1 PDF

INFLUENCE OF INFRARED ENERGY
ON EARLY GROWTH RATES OF POULTRY
BY
NOUREDDINE B. ABDALLAH
B.Sc. Texas A & M U n i v e r s i t y , 1969
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCE
in t h e Department o f
Agricultural Engineering
We a c c e p t this thesis as c o n f o r m i n g to the
required standard
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

December, 1973.
In p r e s e n t i n g this thesis in partial f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r
an advanced degree at t h e U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that
the Library shall make i t freely available f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .
I f u r t h e r agree t h a t permission f o rextensive copying o f this thesis
for s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r
by h i s representatives. I t i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n
of this thesis f o r financial gain shall n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my
written permission.
Department o f A g r i c u l t u r a l Engineering
The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia
V a n c o u v e r 8 , Canada
Date December 17, 1973

ABSTRACT
The r a d i o s i t y method o f r a d i a n t interchange analysis
of e n c l o s u r e s was u s e d to predict the i n t e n s i t y and t h e
uniformity of thermal r a d i a t i o n within a controlled environ-
ment chamber. The chamber was d e s i g n e d for testing the e f f e c t s
of infrared radiation on young b r o i l e r s . The w a l l s o f t h e
chamber were assumed t o be g r e y and s e p a r a t e d by a r a d i a t i v e l y
non-participating medium. A l s o the b l a c k globe thermometer
method was used to c a l c u l a t e the i n c i d e n t radiation at different
locations i n t h e chamber. Then, the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d by t h e
two mentioned methods, were compared.
Two separate experiments were d e s i g n e d for different
purposes. The f i r s t experiment was t o s t u d y the influence
of infrared radiation on p o u l t r y . In t h i s experiment, two
levels of radiation were t e s t e d and t h e r e s u l t s were compared
to t h o s e o b t a i n e d by u s e o f a c o n v e n t i o n a l h e a t lamp brooding
system. The s e c o n d experiment was t o compare a controlled
temperature, warm a i r b r o o d i n g system, to a c o n v e n t i o n a l
heat lamp brooding system. The r e l a t i v e e f f e c t s i n both
sets of experiments were m e a s u r e d by u s e o f t h e w e e k l y growth
rate index.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
TITLE PAGE
ABSTRACT i i
TABLE OF CONTENTS i i i
L I S T OF FIGURES V
L I S T OF TABLES vi
L I S T OF SYMBOLS XX.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xiii
INTRODUCTION 1
LITERATURE REVIEW 3
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN 7
EXPERIMENTAL MATERIAL AND PROCEDURE 12
DESCRIPTION OF EXPERIMENTAL EQUIPMENT 15
1. T h e r m a l R a d i a t i o n B r o o d i n g E x p e r i m e n t 15
2. Warm A i r B r o o d i n g E x p e r i m e n t 17.
DETERMINATION OF THE RADIANT HEAT LOAD DISTRIBUTION

IN THE CHAMBER 19
1. R a d i o s i t y Method 19
Assumptions 19
Theory 20
S o l u t i o n and R e s u l t s 22
2. B l a c k G l o b e Thermometer Method 27
Temperature o f R a d i a n t Heat P a n e l s 27
Mean R a d i a n t T e m p e r a t u r e (MRT), R a d i a n t H e a t
Load (RHL) and B l a c k G l o b e T e m p e r a t u r e (BGT) 28
Results. 34
3. C o m p a r i s o n o f R a d i a n t H e a t L o a d R e s u l t s O b t a i n e d . .
-
by t h e R a d i o s i t y Method and t h e B l a c k G l o b e
Thermometer Method 34
iv.
PAGE
DATA ANALYSIS 38
1. G e n e r a l Models 38
(a) A n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l
data 38
(b) R e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l
data 39
2. R e s u l t s and D i s c u s s i o n o f t h e A n a l y s e s o f
Variance 40
(a) I n f r a r e d b r o o d i n g e x p e r i m e n t 40
TEST 1: New H a m p s h i r e s 40
TEST 2: U.B.C. B r o i l e r s 44
TEST 3: U.B.C. B r o i l e r s . 46
TEST 4: U.B.C. B r o i l e r s 49
(b) Warm a i r b r o o d i n g experiment: Commercial

Broilers 50
TESTS: 5 and 6 50
3. Results of the Linear M u l t i p l e Regression

Analyses 51
(a) I n f r a r e d b r o o d i n g e x p e r i m e n t 51
(b) Warm a i r b r o o d i n g experiment 52
4. Infrared and Warm A i r B r o o d i n g : A Comparison 53
CONCLUSIONS 57
L I S T OF REFERENCES 59
APPENDIX A 62
APPENDIX B 69
APPENDIX C 78
APPENDIX D 87
V .
L I S T OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1 Schematic of the a i r conditioning system
used w i t h the i n f r a r e d r a d i a t i o n experi-
ment 16
2 D e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e chamber showing surface
identification number and t h e 9 l o c a t i o n s
of the globe 21
3 Basic geometry used to c a l c u l a t e the
configuration f a c t o r s by e q u a t i o n s
7, 8 and 18. 25
4 Mean R a d i a n t T e m p e r a t u r e nomograph f o r
2-in diameter black globe thermometer 32

VI ,
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
B l a c k g l o b e t e m p e r a t u r e (BGT) and r a d i a n t
h e a t l o a d (RHL) as p e r t r e a t m e n t and
b r o o d i n g p e r i o d f o r t e s t s 1, 2 and 3 8
B l a c k g l o b e t e m p e r a u t r e (BGT) and r a d i a n t
h e a t l o a d (RHL) as p e r b r o o d i n g p e r i o d
for t e s t 4 9
D r y b u l b t e m p e r a u t r e (°F) as p e r b r o o d i n g
p e r i o d f o r t e s t s 5 and 6. (Relative
h u m i d i t y - 5Q%) 11
Computer o u t p u t f o r t h e v a l u e o f t h e
r a d i o s i t y (B) i n BTU h r ft f o r the
10 s u r f a c e s o f t h e chamber as s p e c i f i e d
i n F i g u r e 2. 27
P r e d i c t e d and e x p e r i m e n t a l RHL (BTU h r ^ 1
ft~2) d i s t r i b u t i o n i n the environmental

chamber 37
A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s i n grams and

a v e r a g e w e e k l y growth, r a t e s as by t r e a t m e n t ,
f o r t e s t s 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 (males) 54
S c h e f f e ' s l i m i t s a t t h e 95% c o n f i d e n c e level

f o r the s p e c i f i e d c o n t r a s t s f o r t e s t s
2, 3, 5 and 6 (males) 55
L I S T OF TABLES
APPENDIX A
Average s u r f a c e t e m p e r a t u r e , e m m i t t a n c e and
surface a r e a o f t h e s u r f a c e o f t h e chamber
C o n f i g u r a t i o n f a c t o r s between t h e surfaces
o f t h e chamber
M a t r i x o f c o e f f i c i e n t s and c o l u m n v e c t o r
of constants f o r the s o l u t i o n of the
s y s t e m o f l i n e a r non-homogeneous e q u a t i o n s
C o n f i g u r a t i o n f a c t o r between t h e sphere a t
d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s and t h e w a l l s o f t h e
chamber
I n c i d e n t r a d i a t i o n on t h e g l o b e f o r t h e 9
locations
A i r v e l o c i t y , a i r temperature, globe
t e m p e r a t u r e and r e s u l t i n g mean r a d i a n t
temperature of the globe f o r the 9 l o c a t i o n s
L I S T OF TABLES
APPENDIX B
TABLE
Bl A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and their

analyses of variance, test 1
B2 A v e r a g e g r o w t h r a t e s and t h e i r analyses
of variance, test. 1
B3 A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and their

analyses of variance, t e s t 2
of v a r i a n c e , t e s t 2

of variance, t e s t 3

of variance, test 4
ix
L I S T OF TABLES
APPENDIX C
TABLE PAGE
Cl A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and t h e i r
a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e , t e s t 5 (males) 79
C2 A v e r a g e g r o w t h r a t e s and t h e i r analyses
o f v a r i a n c e , t e s t 5 (males) 80
C3 A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and t h e i r
a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e , t e s t 5 (females) 81
of v a r i a n c e , t e s t 5 (females) 82
C5 A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and t h e i r
a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e , t e s t 6 (males) 83
o f v a r i a n c e , t e s t 6 (males) 84
C7 A v e r a g e w e e k l y b o d y w e i g h t s and t h e i r
a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e , t e s t 6 (females)
of v a r i a n c e , t e s t 6 (females) 86
X .
L I S T OF TABLES
APPENDIX D
TABLE PAGE
Dl M u l t i p l e l i n e a r regression analyses f o r
t e s t s 1 t o 4, w i t h 3-week body w e i g h t a s
dependent v a r i a b l e
D2 M u l t i p l e l i n e a r regression analyses f o r
t e s t s 1 t o 4, w i t h 7-week body w e i g h t a s
dependent v a r i a b l e 89
D3 M u l t i p l e l i n e a r regression analyses f o r
t e s t 5, w i t h 3-week body w e i g h t a s
D4 Multiple l i n e a r regression analyses f o r

t e s t 6, w i t h 3-week body w e i g h t as
xi.
L I S T OF SYMBOLS
A. = S u r f a c e a r e a o f an a r b i t r a r y surface 'j' o f the

3 chamber.
B_. = Radiosity of surface 'j' as d e f i n e d by e q u a t i o n [1] .
F = Kata f a c t o r supplied by t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r of the

Kata thermometer.
G. .= Configuration factor between s u r f a c e s 'j' and 'i'.
Gg_^= Configuration factor between t h e g l o b e and s u r f a c e 'i'
I. = Incident radiant energy on any s u r f a c e 1

j' of the
3 chamber,
I . = I n c i d e n t r a d i a n t energy on t h e g l o b e due t o s u r f a c e
^ 1 1
i 1
o f t h e chamber.
I = T o t a l i n c i d e n t r a d i a n t energy on t h e g l o b e f r o m a l l
g s u r f a c e s o f t h e chamber.
T. = A b s o l u t e temperature o f any s u r f a c e 'j' of the

3 chamber.
Tg = Absolute temperature of the black globe.
T g = A b s o l u t e mean r a d i a n t temperature.
V = A i r s p e e d i n t h e chamber as d e t e r m i n e d by t h e K a t a
thermometer.
a & b C o n s t a n t s u s e d i n t h e K a t a e q u a t i o n [ 17 ] d e p e n d i n g
upon t h e t y p e o f t h e i n s t r u m e n t , t h e c o o l i n g r a n g e
and t h e a i r s p e e d r a n g e t o be m e a s u r e d .
h = Convective heat t r a n s f e r c o e f f i c i e n t f o r the black

g l o b e t h e r m o m e t e r d e p e n d i n g upon t h e s i z e o f t h e
globe.
q c = Convective heat loss o r g a i n by t h e g l o b e .
q r = Radiative heat loss o r g a i n by t h e g l o b e ,
t = Dry bulb temperature o f a i r i n t h e chamber.

xii.
t = Black globe temperature,

g
t = Mean r a d i a n t temperature.
t = Mean t e m p e r a t u r e o f t h e K a t a t h e r m o m e t e r d e p e n d i n g
m
upon t h e c o o l i n g r a n g e o f t h e i n s t r u m e n t .
0 = Cooling time o f the Kata thermometer.
£j = Total hemispherical emissivity of surface ' j 1

.
e = Total hemispherical emissivity of the black globe.
a_. = Total hemispherical absorptivity of surface 1

j' .
Pj = Total hemispherical r e f l e c t i v i t y of surface ' j 1

.
a = Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
BGT = Black globe temperature t
MRT = Mean r a d i a n t temperature + t
RHL = Radiant heat load -»- I

*•• g
xiii.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wishes t o express h i sappreciation f o r
assistance i n this study by:
P r o f e s s o r L.M. S t a l e y , o f t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Engineering
D e p a r t m e n t , who p r o v i d e d guidance, a d v i c e , and
encouragement d u r i n g this research project;
Dr. CW. Roberts, Poultry Science Department; D r . N.R. B u l l e y ,
Dr. E.O. N y b o r g and P r o f e s s o r E . L . Watson, Agricul-
t u r a l Engineering D e p a r t m e n t , f o r s e r v i n g on t h e
r e s e a r c h c o m m i t t e e and r e v i e w i n g this paper;
Mr. A l Crompton, Foreman, and o t h e r staff members o f t h e
P o u l t r y Farm who h e l p e d during prehatch stage
of this study;
Mr. J . Pehlke, Electronic Technician, f o rcounsel on e l e c -
tronic aspects o f the temperature controllers.
Thanks i s a l s o e x t e n d e d to the National Research
C o u n c i l o f C a n a d a who p r o v i d e d financial support for this
project.
1.
INTRODUCTION
Reduction i n the o v e r a l l heating requirement of
broiler houses can be accomplished by taking advantage of
the thermal and optical properties of infrared radiation.
Due t o the d i r e c t i o n a l property of thermal radia-
tion, the radiant energy can be transmitted directly from
the source of r a d i a t i o n to the birds; thus e l i m i n a t i n g the
usual process of preheating l a r g e masses o f a i r and the
conveyance system a s s o c i a t e d with i t .
By avoiding the necessity of heating the air in
the broiler house a s u b s t a n t i a l r e d u c t i o n i n conductive heat
loss through the structure can be e f f e c t e d due to the decrease
in the temperature g r a d i e n t between the i n s i d e and outside
air.
Another property of thermal r a d i a t i o n of primary
importance i s b a s e d on the fact that the exchange of radiant
e n e r g y b e t w e e n two bodies i s proportional to the difference
of the f o u r t h power o f their respective absolute temperatures
( S t e f a n - B o l t z m a n n Law). Because of this f o u r t h power law,
the amount o f energy that can be exchanged is increased
significantly, with small differences i n surface temperature.
Instant heat i s the other property of i n f r a r e d r a d i a t i o n of
practical importance compared to the relatively long period
of time c o n v e n t i o n a l warm a i r s y s t e m s r e q u i r e to b r i n g the
temperature of the a i r i n the b u i l d i n g to a c o m f o r t a b l e level
f o r young chicks.
Even though infrared r a d i a n t h e a t i n g systems would
appear t o be more e c o n o m i c a l t h a n warm a i r s y s t e m s , the e f f e c t s
of such r a d i a t i o n on b i o l o g i c a l s y s t e m s and a s s o c i a t e d e n v i r o n -
mental parameters must be known b e f o r e r a d i a n t h e a t i n g systems
c a n be w i d e l y a d o p t e d . Unfortunately, limited data are
available about the e f f e c t s of infrared radiation on t h e
growth o f b i r d s and l e s s about their thermal surface properties
Consequently, the purpose of t h i s investigation was to study
the effects of infrared radiation on b r o i l e r c h i c k s , u s i n g
growth r a t e s as an i n d e x . The thermal r a d i a t i o n was from
sources o p e r a t i n g a t temperatures of less t h a n 200°F (93°C).

