MASTER IS-T- 927

Normal Spectral Emissivities of

Liquid Iron, Liquid Nickel^ and Liquid Iron-Nickel Alloys

by

Pisant Ratanapupech

M.S. Thesis submitted to Iowa State University

Ames Laboratory, DOE

Iowa State University

Ames, Iowa 50011

Date Transmitted:

PREPARED FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

UNDER CONTRACT NO. W-7405-eng-82

tO .Pcsisinf inaisq
* ;:od 11 . , .
---- —----------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER---------------------------------------------------
This book was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government.
Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any
warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy,
completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or
represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific
commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does
not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United
States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not
necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.
DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED
Mfriv
 DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an

agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States
Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees,
makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability
or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any
information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents
that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference
herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by
trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not
necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or
favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The
views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily
state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency
thereof.

D IS C L A IM E R

Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image

products. Images are produced from the best available
original document.
 11

DISCLAIMER___________
This book was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an
agency of the United States Government. Neither the United
States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their
employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or as­
sumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy,
completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, pro­
duct, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not
infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific
commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trade­
mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily con­
stitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring
by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The
views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not neces­
sarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or
any agency thereof.

Printed in the United States of America

Available from
National Technical Information Service
U.S. Department of Commerce
5265 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
 iii

Normal spectral emissivities of

liquid iron, liquid nickel and liquid iron-nickel alloys

by

Pisant Ratanapupech

A Thesis Submitted to the

Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Major: Chemical Engineering

Approved:

In Charge of Major Work

For tbe Major Department

For __ _ ollege

Iowa State University

Ames, Iowa

1980
 iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

ABSTRACT . vi

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II. THEORY 4

III. LITERATURE REVIEW 7

A. Pure Liquid Iron 7

B. Pure Liquid Nickel 8

C. Liquid Iron-nickel Alloys 9

IV. EQUIPMENT 12

A. Temperature Measurement Equipment 12

B. Heating Equipment 13

C. Sample Crucible and Support 17

D. System Enclosure and Vacuum System 20

V. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE 29

VI. EXPERIMENTAL CALCULATIONS 32

VII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 33

A. Pure Liquid Iron 33

B. Pure Liquid Nickel 33

C. Liquid Iron-nickel Alloys 38

VIII. CONCLUSIONS 52

IX. REFERENCES 54

X. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 57

XI. APPENDIX A: SAMPLE PREPARATION 58

A. Iron 58

B. Nickel 59
 V

XII. APPENDIX B: COMPOSITION ANALYSIS 60

XIII. APPENDIX C: RAW DATA AND SAMPLE CALCULATIONS 63
 vi

ABSTRACT

The normal spectral emissivities of liquid iron, liquid nickel, and

liquid iron-nickel alloys over the complete range of composition were

determined at wavelength X = 645 nm by an integral blackbody comparison

method. The temperatures of the samples and the blackbody hole were

determined by means of an automatic optical pyrometer. The method of

calculation used Wien's equation. The normal spectral emissivities of

liquid iron, liquid nickel, and liquid iron-nickel alloys were found to

be constant with respect to changes in temperature from 1809 K to 1857 K

for liquid iron, from 1729 K to 1823 K for liquid nickel, and from

1810 K to 1890 K for liquid iron-nickel alloys, respectively. The

normal spectral emissivity of liquid iron-nickel alloy is dependent on

composition. For iron, en^ = 0.346 + 0.007. For nickel,

en^ = 0.340 + 0.007. For the iron-nickel alloys, the results can be

represented by the equation

en\ = °-3462 (±0-0°90) - 0.0506 (+0.0820)

- 0.5009 (+0.1919) X^i + 0.5521 (+0.1240)

where en^ is the normal spectral emissivity and X^ is the mole fraction
2
of nickel. The coefficient of determination, R , for this regression is

0.9607.

The present results, when compared with other literature values,

differ in two ways. The first is that the values of the normal spectral
 vii

emissivity of liquid iron, liquid nickel, and liquid iron-nickel alloys

obtained in the present work were constant within the experimental

temperature ranges, while the previous data reported in the literature

showed significant changes with temperature. The second difference is

that almost all of the previous investigators' data showed higher

normal spectral emissivity values than the present work.

 1

I. INTRODUCTION

The thermal properties of materials at high temperatures (above

1000 K) are of interest and importance in heat transfer applications to

the process industries. The capability to conduct, convect, and radiate

heat makes up the thermal properties of materials. The thermal

properties of materials at high temperatures (above 1000 K) are

important to the design of many devices and industrial plants. One of

these important properties is thermal radiation. Radiant energy in the

form of thermal radiation is emitted by all bodies having a temperature

greater than absolute zero [l]. Thermal radiation is the principal

mechanism of heat transfer at high temperature.

For a given substance, thermal radiation is a function of the

radiating surface area, its temperature and emittance or emissivity.

The emissivity is defined as the ratio of the radiant flux emitted

from the sample to the radiant flux emitted by a geometrically similar

perfect emitter (blackbody) at the same temperature [2, 3], It is a

measure of how well a body can radiate energy as compared with a

blackbody. The blackbody is one that absorbs all the radiation which

falls upon it [4]. Hence, the blackbody is a perfect absorber of

incident radiation [5], The emissivity can be either total or spectral,

depending on whether the radiation measured is over all or a narrow

wavelength band. The emissivity is usually measured experimentally at

a direction normal to the surface. The normal spectral emissivity is

defined as the ratio of the monochromatic radiant flux of a given

 2

wavelength X emitted by the sample to that emitted by a geometrically

similar blackbody at the same temperature [3], The normal spectral

emissivity is a function of the wavelength, the temperature, the

material, and the surface condition of the material.

There are many methods to determine the emissivity of the material.

One of these is the integral or separate blackbody comparison method.

The emissivity is directly measured by the ratio of the radiation from

a sample to that from a blackbody at the same temperature. The measured

emissivity can be either spectral or total, depending on the detector.

The measurements of the radiant flux of a sample are usually made with

an optical or radiation pyrometer and the results converted into

temperatures assuming that the radiant flux is from a blackbody. Since

a non-blackbody sample always radiates less energy at any temperature

and for any wavelength interval than a blackbody of the same size and

temperature, the measured temperatures are lower than the true

temperatures. These quasi-blackbody brightness and radiation

temperatures are called apparent or brightness temperatures. The

apparent or brightness temperature depends upon the wavelength used in

measuring the brightness of the surface with an optical pyrometer

(Hyde, 1920, as cited in Forsythe [4]).

In this work, the normal spectral emissivities of liquid iron,

liquid nickel, and liquid iron-nickel alloys over the complete range

of composition were determined using the integral blackbody comparison

technique. More experimental data to supplement the two previous works

are necessary to determine the accuracy of these data. Accurate values

 3

of the normal spectral emissivity of this liquid alloy system is of

importance in the manufacturing process for stainless steels in terms

of process energy savings. In addition, these data are necessary to

the experimental determination of the heat content and heat capacity

of these alloys.
 4

II. THEORY

The spectral radiation energy flux per unit wavelength is a function

of absolute temperature and wavelength. The spectral radiation energy

flux of a blackbody is related to the absolute temperature and the

wavelength by Planck's distribution law [6]

2ttC^
e\b = ~ C /XT (1)
X (e -1)

where e-,u = energy flux from a blackbody per unit wavelength at

A.D

wavelength X

\ = wavelength (cm)
-13 2
= Planck's first constant, 5.9544 x 10 (W*cm )

C2 = Planck's second constant, 1.4388 (cm*K)

For the case of a non-blackbody, the spectral radiation is related

to that of a blackbody e , at the same temperature by

A.D

e Vxb (2)
X

where is the spectral emissivity. The value of e can also be

A A
represented by Planck's distribution equation through the use of an

apparent temperature, T . Thus, the spectral radiation energy flux of a

non-blackbody would be expressed as

27TC-
ex = ,5 , VXTa (3)
X (e ■1)
 5

Since the spectral emissivity is defined as the ratio of the

spectral radiation of the sample to that of a blackbody at the same

temperature, is given by the equation

'X e
Xb

c2/xt
e
c2/wa (4)
e -1

For small values of XT,

exp (C2/XT) » 1 .

Therefore, Equation (4) becomes

c2/xt

= e (5)

Equation (5) is Wien's equation [7] which provides a good approximation

to the value of spectral emissivity. For values of XT less than

-3
3200 )jJC (3.2 x 10 niK), the error associated with this approximation is

less than 1% [8],

Equation (5) relates the spectral emissivity of the sample to its

true and brightness temperatures. These are the two temperatures which

were measured in this work and Equation (5) was used to calculate the

spectral emissivities of the samples.

 6

In general, the practice is to assign the "-ivity" suffix to

intensive properties of materials, and the "-ance" suffix to extensive

properties. The emittance property is an intensive property. In the

study of radiation properties, the "-ivity" suffix is used for an

optically smooth substance with an uncontaminated surface, and the "-ance"

suffix when the surface condition has to be specified. Since the clean

liquid surface is optically smooth and unique, the term "emissivity" is

used throughout the thesis. When referring to measurements on a solid

surface, the term "emittance" is used.

