The Rayleigh number was
20. Compare to results from experimental determined by considering equation (3) and
data. given values as:
21. Change convection coefficient to get RaD = 1.9452E+4
results to closely match experimental
data. Next, the Nusselt number was determined by
22. Record new convection coefficient calculating equation (2):
value. N uD = 4.950778616
DATA AND RESULTS
The graph of temperature difference is Thus, the convection heat transfer coefficient
was determined from equation (1):
shown in Figure 5.
h = 10.84 mW2 K

h value of SolidWorks was determined by

adjusting the temperature at the edge of the rod
after finding the theoretical value of h. Heat
distribution in SolidWorks are shown below:
The convection heat transfer coefficient of
SolidWorks was set as:
h = 34 mW2 K

Next, temperature between analytical and

Figure 5. Temperature at Block and Rod experimental values are plotted in Figure 7.

The data was plotted with a decreasing function

that depends on the location of the rod. The
location of the rod is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Location of the rod to Measure Figure 7. Temperature between Analytical and
Temperature (including origin). Experimental

According to the data, the temperature decreased In Figure 6, 16 locations including origin were
as the location got closer to the edge of the rod set on the rod to obtain temperature in
and there was a large temperature drop between SolidWorks. There was 23.16 mW2 K difference in
the value of heat transfer coefficient between
theoretical and SolidWorks. Errors between
analytical and experimental temperatures were
determined by using the error equation (4).
According to Table 1, although analytical
temperatures are higher than experimental
temperatures until the location 8, they became
lower after location 8. Thus, location 8 has a
small error between analytical and experimental
temperatures. Although the experimental value
at location 1 had the largest percent error of
8.86%, all locations had less than 10% errors.
Finally, collection function of analytical and
experimental temperature functions was
determined by adding trendlines of both
analytical and experimental plots and
exponential equations were obtained as follows:
F SolidW orks = 175.4e(−0.054x)
F Experimental = 165.47e(−0.048x)
Both functions of analytical and experimental
temperatures are plotted and shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8. Temperature between F SolidW orks and
F Experimental
Collection function is determined by the
following equation:
F Experimental
FC = F SolidW orks
Then, collection function was determined as :
FC = 0.943e(0.006x)
Collection function values are plotted and shown
in Figure 9.
Figure 9. Collection Function
According to the graph shown in Figure 9,
collection function values are between 1 ± 0.1,
which are acceptable values.
DISCUSSION
According to Figure 5, location 1 had the largest
temperature drop. One reason could be that the
origin (location 0) was close to the center of the
block and had the largest temperature. The fluid
flow around location 1 got dramatically larger
than at location 1 since there was the block next
to location 0 and location 1 got further from the
block. Furthermore, locations except location 1
had smooth decreasing temperatures since the
fluid flow around the rod became constant
compared at location 1.
From Figure 7, the analytical temperature was
found using SolidWorks with the heat transfer
coefficient of 34 mW2 K , which had more than
three times of the theoretical heat transfer
coefficient value of 10.84 mW2 K . This result
shows that the rod in the experiment had more
difficult to get heat than theory and some
reasons could be considered such as fluid flow
or material. There could be some fluid flow
around the rod, which caused the larger center of the rod had the most
convection heat. In addition, the rod we used in acceptable temperature in analytical and
the experiment may have been slightly different experimental analysis.
from the perfect Aluminum 6061 since the rod ● There were some errors in the value of
had some scars and stains. heat transfer coefficient in SolidWorks
because it considered the constant heat
The graph of correction function (Figure 9) transfer coefficient at all locations on
showed that since the center of the rod had the the rod. However, it actually changed at
values close to 1, it had the acceptable values of each location.
temperature between analytical and
experimental. Although SolidWorks considered ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
the constant heat transfer coefficient at all The authors would like to thank the
locations on the rod, it changed with the location
University of Arkansas and the Mechanical
of the rod in real. Thus, some errors were caused
Engineering Department within for providing
the heat transfer coefficient in SolidWorks that
the equipment and facilities for the experiment.
was not accurate. In addition, some errors
In addition, the authors would like to thank
happened because of the way of measuring the
Monty Roberts and Austin Crawford for helpful
temperature. Although we tried to measure the
advice on writing the report.
temperature using the tip of the thermocouple, it
may have been moved due to the curve of the
rod. REFERENCES
[1] Roberts, Monty, Lab II MEEG 3212,
Unit 4, Fall 2018, Section 001, University of
CONCLUSION
Arkansas.
● Due to the fluid flow difference, there
[2] Imaging the Universe,A lab manual
was a large temperature drop between
developed by the University of Iowa Department
location 0 and 1 on the rod.
of Physics and Astronomy,
● The heat transfer coefficient of
http://astro.physics.uiowa.edu/ITU/glossary/perc
experiment and theory had a large
ent-error-formula/​.
difference. It is considered that some
[3]Thermal
artificial fluid flow around the rod could
Diffusivity,​https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therma
be the cause of errors or the material
l_diffusivity​.
that was not a perfect Aluminum 6061
because of scars and stains could be
another cause of errors.
● Since obtained correction function was
around 1 ± 0.1, it was acceptable. The
Appendix A
Figure 10: LogUD scaling equations

Appendix B

Point Analytical Temperature Experimental Temperature Error (%)

( Co ) ( Co )

0 190.733 202.53 6.185085958

1 175.365 162 -7.621247113

2 161.663 147.34 -8.859788573

3 149.476 137.3 -8.145789291

4 138.673 130.29 -6.045156591

5 129.136 123.8 -4.132077809

6 120.759 117.2 -2.947192342

7 113.452 111.59 -1.64122272

8 107.134 104.63 -2.33725988

9 101.738 102.07 0.326328412

10 97.2026 99.56 2.425243769

11 93.4797 96.96 3.72305431

12 90.5284 94.89 4.817935587

13 88.3163 90.93 2.959476337

14 86.8201 88.45 1.87733025

15 86.0709 86.63 0.649580753

Table 1. Temperature between Analytical and Experimental and percent errors