3.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Researchers i n the environmental aspects of poultry
agree t h a t the b r o o d i n g phase, h a t c h t o about three or four
weeks o f age, i s t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t and most c r i t i c a l period
in the l i f e of the b i r d . The performance of the b i r d during
its maturity i s mainly d e p e n d e n t upon i t s b r o o d i n g phase
history.
Environmental f a c t o r s which are important f o r the
comfort o f t h e c h i c k s a r e n o t , as y e t , f u l l y defined. These
f a c t o r s may be classified, according to t h e i r nature, into
thermal, p h y s i c a l and sociological.
In most i n s t a n c e s , e n v i r o n m e n t a l factors t h a t were
found to i n f l u e n c e the comfort o f t h e b i r d s were investigated
separately, thus, ignoring i n t e r a c t i o n s w h i c h may exist
between t h e s i m p l e factors.
The- e f f e c t s of a i r speed, a i r composition, noise -
and radiation have r e c e i v e d limited attention. Most of the
available d a t a a r e on the e f f e c t s of dry-bulb temperature and
relative h u m i d i t y on g r o w t h r a t e s of p o u l t r y (Staley et a l .
1970) .
Data on the e f f e c t of q u a l i t y and q u a n t i t y o f light
on b r o i l e r s are n e g l i g i b l e . M c C l u s k e y and A r s c o t t (1967) h a v e
investigated t h e i n f l u e n c e o f i n c a n d e s c e n t and infrared lamps
upon c h i c k s . They f o u n d t h a t body w e i g h t s and feed conversion
of birds, a t 56 d a y s o f age, r e a r e d under c o n t i n u o u s light

4 .
from 250 w a t t , clear glass, i n f r a r e d h e a t lamps d e l i v e r i n g a
maximum o f 600 f o o t c a n d l e s (55.7 l u x ) , were significantly
(P < 0.05) l o w e r than b i r d s reared under continuous light
from 250 w a t t , red glass, i n f r a r e d h e a t lamps d e l i v e r i n g a
maximum l i g h t i n t e n s i t y o f 62 f o o t c a n d l e s (5.8 l u x ) .
Furthermore, t h e 8-week body w e i g h t s of birds reared under
continuous light from 60 w a t t i n c a n d e s c e n t lamps w i t h a
maximum i n t e n s i t y o f 1.2 f o o t c a n d l e s (.11 l u x ) were higher,
though not s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant, t h a n t h e 8-week body
weights of birds reared under red glass h e a t lamps. Unfor-
tunately, we c a n n o t conclude that i n c a n d e s c e n t lamps a r e
better t h a n i n f r a r e d lamps f o r t h e p u r p o s e of poultry
r e a r i n g , because t h e l o w e r body w e i g h t associated with the
infrared h e a t lamp t r e a t m e n t s was p r o b a b l y due t o tempera-
ture difference rather than l i g h t since temperatures within
the pens were n e i t h e r c o n t r o l l e d n o r measured. These
temperatures were o b v i o u s l y d i f f e r e n t because t h e energy
input t o t h e pens were d i f f e r e n t , 250 w a t t s compared t o 60
watts. Because o f t h e n a t u r e o f t h i s experiment, i t is
probably safer to conclude that the r e d glass heat lamps a r e
better than c l e a r g l a s s h e a t lamps f o r b r o o d i n g c h i c k s . This
d i f f e r e n c e was due t o ,the q u a l i t y r a t h e r than the q u a n t i t y
of radiation. L o n g h o u s e and G a r v e r (.1964) f o u n d little
d i f f e r e n c e between i n c a n d e s c e n t and f l u o r e s c e n t lights with
respect to the p h y s i c a l conditions of broilers.

5.
The i n f l u e n c e of l i g h t intensity was investigated
by S k o g l u n d and Palmer (1962). They c o n c l u d e d that birds
reared under a light intensity o f 120 foot candles (11.1 lux)
had significantly (P < 0.05) l o w e r body w e i g h t s than birds
r e a r e d under 10, 5, 2 and 0.5 foot candles (.93, .46, .19,
.05 lux). Also, they found no significant difference among
t h e low light intensity t r e a t m e n t s b u t t h e r e was a tendency
t o a s m a l l i n c r e a s e o f body w e i g h t w i t h a d e c r e a s e i n light
intensity.
Some p r e l i m i n a r y work was done on infrared radiation
b r o o d i n g by B a k e r and Bywaters (1951), S t a l e y , R o b e r t s and
Crober ( 1 9 6 7 ) , B a x t e r , Maddox and Shirley (1970). A l l of the
mentioned investigators have u s e d i n their experiments,
industrial infrared h e a t lamps, h i g h temperature sources of
radiation. These heat lamps were p u r c h a s e d from different
manufacturers with d i f f e r e n t intensity and quality of
radiation.
Baker and Bywaters (1951) h a v e c o n c l u d e d t h a t the
e n e r g y ..requirement f o r w i n t e r b r o o d i n g was from 2 to 3 kWh
per c h i c k w i t h continuous o p e r a t i o n of the heat lamps f o r t h e
first 8 weeks. They h a v e a l s o found that the m o r t a l i t y rate
for infrared b r o o d i n g was

; as low o r l o w e r than f o r other
methods o f b r o o d i n g . No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found
i n body w e i g h t or degree o f f e a t h e r i n g between c h i c k s brooded
under infrared h e a t lamps and c h i c k s brooded with other
systems. Finally, t h e s e a u t h o r s have f o u n d t h a t pullets

6.
reared with infrared radiation started t o l a y 2 t o 3 weeks
earlier than t h e i r sisters brooded with other systems.
Staley e t a l . (1967) have u s e d a c l e a r glass
250-watt h e a t lamp p l a c e d a t 24 i n c h e s (61 cm) above the
c e n t r e o f the pen. The pen was divided into two radiation
levels with a p p r o x i m a t e a v e r a g e s o f 145 B T U / h r / s q f t
(451 Wm~ ) 2
and 185 B T U / h r / s q f t (583 Wm~ ) 2
respectively.
The resulting 2-in black globe thermometer r e a d i n g s were
76.5°F (24.8°C)and 82°F (27.8°C) r e s p e c t i v e l y . They
found significant differences (P < 0.05) i n body w e i g h t s i n
favour o f t h e low r a d i a t i o n level.
B a x t e r e t a l . (1970) have established c o m f o r t zones
for chicks at different ages by c r e a t i n g a heat gradient
using three 375-watt industrial infrared h e a t lamps. The
t e m p e r a t u r e g r a d i e n t was divided into equal c i r c u l a r zones
with known e q u i v a l e n t b l a c k globe t e m p e r a t u r e s , and using
as c r i t e r i o n o f c o m f o r t t h e number o f b i r d s resting in a
specific zone. From t h e r e s u l t s of t h e i r experiments, the
comfort equivalent globe t e m p e r a t u r e a t one week o f age was
a b o u t 79°F (26°C) and a t f i v e s e e k s o f age i t was about 72°F
(22°C) .
7.
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
The entire experiment consisted of s i x tests which
may be d i v i d e d into two categories or into two sub-experiments.
The first s u b - e x p e r i m e n t was designed primarily to study the
effect of thermal r a d i a t i o n on g r o w t h rate o f young broiler
chicks. This s u b - e x p e r i m e n t was composed o f f o u r tests. In
these tests the independent v a r i a b l e o f c o n c e r n was t h e mean
radiant t e m p e r a t u r e as c a l c u l a t e d from the b l a c k globe
thermometer data; w h i l e the dependent variable was the
weekly growth rate as c a l c u l a t e d from the weekly body weight
data.
The first three tests consisted of three treatments
each; a h i g h level of r a d i a t i o n , a low level of r a d i a t i o n and
a conventional brooding. The g l o b e t e m p e r a t u r e s and the
resulting radiant heat load as a f u n c t i o n o f t h e age o f t h e
birds i n days f r o m hatch, a r e i l l u s t r a t e d i n T a b l e 1. For
the high level of radiation the s t a r t i n g globe temperature
was 88°F (31.1°C) dropping a t the r a t e o f 3°F (1.7°C) every
t h r e e days t o a minimum o f 70°F (21.1°C) on t h e n i n e t e e n t h
day o f age. F o r t h e low level of r a d i a t i o n , the s t a r t i n g
globe temperature was,82°F (27.8°C) dropping a t the r a t e of
2°F (.1.1°C) e v e r y t h r e e d a y s t o a minimum o f 70°F (21.1.°C) on
the n i n e t e e n t h day o f age.
For both l e v e l s of r a d i a t i o n , the b i r d s were removed
from the c o n t r o l l e d environment chambers on t h e twenty-first
day and transferred t o s e p a r a t e pens i n t h e same h o u s e where

TABLE 1. Black globe temperature (BGT) and radiant heat
load (RHL) as p e r t r e a t m e n t and brooding period
for tests 1, 2 and 3.
Brooding Period (days)
1-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 13-15 16-18 19-21
High radiation level
BGT (°F) 88 85 82 79 76 73 70
RHL (BTU hr" 1

ft" )
2
163 158 153 149 144 140 135
Low radiation level
BGT (°F) 82 80 78 76 74 72 70
RHL (BTU hr" 1

ft" )
2
151 148 145 143 140 137 135

9.
the c o n v e n t i o n a l brooding t r e a t m e n t was l o c a t e d since the s t a r t
of the t e s t . From t h e end o f t h e t h i r d week t o t h e t e r m i n a t i o n
of the t e s t a t t h e end o f t h e s e v e n t h week, t h e t h r e e treat-
ments were managed i n t h e same manner.
TABLE 2. Black globe temperature (BGT) and r a d i a n t heat
load (RHL) as p e r b r o o d i n g p e r i o d f o r test 4.
1-7 8-14 15-21
BGT (°F) 88 84 80
RHL (BTU/hr" 1
ft" ) 2
163 156 151
The fourth test of this first experiment was
designed to determine the e f f e c t o f a lower r a t e o f the black
globe temperature drop as a f u n c t i o n o f t h e age o f t h e b i r d s .
The final black globe temperature o f 80°F (26.7°C) was chosen
instead o f t h e 70°F (21.1°C) u s e d during the f i r s t three tests
of the experiment.
Test 4 c o n s i s t e d o f two t r e a t m e n t s . One treatment
starting a t a globe temperature o f 88°F (31.1°C) d r o p p i n g 4°F
(2.2°C) p e r week t o 80°F (26.7°C) d u r i n g t h e t h i r d week o f
g r o w t h i n t h e chamber. The o t h e r t r e a t m e n t was a c o n v e n t i o n a l
floor brooding system using i n d u s t r i a l heat lamps. The g l o b e
temperature and t h e RHL f o r t e s t 4 as a f u n c t i o n o f t h e b r o o d -
ing period are i l l u s t r a t e d i n Table 2.
As m e n t i o n e d earlier, the purpose of the p r e v i o u s

10.
four tests, j u s t d e s c r i b e d , was to determine the e f f e c t of
thermal r a d i a t i o n on the r a t e o f g r o w t h o f young c h i c k s . The
second p a r t of the experiment or sub-experiment number two,
was designed f o r t h r e e major purposes:
1) To test the performance o f a 300 cubic f e e t per min

3 —1
(8.5 m min ) a i r conditioning u n i t made by AMINCO-
AIRE and i t s adaptability i n environmental control
experimentation with poultry.
2) To compare i n f r a r e d r a d i a t i o n b r o o d i n g w i t h warm a i r
brooding.
3) To study the e f f e c t of the environmental chambers.
The second p a r t of t h i s experiment consisted of two
tests. In these t e s t s the independent variable of concern
was the dry bulb temperature, w h i l e the dependent variable
was t h e same as b e f o r e . Each test consisted of three treat-
ments; chamber 1, chamber 2, and floor birds. The environ-
mental c o n d i t i o n s i n t h e two chambers were k e p t as c l o s e as
p o s s i b l e with the a v a i l a b l e facilities. The dry bulb
temperature as a f u n c t i o n o f t h e age o f the c h i c k s i n days
f r o m h a t c h , f o r t e s t 5 and test 6, a r e shown i n T a b l e 3.
For both tests the s t a r t i n g dry b u l b temperature was 90°F
(32.2°C) d r o p p i n g a t t h e r a t e o f 3°F (1.6°C) e v e r y t h r e e days
to a minimum o f 78°F (25.6°C) on the t h i r t e e n t h day for test
5 and t o a minimum o f 72°F (22.2°C) on the n i n e t e e n t h day
of age for test 6. T e s t 5 and test 6 were t e r m i n a t e d on the

TABLE 3. Dry-bulb temperature (°F) as p e r b r o o d i n g
period f o r t e s t s 5 and 6. (Relative
humidity = 50%) .
1-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 13-15 16-18 19-21
Test 5
90.0 87.0 84.0 81.0 78.0 78.0 78.0
Test 6
90.0 87.0 84.0 81.0 78.0 75.0 72.0
t w e n t y - f i r s t day o f a g e . During the e n t i r e i n v e s t i g a t i o n , the
floor b i r d s were r e a r e d under i n d u s t r i a l heat lamps u s i n g a
.conventional brooding system.

EXPERIMENTAL. MATERIAL AND PROCEDURE
The experimental birds f o r the f i r s t test were
University of B r i t i s h Columbia New H a m p s h i r e s , a specific
genetic line. T h i s c h o i c e o f e x p e r i m e n t a l m a t e r i a l was an
attempt to reduce the experimental error thus i n c r e a s i n g the
sensitivity of the experiment to the environmental effect of
concern.
During the f o l l o w i n g three tests, U.B.C. broilers,
a l e s s homogeneous genetic line than t h e New Hampshires,
were u s e d as e x p e r i m e n t a l birds.
For t h e warm a i r e x p e r i m e n t which included tests 5
and 6, t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l b i r d s were c o m m e r c i a l broilers from
J.J. Hambley H a t c h e r i e s (B.C.) L t d . , A b b o t s f o r d . The eggs
were h a t c h e d a t t h e U.B.C. p o u l t r y farm.
F o r each of the t e s t s , one t h r o u g h four, 120 m a l e
chicks t h a t hatched on t h e t w e n t y - f i r s t day were randomly
divided and a s s i g n e d so t h a t a total o f 40 b i r d s were i n e a c h
of the three treatments. A l l c h i c k s were c o m p l e t e l y d r y on
removal from t h e i n c u b a t o r and w i t h i n two h o u r s received a
vaccination f o r Marek s disease.

1
After the v a c c i n a t i o n and t h e a s s i g n m e n t of the
birds to t h e i r treatments, t h e y were w i n g banded for identifi-
cation, and w e i g h e d t o t h e n e a r e s t gram. The subsequent
weighings were r a n d o m i z e d s o t h a t no one o r d e r c o u l d be

repeated on the next weighing. An a n t i b i o t i c was mixed
with water f o r the first s e v e n d a y s o f age. The b i r d s were
fed ad. li.bi.tam a standard broiler ration c o n t a i n i n g about
23 percent p r o t e i n , 3.5 percent f a t and 5 percent fibre.
All b i r d s were i n d i v i d u a l l y w e i g h e d every week up
t o s e v e n weeks o f age. I n d i v i d u a l w e e k l y body w e i g h t s were
p u n c h e d on computer c a r d s and the i n d i v i d u a l weekly growth
rates, t h e one t o t h r e e week g r o w t h r a t e and the three to
s e v e n week g r o w t h r a t e were c a l c u l a t e d using t h e power func-
t i o n r e l a t i o n s h i p g i v e n by Roberts (1964).
The individual growth r a t e (r) f o r t h e period
between t i m e s t ^ and t.^ was computed by the f o l l o w i n g
expression:
LOG (=^)
1
r =
H
LOG {-M
1
where = body w e i g h t o f b i r d a t time t ^ from
conception
Y 2 = body w e i g h t o f b i r d a t time from

conception
t^ and t^ = age + 3 (on a w e e k l y base)
Once t h e t e s t was terminated, t h e b i r d s were killed
and their sex verified by internal inspection. The females
were n e g l e c t e d from the anlysis along with the b i r d s t h a t
died during the s e v e n weeks' test.