 7

III. LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Pure Liquid Iron

Bidwell [9] was the first to determine the normal spectral

emissivity = 660 nm) of liquid iron. A Morse pyrometer, which is of

the disappearing filament type, was used for brightness temperature

measurements. A platinum, platinum-107o rhodium thermojunction which

had been calibrated by the Bureau of Standards was used for true

temperature measurements. The material was placed in a small cavity in

a carbon rod which was heated electrically by a current from a low

tension transformer. His results showed an increase of normal spectral

emissivity with an increase in temperature, i.e., 0.36 at 1809 K,

0.42 at 1909 K, 0.48 at 2009 K, and 0.53 at 2100 K.

Dastur and Gokcen [10] determined the normal spectral emissivity

(X = 650 nm) of liquid iron by using an induction furnace. The

atmosphere of the furnace was a mixture of purified argon with hydrogen

containing a small controlled amount of water vapor. The true

temperature of liquid iron was measured by platinum-platinum rhodium

and tungsten-molybdenum thermocouples. The brightness temperature was

measured by optical pyrometer. Their results showed an increase of

normal spectral emissivity with increases in temperature, i.e.,

0.429 at 1809 K, 0.444 at 1873 K, 0.450 at 1923 K, and 0.469 at 2023 K.

d'Entremont [11] determined the normal spectral emissivity

(X = 650 nm) of liquid iron in hydrogen and argon atmospheres by using

electrolytic iron melted in recrystallized alumina crucible. The

 8

temperature measurements were made with a standardized Leeds and

Northrup optical pyrometer of the disappearing filament type, and a

platinum and platinum-107o rhodium thermocouple taken simultaneously.

His results for argon atmosphere showed a decrease of normal spectral

emissivity with increasing temperature, i.e., 0.384 at 1809 K, 0.361 at

1873 K, and 0.344 at 1923 K.

Lange and Schenck [12] determined the normal spectral emissivity

(X = 650 nm) of liquid iron in hydrogen atmosphere by use of a

disappearing filament type pyrometer and a Pt-Rh 18 thermocouple in a

quartz tube. Their results showed an increase of normal spectral

emissivity with increasing temperature, i.e., 0.298 at 1809 K,

0.305 at 1873 K, and 0.312 at 1923 K.

Bonnell, Treverton, Valerga, and Margrave [13] determined the

normal spectral emissivity (\ = 645 nm) of liquid iron in argon

atmosphere by using a Leeds and Northrup pyrometer to measure

temperatures. They determined it only at the melting point and their

result was 0.357 + 0.003 at 1811 K.

B. Pure Liquid Nickel

Bidwell [9] was the first to determine the normal spectral emissivity

(X = 660 nm) of liquid nickel by using the method described under liquid

iron. A carbon and graphite thermojunction was used in place of the

platinum, platinum-107. rhodium thermojunction for true temperature

measurements. His results showed an increase of normal spectral

emissivity with increasing temperature, i.e., 0.221 at 1726 K, 0.281 at

1826 K, 0.555 at 2000 K, and 0.665 at 2070 K.

 9

Lange and Schenck [12] determined the normal spectral emissivity

(X = 650 nm) of liquid nickel by using the method described under liquid

iron. Their results showed an increase of normal spectral emissivity

with increasing temperature, i.e., 0.355 at 1726 K, 0.361 at 1873 K,

and 0.363 at 1973 K.

Bonnell, Treverton, Valerga, and Margrave [13] determined the

normal spectral emissivity (X = 645 nm) of liquid nickel by using the

method described under liquid iron. They determined it only at melting

point. Their result was 0.346 + 0.005 at 1728 K.

C. Liquid Iron-nickel Alloys

Smith and Chipman [14] determined the normal spectral emissivities

(X = 650 nm) of liquid iron-nickel alloys at 0, 49, and 100 at. % Ni at

1808.15 K by using an induction furnace. The atmosphere of the furnace

was a 50-50 mixture of argon and hydrogen. The temperature measurements

were made with a disappearing filament optical pyrometer and a platinum

and platinum-107o rhodium thermocouple taken simultaneously. Their

results showed a linear change of normal spectral emissivity with

respect to composition.

Lange and Schenck [12] showed the dependency of normal spectral

emissivities (\ = 650 nm) of liquid iron-nickel alloys on composition.

Their figure of brightness temperature versus true temperature was

enlarged 7 times and their data were read from the enlargement. The

normal spectral emissivities of liquid iron-nickel alloys at each

composition, based on their data, were determined by the author using

Wien's equation. The results for each composition are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Composition dependence of normal spectral emissivity
of liquid iron-nickel alloys at X = 650 nm calculated
by using Wien's equation from brightness temperature
versus true temperature figure of Lange and
Schenck [12]
 11

---------1--------- 1-------- 1— ----- ,---------,--------- ,---------1----- —i-------- 1----------1

04 19 At % Ni
«nX = 0.2938

0.3 - • ■ • • m + w

34 At % Ni
04 - 6nX =0.2993

uo ^«m

49 At % Ni
e nX

04
cnX=0.3040
NORMAL SPECTRAL EMISSIVITY,

0.3

04 51 At % Ni
6nX =0.3082

0.3 •" ...Y

0.4 71 At % Ni
enx= 0.3119
• * * a
0.3

04 84 At % Ni
«nX =0.3118
* a a
0.3 •

04 94, 97 At % Ni
«nX = 0.3196

0.3
______ 1______ 1______1______i______i______ i_____ i— _J______1______1_____
1800 1820 1840 I860 1880 1900

TEMPERATURE, K
 12

IV. EQUIPMENT

The experimental equipment used in this work is essentially the

same as that of Stretz and Bautista [15] and Moscowitz et al. [16],

which was modified by Dokko and Bautista [17]. This equipment consists

of four main parts: 1) the temperature measurement equipment; 2) the

heating equipment; 3) the sample crucible and support; and 4) the

system enclosure and vacuum system.

A. Temperature Measurement Equipment

The temperature measurement equipment was made with an automatic

recording optical pyrometer. The auxiliary equipment required

includes a digital voltmeter, a printer, a recorder, a prism, a quartz

window, and quartz shutters.

The optical pyrometer used is a Leeds and Northrup #8641 Automatic

Optical Pyrometer. The pyrometer determines the brightness temperature

of the object on which it is sighted by automatically adjusting the

current passing through an internal standard lamp to match its

brightness to that of the object being measured. The standard lamp

current is then converted to a millivolt signal which is measured on a

digital voltmeter. The pyrometer was mounted on an upside-down rotary

indexing head, equipped with two positioning screws perpendicular to

each other and one rotating screw. One of the positioning screws was

used for focusing and the other for moving the pyrometer horizontally

in the optical path. The pyrometer operates over four temperature

ranges: 760 to 1229°C (1033 to 1502 K); 1000 to 1758°C (1273 to 2031 K);
 13

1500 to 2845°C (1773 to 3118 K); and 2000 to 609O°C (2273 to 6363 K).

The filters of the pyrometer have an approximate passband of 350 A

(35 nm) and the effective wavelength is approximately 645 nm.

The digital voltmeter used was a Hewlett-Packard #3490A. The

printer used was a Hewlett-Packard Model #5150A. A Sargent-Welch

Model MR made by the Sargent-Welch Company was used to record the

output from the pyrometer.

A right angle prism was used to bend the optical path perpendicular

to the vertical line. This allowed the sample to be viewed from the

top of the quartz column while the pyrometer remained in a horizontal

position for ease of operation.

The window was made of an optical flat polished quartz. It was

located on the top plate which closed the quartz column, as shown in

Figure 2.

Two shutters were attached to the top plate. The shutters consisted

of quartz windows, a stainless steel holder, and two stainless steel

operating rods. The operating rods extended through the top plate and

were sealed with 0-rings between a flange on the rod and the top of the

top plate. The shutters were designed to protect the quartz window

from condensing metal vapors. These shutters were opened only xvhen

measuring the temperature of the sample and that of the blackbody hole.

B. Heating Equipment

The induction heating furnace consisted of a high frequency

generator, a current field concentrator, and an induction copper coil.

 14

QUARTZ WINDOW BRASS HOLD DOWN FRAME

0A8 INLET SHUTTER

QUARTZ COLUMN

R. F. GENERATOR
COIL ------

TANTALUM TUBE (5)

3/16 OD. SOFT

COPPER TUBING

WATER INLET
WATER OUTLET

Figure 2. Schematic cross section showing assembled equipment

 15

The high frequency generator used was Model #P0.10F SC from the

Ecco High Frequency Corporation. It operated on 208 volts, 60 Hz

A.C. line. The line voltage was transformed into high voltage and

then rectified to a maximum of 9000 volts D.C. The output frequency

of this unit was approximately 3.9 MHz.

The current field concentrator was made of copper shaped into a

discontinuous ring and is shown in Figure 3. The current field

concentrator located inside the quartz column was water cooled. The

copper induction coil was wound around the quartz column. This

intensified the electrical field acting on the sample set in the center

of the concentrator. The concentrator was split to prevent it from

being heated by the radio frequency field. Cooling water dissipated

the heat generated within the concentrator. When the induction furnace

was on, the high frequency current in the copper coil set up a magnetic

field which alternated the direction at the same frequency as the

current. The magnetic field was forced to pass through the space which

was not blocked by the concentrator such as the hole in the center which

contained the sample. The magnetic field strength was much stronger

in the sample region with the concentrator present than without the

concentrator [18].