For t e s t 5 and t e s t 6, t h e same p r o c e d u r e was used
with the following m o d i f i c a t i o n s : The b i r d s were m i x e d
instead of a l l males. The t e s t s were t e r m i n a t e d a t t h e end
of three weeks o f age i n s t e a d o f s e v e n weeks. And, f o r t e s t
6 only, the density was reduced from 40 b i r d s t o 36 b i r d s p e r
treatment.
At t h e end o f e a c h t e s t t h e b i r d s were k i l l e d and
s e x e d by i n t e r n a l i n s p e c t i o n , t h e n t h e m a l e s and f e m a l e s were
analyzed separately.
15.
DESCRIPTION OF EXPERIMENTAL EQUIPMENT
1. Thermal Radiation Brooding Experiment
The e x p e r i m e n t a l s y s t e m may be d i v i d e d into two
major systems:
a) The controlled environment chambers and their radiant
heat sources.
b) The a i r conditioning and conveying system.
Two controlled environment growth chambers o f similar
d e s i g n were u s e d d u r i n g the e n t i r e investigation. Each
chamber was constructed t o h o u s e up to f o r t y birds at three
weeks o f a g e . The overall inside d i m e n s i o n s o f t h e chamber
were 4X4 feet surface a r e a by 3 feet high. The a i r entering
the chambers was i n t h e same c o n d i t i o n f o r b o t h chambers. This
air was kept a t the lowest dew-point temperature p o s s i b l e with
the available a i r conditioning facilities. T h i s was accom -
plished by c i r c u l a t i n g the r e t u r n a i r f r o m t h e chambers o v e r
chilled water coils then passing i t through a f i n e water spray
at t h e same t e m p e r a t u r e as t h a t o f t h e c o o l i n g coils. The
p u r p o s e o f t h e s p r a y chamber i s t w o f o l d . One, to ensure
saturation a t a c o n s t a n t dew-point temperature; two, to
partially clean t h e r e t u r n a i r m i x t u r e f r o m f i n e d u s t , ammonia
and carbon d i o x i d e gases (Figure 1).
Throughout the thermal r a d i a t i o n experiment, tests
1 through 4, the a i r l e a v i n g the a i r c o n d i t i o n i n g system
and e n t e r i n g the growth chamber was saturated at a constant

16 .
FIGURE 1. SCHEMATIC OF THE A I R CONDITIONING SYSTEM USED WITH

THE INFRARED RADIATION EXPERIMENT.
NOMENCLATURE
A R e c i r c u l a t e d a i r from chambers
B Fibre glass f i l t e r
C Make-up a i r i n t a k e
D Damper f o r make-up a i r c o n t r o l
E C e n t r i f u g a l f a n (3 s p e e d s )
F Fan e l e c t r i c motor
G C h i l l e d water c o o l i n g c o i l
H Baffle
I Hot water r e h e a t c o i l
J C o n d i t i o n e d a i r t o chambers
K C o n t r o l l e d e n v i r o n m e n t chambers
L W a t e r r e c i r c u l a t i n g pump
M Water h e a t e r
N Water c h i l l e r
0 S p r a y chamber
17 .
temperature o f about 45°F (7.2°C).
This saturated a i r was c o n v e y e d t o t h e g r o w t h cham-
bers through flexible plastic ducts. The a i r e n t e r e d t h e
chambers n e a r c e i l i n g level and e x h a u s t e d below f l o o r level,
then r e t u r n e d through flexible ducts to a f i b r e glass filter
b e f o r e p a s s i n g o v e r g a s - f i l l e d wet and d r y b u l b s o f a tempera-
ture recorder controller. The r e t u r n a i r was t h e n m i x e d
w i t h make up f r e s h a i r before entering a 3-speed fan to start
a new cycle.
The u s e o f t h e low s a t u r a t i o n temperature o f 45°F
(7.2°C) was t o make s u r e t h a t t h e young b i r d s got p r a c t i c a l l y
all their heat requirement from the radiant heat source. The
r a d i a n t h e a t s o u r c e was composed o f 4 r a d i a n t h e a t p a n e l s o f
750 watts capacity each, a total o f 3 k i l o w a t t s p e r chamber.
The r a d i a n t h e a t p a n e l s were l o c a t e d a t about 18 i n c h e s (45.7
cm) h i g h f r o m the wire f l o o r and p r o v i d e d a l m o s t full coverage
of the c e i l i n g s u r f a c e a r e a o f t h e chambers.
2. Warm A i r B r o o d i n g Experiment
The two c o n t r o l l e d environment chambers u s e d with
the thermal r a d i a t i o n experiment were a l s o u s e d during this
experiment, but with the radiant heat panels turned o f f . In
order t o k e e p t h e a i r i n t h e chambers a t some d e s i r e d state

3 -1
a 300 c u b i c feet p e r m i n (8.5 m min ) a i r conditioning unit
was i n s t a l l e d , replacing the a i r conditioning system used with
the termal r a d i a t i o n experiment.

18.
During t h i s warm a i r b r o o d i n g experiment, tests five
and s i x , the a i r was kept at a constant r e l a t i v e humidity of
50 percent, while the dry bulb temperature was varying as
specified i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l design section, Table 3.
Staley and Roberts (1969) d e s c r i b e d i n d e t a i l
t h e d e s i g n and development of the c o n t r o l l e d environment
chambers u s e d d u r i n g the investigation.

DETERMINATION OF THE RADIANT HEAT LOAD
DISTRIBUTION IN THE CHAMBER
1. R a d i o s i t y Method
Assumptions
In order to perform the r a d i a n t energy exchange
analysis among t h e different surfaces of the chamber, the
following assumptions a r e made:
1. A l l the participating surfaces of the chamber a r e grey,
that i s the emittance of anyone o f the surfaces is
equal to i t s absorptance (e = a) f o r a l l wave-
lengths f o r the range under study;
2. Each of the participating surfaces is isothermal.
3. The radiosity of any surface i s uniform along that
surface.
4. The r a d i a t i o n emitted f r o m any surface is diffuse.
5. The radiation reflected f r o m any surface is diffuse.
6. The surfaces are separated by a non-absorbing, non-
emitting and non-scattering medium.
A s s u m p t i o n number two may be achieved by subdivi-
ding non-isothermal surface into smaller surfaces. The
number o f s u b d i v i s i o n s w i l l depend on the nature of the
p r o b l e m and the degree of accuracy desired. The third
assumption is,partially fulfilled by meeting assumption number
two, but i n a d d i t i o n constant thermal p r o p e r t i e s of the sur-
face are required.

20.
For the purpose of p a r t i a l l y meeting t h e above
mentioned assumptions, the w a l l s o f t h e chamber were d i v i d e d
into t e n s u r f a c e s , e a c h one o f w h i c h i s assumed isothermal.
The d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e chamber and t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number
of the d i f f e r e n t surfaces a r e shown i n Figure 2.
Theory
L e t surface 'j' be any a r b i t r a r y surface of the
participating surfaces. Surface ' j i s receiving radiation

1
from a l l s u r f a c e s o f t h e chamber including itself i f surface
'j' i s concave. Let this total i n c i d e n t r a d i a t i o n on surface
'j' be I j . Part of this incident radiation i s reflected
from surface 'j' a t a r a t e o f p. I , . The r e m a i n i n g i n c i d e n t

33
r a d i a n t energy i s a b s o r b e d by s u r f a c e 'j' at a rate oijlj.
A p o r t i o n of the absorbed r a d i a t i o n i s emitted back a t a
rate EJOTJ and t h e r e m a i n d e r i s l o s t by c o n d u c t i o n through
the chamber w a l l s and by c o n v e c t i o n to the a i r stream. There-
fore, the t o t a l r a d i a n t energy leaving a surface 'j' per u n i t
surface area p e r u n i t t i m e i s termed radiosity. Radiosity
(B) i s t h e sum o f t h e r e f l e c t e d energy and t h e e m i t t e d energy.
In equation form, the r a d i o s i t y of a surface 'j' may be
stated as:
e.aT. + p•I [1]

3 3 3 j
and f o r a grey-body (e=a).
Therefore p. = 1-e . [2]

3 3
and equation [1] becomes,
globe loco Hons
FIGURE 2. Development o f the chamber showing s u r f a c e

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number and the 9 l o c a t i o n s o f
the globe.
B = e.aT. 4
+ (1 - e.) I. [3]
3
i
3
D D J
But, I j , the total i n c i d e n t r a d i a t i o n on surface
'j' i s the sum of the r a d i a n t energy, r e f l e c t e d and emitted,
leaving e v e r y one of the p a r t i c i p a t i n g surfaces of the chamber
that i s reaching surface 1

j .
1
Or i n equation form,
n
I . = E Bi G • [4]
3 i=l ^
where, G. . i s the c o n f i g u r a t i o n f a c t o r between the a r b i t r a r y

3-1
surface 'j' and the surface .'i .
1
n = number o f p a r t i c i p a t i n g s u r f a c e s making up
the enclosure.
By i n s e r t i n g the value of I., i n t o t h e general radiosity
equation [ 1 ] , we get,
4 n
B • = e.oT •* + p E Bi G . • . [5]
3
i=l J
From t h e above d i s c u s s i o n i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e r e are as many
radiosities as surfaces. Therefore, an equation of the form
of equation [5] may be written f o r each s u r f a c e . Thus, we
obtain a system of 'n' linear non-homogeneous algebraic
equations with 'n' unknown radiosities.
Solution and Results
This sytem of linear a l g e b r a i c e q u a t i o n s may be
written i n simple matrix form:
A X - b [6]
where A = matrix of coefficients,
b = column v e c t o r o f c o n s t a n t s ,
and X = c o l u m n v e c t o r o f unknowns.
Our problem i s t o f i n d t h e column v e c t o r o f unknowns w h i c h
represents the r a d i o s i t i e s , given t h e column v e c t o r o f con-
stants and t h e m a t r i x of coefficients.
W i t h some s i m p l e algebraic manipulation, equation
[5] may be c h a n g e d t o t h e m a t r i x form:
d-PlGi-i) B
l-Pl i-2 2-Pl i_3 3-
G B G B
- l l-10 l
p G B
0
= £
1° 1 T 4
4
" 2 2-l i
p G B + ( 1
~ 2 2-2
P G ) B
2" 2 2-3 3
P G B _
~ 2 2-10 10
P G B = e
2 a T
2
- 10 10-l r 10 lO_2 2" 10 10-3 3'--

p G B P G B P G B + ( 1
- l p
0
G
10-10 ) B
10 = £
l 0
a T
l
To s o l v e t h e system o f l i n e a r a l g e b r a i c equations f o r the
t e n unknown r a d i o s i t i e s , the surface temperatures as w e l l as
the c o n f i g u r a t i o n f a c t o r between each p a i r of surfaces i n
the chamber must be known. A minimum o f t h r e e temperatures
at d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s o n e a c h s u r f a c e o f t h e chamber were
measured. The. mean o f t h e t h r e e o r more measurements i s
taken as t h e temperature o f t h a t s p e c i f i c surface. These
means a r e i n c l u d e d i n A p p e n d i x A, T a b l e A l along with the
surface area, t h e m a t e r i a l a n d t h e assumed e m i t t a n c e o f each
surface.
The configuration factors f o ra rectangular enclos-
ure a r e easy t o c a l c u l a t e since only two b a s i c types o f con-
figuration are present:
1. O p p o s i t e and e q u a l parallel r e c t a n g l e s , and
2. Perpendicular rectangles with a common edge.
Equations, t a b l e s and g r a p h s u s e d t o determine the
configuration f a c t o r s f o r these two common g e o m e t r i e s a r e
available i n most r a d i a t i o n h e a t t r a n s f e r t e x t books. The
two equations used i n t h i s paper a r e given by S i e g e l and
Howell (1972).
For t h e two e q u a l , parallel, directly opposed
rectangles,
1/2
X
* G + X /^ 2 arctan
1-2 TTXY
+ Y
l+X + Y
[7]
+ Y Al+X arctan - (X a r c t a n X) - ( Y a r c t a n Y )
where X =
a/c and Y = b / c . F o r t h e two f i n i t e rectangles o f the
same l e n g t h , having one common edge, and p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o
each other
i —
1 1 - / 2.„2 1
** G X + Y arctan
y
1-2 TTX X arctan — + Y arctan

X x
[8]
2„
X'
+ \ m { [ ( 1
(l+X
+ x
^ ^ :
2
+ Y
Y
2
)
^ ] [ *<j;
2
x
y>]
2 2
(l+X ) ( X + Y )
+ x
1
^ 2
( I + X
2
(1+Y ) ( X
2
2 2
+ Y
+ Y
2
)
)
}
* For definition o f terms r e f e r t o F i g u r e 3a
For definition o f terms r e f e r t o F i g u r e 3b

With the use of equations [7] and [8] along with the symmetry
relations, the flux-algebra or angle-factor algebra, and the
configuration factor reciprocity rule; a l l the one hundred
configuration factors required can e a s i l y be determined.
The configuration factor reciprocity rule is
The calculations for configuration f a c t o r s use the flux
algebra method w h i c h has been e x p l a i n e d by Sparrow and
Cess (1970) . Using the dimensions of Figure 2 and the above
equations and r u l e s , the configuration f a c t o r s were calculated
and the r e s u l t s are shown i n A p p e n d i x A, Table A2.
The sum of a l l the configuration factors from
any surface ' j 1

to a l l the surfaces making up the enclosure
must e q u a l u n i t y , or i n equation form:
n
E G. . = 1.0. [10]
i=l 3 1
This sum i s also shown i n T a b l e A2 as a check f o r e r r o r s in
calculating configuration factors.
With these c o n f i g u r a t i o n factors and the surface
temperatures, the system of l i n e a r nonhomogeneous equations
can be solved on the digital computer.
The matrix of c o e f f i c i e n t s and the column v e c t o r of
constants are shown i n A p p e n d i x A, Table A3.
The s o l u t i o n of the m a t r i x was o b t a i n e d by using
the G a u s s i a n e l i m i n a t i o n method w i t h partial pivoting. The
results are summarized i n Table 4.

TABLE 4. Computer o u t p u t f o r t h e v a l u e of the r a d i o s i t y
(B) i n BTU h r f t for t h e 10 s u r f a c e s of the
chamber as s p e c i f i e d in Figure 2.
Surface Radiosity Surface Radiosity
1 210.96 6 166.07
2 152.66 7 151.38
3 172.84 8 166.85
4 165.58 9 174 .48
5 173.44 10 166.29
2. B l a c k G l o b e Thermometer Method
Temperature of r a d i a n t heat panels
Temperature r e g u l a t i o n o f the r a d i a n t heat panels
was critical b e c a u s e o f t h e f o u r t h power law o f r a d i a t i o n

4
(q <x T ) . An o n - o f f H o n e y w e l l c o n t r o l l e r was tested first;
it was found that there were f l u c t u a t i o n s up t o 7°F (4°C)
in the s u r f a c e temperatures of the heat panels. In order to
minimize these f l u c t u a t i o n s , the on-off c o n t r o l l e r was
replaced by an e l e c t r o n i c p r o p o r t i o n a l c o n t r o l l e r with
resistance type temperature sensor cemented to t h e s u r f a c e
of the r a d i a n t heat panel. With t h i s proportional controller
a maximum f l u c t u a t i o n o f 4°F (2.2°C) was encountered.

28 .
The location of the temperature sensor on the heat
panel was determined by measuring the temperature on i t s
surface at nine locations simultaneously. The measured
difference i n temperature between locations were w i t h i n 2°F
(1°C). Since these differences were w e l l within the tempera-
ture fluctuation range, the location of the sensor on the
heat panel was immaterial.
Mean R a d i a n t T e m p e r a t u r e (MRT), R a d i a n t Heat Load (RHL)

and B l a c k G l o b e T e m p e r a t u r e (BGT).
The MRT, like the effective temperature, the
equivalent temperature and similar terms, i s an environmental
index rather than a real temperature. Therefore, like other
thermal environmental indices, i t can not be measured
directly.
The MRT i s a measure of the combined effects of
three of the main environmental factors, namely ambient a i r
temperature, air velocity and thermal radiation. The MRT
can only be computed from the black globe thermometer data.
Few papers have been w r i t t e n on the theory of the black globe
thermometer and i t s application to thermal environmental
studies in agriculture and other fields. Among these, Bedford
and Warner (1934), Bond and Kelly (1955), Pereira et a l .
(1966) and Parker et a l . (1967) are notable examples.

The b a s i c b l a c k g l o b e thermometer c o n s i s t e d o f a
temperature sensor placed a t the centre o f a hollow, blackened,
copper sphere. Pereira e t a l . (1966) c o n s i d e r e d u s i n g a t a b l e
tennis b a l l as a b l a c k g l o b e thermometer; they found that the
response time o f the black globe t h e r m o m e t e r made o f a t a b l e
t e n n i s b a l l was c o n s i d e r a b l y f a s t e r than t h a t o f t h e copper
black globe thermometer.
The selection of the s i z e of the sphere, t h e type
and size o f the temperature sensor i s d e p e n d e n t on t h e a p p l i c a -
tion and t h e r e s p o n s e time desired. The e f f e c t of the diameter
of the sphere on t h e b l a c k g l o b e temperature was d i s c u s s e d by
Bond and K e l l y (1955) and B e d f o r d and Warner (1934) .
Parker e t a l . (1967) d i s c u s s e d t h e e f f e c t o f thermo-
couple wire size on t h e b l a c k g l o b e thermometer r e a d i n g ;
they also estimated t h e p e r c e n t e r r o r due t o h e a t conduction
for various wire sizes.
The s i z e o f t h e g l o b e was s e l e c t e d using the surface
a r e a t o volume ratio criterion. F o r young c h i c k s , the surface
a r e a t o volume r a t i o decreases with age f r o m about 2.6 a t
hatch t o 0.8 a t 7 weeks o f a g e . When t h e e q u i v a l e n t d i a m e t e r
of the b i r d i s taken as t h e diameter o f t h e sphere having the
same s u r f a c e a r e a , t h e 2 i n c h (.5 cm) d i a m e t e r globe w i l l have
approximately t h e same s u r f a c e a r e a t o volume r a t i o as a
hatching b i r d . Therefore, the 2 inch (5 cm) d i a m e t e r black
globe thermometer, p a i n t e d w i t h two c o a t s o f f l a t black
l a c q u e r , was c h o s e n as t h e s t a n d a r d to correlate t h e growth

30 .
rate o f young b r o i l e r s t o t h e BGT.
Iron-constantan t h e r m o c o u p l e s were u s e d t o measure
t h e a i r and g l o b e temperatures. The s i z e of the thermocouples
(24 gauge) i n t h i s experiment was n o t c r i t i c a l because of the
steady-state c o n d i t i o n of the environmental chambers.
For a better understanding o f how t h e MRT i s related
to the black globe temperature, i ti s helpful t o examine t h e
final result of the theory of the black globe thermometer.
If i t i s assumed t h a t the globe i s a t equilibrium with i t s
surroundings and i t i s u n d e r s t e a d y state conditions, and i f
conduction through the thermocouple wires and t h e s u p p o r t i s
neglected, then the heat l o s s o r g a i n b y r a d i a t i o n must equal
the heat l o s s o r g a i n by c o n v e c t i o n , (q^ = q „ ) , thus
H
C ^ % " t ) = £ a g O (T s
4
- T 4) g [11]
Solving t h e above e q u a t i o n f o r t h e mean r a d i a n t temperature,
T ,
s i n degrees Rankine, we g e t ,
0 . 25
T = 100 C „0.5 — 4 - ^ 4 -
[12 ]
4
h
s — V
^g " V +
<1*0>
and i n degrees Farhenheit
MRT = T g - 459.69
I n t h e above e q u a t i o n s , t h e c o n v e c t i v e h e a t transfer
coefficient (h ) f o r d i f f e r e n t d i a m e t e r s of the globe are
g i v e n by t h e ASHVE R e s e a r c h T e c h n i c a l A d v i s o r y Committee on
31
Instruments (1942). For the 2 inch diameter globe, they suggest
t h e v a l u e o f 0.202. Also, i n t h e above e q u a t i o n s , t h e emmissiv-
ity o f t h e b l a c k g l o b e may be t a k e n a s t h a t o f t h e f l a t black
lacquer paint (e = .95). By e q u a t i o n [12] i t may be s e e n that
i n o r d e r t o compute t h e MRT, measured v a l u e s of the g l o b e
temperature, the a i r temperature and t h e a i r v e l o c i t y near the
globe are r e q u i r e d . Also, i t may be s e e n from equation [12]
that t h e MRT approaches t h e BGT i f the d i f f e r e n c e between BGT
and a i r temperature approaches zero o r the v e l o c i t y of the a i r
approaches zero (calm e n v i r o n m e n t a l conditions). In e i t h e r
case e q u a t i o n [12] becomes
4 4 %
e a (T - T ) = O h
i Jo ]
g s g
which implies that,
T = T .
s g
The MRT i s a measure o f t h e e q u i v a l e n t temperature
of the surrounding s u r f a c e s w i t h which the animals are exchang-
ing radiant energy. Also, t h e MRT i s a direct indicator of
the r a d i a n t energy incident on t h e a n i m a l s . This incident
radiation, referred t o as r a d i a n t heat load (RHL) by Bond and
Kelly (1955), i s proportional t o t h e f o u r t h power o f t h e MRT,
or
4
RHL = a T g . [14 ]
The MRT may be c a l c u l a t e d using equation [12] o r r e a d directly
from t h e nomograph, F i g u r e 4.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GLOBE .AND AIR TEMPERATURE ( t g - t j , °F.
\ \
\ \ V
\ \
\ \
a H \ \
r c.
1
\ \
o v • TJ \ \
co cn M
tn o \ \
z c
HfJ
~ 2
O »
tt \ s
\
tn o
w a \
s jo \
o >
S 13 sr rc \
i \
tn a ll II
cn o o
S3- o
?J
fo o. Ul
I M
H
z
D
H
> i l l \
tt
W
•2 v> S. ^
(to n
Co f
o 00
o o o o!
MEAN PADT.ANT TEMPERATURE, °F
In o r d e r t o check the v a r i a t i o n s i n RHL i n s i d e t h e
chamber t h e MRT was d e t e r m i n e d a t nine l o c a t i o n s * of the f l o o r
surface area. The c e n t r e o f t h e g l o b e was k e p t a t a b o u t 13
inches (33 cm) f r o m t h e h e a t p a n e l s d u r i n g a l l t h e n i n e measure-
ments. The a i r t e m p e r a t u r e was measured a t a b o u t 2 inches
(5 cm) f r o m t h e g l o b e by a s h i e l d e d i r o n - c o n s t a n t a n thermo-
couple.
The cooling r a t e o f a K a t a t h e r m o m e t e r was u s e d t o
determine the a i r v e l o c i t y near t h e b l a c k globe a t each loca-
tion. The K a t a t h e r m o m e t e r was c h o s e n b e c a u s e o f t h e low
velocity range encountered i n t h e chamber. The e q u a t i o n u s e d
to r e l a t e the cooling time t o t h e a i r v e l o c i t y was g i v e n by
Bruce (1960) a s ,
" 2
F/0 I
V [15]
(t - t ) - a /b
m a
where V air velocity i n fpm
F Kata factor
0 average cooling time i n sees
t mean t e m p e r a t u r e o f the Kata thermometer

m i n °F
t = air temperature i n °F
a and b = constants.
The Kata f a c t o r F i s s u p p l i e d w i t h each t h e r m o m e t e r by t h e
manufacturer. The F f a c t o r f o r the non-silvered thermometer
employed i n this e x p e r i m e n t was 473 ( c o o l i n g range 100 - 95°F)
The v a l u e s o f a and b a s w e l l a s t h e mean tempera-
ture, t , a r e g i v e n by Bruce (1960) f o r low v e l o c i t i e s
* Refer to Figure 2, on page 21.

(< 180 f p m ) . In t h i s experiment the v e l o c i t y equation
0 . 1 1 1 "" 2
V (97.7-ta)
0.0158
L
was used.
Results
The computed air velocities, mean r a d i a n t tempera-
tures, and r a d i a n t heat loads f o r the nine locations are
tabulated i n A p p e n d i x A, T a b l e A6, a l o n g w i t h t h e measured
air temperatures and g l o b e temperatures f o r a constant heat
panel temperature o f 136°F (58°C).
A c o r r e c t i o n was r e q u i r e d t o a c c o u n t f o r the s i z e
of the globe. Bond and K e l l y (1955) have shown t h a t there
is an i n c r e a s e i n g l o b e temperature with i n c r e a s e i n globe
size. They a l s o indicated that t h e 6 and 8 i n c h (15.2-
20.3 cm) g l o b e s gave t h e c l o s e s t v a l u e s t o t h e s p h e r i c a l
radiometer readings. A maximum temperature difference of
7°F (3.8°C) b e t w e e n t h e 2 and 6 i n c h g l o b e t h e r m o m e t e r was
reported.
The equivalent radiant heat load values corrected
to the standard 6 inch (15.2 cm) d i a m e t e r black globe
t h e r m o m e t e r a r e shown i n t h e l a s t row o f T a b l e A6.

3. C o m p a r i s o n o f R a d i a n t H e a t L o a d R e s u l t s O b t a i n e d by t h e
R a d i o s i t y Method and t h e B l a c k G l o b e Thermometer Method
I n o r d e r t o compare t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e two methods
it i s necessary to calculate the incident radiation (RHL) on
the globe u s i n g t h e p r e d i c t e d r a d i o s i t i e s o f t h e chamber

walls and h e a t p a n e l s . This incident radiation i s t h e sum
of the r a d i a t i o n streaming away f r o m e a c h s u r f a c e of the
chamber t h a t i s reaching the globe.
Let this incident radiant e n e r g y be t e r m e d I ,
then i n equation form,
n
I = I G.G . (n = 10) [17]
g i = 1 i g-i
where
n
Z G . = 1
i=l
G . = configuration f a c t o r between t h e
Q i —
y
g l o b e and s u r f a c e 'i 1
of the
chamber.
The configuration factors between t h e g l o b e and
the ten surfaces o f chamber f o r e a c h o f t h e n i n e locations*
of t h e g l o b e were d e t e r m i n e d by t h e u s e o f e q u a t i o n [ 1 8 ] ,
along with t h e symmetry r e l a t i o n s and flux-algebra.
G . = -.— a r c s i n [18]
4u r 2 2 2 2
l+X +Y +X Y
The configuration factors f o r t h e g l o b e a t any
location (A^, A^, A^, B.^, B^, B^, C^, C^, C^) t o any o f t h e
ten surfaces o f t h e chamber a r e t a b u l a t e d i n Appendix A,Table A4
Using equation [17] and t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n factors
of T a b l e A4, t h e t h e o r e t i c a l i n c i d e n t r a d i a t i o n on t h e g l o b e
at e a c h l o c a t i o n may be c a l c u l a t e d . The r e s u l t s a r e shown i n
* Appendix A
** F o r d e f i n i t i o n o f terms r e f e r to Figure 3c,
A p p e n d i x A, T a b l e A 5 .
For t h e purpose o f comparison, t h e p r e d i c t e d and
experimental r a d i a n t heat load values f o r the nine locations
of the globe i n t h e chamber, a r e r e p r o d u c e d i n Table 5. The
experimental values of theincident r a d i a n t energy o f t h e globe
(RHL), u s i n g t h e b l a c k g l o b e t h e r m o m e t e r method, a r e t a k e n from
T a b l e A6*; and t h e p r e d i c t e d v a l u e s u s i n g t h e r a d i o s i t y method
are taken from T a b l e A5*.
Table 5 shows t h a t t h e p r e d i c t e d mean r a d i a n t h e a t

-1 -2 -2
load i n t h e chamber was 8.8 BTU h r f t (27.75 Wm ) higher
than the experimental mean v a l u e . This implies, i f the
radiosity method was t o be u s e d to design such environmental
chambers f o r a s p e c i f i c r a d i a n t heat l o a d on c e r t a i n surface
of t h e e n c l o s u r e , then t h e a c t u a l mean r a d i a n t h e a t l o a d , as
determined by t h e b l a c k g l o b e t h e r m o m e t e r w o u l d be a b o u t 5
percent lower than the required value. F o r most d e s i g n purposes
this error i sacceptable; therefore, the r a d i o s i t y method i s
a valuable design tool, i fa digital computer i s accessible.
The main a d v a n t a g e o f t h e r a d i o s i t y method i s
probably the a b i l i t y t o change t h e p r o p e r t i e s o f t h e s u r f a c e s
as w e l l a s t h e shape o f t h e s t r u c t u r e , i norder t o o b t a i n an
even r a d i a n t energy distribution with t h e most efficient
radiant energy utilization.
In the p r e s e n t experiment t h e p r e d i c t e d maxiumum
difference i n r a d i a n t heat l o a d between l o c a t i o n s , a t the f l o o r
level o f t h e chamber, was 4.0 BTU h r " 1

f t " 2
(12.6 Wm" ), a s
2
-1 -2
compared t o t h e m e a s u r e d maxiumum v a l u e o f 6.1 BTU h r f t
(19.2 Wm~ ).
2
* Appendix A
TABLE 5. Predicted and e x p e r i m e n t a l RHL (BTU h r f t )
distribution i n the environmental chamber.
Location of the globe i n t h e chamber
Al A2 A3 BI B2 B3 Cl C2 C3
Predicted 170 .9 171.6 171.0 174. 0 174 .9 174 .2 173 .3 174 .4 173 . 5
Experi-
mental 163 .8 161.8 166.2 162. 7 163 .3 167 .9 163 .6 163 .3 166 .3
Difference 7 .1 9.8 4.8 11. 3 11 .6 6 .3 9 .7 11 .1 7 .2
% Error 4 .3 6.0 2.8 6. 9 7 .1 3 .7 5 .9 6 .7 4 .3
P r e d i c t e d mean RHL i n t h e chamber = 173.1 B T U h r f t

= 545.88 Wm -2
-1 -2
E x p e r i m e n t a l mean RHL i n t h e chamber = 164.3 B T U h r f t
= 518.13 Wm -2
P r e d i c t e d maximum d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n l o c a t i o n s i n t h e chamber
= 4,0 BTU h r f t 1 - 2
(12.6 Wm ) -2
E x p e r i m e n t a l maximum d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n l o c a t i o n s i n t h e chamber
= 6 . 1 BTU h r f t - 1 - 2
(19.2 Wm" ) 2
Maximum d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n e x p e r i m e n t a l and p r e d i c t e d RHL
s 11.6 BTU h r - 1
f t " 2
(36.58 Wm" )
2
Mean d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n e x p e r i m e n t a l and p r e d i c t e d RHL
= 8.8 B T U h r ^ 1
f t " 2
(27.75 Wm )
-2
Mean p e r c e n t error
= 17 3.1 - 164.3 x 1 0 Q _ 5 _ 3 %
164.3
DATA ANALYSIS
1. General Models
(a) A n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e of the e x p e r i m e n t a l data
The w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and g r o w t h r a t e s were analyzed
using the following statistical model:
Y i j = y + d ± + e ± j [19]
where,
Y^. = t h e w e e k l y body w e i g h t o r g r o w t h r a t e o f
- b i r d ' j ' i n treatment
1
'i',
y = the t r u e p o p u l a t i o n mean,
d^ = the fixed e f f e c t of treatment 'i',
e.. = i n d e p e n d e n t random n o r m a l d e v i a t e s with

- 1 1
mean z e r o a n d v a r i a n c e a , e
2
i = t r e a t m e n t s = 1-3 f o r a l l t e s t s except for

t e s t 4, where i = 1, 2
and j = 1 - = individuals within treatments.
In order to perform the a n a l y s i s of the d a t a f o r
the case of unequal number o f o b s e r v a t i o n s p e r treatment, a
F o r t r a n p r o g r a m was w r i t t e n f o l l o w i n g the procedure of analysis
o u t l i n e d by Brownlee (1960), chapter 10. For the single degree
of f r e e d o m c o n t r a s t s , and the e s t i m a t i o n of the confidence
intervals, t h e S c h e f f e ' s method was used, Brownlee (1960).
The confidence interval f o r any c o n t r a s t 9, where
k
e = z c, y. 120]
i=i 1
with an e s t i m a t e d variance
2 k
V[@] = a e
z
z (Ci/rii) [21]
i=l
39
k
and w i t h t h e r e s t r i c t i o n , E = 0. [22]
i=l
Then, the Scheffe's limits f o r the contrast are
+ S (V [ 9 ] ) - 0 5
r 2 3 ]
where, S 2
= (k-1) F _ ± a ( k - 1 , v) [24]
k = number o f t r e a t m e n t s ,
v = degrees o f freedom f o r the error term,
(b) R e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s of the experimental data
Multiple linear r e g r e s s i o n was u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e

2
coefficient of determination, R . Three m a t h e m a t i c a l models
were f i t t e d to the infrared brooding experimental data. These
models a r e :
i) Y = a Q + h 1 X_ + b
] 2 X 2 + b 3 X 3 [25]
where,
Y = 3-week body w e i g h t i n grams,
Xj_ = 1-week body w e i g h t i n grams,
X 2 = 1-2 week g r o w t h rate,
X-j = 2^3 week g r o w t h rate
and a , b , b „ and b , a r e m u l t i p l e linear regression coefficients

o 1 I ~>
ii) Y 1
= a Q + b{ X-L + b ' X 4 [26]
where,
I Y 1
= 3--week body w e i g h t i n grams,
X^ = l^week body w e i g h t i n grams,
X^ = 1--3 week g r o w t h rate,
and a ^ , b j and b ^ a r e m u l t i p l e linear regression coefficients.