The ten turns 3-1/4 in. (8.255 cm) I.D. copper coil was made of

refrigeration grade soft copper tubing 1/4 in. (6.35 mm) O.D. Heat

shrinkable plastic tubing was put on the copper tubing before it was

wound to prevent it from shorting. It was positioned such that the

concentrator was equally spaced in the center.

 16

TOP VIEW

SOFT SOLDERED

COPPER
UNION

WATER
CHAMBER

I’thick THICK

SOFT COPPER TUBING

SWAGELOK FITTING BRASS

CUTAWAY VIEW SIDE VIEW

SCALE
i:2

Figure 3. Current field concentrator constructed from copper

pieces joined with soft soldered
 17

C. Sample Crucible and Support

Two crucibles were used. The inside crucible was made of high

purity Al^O^j and the outside crucible was made of tantalum. Molten

iron and molten nickel react with the Ta crucible. The crucible

inside the Ta crucible prevents any alloying. The crucible used

to hold the sample was 0.755 in. (1.9177 cm) O.D. and 1.040 in.

(2.6416 cm) long. The Ta crucible was constructed from 0.760 in.

(1.9304 cm) I.D. seamless tantalum tubing with a 0.015 in.

(3.81 x 10 cm) wall thickness. A 3/16 in. (4.7625 mm) diameter Ta

rod was milled to fit the outside of the tube. It was then welded

on the outside of the 3/4 in. (1.905 cm) tantalum tubing. The

blackbody hole was drilled as close as possible to the wall of the

main Ta crucible. These crucibles are shown in Figure 4. The

blackbody hole has a diameter of 1/16 in. (1.5875 mm) and is 5/8 in.

(1.5875 cm) deep, giving a depth to diameter ratio of 10. Since

the normal spectral emittance of mechanically polished tantalum is

0.55 [19] and the interior of the hole is left rough to increase the

emittance of the tantalum [5], the blackbody hole used in this work

should have more than 99 percent blackness [20, 21],

The crucible support tube consisted of a telescoping tantalum

tube, and stainless steel tubing. The tantalum tube was 0.500 in.

(1.27 cm) O.D. and swaged to 0.400 in. (1.016 cm) O.D. to fit inside

the stainless steel tube. The tantalum tube was 8-1/4 in. (20.955 cm)

long and had a 1/16 in. (1.5875 mm) by 3-1/8 in. (7.9375 cm) slot.

This tube is shown in Figure 5. Tantalum was chosen for the support
 18

0.890’

0.796'

t^'hole, I" DEEP

ROD MILLED ROUND TO

FIT OUTSIDE OF TUBE

0.760'

SHOULD BE LOOSE FIT

FOR Al203 CRUCIBLE
0.755'
ALO. CRUCIBLE

0.703125'
(18 mm)

To CRUCIBLE

DEPTH NOT CRITCAL

SCALE
2 : I

Figure 4. Details of the AI2O3 crucible and Ta crucible for

containing the liquid metal samples
 19

1/2" TANTALUM TUBE

0.015" WALL THICKNESS

SLOT
1/16" x 3 1/8 "

8 1/4

SWAGED TO 0.400

SCALE

Figure 5. Crucible support tube constructed from tantalum

 20

tubing because it can withstand the high temperature in contact with

the Ta crucible. The stainless steel tube had an O.D. of 5/8 in.

(1.5875 cm) and was machined to 1/2 in. (1.27 cm) O.D. at the bottom

and was 6-1/4 in. (15.875 cm) long. A 1/16 in. (1.5875 mm) wide slot

was cut in the wall extending the full length of the tube, and two

set screws were attached for positioning the support tube as shown

in Figure 6. The top of the stainless steel tube is provided with a

3/16 in. (4.7625 mm) O.D. copper cooling coil to dissipate any heat

reaching the tube either by radiation from the crucible or by

conduction down the support tube.

The crucibles were supported on the tantalum tube which was

secured inside the stainless steel tube with two set screws as shown

in Figure 2.

D. System Enclosure and Vacuum System

The system enclosure consisted of a quartz column, a top plate,

a base plate, and a spacer plate. The quartz column was constructed

from a standard 3 in. (7.62 cm) I.D. column, and was 18-1/32 in.

(45.799 cm) long as shown in Figure 7. The top plate was made of

4-3/4 in. (12.065 cm) O.D. by 1/4 in. (6.35 mm) thick stainless steel

plate containing a 15/16 in. (2.38125 cm) diameter hole through which

the sample was viewed and two 1/4 in. (6.35 mm) diameter holes through

which the shutter shafts enter. The plate is shown in Figure 8. The

base plate was made of 3/4 in. (1.905 cm) thick stainless steel and

was 6-9/16 in. (16.669 cm) O.D. Cooling water inlets and outlets were
 21

2 HOLES DRILLED a TAPPED

180° APART
FOR 4-40 SET SCREWS

0.410"* 0.001"

COOLING COIL
SOFT SOLDERED TO
6 1/4" * O.OIO" SUPPORT TUBE

3/16" OD. SOFT

COPPER TUBING

D
1/2"
(PRESS FIT IN BASE PLATE)
SCALE
I: I

Figure 6. Support tube and cooling coil. Support tube is

stainless steel. Cooling coil is soft copper
 22

18 1/32"

STANDARD 3" ID. COLUMN

SCALE
1:3

Figure 7. Quartz column constructed from a standard

3 in. (7.62 cm) I.D. column
 23

©
2 HOLES

4 3/4
2 HOLES
10-32 N F THREADS
1/4" DEEP

15/16" HOLE
3 HOLES, DRILLED a TAPPED
ALL THE WAY
6-32 THREADS
THROUGH DRILLED a TAPPED
ALL THE WAY THROUGH
1/8“ NTP
0- RING
DRILLED a
GROOVE
TAPPED

1/4" THICK

TOP VIEW

O-RING
GROOVE
15/16" HOLE 3 HOLES,DRILLED a TAPPED
ALL THE WAY 6-32 NF THREADS
THROUGH DRILLED a TAPPED

HOLE DRILLED 8 TAPPED

4 3/4* 0.010

BOTTOM VIEW

SCALE
1:2

Figure 8. Top plate constructed from stainless steel

 24

drilled into the base plate to provide cooling for the support tube and

the concentrator. The base plate is shown in Figure 9. A 1/2 in.

(1.27 cm) diameter hole in the center of the base plate provided

support for the crucible support tube and as an outlet to the vacuum

system. The quartz column was closed at the top by the top plate and

closed at the bottom by the base plate. These were secured with

clamping ring and tapered fiber ring as shown in Figures 10 and 11,

respectively. The spacer plate was made of 3/4 in. (1.905 cm) thick

stainless steel and was 9.00 in. (22.86 cm) O.D. It had a 2-3/4 in.

(6.985 cm) diameter hole in the center and eight 5/8 in. (1.5875 cm)

diameter holes every 45° (0.7854 rad) as shown in Figure 12. The

spacer plate was attached on the top of the vacuum system and the

base plate was secured to the top of the spacer plate with four

socket head cap screws. The vacuum system used was a 6 in. (15.24 cm)

NRG high vacuum pumping station and provided a reduction in pressure

-5 -3
to less than 1 x 10 torr (1.3332237 x 10 Pa) in the system.
 2, 1/4 HOLES 180° APART
ALL THE WAY THROUGH
I 1/4" RADIUS
3 HOLES(SS RING TO CLAMP)
DRILLED 8 TAPPED 6~32
EVERY 120°, 2 3/16" RADIUS
1/2" DEEP
2, 3/8 HOLES
/4" x 1/8" O-RING GROOVE
ALL THE WAY THROUGH
I 1/8" RADIUS

8 HOLES, EVERY 45«

13/32", ALL THE WAY THROUGH
2 15/16" RADIUS

4 HOLES, DRILLED 8 TAPPED

1/4" NTP THREADS
1/2 HOLE
N>
ALL THE WAY THROUGH Ui

5/16 DRILLED a TAPPED

NTP THREADS

4 HOLES DRILLED IN
CENTER OF FLANGE t—r "i—r -

TO MEET 4 HOLES - 3/4 "*0.005" THICK

DRILLED 8 TAPPED
WITH 1/4" NTP THREADS T
(FORMS WATER INLETS OUTLET)

SCALE
2:3

Figure 9. Top view and front view of base plate

 26

4 3/4*0.010

3 29/32^0.005

304 STAINLESS
STEEL

5/32 HOLES

1/4" THICK

TAPERED TO FIT
FIBER RING

(Da©

Figure 10. Clamping ring constructed from stainless steel

 27

©a®
3 11/16 HOLE
TAPERED TO 3 1/2

4 1/8
TAPERED TO
3 7/8 ••

3 15/32

4 1/8

SCALE
l: I

Figure 11. Top view of tapered fiber ring

 ©

4 HOLES DRILLED a TAPPED

2 3/4 * 0.010 HOLE 7/16" NF THREADS, 3" RADIUS
ALL THE WAY THROUGH 5/16" DEEP, EVERY 90°

3 3/4 5/8" HOLE, 3 3/4" RADIUS

ALL THE WAY THROUGH
EVERY 45°

O-RING GROOVE

SCALE
3/4' * 0.005 THICK
I :2 SS 304

Figure 12. Spacer plate constructed from stainless steel

 29

V. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

The system was first evacuated by a mechanical vacuum pump and

then pumped down with a diffusion pump to a pressure of about

—6 — be
2 x 10 torr (2.6664474 x 10 Pa). The vacuum system was closed off

and the column back-filled with high purity argon gas to prevent the

sample from oxidizing. A clean, unused Al^O^ crucible was loaded with

precleaned and preweighed pieces of metal, which, when melted, would

completely fill the sample crucible. The A^O^ crucible was placed

inside the Ta crucible. The top of the column was removed. The

crucibles were placed inside the column on the sample support tube.