40.
iii.) Y" ~ + X x + X 2 + X 5 [27]
where,
y" f= 7^-week body w e i g h t i n grams,
X-^ = 1-week body w e i g h t i n grams,
X 2 ?= 1^3 week g r o w t h rate,
X^ = 3-7 week g r o w t h rate,
and a " , b " , b o and b , a r e m u l t i p l e linear regression coefficients,

o
For t h e warm a i r b r o o d i n g experimental data, only the
first two m o d e l s were u s e d , s i n c e t h e e x p e r i m e n t was terminated
at three weeks o f age r a t h e r t h a n s e v e n weeks.
2. Results and D i s c u s s i o n of the Analyses of Variance
a) Infrared brooding experiment
TEST 1: New Hampshires
The a v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and t h e i r analyses of
variance are included i n A p p e n d i x B, T a b l e B I . The a v e r a g e
weekly growth r a t e s as w e l l as t h e average growth r a t e s f o r
the 1 t o 3-week p e r i o d and t h e 3 t o 7-week p e r i o d w i t h their
analyses of variance are included i n A p p e n d i x B, T a b l e B2. In
the above m e n t i o n e d two t a b l e s , t h e t r e a t m e n t s were a s f o l l o w s :
Floor (conventional heat lamp brooding).
Chamber 1 (low r a d i a t i o n l e v e l brooding).
Chamber 2 (high radiation level brooding).
The analyses of variance o f a v e r a g e w e e k l y body weights
(Table B l ( b ) ) show t h a t f o r the f i r s t three weeks o f a g e , t h e
a v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s o f b i r d s reared i n t h e two chambers

41.
were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher (probably < 0.01) than the average
weekly body w e i g h t s o f b i r d s reared on the f l o o r . T a b l e BI,
also indicates that t h e r e was no significant difference in
average weekly body w e i g h t s between b i r d s brooded under the
high level of thermal r a d i a t i o n (chamber 2) and b i r d s brooded
under t h e low level of r a d i a t i o n (chamber 1). However, the
average 7-week body w e i g h t o f b i r d s brooded i n the high
radiation level chamber was 25 grams h i g h e r (though
statistically non-significant) than t h a t of birds brooded in
the low r a d i a t i o n level chamber. The failure o f the analysis
to d e t e c t t h e above d i f f e r e n c e was due t o t h e ^random
v a r i a t i o n s which a c c o u n t e d f o r more t h a n 9 8 p e r c e n t o f t h e
total sums o f s q u a r e s . Furthermore, the analyses of variance
of average weekly body w e i g h t s (Table Bl (b)) i n d i c a t e s that
the difference i n average weekly body w e i g h t s , between birds
brooded i n chambers and b i r d s brooded on t h e f l o o r , became
non-significant during the l a t e r weeks o f t h e t e s t (4 to 7
weeks), when t h e c h i c k s reared i n t h e chamber f o r t h e first
t h r e e weeks o f age were t r a n s f e r r e d to the f l o o r . The failure
of the b i r d s brooded i n t h e chambers to m a i n t a i n their
advantage i n body w e i g h t s o v e r t h e f l o o r birds, implies that
they suffered a depression i n growth rate. This depression
started as e a r l y as t h e s e c o n d week o f g r o w t h as indicated
by the analyses of v a r i a n c e o f average growth rates (Table
B2 ( b ) ) .
It i s important to notice the highly significant
average d i f f e r e n c e i n the f i r s t week g r o w t h r a t e i n favour of
the chicks reared i n t h e chambers. The a v e r a g e f i r s t week
g r o w t h r a t e s were 2.62 and 1.9 5 f o r chambers and f o r f l o o r
birds, respectively (Table B2). But, during the growth periods
(1 t o 3) and (3 t o 7) weeks, t h e f l o o r b i r d s had s i g n i f i c a n t l y
higher ( p r o b a b i l i t y < 0.01) g r o w t h r a t e s than the corresponding
growth r a t e s f o r birds reared i n t h e chambers. Even though the
a v e r a g e g r o w t h r a t e o f b i r d s b r o o d e d i n t h e chambers was
2.77 compared t o 3.0 8 f o r f l o o r birds f o r t h e same p e r i o d , t h e
birds reared i n chambers f i n i s h e d with a highly'significant
average 3-week body w e i g h t o v e r f l o o r birds. The highest
decline i n growth r a t e f o rbirds i n t h e chambers was during
the 3 t o 4-week p e r i o d . This period corresponded to the
transfer o f t h e young chicks f r o m t h e chambers to the f l o o r .
The average growth r a t e s f o r t h e 3 t o 4-week p e r i o d were 2.38
and 2.67 f o r chamber and f l o o r birds, respectively. The c a u s e
of the reduction i n growth r a t e during t h e 3 t o 4-week period
was due t o t h e s u d d e n e n v i r o n m e n t a l change f r o m chambers t o
floor. However, i t seems t h a t after a period of acclimatiza-
t i o n o f one week, t h e b i r d s , w h i c h h a v e b e e n transferred from
the chambers to the f l o o r , adjusted t o t h e new e n v i r o n m e n t .
This a d j u s t m e n t t o t h e new e n v i r o n m e n t i s i n d i c a t e d by t h e
equal average weekly growth r a t e s during the growth period
between 4 and 7 weeks, (Table B2).. The e q u a l i t y o f w e e k l y
growth r a t e s during t h e 4 t o 7-weeks p e r i o d implies that the
significance o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e 3 t o 7-week period

growth r a t e i n f a v o u r o f t h e f l o o r b i r d s , was m a i n l y due t o t h e
significant difference i n t h e 3 t o 4-week g r o w t h r a t e . The
h i g h r e d u c t i o n i n g r o w t h r a t e d u r i n g t h e 3 t o 4-week p e r i o d i s
an indication that the t r a n s f e r of birds from t h e chambers t o
the floor was c r i t i c a l . In the subsequent t e s t s , c a r e was taken
to minimize physical and e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t r e s s e s during the
transfer period. The c a u s e o f t h e low g r o w t h r a t e , during the
second and t h i r d week o f g r o w t h o f b i r d s i n t h e two chambers
compared to floor birds ( T a b l e B 2 ) , r e m a i n s t o be i n v e s t i g a t e d .
The confidence interval f o r t h e c o n t r a s t , chamber 1
and chamber 2 birds versus floor b i r d s may be e s t i m a t e d during
S c h e f f e ' s method. In equation form t h e c o n t r a s t may be
expressed as,
/\ /\
e = \i 1 + y - 2y 2 3
where,
^1' ^2' a n c
^ ^3 a r
t i m a t e s °f t h e t r u e mean o f
e e s
chamber 1, chamber 2, and f l o o r

birds respectively.
For t h e 1-week body w e i g h t , we have
0 = 89 + 89 - 2(74) = 30 grams,
with an e s t i m a t e d v a r i a n c e V
V [0] = [(l) 2
'+ ( l ) + 2
(-2) ]2
- 16.33
By equation [24],
S 2
= 6.24;
then, by e q u a t i o n [ 2 3 ] , t h e 95 p e r c e n t confidence limits are:
9 = 30+10 grams.
Similarly f o r t h e 2-week body w e i g h t we g e t ,
9 = 36+21 grams,
and, f o r t h e 3-week body w e i g h t ,
9 = 35+33 grams.
The 95 p e r c e n t c o n f i d e n c e level limits f o r the
difference i n w e e k l y body w e i g h t s between the high radiation
level (chamber 2) and t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l b r o o d i n g (floor)
t r e a t m e n t s , may be c a l c u l a t e d i n a similar manner. We have
the contrast,
9 = u 2 - -u .
3
For t h e 1-week body w e i g h t ,
9 = 15+6 grams.
9 = 20+9 grams.
And f o r t h e 3-week body w e i g h t ,
9 = 20+11 grams.
TEST 2: U.B.C. Broilers
The a v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and t h e i r analyses
v a r i a n c e a r e shown i n A p p e n d i x B, T a b l e B3. The a v e r a g e
weekly growth r a t e s as w e l l as t h e average growth r a t e s f o r
the 1 t o 3-week p e r i o d and t h e 3 t o 7-week p e r i o d and t h e i r
analyses o f v a r i a n c e a r e shown i n A p p e n d i x B, T a b l e B4. In
thesej two t a b l e s , t h e t r e a t m e n t s were as f o l l o w s :
Floor ( c o n v e n t i o n a l pen b r o o d i n g ) .
Chamber 1 (high r a d i a t i o n level brooding).
Chamber 2 (low r a d i a t i o n level brooding).

The a n a l y s i s of variance of the average first week
body w e i g h t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t c h i c k s b r o o d e d i n t h e two chambers
were s i g n i f i c a n t l y superior (probability < 0.01) t h a n chicks
brooded with the conventional system. This i s i n agreement
with the r e s u l t s of test 2. But, u n l i k e t e s t 1, t h e r e was a
highly significant difference (11 grams) i n 1-week body
w e i g h t b e t w e e n t h e two l e v e l s of thermal r a d i a t i o n i n favour
of the high level (chamber 1 ) .
During t h e f o l l o w i n g weeks o f t h e t e s t , t h e r e was a
steady d e c l i n e i n growth rates of b i r d s reared i n t h e chambers,
as i n d i c a t e d by t h e a v e r a g e w e e k l y growth rate analyses of
variance (Table B4). This d e c l i n e i n growth rates, starting
during t h e s e c o n d week o f g r o w t h , was m a i n l y due t o a d i s e a s e
( p o r o s i s ) w h i c h was o b s e r v e d , i n t h e chambers o n l y , early
during t h e s e c o n d week o f g r o w t h . Dead and v i s i b l y diseased
b i r d s were n e g l e c t e d from the r e p o r t e d analyses.
Using Scheffe's method, t h e 95 p e r c e n t confidence
level limits f o r t h e c o n t r a s t between c h i c k s b r o o d e d i n the
chambers and c h i c k s b r o o d e d on t h e f l o o r , may be c a l c u l a t e d .
We have t h e c o n t r a s t ,
/N /\ /\
© = +v ~ v- 2
2
3
For t h e 1-week body weight,
0 = 75+17 grams.
0 = 28+34 grams.
And f o r t h e 3-week b o d y weight,
0 = -44 + 53 grams.
Similarly, t h e 95 p e r c e n t confidence level limits
for the difference i n weekly body weights, between high level
of radiation (chamber 1) a n d f l o o r treatments may be constructed.
We have the contrast,
e = u 1 - u -
3
9 = 4 3 + 1 0 grams.
For t h e 2-week b o d y weight,
9 = 1 9 + 2 0 grams.
And f o r t h e 3-week b o d y weight,
0 = - 8 + 3 1 grams.
The average weekly body weights with their analyses
of variance a r e shown i n A p p e n d i x B, T a b l e B5. The a v e r a g e
weekly growth rates as w e l l a s t h e a v e r a g e 1 t o 3-week period
and t h e a v e r a g e 3 t o 7-week period growth rates are included
in A p p e n d i x B, T a b l e B6. In these tables the treatments are
as follows:
Chamber 1 (low r a d i a t i o n level brooding).
Chamber 2 (high radiation level brooding).
From t h e weekly body weight analyses of variance,
Table B 5 , we can conclude:

First, on t h e a v e r a g e , week one and week two body
weights o f the c h i c k s brooded i n t h e two chambers were
significantly higher (probability < 0.01) t h a n t h e c o r r e s -
p o n d i n g body w e i g h t s o f b i r d s brooded under h e a t lamps.
Second, f r o m week t h r e e t o week s e v e n , t h e r e was no
significant difference between t h e a v e r a g e v a l u e o f w e e k l y
body w e i g h t s o f t h e b i r d s i n t h e chambers and t h e f l o o r birds
Third, f r o m week two t o week f i v e , t h e weekly body
weights f o r birds brooded under high thermal r a d i a t i o n level
(chamber 2) were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher (probability < 0.01)
than the weekly body w e i g h t s f o rbirds brooded u n d e r low
radiation level (chamber 1 ) .
The Scheffe's limits a t t h e 95 p e r c e n t l e v e l of
confidence f o r the c o n t r a s t
/\ S\
0 = V ± + y 2 - 2y 3
are, f o r t h e 1-week body weight,
6 = 19+13 grams.
0 = 26+24 grams.
0 = 22+40 grams.
© = -5+57 grams.
And, f o r t h e 5-week body weight,

0 = 21+77 grams.
48 .
S i m i l a r l y , the'Scheffe s l i m i t s1
f o r the d i f f e r e n c e i n
w e e k l y body w e i g h t s , between the high level of thermal
radiation (chamber 2) and f l o o r treatments, are:
0 = y 2 - y 3
for t h e 1-week body w e i g h t ,
9 - 8+7 grams.
6 = 20+14 grams.
© - 31+23 grams.
0 = 24+33 grams.
And f o r t h e 5-week body w e i g h t ,
0 = 38+45 grams.
The a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e o f t h e mean w e e k l y g r o w t h
rates f o r the f i r s t t h r e e week period o f growth, indicated
the same trend as t h e p r e v i o u s two t e s t s . On t h e average,-
the h a t c h t o 1-week g r o w t h r a t e of birds reared i n t h e two
chambers, was h i g h e r compared t o t h e growth r a t e f o r t h e same
period of t h e i r contemporaries reared on t h e f l o o r . However,
t h e s i t u a t i o n was r e v e r s e d d u r i n g the f o l l o w i n g two weeks o f
growth (Table B6).
It i s of importance to mention that t h e same d i s e a s e
as i n t e s t 2 was o b s e r v e d again within the b i r d s i n the
chambers, b u t t o a l e s s e r d e g r e e .
The a v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and their analyses
of v a r i a n c e are shown i n A p p e n d i x B, Table B7. The average
weekly growth r a t e s , the 1 t o 3-week and the 3 t o 7-week
g r o w t h r a t e s and their analyses of v a r i a n c e are shown i n
A p p e n d i x B, Table B8. In these t a b l e s , the two•treatments
are as f o l l o w s :
Chamber 2 (high r a d i a t i o n level, the same s t a r t i n g black
globe t e m p e r a t u r e as i n the p r e v i o u s tests, but the
final globe t e m p e r a t u r e was i n c r e a s e d from 70°F
(21°C) to"80°F (26.7°C)).
The average weekly growth r a t e a n a l y s e s of variance
show an alternating trend of s i g n i f i c a n c e and n o n - s i g n i f i c a n c e .
This trend i s unique to t h i s test, and i t i s probably a result
of the m o d i f i e d r a t e of black globe temperature drop.
In the p r e v i o u s tests, the average hatch t o 1-week
growth r a t e o f b i r d s brooded i n the chambers was significantly
higher than t h a t o f b i r d s b r o o d e d on the floor, while in this
test the s i t u a t i o n was reversed. Therefore, maintaining a
black globe temperature of 88°F (31.1°C), Table 2, for the
whole f i r s t week o f the t e s t had an adverse effect on growth
r a t e o f chamber b i r d s . The reverse situation occurred again
during the s e c o n d week o f g r o w t h . The chamber b i r d s had a
superior 1 t o 2-week g r o w t h r a t e t o f l o o r birds, while in
the p r e v i o u s tests, the opposite situation occurred. There-
fore, during the s e c o n d week o f g r o w t h , a b l a c k globe

50 .
t e m p e r a t u r e o f 84°F (28.9°C), T a b l e 2, was b e t t e r f o r growth
t h a n a b l a c k g l o b e t e m p e r a t u r e o f 82°F (27.8°C) d r o p p i n g t o
76°F (24.4°C) d u r i n g the l a t e r p a r t o f t h e week, T a b l e 1.
Finally, the present t e s t indicated no s i g n i f i c a n t difference
in t h e 2 t o 3-week g r o w t h r a t e between chamber and f l o o r
birds, while previous tests showed a s u p e r i o r growth rate
during t h e t h i r d week o f g r o w t h i n favour of f l o o r birds.
Therefore, a b l a c k g l o b e t e m p e r a t u r e o f 80°F (26.7°C) during
the t h i r d week gave s l i g h t l y better results than a globe
t e m p e r a t u r e o f 73°F (22.8°C) d r o p p i n g t o 70°F (21°C).
b) Warm A i r B r o o d i n g E x p e r i m e n t : Commercial Broilers
TESTS: 5 and 6
The mean w e e k l y body w e i g h t w i t h their analyses of
variance for test 5 and f o r t e s t 6, f e m a l e s and m a l e s , a r e
included i n A p p e n d i x C, T a b l e s C l , C3, C5 and C7, r e s p e c t i v e l y .
The average weekly growth r a t e s as w e l l a s t h e 1 t o 3-week
growth r a t e s w i t h their analyses of variance are also included
i n A p p e n d i x C, T a b l e s C2, C4, C6 and C8, r e s p e c t i v e l y .
The body w e i g h t a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n d i c a t e d a
significant difference i n t h e 1-week body w e i g h t s i n f a v o u r
of the b i r d s reared i n t h e chambers compared to birds reared
on t h e f l o o r . T h i s d i f f e r e n c e was p r e s e n t i n b o t h t e s t s and
f o r fc?oth s e x e s . But, during the f o l l o w i n g two weeks, t h e
difference i n body w e i g h t s r e m a i n e d s i g n i f i c a n t f o r females
only.
It i s important t o note the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n
3-week body w e i g h t between t h e two chambers. This difference
was i n f a v o u r of b i r d s i n chamber 1. I t i s also important to
note t h a t t h e above t r e n d was c o n s i s t e n t l y present i n both
tests and f o r both sexes. The a n a l y s e s of variance tables
for growth r a t e s ( A p p e n d i x C) indicated that the growth r a t e of
birds i n chamber 2 started to f a l l behind that of birds i n
chamber 1 during t h e s e c o n d week o f g r o w t h . Also, these tables
indicated that the d i f f e r e n c e i n growth r a t e s o f t h e two
chambers become h i g h l y significant during the t h i r d week.
During this period, the growth r a t e s o f the male b i r d s i n test
5 were 3.39 and 3.12 f o r chamber 1 and chamber 2, r e s p e c t i v e l y ;
and, i n test 6, t h e y were 3.19 and 2.86 f o r chamber 1 and
chamber 2, r e s p e c t i v e l y . The c a u s e o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n
growth r a t e s could n o t be e n v i r o n m e n t a l , since t h e two
chambers were p r a c t i c a l l y a t t h e same e n v i r o n m e n t a l conditions.
The c a u s e o f t h i s d i f f e r e n c e was due t o t h e f a c t that the
feeder i n chamber 2 was smaller than the feeder i n chamber 1.
Obvicusly, the c a p a c i t y of the feeder d i d not i n f l u e n c e the
birds during t h e e a r l y s t a g e o f g r o w t h b u t , as t h e f e e d con-
sumption i n c r e a s e d , the feeder capacity became a f a c t o r .
3. Resui.ts Of t h e L i n e a r Multiple Regression Analyses
, a) Infrared brooding experiment
The s i m p l e and m u l t i p l e coefficients of determina-

2
tion (R ) f o r t h e 3-week body w e i g h t w i t h 1-week body weight,
1 t o 2-week g r o w t h r a t e , 2 t o 3-week g r o w t h r a t e and 1 t o 3-
week g r o w t h r a t e , a r e shown i n A p p e n d i x D (Table D I ) . For
all treatments, t h e 1-week body w e i g h t a l o n e explained
between 70%-85%, 26%-59%, 41%-62% and 47%-54% of the
variability i n t h e 3-week body w e i g h t f o r t e s t 1, 2, 3 and 4
respectively. The s i m p l e correlation coefficients between
the 3-week body w e i g h t and e a c h one o f t h e t h r e e g r o w t h rates
listed a b o v e , were g e n e r a l l y low and n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t . It is
interesting t o note t h a t only the following two traits,
1-week body w e i g h t and 1 t o 3-week g r o w t h r a t e , were needed
to a c c o u n t f o r a l m o s t 100 p e r c e n t o f t h e v a r i a b i l i t y i n the
3-week body w e i g h t .
The c o e f f i c i e n t s o f d e t e r m i n a t i o n f o r t h e 7-week
body w e i g h t w i t h 1-week body w e i g h t , 1 t o 3-week g r o w t h rate
and 3 t o 7-week g r o w t h r a t e are included i n Appendix D
(Table D2). I t i s of interest t o note that f o r a l l treatments
the correlations between t h e 7-week body w e i g h t and 1-week
body w e i g h t ( T a b l e D2) were l o w e r than the c o r r e l a t i o n s between
3-week body w e i g h t and 1-week body w e i g h t ( T a b l e D I ) . As was
expected, the combination o f the three t r a i t s , 1-week body
weight, 1 t o 3-week g r o w t h r a t e and 3 t o 7-week g r o w t h rate,
e x p l a i n e d most o f t h e v a r i a b i l i t y i n t h e 7-week body w e i g h t ,
b) Warm A i r B r o o d i n g E x p e r i m e n t
The c o e f f i c i e n t s o f d e t e r m i n a t i o n f o r t h e 3-week
body w e i g h t w i t h 1-week body w e i g h t , 1 t o 2-week g r o w t h rate,

2 t o 3-week g r o w t h rate and 1 t o 3-week g r o w t h rate are
tabulated i n Appendix D ( T a b l e D3) f o r t e s t 5 and ( T a b l e D4)
for test 6.
The regression a n a l y s e s f o r t h e two t e s t s indicated
t h a t t h e 1-week body w e i g h t e x p l a i n e d b e t w e e n 4 4 and 7 6 p e r -
cent (a s i g n i f i c a n t amount) o f t h e v a r i a t i o n associated with
the 3-week body w e i g h t , assuming a l l other independent
v a r i a b l e s were k e p t c o n s t a n t . The o t h e r s i m p l e coefficients
of d e t e r m i n a t i o n were g e n e r a l l y low. As i n t h e i n f r a r e d
brooding experiment, the following two t r a i t s , 1-week body
w e i g h t and 1 t o 3-week g r o w t h rate explained almost a l l the
variability i n t h e 3-week body weight.
.Infrared and Warm A i r B r o o d i n g : A Comparison
For the purpose o f comparison, T a b l e 5 was constructed
which represents a summary o f t h e r e s u l t s f o r the brooding
period, h a t c h t o t h r e e weeks o f a g e . Test 1 was neglected,
because New Hampshires\ were used as e x p e r i m e n t a l m a t e r i a l
instead of b r o i l e r s ; therefore, no c o m p a r i s o n could be made
between t e s t 1 and o t h e r t e s t s o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t .
Table 5 shows t h e a v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s i n
grams and t h e i r resulting average weekly growth rates. The
actual treatments with t h e i r identifications are l i s t e d below
the table. As t h e t a b l e indicates, some o f t h e t r e a t m e n t s were
replicated once o r more.
It i s of i n t e r e s t t o n o t e t h e growth rate trend of
each treatment. During a l l the tests, t h e growth rates of the

54.
TABLE 6. Average weekly body weights i n grams and a v e r a g e weekly

growth rates a s by t r e a t m e n t , f o r t e s t s 2, 3, 4, 5 and
6 (males).
Age (weeks) Growth p e r i o d

Test Treat-
H 1 2 3 H-l 1-2 2-3 n
No ment
2 E. 43 98 294 543 2.87 4.95 3.37 22
3 E 45 127 283 511 3.65 3 .57 3.25 30
Floor 4 E 47 124 278 500 3.34 3.63 3.22 37
5 E 46 115 290 542 3.14 4 .15 3.43 24
6 E 41 116 268 497 3. 60 3 .74 3.40 23
2 A 43 141 313 53 5 4.08 3 .60 2.93 20

3 C 44 138 289 502 3.95 3.33 3 .03 25
Chamber 1 5 D 48 126 301 559 3 .36 3.91 3 .39 14
6 D 42 124 277 496 3.77 3 .60 3.19 18
2 C 42 130 303 507 3.89 3 . 81 2 .82 25

3 A 44 135 303 542 3.88 3 .64 3.18 27
Chamber 2 4 B 47 120 288 519 3 . 28 3.92 3 .22 26
5 D 48 125 297 525 3.34 3.90 3.12 18
6 D 41 125 269 452 3. 89 3.42 2. 86 11
Nomenclature below:
A: High r a d i a t i o n l e v e l brooding, f i n a l BGT o f 70°F
(21.1°C)
B: High r a d i a t i o n l e v e l brooding, f i n a l BGT o f 80°F
(26.7°C)
C: Low r a d i a t i o n l e v e l b r o o d i n g , final BGT o f 70°F
(21.1°C)
D: Warm a i r b r o o d i n g , r e l a t i v e h u m d i t y = 50%
E: H e a t lamps b r o o d i n g .
H: Hatch
n: Number o f b i r d s
TABLE 7. Scheffe's limits a t t h e 95% c o n f i d e n c e level for
the specified contrasts f o rtests 2, 3, 5 and 6
(males).
AGE
Contrast * T e s t No. Week 1 Week 2 Week 3
CO
< 3-
2 75+17 28+34 -44+53

1
CN 3 19+13 26+24 22+40
+
5 21+17 18+37 0+60
,—j
< 3.
6 17 + 15 10+35 -46+60
II
CD
e = 2 43+10 19+20 - 8+31

y
3
e = 3 8+ 7 20+14 31+23
^2 " y
3
e = 5 11+10 11+23 17 + 37
y
l " ^3
e 6 8+ 8 9 + 19 - 1+33
y
i " ^3
= e s t i m a t e d mean o f chamber 1 birds

M
l
y = e s t i m a t e d mean o f chamber 2 birds
= e s t i m a t e d mean o f floor birds

y
3
f l o o r b i r d s i n d i c a t e d a low-high-low trend. The low h a t c h
to 1-week growth r a t e i n d i c a t e d t h e b i r d s were s t r e s s e d d u r i n g
t h e i r f i r s t week o f growth. T h i s s t r e s s was due t o e i t h e r
a r e c o v e r y from h a t c h i n g e f f e c t and/or an e n v i r o n m e n t a l effect.
The same growth r a t e t r e n d o c c u r r e d d u r i n g t e s t 4, i n chamber
2, w i t h t h e h i g h r a d i a t i o n l e v e l and h i g h f i n a l b l a c k g l o b e
temperature treatment. However, d u r i n g t e s t s 2 and 3, i n
chambers 1 and 2, w i t h t h e h i g h l e v e l o f r a d i a t i o n and low
f i n a l b l a c k g l o b e temperature t r e a t m e n t , t h e growth r a t e s
showed a d e c r e a s i n g t r e n d w i t h age. These growth r a t e t r e n d s
i n d i c a t e d t h e importance o f t h e r a t e o f change o f t h e b l a c k
g l o b e temperature w i t h time.
Furthermore, a t a b l e of confidence i n t e r v a l s i s
i n c l u d e d f o r a b e t t e r a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e between
some o f t h e t r e a t m e n t means o f T a b l e 5. These c o n f i d e n c e limits
at t h e 95 p e r c e n t l e v e l , f o r some s e l e c t e d c o n t r a s t s , a r e shown
i n Table 6. The l a r g e s t t r e a t m e n t d i f f e r e n c e of 43 + 10 grams
o c c u r r e d d u r i n g t e s t 2. T h i s d i f f e r e n c e was between t h e h i g h
l e v e l t h e r m a l r a d i a t i o n and t h e f l o o r treatments.
57 .
CONCLUSIONS
The intensity and u n i f o r m i t y o f t h e r m a l radiation
within the c o n t r o l l e d environment chambers were s t u d i e d using
the following two m e t h o d s :
a) The r a d i o s i t y method.
b) The b l a c k g l o b e thermometer method.
The incident radiant e n e r g y was d e t e r m i n e d a t n i n e
different locations within t h e chamber, and i t was f o u n d that:
a) The v a r i a t i o n s between l o c a t i o n s were small.
b) For a l l locations, the r a d i o s i t y method p r e d i c t e d about
5 percent higher values of i n c i d e n t radiation than
v a l u e s d e t e r m i n e d by t h e b l a c k g l o b e thermometer.
A first e x p e r i m e n t was d e s i g n e d t o s t u d y t h e e f f e c t s
of infrared e n e r g y on p o u l t r y . A total o f 311 young male chicks,
99 New H a m p s h i r e s , and . 212 U.B.C. b r o i l e r s were u s e d i n the
experiment. This experiment c o n s i s t e d of four tests, with three
treatments i n each t e s t ; a high radiation level, a low
radiation level and a c o n v e n t i o n a l h e a t lamp b r o o d i n g s y s t e m .
It was f o u n d that:
a) On t h e a v e r a g e , the weekly body w e i g h t s , f o r t h e f i r s t
t h r e e o f growth, of birds brooded under t h e low and
high levels o f r a d i a t i o n were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r
t h a n t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g body w e i g h t s o f b i r d s reared
under heat lamps.
b) B i r d s brooded under the high level of r a d i a t i o n were
superior to b i r d s brooded under t h e low l e v e l o f
radiation.
58 .
A second e x p e r i m e n t was d e s i g n e d t o compare warm a i r
brooding t o h e a t lamp b r o o d i n g . A t o t a l o f 212 m i x e d s e x
commercial broilers were u s e d i n the experiment. This experi-
ment c o n s i s t e d o f two t e s t s , w i t h t h e t r e a t m e n t s i n each test;
chamber 1, chamber 2 and f l o o r ( h e a t lamp b r o o d i n g ) . The two
chambers were m a i n t a i n e d a t t h e same e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s
for each test. I t was f o u n d that:
a) On t h e a v e r a g e , t h e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s o f b i r d s w i t h warm
a i r were h i g h e r t h a n t h e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s o f b i r d s
brooded under heat lamps.
b) T h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t chamber e f f e c t , during the t h i r d
week o f g r o w t h , i n f a v o u r o f chamber 1.
When t h e h i g h l e v e l of thermal r a d i a t i o n of the f i r s t
e x p e r i m e n t was compared t o t h e warm a i r e x p e r i m e n t , the weekly
body w e i g h t s o f t h e f o r m e r t r e a t m e n t were h i g h e r o r a t l e a s t
equal t o the weekly body w e i g h t s o f t h e l a t t e r t r e a t m e n t .

L I S T OF REFERENCES
ASHVE R e s e a r c h T e c h n i c a l A d v i s o r y Committee on Instruments.
"Measurement o f p h y s i c a l properties of the thermal
environment", Heating, Piping and A i r C o n d i t i o n i n g ,
14: 382-385, 1942.
B a k e r , V.H. and J.H. Bywaters. ''Brooding P o u l t r y with
I n f r a r e d Energy". A g r . Eng. 42: 316^320, June 1951.
B a x t e r , D.O., T.E. Maddox and H.V. Shirley. "Temperature
preferences of chicks". T r n a s a c t i o n s o f t h e ASAE,
Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 788^791, 1970.
B e d f o r d , T. and C.G. Warner. "The g l o b e thermometer in
studies of heating and v e n t i l a t i n g " . Journal of
Hygiene, 34: 458, 1934.
Bond, T.E. and C E . Kelly. "The g l o b e thermometer in
agricultural research". A g r . Eng. 36: 251-255,
April, 1955.
Brownlee, K.A. Statistical Theory and M e t h o d o l o g y in
Science and E n g i n e e r i n g . J o h n W i l e y & Sons, N.Y.
1960.
B r u c e , W. Man and H i s T h e r m a l Environment. Technical
P a p e r No. 84, D i v i s i o n of Building Research,
National Research C o u n c i l o f Canada, Ottawa,
NRC 5514, pp. 123-126, F e b r u a r y 1960.

60.
8. L o n g h o u s e , A.D. and H.L. Garver. "Poultry environments".
ASHRAE J o u r n a l , 68-74, J u l y 1964.
9. M c C l u s k e y , W.H. and G.H. Arscott. "The influence of
i n c a n d e s c e n t and infrared light upon chicks".
Poultry Science, 46: 528-29, 1967.
10. P a r k e r , B.F., E.M. S m i t h and B.P. Verma. "Black sphere
thermal radiometry". Transactions of the ASAE 10:
780-783, 1967.
11. P e r e i r a , N., T.E. Bond and S.R. Morrison. "Thermal
characteristics of a t a b l e - t e n n i s - b a l l used as a
black-globe thermometer". ASAE p a p e r No.66-328,
1966.
12. R o b e r t s , C.W. "Estimation of e a r l y growth r a t e in the
chicken". Poultry Science, 43: 238-252, J a n u a r y ,
1964.
13. S i e g e l , R. and J.R. Howell. Thermal R a d i a t i o n Heat
Transfer. M c G r a w - H i l l Book Company, N.Y., 1972.
14. S k o g l u n d , W.C. and D.H. Palmer. "Light intensity studies
with b r o i l e r s " . Poultry Science, 41: 1839-1842,
1962.
15. S p a r r o w , E.M. and R.D. Cess. Radiation Heat Transfer.
Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, B e l m o n t , California,
1970.
16. S t a l e y , L.M., C.W. R o b e r t s and D.C. Crober. "The effect
of t h e r m a l r a d i a t i o n on e a r l y growth of the New
Hampshire c h i c k e n " . Can. Agr. Eng. 9: 39-42,
January, 1967.
61.
17. Staley, L.M. and C.W. Roberts. "Design and development
of c o n t r o l l e d environment brooders for poultry".
Can. Agr. Eng. 11: 71-73, November 1969.
18. Staley, L.M., C.W. Roberts and S. Paulson. "Improved
growth o f p o u l t r y u t i l i z i n g controlled environ-
ments". Can. Agr. Eng. 12: 76-79, November 197 0.