The height of the sample support tube was adjusted to place the

crucibles in the center of the concentrator. The column was then

•6
closed and the system evacuated to a pressure of 2 x 10 torr
(2.6664474 x 10 ^ Pa).

The high frequency generator was turned on to heat up the sample.

The temperature was raised to approximately 873 K to outgas the

sample for approximately 1-1/2 hours before the run was started. The

high frequency generator was shut off and the sample cooled to room

temperature, allowing the vacuum system to remove the impurities

driven out of the metal and the crucibles. Thirty minutes before

starting the run, the temperature controller for the gas purification

furnace was turned on to heat the titanium sponge to 898 K. The argon

gas first passed through the molecular sieves to remove any moisture

and then passed through the titanium sponge in the furnace to remove

any oxygen which might be present in the gas and in the stainless steel
 30

pipe line. The vacuum system was closed and the column back-filled

with purified argon gas. Both lower and upper shutters were then

opened and the pyrometer was carefully aligned with the blackbody hole

located at the rim of the Ta crucible. Then both shutters were closed.

The high frequency generator was turned on to heat the sample. The

temperature was then raised slowly to melt the sample. Ionization

within the column between the current field concentrator and the

quartz column was observed when the temperature was increased to

about 1473 K. To avoid this, a cooling ring, 5 in. (1.27 x 10 ^ m) I.D.

was placed around the quartz column under the copper coil to blow air

on the column. The cooling ring was constructed from 1/2 in.
_2
(1.27 x 10 m) O.D. polyethylene tubing which had 1/16 in.
-3 -2
(1.5875 x 10 m) holes drilled every 1 in. (2.54 x 10 m) on the I.D.
of the cooling ring. Forty psi (2.7579 x 10^ Pa) air pressure were

used. The pyrometer was positioned to read the temperature of the

blackbody hole. It was then moved horizontally to read the brightness

temperature of the surface by sighting the sample surface at a point

which is nearest the blackbody hole. These temperatures were recorded

by the automatic printer until the temperature of the blackbody hole

and that of the sample surface attained constant values. Approximately

3 to 5 minutes were required for the temperature to stabilize

after a change in power setting. When the temperature stabilized, the

measurement process was repeated.

The shutters were installed to prevent the condensation of the

vaporized sample material on the quartz window. The vaporization of

 31

the sample was suppressed by maintaining a constant flow of purified

argon from the top of the column at a pressure of about 1.27 atmosphere

(128682.75 Pa). Readings were made at several different temperatures

before terminating a run. At temperatures where the vapor pressure

of the sample material approaches the system pressure, window fogging

was experienced in the short time necessary to take the sample

measurements. Under these conditions, it was often impossible to take

readings at more than one or two temperatures per sample.

 32

VI. EXPERIMENTAL CALCULATIONS

To obtain the actual surface brightness temperature and the actual

blackbody temperature, the effect of the quartz window and the prism

in the optical path was taken into consideration. The corrections were

determined by measuring the brightness temperature of a standard lamp,

N.B.S. test No. 174783, with the automatic optical pyrometer by first

focusing on the lamp through the window and prism and then focusing

on the lamp directly, recording the difference between the two

readings. The difference is the correction factor. This correction

can be expressed as

T = 1.05701 x Tobg + 237.568 (6)

where Tobg (C) is the observed blackbody or surface brightness

temperature, and T (K) is the actual blackbody or surface brightness

temperature.

The normal spectral emissivity of the liquid sample was determined

using Wien's equation

^2 1 1
e , = exp [-— (— - —)] (5)
n\ ^LXTT
a

where en^ is the normal spectral emissivity, is the Planck second

radiation constant (1.4388 cm K), X is the wavelength of radiation

-4
(645 nm or 0.645 x 10 cm), T is the actual blackbody temperature,

and T is the actual surface brightness temperature.

cl
 33

VII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Pure Liquid Iron

A film of oxide on the top of the liquid surface was observed

following the melting of the electropolished iron in an crucible.

These oxide films were observed on almost all liquid iron samples.

No measurements of sample temperature were made while there was a film

of oxide floating near the blackbody hole. It was found that increasing

the power input to the copper coil caused the film of oxide to move. The

increase in power input to the copper coil increased the magnetic flux

flowing between the concentrator and the sample [18]. This caused the

top layer of liquid sample to flow. Since the copper coil has a

circular shape, the flow direction of the top layer was radial from

the center in agreement with Tarapore's work on mercury [22],

Temperature gradients within the sample were observed. The

temperature at a point near the blackbody hole was higher than the

temperature at a point in the center of the crucible. The brightness

temperature of iron was measured on a clean liquid sample surface at

the point which was nearest the blackbody hole.

The experimental temperature range in which measurements could be

made was less than 100 K due to the high melting point of iron (1809 K)

and the high vapor pressure of iron at this temperature range.

The experimental normal spectral emissivity of pure liquid iron

from 1809.2 K to 1856.9 K was found to be 0.346 + 0.007. The normal

spectral emissivity data are presented in Figure 13. The results are
 €nX
NORMAL SPECTRAL EMISSIVITY, = 0.3461 0.007

1830 1840
TEMPERATURE, K

Figure 13. Experimental data on the normal spectral emissivity of liquid iron at X = 645 nm
 35

compared with other literature values in Table 1 and in Figure 14. Two

distinct differences can be found from the comparison. The first is that

the value of the normal spectral emissivity of liquid iron obtained in

the present work is constant within the experimental temperature range,

while the other data showed significant changes with temperature. It

is believed that the normal spectral emissivity of liquid iron is

constant as it is for liquid Y, Nd, and Gd [15], La, Ce, and Pr [16],

V and Mo [23], and Cu [17].

The second difference is that all of the previous results except

those of Lange and Schenck [12] showed higher normal spectral

emissivity values than the present work. These differences may be due

to: (i) the wavelength of radiation; (ii) the quality of the blackbody

hole; (iii) the presence of oxide films or other impurities; (iv) the

involvement of reflected light into the measuring equipment; (v) the

accuracy of the equipment for measuring the temperatures; and (vi) the

accuracy of the equipment for recording the temperatures. The wavelength

of radiation used for the present work was 645 nm, while the others were

650 nm or 660 nm. The quality of the blackbody hole used in the

present work had more than 99% blackness from the criteria of Devos [20].

The brightness temperature of iron for the present work was measured

on a clean liquid surface. The temperature measurements for the present

work were taken in a dark room. The present work used a Leeds and

Northrup automatic recording optical pyrometer, which was calibrated by

the Leeds and Northrup Co. against their standards which have been

calibrated at the gold point by the National Bureau of Standards. The

 36

Table 1. Past work on the normal spectral emissivity of pure liquid

iron

Investigator Year Wave­ Temp. Normal True temperature

length (K) spectral measured by
(nm) emissivity
®nX

Bidwell [9] 1914 660 1809 0.36 Pt/Pt-10% Rh

1909 0.42 th ermoj unction
2009 0.48
2100 0.53

Dastur & 1949 650 1809 0.429 Pt/Pt-Rh and W/Mo

Gokcen [10] 1873 0.444 thermocouples
1923 0.450
2023 0.469

d'Entremont [ll] 1963 650 1809 0.384 Pyrometer and

1873 0.361 Pt/Pt-107o Rh
1923 0.344 thermocouple

Lange & 1968 650 1809 0.298 Pt-Rh 18

Schenck [12] 1873 0.305 thermocouple
1923 0.312

Bonnell, 1972 645 1811 0.357 Literature value

Treverton, +0.003 of m.p. of. Fe
Valerga, &
Margrave [13]

Present work 1980 645 1809 0.346 Integral blackbody

to +0.007 comparison
1857
 0.550

BIDWELL
e nx (1914)
0.500
NORMAL SPECTRAL EMISSIVITY,

DASTUR

0.450 GOKCEN
(1949)

0.400

BONNELL
ET AL.
— (1972) '
d'ENTREMONT (1963)
PRESENT WORK

LANGE S SCHENCK (1968)

0.300

0.250
>00 1950 2000 2050
TEMPERATURE, K

Figure 14. Comparison of the reported values of the normal spectral emissivity of liquid iron
at around \ = 650 nm
 38

present work used a Hewlett-Packard thermal printer to record the

pyrometer output.