62.
APPENDIX A
TABLE A l
AVERAGE SURFACE TEMPERATURE EMITTANCE AND

SURFACE AREA OF THE SURFACES OF THE CHAMBER.
Surface Material Surface Size Emittance Average

No. (in) Temperature
(°F)
1 white p a i n t UO x 40 ' 0.90 136
2 wood 40x4 0 0.85 82
3 oxidized 40 x 13 0.20 74
alum.
4 " 40 x 16 0.20 68
5 " 40 x 13 0.20 82
6 " 40 x 16 0.20 70
7 plexiglass 40 x 13 0.90 82
8 oxidized Al 40 x 16 0,20 70
9 " 40 x 13 0.20 87
10 " 40 x 16 0.20 72
64 .
TABLE A2
CONFIGURATION FACTORS BETWEEN THE S U R F A C E S OF THE

CHAMBER.
1 F
l - i F
2 - i 3 - i 4 - i 5 - i 6 - i 7 - i 8 - i 9 - i
F F ? F F F F F
1 0 - i
1 0 0.293 0.329 0.175 0.329 0.175 0.329 0.175 0.329 0.175
2 0.293 0 0 . 1 6 0 0 . 3 1 2 0.160 0 . 3 1 2 0 . 1 6 0 0 . 3 1 2 0 . 1 6 0 0 . 3 1 2
3 0 . 1 0 7 0.052 0 0 0.125 0.048 0.070 0 . 0 6 5 0 . 1 2 5 0 . 0 4 8
4 0.070 0.125 0 0 0.060 0 . 1 3 9 0.080 0.096 0.060 0.139
5 0 . 1 0 7 0.052 0.125 0.049 0 0 0 . 1 2 5 0.048 0.070 0.065
6 0 . 0 7 0 0 . 1 2 5 0.060 0 . 1 3 9 0 0 0.060 0 . 1 3 9 0 . 0 8 0 0.096
7 0.107 0.052 0.070 0 . 0 6 5 0 . 1 2 5 0 . 0 4 9 0 0 0 . 1 2 5 0.048
8 0.070.0.125 0.080 0.096 0.060 0.139 0 0 0.060 0.139
9 0.107 0.052 0.125 0.049 0.070 0.065 0 . 1 2 5 0 . 0 4 9 0 0
10 0.070 0 . 1 2 5 0.060 0 . 1 3 9 0.080 0.096 0.060 0 . 1 3 9 0 0
Total 1.001 1 . 0 0 1 1.009 1.025 1.009 1.023 1.009 1.023 1.009 1.022
TABLE A3
THE - MATRIX OF COEFFICIENTS AND THE COLUMN VECTOR OF CONSTANTS FOR THE
• SOLUTION OF THE SYSTEM OF LINEAR NONHOMOGENEOUS EQUATIONS ON DIGITAL COMPUTERS
+ 1.0 -0. 0293 -0. 0107 -0. 0070 -0. 0107 -0. 0070 -0. 0107 -0 .0070 -0. 0107 -0. 0070
V 194. 64
-0. 04 3 9 + 1.0 -0. 0078 -0. 0187 -0. 0078 -0. 0187 -0. 0078 -0 . 0187 -0. 0078 -0. 0187 125 .73
! 2 B
-0. 26 32 -0. 1280 + 1.0 0. 0 -0. 1000 -0. 0480 -0. 0560 --0 .0640 -0. 1000 -0. 0480 27. 87
! 3 B
- 0 . 1400 -0. 2497 0. 0 + 1.0 -0 .0392 -0. 1112 -0. 0 5 20 -0 . 0768 -0, 0392 -0. 1112
V 26. 64
- 0 . 2632 -0. 1280 -0. 1000 -0. 0480 + 1.0 0. 0 -0. 1000 -0 . 0480 -0. 0560 -0. 0640 B,- I 29. 58
5 i
-0 .1400 -0. 2496 -0. 0384 -0. 1112 0 .0 + 1.0 -0 .0392 -0 .1112 -0 .0520 -0. 0768
! 6 B
- 27. 05
-0. 0329 - 0 . 0160 -0. 0070 -0 .0080 -0 .0125 -0. 0060 + 1.0 0. 0 -0. 0125 -0 .0060
h 133. 12
-0. 1400 -0 .2496 -0. 052 -0. 0768 -0 .0384 -0. 1112 0. 0 + 1. 0 -0. 0392 -0. 1112 27. 05
B
8
-0. 2632 -0. 128 -0, 1000 -0 .0480 -0. 0560 -0. 0640 -0. 1000 -0 . 0480 +1. 0 0 .0 30. 59
B
9
- 0 . 140 0 2496 -0. 0 3 84 -0. 1112 -0. 0520 -0. 0 7 68 -0. 0384 -0 .1112 0. 0 +1. 0 27. 46
!
B
io|
J i
66 .
TABLE A4
CONFIGURATION FACTOR BETWEEN THE SPHERE AT DIFFERENT

LOCATIONS AND THE WALLS OF THE CHAMBER.
LOCATION OF GLOBE IN CHAMBER

Surface —• —•—•
Al A2 A3 BI B2 B3 Cl C2 C3
1 0.162 0.203 0.162 0.203 0.248 0.203 0.162 0.203 0.162
2 0.138 0.168 0.138 0 . 168 0.208 0.16.8 0.138 0.168 0.138
3 0.025 0.029 0.025 0.051 0.063 0.051 0.144 0.168 0.144
4 0.030 0.035 0.030 0.059 0.073 0.059 0.151 0.177 0.151
5 0.144 0.051 0.025 0.168 0.063 0.029 0.144 0.051 0.025
6 0.151 0.059 0.030 0.177 0.073 0.035 0.151 0.059 0.030
7 0.144 0.168 0.144 0.051 0.063 0.051 0.025 0.029 0.025
8 0,151 0.177 0.151 0.059 0.073 0.059 0.030 0.035 0.030
9 0.025 0.051 0.144 0.029 0.063 0.168 0.025 0.051 0.144
10 0.030 0.059 0.151 0.035 0.073 0.177 0.030 0.059 0.151
10
E F . 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
i =l g
TABLE A5
INCIDENT RATIATION*ON THE GLOBE FOR THE 9 LOCATIONS
LOCATION OF GLOBE ON THE CHAMBER

Surface
N o
- Al A2 A3 BI B2 B3 Cl C2 C3
1 34.18 42.82 34.18 42.82 52.32 42.82 34.18 42.82 34.18
2 21.08 25.65 21.08 25.65 31.75 25.65 21.08 25.65 21.08
3 ~~ 4. 32 5.01 4.32 8,81 10.89 8 . 81 24.89 29 . 04 24.89
4 4.97 5.80 4.97 9.77 12.09 9.77 25.00 29.31 25.00
5 24.96 8.85 4.34 29.14 10.93 5.03 24.96 8.85 4.34
6 25.08 9.80 4.98 29.39 12.12 5.81 25.08 9.80 4.98
7 21.80 25.43 21.80 7.72 9.54 7.72 3.78 4.39 3.78
8 25.19 29.53 25.19 9.84 12.18 9.84 5.00 5.84 5.00
9 4.36 8.90 25,12 5.06 11.00 29.31 4.36 8.90 25.12
10 4.99 9.81 25.11 5.82 12.14 29.43 4.99 9.81 25,11
Total 170.93 171-60 171.09 174.02 174.96 174.19 173.32 174.41 173.48
* Units: BTU h r - 1
f t - 2
TABLE A6
AIR VELOCITY, A I R TEMPERATURE, GLOBE TEMPERATURE AND RESULTING MEAN

RADIANT TEMPERATURE OF THE GLOBE FOR THE 9 LOCATIONS ( h e a t p a n e l
t e m p e r a t u r e = 136°F = 58°C)
LOCATION OF GLOBE IN THE CHAMBER
Al A2 A3 BT B2 B3 Cl C2 C3 Mean
Air v e l o c i t y (FPM) 7.0 3.2 4.3 7.0 3.6 7.6 20 .0 24 .7 14 .8 10.2
Air t e m p e r a t u r e (°F) 74.0 74.0 75.0 69.5 78.0 74 .0 65.5 68.0 73.0 72.3
Globe tempera-
80.2 80.6 83.1 78.0 82.4 82.4 73.6 74 .0 79 .3 79.3
t u r e (°F)
MRT (°F) 83.5 82.9 86.3 82.5 85.1 86.8 80 .8 79.8 84 .0 83.5
RHL (BTU hr" ft 1 - 2

) 150.9 150.3 153.1 149.9 152.7 154.7 147.9 146.9 151.6 150.9
RHL ( c o r r e c t e d
to the standard • ^rK
6 i n b l a c k globe) 163.8 161.8 166.2 162.7 163.3 167.9 163.6 163.3 166.3 164.3
69 .
APPENDIX B
, j
TABLE B I
a) A v e r a g e w e e k l y body weights * o f
3
t e s t 1 as by treatment.
A G E
Treatment (n) Hatch Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7
Floor (33) 42 74 148 256 386 535 719 923
Chamber 1 (33) 41 89 164 271 391 539 720 926
Chamber 2 (33) 42 89 168 276 399 554 740 951
Mean (99) 42 84 160 268 392 543 726 933
b) Weekly body w e i g h t a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n p e r c e n t a g e o f t o t a l sums o f s q u a r e s

of t e s t 1 f o r treatment e f f e c t .
A G E
s.v. d.f. Hatch Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7
Treatments 2 1.2 37 . 3 * * 16 . 2 * * 7 .3** 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.9
-Chambers v s
floor 1 - 37 . 3 * * 15.7** 6.9** 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.6
-Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 - 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.9 1.2 1.3
Error 96 98.8 62.7 83.8 92.7 98 .7 98.4 98.4 98.1
Total 98 1,031 13,756 47,548 101,729 210,241 376,566 555,727 771,999
** Highly s i g n i f i c a n t (P < 0.01)
* Significant (P < 0.05)
a i n grams
TABLE B2
a) A v e r a g e g r o w t h r a t e s o f t e s t 1 as by t r e a t m e n t .
Growth Period
Treatment ( (n) H-l 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 1-3 3-- 7
Floor (33) 1.95 3.13 3.01 2.67 2.46 2.51 2.38 3.08 2 .52
Chamber 1 (33) 2.64 2.74 2.76 2.39 2.41 2.47 2.39 2.75 2 .41
Chamber 2 (33) 2.60 2. 84 2.73 2.38 2.45 2.47 2.39 2.79 2 .42
Mean 99 2.40 2.90 2.83 2.48 2.44 2.48 2.39 2.87 2 .45
b) Growth r a t e a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n percentage of t o t a l sums o f squares

Growth Period
s.v. d.f. H--1 1--2 2-:I 3-4 4--5 5--6 6--7 1--3 3- -7
Treatments 2 37. .4** 32, . 21** 25..6** 34 .0** 2 .21
, , 0, .8 0,.1 49 ,.7** 14 , 7**
-Chambers v s
floor 1 .
37 .3** 30. .3** ,
25..3** 34 .0** 0, .7 0, .8 . 0,.1 49 ,.0** 14 .6**
,
-Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 0..1 1..9 0. .3 0,.0 1,.5 0 .0
, 0,.0 0,.7 0 .1
,
Error 96 62,.6 67. .8 74, .4 66 ,.0 ,
97 .8 99 ,.2 99 ,.9 50 ,.3 85 ,.3
Total 98 26 ,.92 8..50 6 .19
, 5,. 26 2,.08 4 .31
, 3, .43 4 .28
, 1..52
** Highly significant (P < 0.01)

TABLE B3
a) A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s o f t e s t
3
2 as by t r e a t m e n t ,
A G E
Floor (22) 43 98 294 543 812 1108 1469 1826
Chamber 1 (20) 43 141 313 535 800 1117 1458 1814
Chamber 2 (25) 42 130 303 507 771 1083 1428 1795
Mean (67) 43 123 303 528 794 1103 1452 1812
b) W e e k l y body w e i g h t a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n p e r c e n t a g e o f t o t a l sums o f s q u a r e s
of t e s t 2 f o r treatment.
A G E
S.V. d.f. Hatch Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7
Treatments 2 2.5 67.4** 7.7 13.4* 7.4 2.8 2.6 0 .8
-Chambers v s
floor 1 63.1** 5.3 6.5* 4.2 0.3 1.4 0.5
-Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 4.3** 2.4 6.8* 3.2 2.5 1.2 0.3
Error 64 97.5 32.6 9 2.3 86.6 92.6 97.2 97 .4 99.2
Total 66 514 32,075 49 ,291 123,264 284,484 492,960 852,416 1, 423,984
a i n grams
TABLE B4
a) A v e r a g e growth r a t e s of test 2 as by t r e a t m e n t .
Growth Period
Treatment (n) H-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 1-3 3-7
Floor (22) 2. 87 4.95 3.37 2.62 2 .33 2.40 2.06 4 . 24 2.38
Chamber 1 (20) 4.08 3.60 2.93 2. 61 2.50 2.26 2.06 3.30 2.39
Chamber 2 (25) 3 . 89 3.81 2 . 82 2.72 2.55 2.34 2.17 3.36 2.48
Mean (67) 3.61 4.12 3.04 2.65 2.46 2.33 2.10 3.63 2.42
b) Growth r a t e a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n percentage o f t o t a l sums o f s q u a r e s -

Growth Period
s.v. d.f. H--1 1--2 2--3 3--4 4--5 5--6 6--7 1--3 3--7
Treatments 2 67 .2 * * 67..3** 51.. 0** 7..9 23 .
.0** 11..1* 5 .7
. 81.. 8** 15,.8**
-Chambers v s
floor 1 65..8** 65..8** 49 ..4** 1.. 9 21.. 9** 7 .0*
. 1..6 81..6** 5.. 8*
-Chamber 1 vs
Chamber 2 1 1..4 1.. 5 1.. 6 6..0* 1..1 4 .1
. 4 .1
. 0 .2
. 10.. 0**
Error 64 32 ., 8 32..7 49 .0
, 92..1 77..0 88 .9
. 94 .3
, 18.. 2 84 .2
.
Total 66 27 . 64 33..98 7.. 59 2.. 26 2,.75 2..06 3 .45
, 14 ..62 0 . 89

T A B L E B5
a) Average weekly body weights 3 ,

of test 3 as by t r e a t m e n t .
A G E
Floor (30) 45 127 283 511 776 10 8 6 1435 1792
Chamber 1 (25) 44 138 289 502 747 1069 1420 1781
Chamber 2 (27) 44 135 303 542 800 1124 1466 1815
Mean (82). 44 133 292 518 774 1093 1440 1796
b) W e e k l y body w e i g h t a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n p e r c e n t a g e o f t o t a l sums o f s q u a r e s
A G E
S.V. d .f. Hatch Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7
Treatments 2 0..5 13 .3** 15..2** 18 .,8** 15..4** 10 ..4* 4 .3
. 1..5
-Chambers v s
floor 1 12 .6** 9.. 0** 2..2 0 .0
. 0..6 0..3 0..1
-Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 0 .7 6..2* 16..6** 15..4** 9 .. 8** 4..0 1..4
Error 79 99 ..5 86 .7 84.,8 81..2 84..6 89 ..6 95..7 98 ..5
Total 81 784 11,612 42,029 121,692 231,120 402,368 285,216 1,050,640
a i n grams
TABLE B6
a) Average growth r a t e s of t e s t 3 as by treatment.
Growth Period
Treatment (n) H-l 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 1-3 3-7
Floor (30) 3.65 3.57 3.25 2.72 2.52 2 . 36 2.11 3.43 2.46
Chamber 1 (25) 3.95 3.33 3.03 2.58 2.68 2.41 2.15 3 .20 2.48
Chamber 2 (27) 3 . 88 3.64 3 .18 2.53 2.55 2 . 26 2.03 3.43 2.37
Mean (82) 3.83 3.51 3.15 2.61 2.58 2.34 2.10 3.35 2 . 44
b) Growth r a t e a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n percentage o f t o t a l sums o f squares

Growth Period
S.V. d.f. H-l 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 1-3 3-7
Treatments 2 15.4** 29.1** 29.4** 16.4** 18.3** 13.3** 7~77* 33.6** 16.4**
-Chambers v s
floor 1 14.7** 2.2 21.9** 15.7** 7.9** 0.7 0.5 7.8** 2.4
-Chamber 1 vs
Chamber 2 1 0.7 26.9** 7.5** 0.7 10.4** 12.6** 7.2* 25.8** 14.0**
Error 79 84 . 6 70 . 9 70 . 6 83 . 6 81.7 86 . 7 92.3 66 .4 83 .6
Total (81) 9.34 4.09 3.88 3.26 2.13 2.56 2.70 2.81 1.08