B. Pure Liquid Nickel

With few exceptions, almost all of the liquid nickel samples had

clean surfaces. As in the case of iron, the temperature at a point

near the blackbody hole was higher than the temperature at the center

of the crucible. The brightness temperature of nickel was measured at

a point nearest the blackbody hole.

The normal spectral emissivity of pure liquid nickel was found to

be 0.340 + 0.007, constant in temperature range from 1729.3 K to

1823.3 K. The normal spectral emissivity is shown in Figure 15. These

results are compared with the literature values given in Table 2 and

shown in Figure 16. Again, two distinct differences can be found from

the comparison. The first is that the value of the normal spectral

emissivity of pure liquid nickel obtained in the present work is constant

within the experimental temperature range, while the others showed

significant changes with temperature. The second difference is that

within the present experimental temperature range, all of the previous

investigators' results, except the one by Bidwell [9], showed higher

normal spectral emissivity values than the present work. These differences

may be explained in the same way as in the case of iron.

C. Liquid Iron-nickel Alloys

The phase diagram for the iron-nickel binary system [24] is

reproduced in Figure 17 with the publisher's permission.

 1 1------------1------------ f—--------1------------ 1------------ 1------------1------------ 1------------ 1------------

NICKEL

0.5 “M.P D RUN _

[ a RUN #2
*< j o RUN #3
c
| «nX = 0.340 ± 0.007
yr 0.4
h- 1
> 1 O A A A ^ A q nnj) oo_ ak. <i n 0 _
CO i a an ®ao ^ o ®a ^ ^
CO
5 0.3 » ' i —

LlJ
1
1
|
< 1
cr 1
1
o 0.2
UJ 1
CL 1
CO 1
1
1
_l 1

I o.i
QC
O *
1

____!___ 1________l________1________ i i i________ i i i i

1720 1730 1740 1750 1760 1770 1780 1790 1800 1810 1820 1830
TEMPERATURE, K

Figure 15. Experimental data on the normal spectral emissivity of liquid nickel at X = 645 nm
 40

Table 2. Past work on the normal spectral emissivity of pure liquid

nickel

Investigator Year Wave­ Temp. Normal True temperature

length (K) spectral measured by
(nm) emissivity

Bidwell [9] 1914 660 1726 0.221 Thermo]unction of

1826 0.281 carbon and
2000 0.555 graphite
2070 0.665

Lange & 1968 650 1726 0.355 PtRhlS

Schenck [12] 1873 0.361 thermocouple
1973 0.363

Bonnell, 1972 645 1728 0.346 Literature value

Treverton, +0.005 of m.p. of Ni
Valerga, &
Margrave [13]

Present work 1980 645 1729 0.340 Integral blackbody

to +0.007 comparison
1823
 0.700
BIDWELL
(1914) /
0.600
NORMAL SPECTRAL EMISSIVITY, *

0500

0400 BONNELL ET AL. (1972)

LANGE & SCHENCK
PRESENT WORK (1968)
0.300

0.200

1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100

TEMPERATURE, K

Figure 16. Comparison of the reported values of the normal spectral emissivity of liquid
nickel at around X = 650 nm
 WEIGHT PERCENT Ni
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

0.059

CURIE
TEMP 4>
N)
rl042‘
CURIE TEMP 885'

.0.625

LiiiUiiiJ X f\j j

Figure 17. phase diagram of binary Fe-Ni system [24] with permission of the publisher
 43

The liquid alloys were obtained by melting electrolytically cleaned

pure iron and pure nickel metal pieces. To obtain a homogeneous alloy

composition in the crucible, the sample was heated to a temperature

higher than the melting point of iron and left at that temperature about

20 to 25 minutes to allow complete mixing before the first measurement

was made. The solidified alloy No. 5 was selected to be segmented and

the composition of the different sections analyzed to prove the existence

of a homogeneous alloy composition in the crucible. The sample

was cut into pieces as shown in Figure 18 using a Sparkatron spark cutter

The method used for the composition analysis of iron-nickel alloy [25]

is described in Appendix B. The results of the composition analysis

for alloy No. 5 are shown in Figure 18. The results of composition

analysis showed no concentration gradient circumferentially or vertically

The overall composition of the sample was obtained by taking the

average value of each segment composition analysis. The results of the

normal spectral emissivity of liquid iron-nickel alloys for each run

are plotted against temperature in Figure 19. No temperature dependence

was observed for the normal spectral emissivities of these liquid iron-

nickel alloys in the temperature range studied. The results are

summarized in Table 3.

The composition dependence of the normal spectral emissivities of

liquid iron-nickel alloys is shown in Figure 20. It shows a decrease in

normal spectral emissivity up to a nickel composition of about

67.5 at. 7o Ni. It then increases to e , = 0.340 for pure nickel. The
n\
least-square method shows that this result can be represented by the
Figure 18. Sections of the solidified sample No. 5 segmented
by a Sparkatron spark cutter for chemical analysis
and the results of composition analysis
45
Figure 19. Experimental data on the normal spectral emissivity
for liquid iron-nickel alloys at \ = 645 nm
 47

T T
RUN Xf I -14.61 At % Ni
04 enX 1 0.333 ± 0.007
M-m.
0.3

RUN Xt 2-2090 At % Ni
0.4 «nX =0.312 ± 0.005

1-------•-------- ^5------•---- j-%------ •

0.3

RUN# 8-29.94 At % Ni
04 «nX '0.304 ± 0.007

0.3 r^-

04 RUN #11-51.43 At % Ni
«nX =0.270i 0008

03
j* m # ^
RUN #5-66.47 At % Ni
0.3 «nX =0246 t 0.007
»—•
0.2
RUN # 12 -72.25 At % Ni
0.3 enX =0.250 * 0.004
*--f» »» » * *---- #»■
0.2

RUN #7-90.70 At % Ni
04 <nx =0 314 ♦ 0007

0.3
J_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ _
1820 1840 I860 1880 1900

TEMPERATURE, K
 48

Table 3. Results of normal spectral emissivity measurement at

X - 645 nm

At. % Ni Normal Experimental

spectral temp, range
emissivity (K)
e n\-i

Pure iron 0.0 0.346 + 0.007 1809.2-1856.9

Alloy #1 14.61 + 0.09 0.333 + 0.007 1815.8-1887.6

Alloy #2 20.90 + 0.04 0.312 + 0.005 1810.7-1891.5

Alloy #8 29.94 + 0.18 0.304 + 0.007 1810.9-1868.0

Alloy #11 51.43 + 0.01 0.270 + 0.008 1813.3-1868.0

Alloy #5 66.47 + 0.05 0.246 + 0.007 1811.7-1877.8

Alloy #12 72.25 + 0.07 0.250 + 0.004 1808.3-1894.2

Alloy #7 90.70 + 0.03 0.314 + 0.007 1812.2-1867.5

Pure nickel 100.00 0.340 + 0.007 1729.3-1823.3

Figure 20. Composition dependence of normal spectral emissivity of liquid iron-nickel
alloys at \ = 645 nm and those reported by Smith and Chipman [14], and
Lange and Schenck [12]
NORMAL SPECTRAL EMISSIVITY

SMITH 8 CHIPMAN (1952), 1808.15 K

LANGE a SCHENCK (1968), 1810 K- 1905 K

PRESENT WORK, 1810 K - 1890 K

ATOMIC % Ni
 51

equation,

enX = 0.3462 (+0.0090) - 0.0506 (+0.0820)

- 0.5009 (+0.1919) X^i + 0.5521 (+0.1240) (7)

where is the mole fraction of nickel. The coefficient of determination,

2
R , for this regression is 0.9607. Equation (7) is in very good

agreement with the experimental data up to 0.75 mole fraction nickel.

A slight deviation between 75 and 100 at. 7<> Ni is observed for

Equation (7) as shown by the dotted line in Figure 20.

There are very few normal spectral emissivity studies of binary

liquid alloys reported in the literature. The results of the normal

spectral emissivities of iron-copper, nickel-copper [14], and nickel-

cobalt [12] alloys showed that they monotonically change with respect

to composition. The iron-nickel [12, 14] system showed a linear change

with respect to composition. The cerium-copper [26] system showed a

plateau near the pure cerium side and then went through a maximum at

about 67 at. % Cu, followed by a drastic drop to that for pure copper.

The present results are compared with the literature values

shown in Figure 20. The present results show a decrease in normal

spectral emissivity as the composition of nickel increases to about

67.5 at. 7, Ni. The normal spectral emissivity then increased to that

for pure nickel. Smith and Chipman's [14] results are higher and Lange

and Schenck's [12] results increased linearly with respect to composition.

These differences may be explained in the same way as in the case of iron.
 52

VIII. CONCLUSIONS

The normal spectral emissivities of liquid iron, liquid nickel,

and liquid iron-nickel alloys were determined at wavelength \ = 645 nm

by an integral blackbody comparison method. The apparent or brightness

temperature of the liquid sample surface was determined by sighting

the automatic optical pyrometer onto the liquid sample surface. The

true temperature of the liquid sample surface was determined by

sighting the automatic optical pyrometer onto the blackbody hole. The

quality of the blackbody hole used in this work has more than 99%

blackness according to the criteria of Devos [20]. The calculation

method is based on Wien's equation. The normal spectral emissivities

of liquid iron, liquid nickel, and liquid iron-nickel alloys over all

compositions are independent of temperature over the experimental

temperature range. The normal spectral emissivities of liquid iron-

nickel alloys are dependent on composition. This can be represented

by the equation

en\ != °-3462 (±0-0090) - 0.0506 (+0.0820)

- 0.5009 (+0.1919) X^i + 0.5521 (+0.1240) (7)

where 8n^ is the normal spectral emissivity and X^ is the mole

2
fraction of nickel. The coefficient of determination, R , for this

regression is 0.9607.