TABLE B 7
a) A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s o f t e s t
3
4 as by t r e a t m e n t .
A G E
Floor (37) 47 124 278 500 765 1082 1438 1799
Chamber 2 (26) 47 120 288 519 775 1087 1411 1770
Mean (63) 47 122 283 510 770 1085 1425 1785
b) Weekly body w e i g h t a n a l y s e s o f variance i n percentage of t o t a l sums o f s q u a r e s

of t e s t 4 f o r treatment.
A G E
S.V. d.f. Hatch Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7
Chamber 2 vs
floor 1 0.6 2.0 4.7 4.9 0.6 0.1 1.5 1.1
Error 61 99.4 98.0 95.3 95.1 99.4 99.9 98.5 98.9
Total 62 762 8,261 36 ,109 114,451 252,304 446,016 744,592 1,190,896
a i n grams
TABLE B8
a) A v e r a g e growth r a t e s o f t e s t 4 as by t r e a t m e n t v
Growth Period
Treatment (n) H-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 1-3 3 -7
Floor (37) 3.34 3.63 3 . 22 2.76 2.59 2.42 2.13 3 .44 2 .51
Chamber 2 (26) 3.28 3.92 3. 22 2.61 2.53 2.22 2.15 3 .61 2 .40
Mean (63) 3.31 3.78 3. 22 2.69 2.56 2.32 2.14 3.53 2 .46
b) Growth r a t e a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n ]p e r c e n t a g e o f t o t a l sums o f s q u a r e s
Growth Period
S .V. d.f. H-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 1-3 3'-7
-Chamber 2 vs
floor 1 1.0 30.8** 0.0 18.3** 1.8 29.9** 0.3 16 .8** 17 . 2**
Error 61 99.0 69 .2 100 . 0 81.7 98.2 70.1 99.7 83.2 82 .8
Total 62 7.12 4 . 20 2.16 2.00 3.05 2.08 3.12 2.31 0 .96

78.
APPENDIX C
\
79 .
TABLE C l
a) A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s i n grams o f t e s t 5 (males)'
by treatment
Weeks o f Age
Treatment (n) Hatch 1 2 3
Floor (24) 46 115 290 542
Chamber 1 (14) 48 126 301 559

Chamber 2 (18) 48 125 297 525
Mean (56) 47 122 296 542
b) Weekly body w e i g h t a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n p e r c e n t a g e sums

of squares of test 5 (males) f o r treatment e f f e c t .
Weeks o f Age
S .V. d.f. 1 2 3
Treatments 2 16.3** 3.1 8.4
- Chambers v s
floor 1 16.3** 2.8 0.0
- Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 0.0 0.3 8.4*
Error 53 83.7 96.9 91.6
Total 55 9,595 39,659 110,637
** Highly'significant (P < 0.01)

* significant ..' (P < 0.05)
80 .
TABLE C2
a) Average growth r a t e s o f t e s t 5 (males) by treatment-
Growth Period
Treatment (n) H-l 1-2 2^3 1-3
Floor (24) 3.14 4.15 3.43 3.83

Chamber 1 (14) 3.36 3.91 3.39 3.68
Chamber 2 (18) 3.34 3.90 3.12 3.55
Mean (56) 3.28 3.99 3.31 3.69
b) Growth r a t e analyses of variance i n percentage sums o f

squares of t e s t 5 (males) f o r treatment effect.
Growth Period
S.V. d.f. H-l 1-2 2-3 1-3
Treatments 2 10.4 18.7*'* 33.5** 34.8**

- Chambers vs
floor 1 10.4* 18.7** 15.8** 29.3**
- Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 0.0 0.0 17 .7** 5.5*
Error 53 . 89.6 . 81.3 66.5 65.2
Total 55 5 .661 4 .415 3 -224 2 -343
* Significant ••' (P < 0.05)

81.
TABLE C3
a) A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s in grams o f test 5 (females).
by treatment.
Weeks o f Age
Floor (16) 47 109 265 469
Chamber 1 (25) 47 125 285 505
Chamber 2 (20) 46 120 276 480
Mean (61) 47 118 275 485
b) W e e k l y body w e i g h t analyses of variance i n percentage sums

of squares o f t e s t 5 (females) f o r treatment effect..
Weeks o f Age
S.V. d.f 1 2 3
Treatments 2 22.1** 9.4 12.4*
- Chambers v s
floor 1 19 .5** 7 .4* 6.1
- Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 2.6 2.0 6.3*
Error 58 77.9 90.6 87.6
Total 60 10,557 42,084 117,353
** highly significant; (P < 0.01)

* significant (P < 0.05)
82.
TABLE C4
a) Average growth r a t e s of test 5 ( f e m a l e s ) by treatment.
Growth Period
Treatment (n) H - l 1-2 2 - 3 . 1 - 3
Floor (16) 2.93 3.95 3.15 3.59
Chamber 1 (25) 3.40 3.70 3.15 3.45
Chamber 2 (20) 3.34 3.75 3.04 3.43
Mean (61) 3.22 3.80 3.11 3.49

squares of test 5 (females) f o r treatment effect.
Growth Period
S.V. d.f. H - 1 1 - 2 2 - 3 1 - 3
Treatments 2 23. 2** 19. 3** 10. 6* 16. -j * *
- Chambers v s
floor 1 22. g * * 18. 5* * 1. 8 16. 2**
- Chamber 1 vs
Chamber 2 1 0. 4 0. 8 8. 8* 0. 5
Error 58 76. 8 80. 7 89. 4 83. 3
Total 60 10.358 3.322 1.705 1.657
highly significant (P < 0.01)

significant ! (P < 0.05)
83 .
TABLE C5
a) Average weekly body w e i g h t s i n grams o f t e s t 6 (males),
by treatment
Weeks o f Age
Floor (23) 41 116 268 497
Chamber 1 (18) 42 124 277 496
Chamber 2 (11) 41 125 269 452
Mean (52) 41 122 271 482
b) Weekly body w e i g h t a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e i n percentage sums

of squares of t e s t 6 (males) f o r treatment effect.
Weeks o f Age
S .V. d.f. 1 2 3
Treatments 2 13. 8* 2.9 17 . 2*
- Chambers v s
floor 1 13.7** 1.5 4.3
- Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 0.1 1.4 12.9**
Error 49 86 . 2 97.1 82 . 8
Total • 51 6,101 " ' 30,384 102 ,778
, j
** highly significant (P < 0 .01)
* significant (P < 0 .05)
TABLE C6
a) Average growth r a t e s of test 6 (males) by t r e a t m e n t •
Growth Period
Treatment (n) H>1 1^2 ~2^3 1-3
Floor (23) 3.60 3.74 3.40 3.58

Chamber 1 (18) 3.77 3.60 3.19 3.42
Chamber 2 (11) 3.89 3.42 2.86 3.17
Mean (52) 3.75 3.59 3.15 3.39

squares of test 6 (males) f o r treatment effect..
Growth Period
S .V. d.f. H -1 1- 2 2-3 1 -3
Treatments 2 14 .7* 19 . 8** 50 .6** 59 . 5**
- Chambers v s
floor 1 12 .5** 11. 8** 32 .6** 40 .1**
- Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 2 .2 8. 0* 18 . 0** 19 .4**
Error 49 8 5 .3 80 .2 49 .4 40 . 5
Total 51 5-000 2.802 4.329 2.238

85.
TABLE C7
a) Average weekly body w e i g h t s i n grams a t t e s t 6 (females)*
by treatment
Weeks o f Age
Floor (10) 40 103 229 405
Chamber 1 (13) 41 114 251 446
Chamber 2 (20) 40 120 256 433
Mean (43) 40 112 245 428
b) Weekly body weight a n a l y s e s of variance i n percentage sums

of squares of test 6 (females) f o r treatment effect.
Weeks o f Age
S .V. d.f. 1 2 3
Treatments 2 37 .6** 20 .4* 13.7
- Chambers v s
floor 1 31.7** 19.5** 12.0*
- Chamber 1 vs
Chamber 2 1 5.9 0.9 1.7
Error 40 62.4 79.6 86.3
Total- 42 5,470 23 ,492 73,524
** ' H i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t (P < 0.01)
Significant (P < 0.05)

86 .
TABLE C8
a) Average growth r a t e s o f t e s t 6 ( f e m a l e s ) by t r e a t m e n t .
Growth Period
Treatment (n) H-l 1-2 2-3 1-3
Floor (10) 3.32 3.58 3.11 3.37
Chamber 1 (13) 3.56 3.53 3.16 3.37
Chamber 2 (20) 3.84 3.38 2.88 3.15
Mean (43) 2.57 2.50 3.05 3.30
squares of t e s t 6 (females) f o r treatment effect.
Growth Period
S .V. d.f. H--1 1--2 2--3 1--3
Treatments 2 41,.4** 15,.8* 39 ,7**

> 35..8**
- Chambers v s
floor 1 27 , 7 .,3 a
5,. 5 a
10..0*
- Chamber 1 v s
Chamber 2 1 13,.5** 8,. 5 a
. 2**
34 , 25.. 8**
Error 40 58,.6 84,.2 60..3 64 ,

.2
Total 42 4-738 2-239 1.864 1.375
a Approaching significance
87 .
APPENDIX D
... v
' J • •
TABLE DI
Multiple l i n e a r regression analyses f o r

t e s t s 1 t o 4, w i t h 3-week body w e i g h t
as d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e .
Dependent variables R2 f o r test
Treatment x 1 2 3 4
X
l 2 X
3 X
4
Floor * 70.7 25.9 61.6 47.4

* 1.0 19 .9 2.8 3.3
* 1.0 32.0 0.3 8.4
* 0.0 6.7 1.9 7.6
* * 88.4 89.3 83.0 83.7
* * 88.9 46.9 81.5 83.6
* * 99 .5 99.2 99.8 99.8
* * * 99 .5 99.4 99.8 99.8
Chamber 1 * 85.6 30.6 42.9

* 48 .7 0.8 9.5
* 4.0 15.8 0. 0
* 25.7 1.5 5.4
* * 93.7 59 .6 77 .1
* * 88 .7 49.0 61.1
* * 99.5 99.3 99.6
* * * 99 .7 99 .3 99.6
Chamber 2 * 70 .0 58.5 40.8 53.9

* 20 .4 0.0 0.0 2.0
* 1.4 15 .0 5.8 0.0
* 19 .3 6.3 1.0 1.1
* * 92.3 87 .3 81.9 90.7
* * 70.1 58 .5 77 .0 77.2
* * 99.8 99.8 99.4 98.4
* * * 99 .8 99.8 99.4 98.5
X-^ = 1-week body w e i g h t .

X2 = 1-2 week g r o w t h r a t e .
X^ =1 2-3 week g r o w t h r a t e .
X. '= :
1-3 week g r o w t h r a t e .
89 .
TABLE D2
Multiple l i n e a r regression analyses f o r

t e s t s 1 t o 4, w i t h 7-week body w e i g h t as
dependent v a r i a b l e .
Dependent v a r i a b l e s R for test
Treatment x 1 2 3 4
X
l 2 X
3
Floor * 19.2 17 .2 16.2 28 .4

* 11.4 8.4 4.9 9.9
* 0.6 0.3 10 .4 2.0
* * 66.6 82.7 40 .4 74.5
* * 54.9 20 .1 53.5 41.6
* * * 98.3 99.4 99.7 99.5
Chamber 1 * 71.1 14 .0 25.3

* 24 .9 1.5 1.5
* 11.2 54.3 22.6
* * 85.3 52.6 51.6
* * 79.5 69 .9 54 .4
* * * 99.3 99 .5 99.6
Chamber 2 * 63 .0 38.3 4.8 7.4

* 11.2 0.9 7.7 12.0
* 0.0 5.6 6.0 8.4
* * 82.0 54.4 41.0 47.1
* * 68.4 57.4 24 .7 42.8
* * * 99 .5 99 .7 98.9 97 .4
= 1-week body w e i g h t .
= 1-3 week g r o w t h r a t e .
= 3-7 week g r o w t h r a t e .
TABLE D3
M u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s f o r t e s t 5,
w i t h 3 -week body w e i g h t as d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e .
Treatment R 2
R 2
X
l X
2 X
3 X
4
(males) (females
Floor * 54.8 70.6

* 26.0 21. 2
* 10 . 2 1.7
* 4.4 12.3
* * 92.3 93.4
* * 67.6 76.6
* * * 99.8 99.7
* * 99.8 99.7
Chamber 1 * 43.6 60.8

* 2.9 0.4
* 14 .4 0.5
* 11. 6 0. 6
* * 79 .1 84.8
* * 63.4 75.5
* * * 99 . 8 99.6
* * 99.7 99.6
Chamber 2 * 74.0 62.4

* 12.3 1.0
* 2.6 1.0
* 16.0 1.0
* * 81.7 91.6
* * 77 . 2 83.4
* * * 99 . 2 99 . 5
* * 9 8.3 99.5
X^ = l^week body^ w e i g h t .
X^ = 1-^2 week g r o w t h r a t e .
X = 2-3 week growth, r a t e .
X^ = 1-^3 week g r o w t h / r a t e .
TABLE D4
M u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s f o r t e s t 6,
w i t h 3-week body w e i g h t as d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e .
Treatment R2
R 2
X
l X
2 X
3 X
4 (females)
(males)
Floor * 65.0 75.5

* 1.3 55.0
* 4.5 6.6
* 12.3 52.7
* * 69 .5 94.5
* * 82.4 86 .6
* * * 84.6 99 .9
* * 99.7 99 .9
Chamber 1 * 58.5 55.2

* 3.1 5.4
* 8.0 6.4
* 8.5 1.0
* * 81.7 90.2
* * 80 . 2 56.8
* * * 99 .7 99 .7
* * 99.7 99.6
Chamber 2 * 68.4 52.3

* 22.9 14.6
* 5.8 27.9
* 9.6 33.8
* * 86 .4 87.8
* * 71.1 77.2
* * * 99.8 99 .6
1
* * 99.7 99.6
X = 1-week body w e i g h t .
Xy = 1-2 week g r o w t h r a t e .
X.-, = 2-3 week g r o w t h r a t e .
X. = 1-3 week g r o w t h r a t e .

1 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

1 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFLUENCE OF INFRARED ENERGY

ON EARLY GROWTH RATES OF POULTRY

B.Sc. Texas A & M U n i v e r s i t y , 1969

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCE

We a c c e p t this thesis as c o n f o r m i n g to the

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

an advanced degree at t h e U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that

the Library shall make i t freely available f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y .

I f u r t h e r agree t h a t permission f o rextensive copying o f this thesis

for s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r

by h i s representatives. I t i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n

of this thesis f o r financial gain shall n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my

Date December 17, 1973

The r a d i o s i t y method o f r a d i a n t interchange analysis

of e n c l o s u r e s was u s e d to predict the i n t e n s i t y and t h e

uniformity of thermal r a d i a t i o n within a controlled environ-

ment chamber. The chamber was d e s i g n e d for testing the e f f e c t s

of infrared radiation on young b r o i l e r s . The w a l l s o f t h e

chamber were assumed t o be g r e y and s e p a r a t e d by a r a d i a t i v e l y

non-participating medium. A l s o the b l a c k globe thermometer

method was used to c a l c u l a t e the i n c i d e n t radiation at different

locations i n t h e chamber. Then, the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d by t h e

two mentioned methods, were compared.

Two separate experiments were d e s i g n e d for different

purposes. The f i r s t experiment was t o s t u d y the influence

of infrared radiation on p o u l t r y . In t h i s experiment, two

levels of radiation were t e s t e d and t h e r e s u l t s were compared

system. The s e c o n d experiment was t o compare a controlled

temperature, warm a i r b r o o d i n g system, to a c o n v e n t i o n a l

heat lamp brooding system. The r e l a t i v e e f f e c t s i n both

sets of experiments were m e a s u r e d by u s e o f t h e w e e k l y growth

EXPERIMENTAL MATERIAL AND PROCEDURE 12

DESCRIPTION OF EXPERIMENTAL EQUIPMENT 15

DETERMINATION OF THE RADIANT HEAT LOAD DISTRIBUTION

(b) Warm a i r b r o o d i n g experiment: Commercial

3. Results of the Linear M u l t i p l e Regression

(b) Warm a i r b r o o d i n g experiment 52

4. Infrared and Warm A i r B r o o d i n g : A Comparison 53

1 Schematic of the a i r conditioning system

used w i t h the i n f r a r e d r a d i a t i o n experi-

2 D e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e chamber showing surface

identification number and t h e 9 l o c a t i o n s

3 Basic geometry used to c a l c u l a t e the

2-in diameter black globe thermometer 32

P r e d i c t e d and e x p e r i m e n t a l RHL (BTU h r ^ 1

ft~2) d i s t r i b u t i o n i n the environmental

A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s i n grams and

S c h e f f e ' s l i m i t s a t t h e 95% c o n f i d e n c e level

Bl A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and their

B3 A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and their

B5 A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and their

B7 A v e r a g e w e e k l y body w e i g h t s and their

D4 Multiple l i n e a r regression analyses f o r

A. = S u r f a c e a r e a o f an a r b i t r a r y surface 'j' o f the

B_. = Radiosity of surface 'j' as d e f i n e d by e q u a t i o n [1] .

F = Kata f a c t o r supplied by t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r of the