The present results are compared with other literature values.

Two distinct differences can be found from the comparison. The first
 53

is that the values of the normal spectral emissivity of liquid iron,

liquid nickel, and liquid iron-nickel alloys obtained in the present

work were constant within the experimental temperature ranges, while

previously reported data showed significant changes with temperature.

The second difference is that almost all of the previous investigations,

showed higher normal spectral emissivity values than the present work.

For some of the runs, the experiments could only be made over a

short temperature range, while for other runs, it was possible to

extend the temperature range. In either case, the normal spectral

emissivities of the liquid metals and alloys were found to be constant.

It can, therefore, be assumed that the constancy of the normal spectral

emissivity of liquid metals and alloys could be extended to the higher

temperature without loss of accuracy.

 54

IX. REFERENCES

1. Bennett, C. 0., and J. E. Myers. 1974. Momentum, heat, and mass

transfer. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, N. Y.

2. Jones, E. B. 1965. Instrument technology. Vol. 1. Butterworths,

London.

3. Weber, R. L. 1941. Temperature measurement and control. The

Blakiston Co., Philadelphia, Pa.

4. Forsythe, W. E. 1937. Measurement of radiant energy. McGraw-Hill

Book Company, New York, N. Y.

5. Siegel R., and J. R. Howell. 1972. Thermal radiation heat

transfer. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, N. Y.

6. Planck, M. 1901. Ueber das Gesetz der Energieverteilung im

Normalspectrum. Ann. Physik. Ser. 4, 4(3):553.

7. Kingery, W. D. 1959. Property measurements at high temperatures.

John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y.

8. Siegal, R., and J. R. Howell. 1968. Thermal radiation heat

transfer. Vol. 1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
SP-164.

9. Bidwell, C. C. 1914. A comparison of actual and blackbody

temperatures. Phys. Rev. 3:439-449.

10. Dastur, M. N., and N. A. Gokcen. 1949. Optical temperature scale

and emissivity of liquid iron. J. Metals 1(10):665-667.

11. d'Entremont, J. C. 1963. Optical temperature measurements for

liquid iron. Trans. AIME 227:482-485.

12. Lange, K. W., and H. Schenck. 1968. Messung des spektralen

Emissionsgrades von Metallen und Metallegierungen. Arch.
Eisenhettenw. 39(8):611-615.

13. Bonnell, D. W., J. A. Treverton, A. J. Valerga, and J. L. Margrave.

1972. The emissivities of liquid metals at their fusion temperatures
Pages 483-487 in H. H. Plumb, ed. Temperature-Its measurement and
control in science and industry. Volume 4, Part 1. Instrument
Society of America, Pittsburgh, Pa.
 55

14. Smith, D. B., and J. Chipman. 1952. Optical temperature scale

and emissivities of liquid iron-copper-nickel alloys. Trans.
AIME 194:643-644.

15. Stretz, L. A., and R. G. Bautista. 1972. The emissivities of

selected lanthanide metals at temperatures above their melting
points. Pages 489-499 in H. H. Plumb, ed. Temperature-Its
measurement and control in science and industry. Volume 4, Part 1.
Instrument Society of America, Pittsburgh, Pa.

16. Moscowitz, C. M., L. A. Stretz, and R. G. Bautista. 1972. The

spectral emissivities of lanthanum, cerium, and praseodymium.
High Temp. Sci. 4(5):372-378.

17. Dokko, W., and R. G. Bautista. 1979. The normal spectral

emissivity measurements on liquid copper. Met. Trans. 106:450-453.

18. Babat, G., and M. Losinsky. 1940. Concentrator of eddy currents

for zonal heating of steel parts. J. Appl. Phys. 11:816-823.

19. Baria, D. N., and R. G. Bautista. 1974. Normal spectral emittance

of vanadium and tantalum for different surface conditions at
temperatures above 1000 K. Met. Trans. 5:1543-1546.

20. Devos, J. C. 1954. Evaluation of the quality of a blackbody.

Physica 20:669-689.

21. Buckley, H. 1934. On the radiation from the inside of a circular

cylinder-part 3. Phil. Mag. 17:576.

22. Tarapore, Erach Dorab. 1977. Fluid flow and mass transfer in
induction melting furnaces. Ph.D. Thesis. University of
California, Berkeley. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich.
(Diss. Abstr. Int. 77-15878).

23. Koch, R. K., J. L. Hoffman, and R. A. Beall. 1973. Liquid state

spectral emissivities of titanium, vanadium, zirconium, molybdenum,
and platinum in an electron-beam furnace. U.S. Nat. Tech. Inform.
Serv. Rept. No. PB-221526.

24. Hultgren, R., P. D. Desai, D. T. Hawkins, M. Gleiser, and

K. K. Kelley. 1973. Selected values of the thermodynamic properties
of binary alloys. Amer. Soc. Metals, Metals Park, OH.

25. American Society for Testing and Materials. 1973. Annual Book of
ASTM Standards. Part 32. American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, Pa.
 56

26. Dokko, W. 1979. Thermodynamic study of liquid cerium and copper

alloys by levitation calorimetry. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis.
Iowa State University, Ames', Iowa.

27. Lustman, B., and F. Kerze, Jr. 1955. The metallurgy of zirconium.
1st ed. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, N. Y.
 57

X. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to thank Dr. Renato G. Bautista for his

interest and suggestions on this work. Mr. Harvey J. Jensen is

thanked for his invaluable support in most of the work, especially

the equipment modification and maintenance. Mr. Frederick A. Schmidt

is thanked for the sample preparation. Mr. Harlan H. Baker is thanked

for electrolytic polishing the iron samples. Mr. Robert Z. Bachman

and Mr. Gary Austin are thanked for composition analysis. The author

also wishes to acknowledge the fellowship from the Royal Thai Navy,

Thailand and the research support from the Ames Laboratory under

contract No. W-7405-Eng-82 with the Department of Energy, Assistant

Secretary for Energy Research, Office of Basic Energy Sciences,

WPAS-KC-02-03.
 58

XI. APPENDIX A: SAMPLE PREPARATION

The iron and nickel samples used in this work both analyzed

99.997» pure. The metals were prepared by using the nonconsumable-

electrode arc melting method [2?]. The metal was first etched

before being put in the arc melter and melted into buttons. These

buttons were then beam melted into large.fingers approximately 3/4 in.

(1.905 cm) O.D., and 4 in. (10.16 cm) long. The beam melting helped

remove the gases trapped in the metal. The finger was then swaged

to 11/16 in. (1.74625 cm) O.D. after which it was machined down to

5/8 in. (1.5875 cm) O.D. The metal finger was cut into pieces. The

pieces of metal were weighed to the amount which when melted would

completely fill the sample crucible. Then they were cleaned by the

proper method.

A. Iron

The iron sample was cleaned by the electrolytic polishing method.

Electrolytic polishing was done in a perchloric acid-methyl alcohol

3
bath at low temperatures. The polishing was done in a 250 ml (250 cm )

beaker containing a solution of 67» perchloric acid in methyl alcohol at

a temperature reduced to about 203 K by a surrounding bath with a

dry ice-acetone solution. Uniform temperature was maintained by

stirring the electrolyte with a magnetic stirrer. A stainless steel

cathode at the bottom of the beaker was connected to the negative

terminal of a D.C. power supply capable of furnishing up to 100 V and

3 A. The open circuit voltage used seldom exceeded 50 V. The sample

 59

was connected to the positive side of the power source, usually by

forceps and a flexible lead. The sample was submerged in the cold

electrolyte. An open circuit voltage of 50 V was applied. After a

polishing time of 2 to 5 minutes, the sample was assumed to be free

of any surface contamination. It was quickly removed from the

electrolyte with the current still flowing and rinsed briskly in absolute

methyl alcohol. It was then dried immediately in a stream of warm air.

This procedure of rapid cleaning, rinsing and drying is important to

prevent staining from the acid after warming from the 203 K temperature

of the electrolyte. It is advisable to monitor the electrolyte

temperature during polishing and not allow it to rise above 213 K to

prevent excessive current flow and loss of favorable polishing

characteristics.

B. Nickel

The nickel sample was cleaned by an acid etching method. The

3
etching was done in a 50 ml (50 cm ) beaker containing a solution of
40 ml (40 cm^) 1^0, 60 ml (60 cm^) H^SO^, 90 ml (90 cm^) HNO^ which is

-3
cooled to room temperature before addition of 1.2 gm (1.2 x 10 kg)

NaCl. After an etching time of 2 to 5 minutes, the clean sample was

quickly removed from the solution, rinsed with distilled water, then

rinsed briskly in absolute methyl alcohol. It was then put in a

desiccator under vacuum to dry.

Both iron and nickel samples were placed in a desiccator under

vacuum after cleaning to prevent oxidation.

 60

XII. APPENDIX B: COMPOSITION ANALYSIS

-3
Transfer 1 g (1 x 10 kg) of the sample (10 percent of iron or over),
-3
or 3 g (3 x 10 kg) (under 2 percent iron), from which iron has been
3
removed, to a 400-ml (400 cm ) covered beaker. Add 10 to 25 ml
3
(10 to 25 cm ) of 70 percent HCIO^. Heat to dense white fumes to

facilitate solution of the alloy, and continue the fuming for an

3
additional 5 minutes. Cool and dilute to 200 ml (200 cm ) with hot water.

Add NH^OH slowly, while stirring, until the precipitate formed slowly
3
dissolves. Then quickly add about 25 ml (25 cm ) of NH^OH and
-3
2 g (2 x 10 kg) of (NH^)2S20g. Boil a few minutes, filter through

coarse paper, and wash several times with warm water.

Dissolve the precipitate in hot HC1 (l+S)'*', (Note 1) catching the
3
solution in a 600-ml (600 cm ) beaker. Wash the paper with water until
3
free of acid. Dilute the filtrate and washings to 150 ml (150 cm ), and

precipitate the iron with NH^OH and (NH^)2S20g as before. Filter and

wash the precipitate.

Note 1 - Several drops of H2O2 (30 percent) added to the hot

HC1 (1+3) aids in dissolving the NH^OH precipitate when considerable

manganese is present.
3
Dissolve the precipitate with 15 to 25 ml (15 to 25 cm ) of hot

HCl (1+4) and wash the filter thoroughly with hot water. Heat the solution

to boiling. Add SnC^ solution drop by drop, while stirring, until the

1 3 3
HCl (i+j) means the mixture of i m of HCl and j m of ^0.
 61

color of the ferric iron is discharged, and then add 1 or 2 drops more.

Wash down the inside of the beaker and quickly cool the solution to
3
room temperature. Add, all at once, 10 ml (10 cm ) of saturated HgC^

solution, stir, again wash down the inside of the beaker, and allow the
3
solution to stand for 2 to 3 minutes. Add 15 ml (15 cm ) of the

^2^4-^3^4 m:*-xture anc^ 2 to 3 drops of sodium diphenylamine sulfonate

3
indicator, and dilute to about 200 ml (200 cm ). Titrate slowly with

0.1N K^C^O.^ solution. As the end point is approached, the color

deepens to a blue-green, which changes to a purple or violet-blue on the

addition of 1 drop of K^C^O^ solution. The titration should be finished

deliberately, as it takes a few seconds to obtain the permanent end­

point color. Make a blank determination, following the same procedure

and using the same amounts of all reagents.

Note 2 - Ferric iron must be present in the solution in order to

obtain the purple or violet-blue end-point color. If the color fails

to form, the blank is less than the equivalent of 1 drop of

0.02N FeSO^ solution, as this contains sufficient iron to yield an

end point.

Calculate the percentage of iron as follows;

Iron, percent = [(A - B)C x 0.0559/D] x i00 (8)

where A = milliliters of solution required for titration

of the sample,
 62

B = milliliters of solution required for titration

of the blank,

C = normality of the solution, and

D = grams of sample used.

 63

XIII. APPENDIX C: RAW DATA AND SAMPLE CALCULATIONS

The pyrometer output data for the run on liquid iron, liquid

nickel, and liquid iron-nickel alloys are given in Tables 4 through 6.

The pyrometer output is converted to the observed blackbody temperature

and the observed surface brightness temperature by linear interpolation

of the pyrometer calibration data given in Table 7. The observed

blackbody temperature and the observed surface brightness temperature

are then corrected for the effect of absorption of light by the quartz

window and the prism. After this correction, the observed blackbody

temperature and the observed surface brightness temperature are changed

to actual blackbody and surface brightness temperatures.

The correction is expressed as

T = 1.05701 x T , + 237.568 (6)

obs

where T is the actual temperature in K, and To^s is the observed

temperature in C.

The actual blackbody temperature, T, and the surface brightness

temperature, T , are then substituted into Wien's equation to determine

the normal spectral emissivity en^,

enX = exP ^ ~ (5)

where C2 is Planck's second constant (1.4388 cm K), and \ is the

-4
wavelength of radiation (645 nm or 0.645 x 10 cm).
 64

The sample calculation given below is for the first point in run

No. 1 for iron.

Calculation of the observed blackbody temperature from pyrometer

output:

mv - mv.
(T) (T. .. - T.) + T. (9)
obs mv. n - mv. i+l i i
i+l i

43.03 - 43.00
(1488 - 1486) + 1486
43.07 - 43.00

= 1486.86°C .

Calculation of the observed surface brightness temperature from

pyrometer output:

- fKv - 3?: It <1352 - i35o>+1350

= 1350.57°C .

Correction of temperatures:

T = 1.05701 x (T)obg + 237.568 = 1809.19 K

T = 1.05701 x (T ) , + 237.568 = 1665.14 K

<3. cl ODS

Calculation of the normal spectral emissivity from the actual

temperatures:

v [ r (t - 5-)]
a
1.4388
= exp [
-4 (v1809.19 1665.14 )]
0.645 x 10

e = 0.344
n\
 65

Table 4. Raw data for runs on iron

Pyrometer Pyrometer
Run output3 Run output3
# B S # B S
mv mv mv mv

1 43.03 37.96 3 cont. 44.33 39.02

43.12 37.92 44.36 38.98
43.14 38.01 44.40 38.96
43.19 38.04 44.55 39.17
43.38 38.19
43.52 38.52 4 43.24 38.10
43.58 38.50 43.43 38.29
43.96 38.74 43.65 38.61
44.37 39.01 43.69 38.51
43.82 38.72
2 44.26 38.90 43.83 38.55
43.88 38.82
3 43.25 38.18 43.92 38.57
43.27 38.20 43.93 38.72
43.38 38.27 44.08 38.89
43.42 38.17 44.15 38.95
43.55 38.38 44.15 38.98
43.55 38.44 44.18 38.81
43.60 38.51 44.27 39.02
43.65 38.54 44.66 39.21
43.69 38.58 44.77 39.20
43.72 38.41
43.72 38.48
43.74 38.49
43.74 38.59
43.75 38.45
43.88 38.70
43.92 38.78
43.97 38.68
43.98 38.70
43.99 38.67
44.03 38.80
44.04 38.90
44.05 38.76
44.05 38.90
44.10 39.00
44.22 38.97

pyrometer output: B = blackbody hole, S = sample surface.

 66

Table 5. Raw data for runs on nickel

Pyrometer Pyrometer
Run output3 Run output3
# B S # B S
mv mv mv mv

1 40.25 35.79 3 cont. 41.55 36.69

40.28 35.64 41.67 36.85
40.73 36.08 41.69 36.84
40.91 36.24 41.70 36.85
41.23 36.58 41.74 37.02
41.24 36.42 41.79 36.89
41.41 36.61 41.81 36.90
41.53 36.79 41.85 37.05
41.61 36.81 41.99 37.15
42.75 37.75 42.04 37.11
42.21 37.20
2 40.18 35.56 42.29 37.38
40.20 35.58 42.30 37.36
40.36 35.81 42.42 37.39
40.37 35.89 42.48 37.36
40.57 36.02 42.55 37.42
40.65 36.03 42.67 37.66
40.67 36.10 42.76 37.56
40.84 36.25 42.88 37.89
40.86 36.22 42.90 37.74
40.98 36.42 43.02 37.89
41.10 36.35 43.16 37.85
41.14 36.55 43.19 38.00
42.49 37.36
42.78 37.62
43.07 37.87
43.54 38.20

3 41.20 36.42
41.39 36.66
41.39 36.67
41.42 36.74
41.44 36.70
41.49 36.67
41.49 36.80
41.50 36.75

pyrometer output: B = blackbody hole, S = sample surface.

 67

Table 6. Raw data for runs on iron-nickel alloys

Pyrometer Pyrometer
Run output3 Run 4. a
# B S # B S
mv mv mv mv

1 43.27 38.10 2 cont. 45.77 39.64

43.38 38.13 45.78 39.60
43.57 38.20 46.05 39.85
43.78 38.50
43.80 38.42 5 43.12 36.65
43.83 38.39 43.31 36.81
43.88 38.44 43.33 36.59
44.06 38.54 43.35 36.63
44.17 38.74 43.51 37.17
44.35 38.71 43.55 36.95
44.67 38.96 43.65 36.94
44.76 39.30 43.69 37.11
44.85 39.18 43.83 37.12
45.02 39.53 43.94 37.39
45.63 39.99 44.05 37.35
45.90 40.08 44.12 37.39
44.13 37.64
2 43.08 37.55 44.19 37.32
43.24 37.79 44.20 37.50
43.33 37.74 44.33 37.63
43.42 37.91 44.35 37.80
43.52 37.98 44.44 37.61
43.62 37.99 44.46 37.63
43.85 38.13 44.46 37.86
43.87 38.16 44.77 37.80
43.87 38.17 44.81 38.03
43.87 38.28 44.92 37.88
44.17 38.36 44.98 37.85
44.34 38.56 44.99 38.02
44.43 38.67 45.16 38.10
44.73 38.89 45.19 38.23
45.05 39.17 45.29 38.19
45.17 39.33 45.31 38.24
45.42 39.44 45.54 38.37
45.64 39.41

pyrometer output: B = blackbody hole, S = sample surface.

 68

Table 6. (Continued)

Pyrometer Pyrometer
Run output5 Run : ______ output5
# B S # B S
mv mv mv mv

7 43.14 37.52 8 cont. 43.60 37.93

43.18 37.63 43.66 37.91
43.19 37.69 43.77 38.05
43.22 37.60 44.04 38.15
43.22 37.65 44.13 38.33
43.26 37.82 44.15 38.15
43.27 37.88 44.27 38.29
43.29 37.86 44.29 38.27
43.48 38.05 44.34 38.35
43.53 38.13 44.48 38.48
43.55 38.00 44.53 38.54
43.71 38.28 44.60 38.63
43.76 38.10 44.69 38.67
43.79 38.08 44.75 38.87
43.80 38.03 45.18 39.15
44.00 38.32
44.04 38.38 11 43.18 37.08
44.10 38.40 43.27 37.29
44.28 38.54 43.30 37.00
44.31 38.64 43.31 37.32
44.45 38.61 43.38 37.08
44.50 38.78 43.50 37.16
44.57 38.85 43.51 37.48
44.71 39.01 43.60 37.41
44.75 38.74 43.75 37.34
44.96 39.18 43.95 37.85
45.08 39.06 43.96 37.62
45.14 39.23 44.04 37.76
45.16 39.22 44.08 37.61
44.18 37.82
8 43.09 37.65 44.40 38.00
43.11 37.65 44.42 38.10
43.27 37.46 44.99 38.43
43.33 37.62 45.01 38.30
43.34 37.76 45.16 38.69
43.34 37.79 45.18 38.58
43.37 37.77
43.52 37.92 12 43.00 36.59
43.54 37.73 43.16 36.64
43.57 37.93 43.16 36.65
 69

Table 6. (Continued)

Pyrometer
Run output3
# B S
mv mv

12 cont 43.21 36.71

43.32 36.78
43.35 36.84
43.44 36.88
43.44 36.96
43.57 37.06
43.58 36.99
43.69 37.20
43.79 37.31
44.07 37.49
44.08 37.48
44.23 37.60
44.29 37.62
44.31 37.64
44.46 37.67
44.53 37.70
44.61 37.77
44.82 38.01
44.91 38.01
45.02 38.10
45.07 38.22
45.17 38.22
45.36 38.41
45.52 38.57
45.58 38.53
45.88 38.68
45.93 38.89
45.94 38.85
46.15 38.95
 70

Table 7. Pyrometer calibration

Medium range Medium range Medium range

T °C mv T °C mv T °C mv

1000 27.02 1080 29.16 1160 31.54

1002 27.07 1082 29.21 1162 31.60
1004 27.12 1084 29.27 1164 31.66
1006 27.17 1086 29.33 1166 31.73
1008 27.22 1088 29.39 1168 31.79
1010 27.27 1090 29.44 1170 31.85
1012 27.32 1092 29.50 1172 31.91
1014 27.37 1094 29.56 1174 31.98
1016 27.42 1096 29.62 1176 32.04
1018 27.47 1098 29.67 1178 32.10
1020 27.53 1100 29.73 1180 32.17
1022 27.58 1102 29.79 1182 32.23
1024 27.63 1104 29.85 1184 32.29
1026 27.68 1106 29.91 1186 32.36
1028 27.74 1108 29.97 1188 32.42
1030 27.79 1110 30.02 1190 32.48
1032 27.84 1112 30.08 1192 32.55
1034 27.89 1114 30.14 1194 32.61
1036 27.95 1116 30.20 1196 32.68
1038 28.00 1118 30.26 1198 32.74
1040 28.05 1120 30.32 1200 32.81
1042 28.11 1122 30.38 1202 32.87
1044 28.16 1124 30.44 1204 32.94
1046 28.22 1126 30.50 1206 33.00
1048 28.27 1128 30.56 1208 33.07
1050 28.32 1130 30.62 1210 33.13
1052 28.38 1132 30.68 1212 33.20
1054 28.43 1134 30.74 1214 33.26
1056 28.49 1136 30.80 1216 33.33
1058 28.54 1138 30.86 1218 33.39
1060 28.60 1140 30.92 1220 33.46
1062 28.65 1142 30.98 1222 33.52
1064 28.71 1144 31.05 1224 33.59
1066 28.76 1146 31.11 1226 33.66
1068 28.82 1148 31.17 1228 33.72
1070 28.88 1150 31.23 1230 33.79
1072 28.93 1152 31.29 1232 33.85
1074 28.99 1154 31.35 1234 33.92
1076 29.05 1156 31.41 1236 33.99
1078 29.10 1158 31.48 1238 34.05
 71

Table 7. (Continued)

Medium range Medium range Medium range

T °C mv T °C mv T 0C mv

1240 34.12 1320 36.87 1400 39.76

1242 34.19 1322 36.94 1402 39.84
1244 34.25 1324 37.01 1404 39.91
1246 34.32 1326 37.08 1406 39.98
1248 34.39 1328 37.15 1408 40.06
1250 34.46 1330 37.23 1410 40.13
1252 34.52 1332 37.30 1412 40.21
1254 34.59 1334 37.37 1414 40.28
1256 34.66 1336 37.44 1416 40.35
1258 34.73 1338 37.51 1418 40.43
1260 34.79 1340 37.58 1420 40.50
1262 34.86 1342 37.65 1422 40.58
1264 34.93 1344 37.72 1424 40.65
1266 35.00 1346 37.80 1426 40.73
1268 35.07 1348 37.87 1428 40.80
1270 35.13 1350 37.94 1430 40.88
1272 35.20 1352 38.01 1432 40.95
1274 35.27 1354 38.08 1434 41.03
1276 35.34 1356 38.16 1436 41.10
1278 35.41 1358 38.23 1438 41.18
1280 35.48 1360 38.30 1440 41.25
1282 35.54 1362 38.37 1442 41.33
1284 35.61 1364 38.45 1444 41.40
1286 35.68 1366 38.52 1446 41.48
1288 35.75 1368 38.59 1448 41.55
1290 35.82 1370 38.66 1450 41.63
1292 35.89 1372 38.74 1452 41.70
1294 35.96 1374 38.81 1454 41.78
1296 36.03 1376 38.88 1456 41.86
1298 36.10 1378 38.95 1458 41.93
1300 36.17 1380 39.03 1460 42.01
1302 36.24 1382 39.10 1462 42.08
1304 36.31 1384 39.17 1464 42.16
1306 36.38 1386 39.25 1466 42.23
1308 36.45 1388 39.32 1468 42.31
1310 36.52 1390 39.39 1470 42.39
1312 36.59 1392 39.47 1472 42.46
1314 36.66 1394 39.54 1474 42.54
1316 36.73 1396 39.61 1476 42.61
1318 36.80 1398 39.69 1478 42.69
 72

Table 7. (Continued)

Medium range Medium range Medium range

T °C mv T °C mv T °C mv

1480 42.77 1560 45.86 1640 49.03

1482 42.84 1562 45.94 1642 49.11
1484 42.92 1564 46.02 1644 49.19
1486 43.00 1566 46.10 1646 49.27
1488 43.07 1568 46.18 1648 49.35
1490 43.15 1570 46.26 1650 49.43
1492 43.23 1572 46.33 1652 49.51
1494 43.30 1574 46.41 1654 49.59
1496 43.38 1576 46.49 1656 49.67
1498 43.46 1578 46.57 1658 49.75
1500 43.53 1580 46.65 1660 49.83
1502 43.61 1582 46.73 1662 49.91
1504 43.69 1584 46.81 1664 49.99
1506 43.76 1586 46.89 1666 50.07
1508 43.84 1588 46.96 1668 50.15
1510 43.92 1590 47.04 1670 50.23
1512 44.00 1592 47.12 1672 50.31
1514 44.07 1594 47.20 1674 50.39
1516 44.15 1596 47.28 1676 50.47
1518 44.23 1598 47.36 1678 50.55
1520 44.31 1600 47.44 1680 50.63
1522 44.38 1602 47.52 1682 50.71
1524 44.46 1604 47.60 1684 50.79
1526 44.54 1606 47.68 1686 50.87
1528 44.62 1608 47.76 1688 50.95
1530 44.69 1610 47.84 1690 51.03
1532 44.77 1612 47.91 1692 51.11
1534 44.85 1614 47.99 1694 51.20
1536 44.93 1616 48.07 1696 51.28
1538 45.00 1618 48.15 1698 51.36
1540 45.08 1620 48.23 1700 51.44
1542 45.16 1622 48.31 1702 51.52
1544 45.24 1624 48.39 1704 51.60
1546 45.32 1626 48.47 1706 51.68
1548 45.39 1628 48.55 1708 51.76
1550 45.47 1630 48.63 1710 51.84
1552 45.55 1632 48.71 1712 51.92
1554 45.63 1634 48.79 1714 52.00
1556 45.71 1636 48.87 1716 52.08
1558 45.79 1638 48.95 1718 52.16