Thermocouple conduction error with radiation heat loss

Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Hess, Wesley Graig, 1940-

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material

is made possible by the University Libraries, University of
Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation
(such as public display or performance) of protected items is
prohibited except with permission of the author.

Download date 05/06/2018 21:52:18

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/318475

 THERMOCOUPLE CONDUCTION
ERROR WITH RADIATION HEAT
LOSS

by
Wesley Craig Hess

A Thesis Submitted, to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF AEROSPACE AND MECHANICAL
ENGINEERING
In Partial Fulfillment-of the
Requirements For the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
In the Graduate College
THE. UNIVERSITY OF
ARIZONA

1 9 6 5
 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This thesis has been submitted in partial

fulfill ment of requirements for an advanced degree at
The Univer sity of Arizona and is deposited In the
University Library to be made available to borrowers
under rules of the Library.
Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable
without special' permission, provided that accurate
acknow ledgment of source is made. Requests for
permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of
this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by
the head of the major department or the Dean of the
Graduate College
when in his judgment the proposed use of the material is
in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances,
however,' permission must be obtained from" the author.

APPROVAL BY THESIS
DIRECTOR
This thesis has been approved on the date shown below#

“T>. M.^fEoSligb'b Date"

Associate Professor of
Aerospace and Mechanical
Engineering
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to express his gratitude to

Dr. D. M. MoEllgotg without whose guidance and
encourage-, ment this work would not have been
accomplished.
Appreciation is extended to T. B. Swearingen for
his assistances. The author also expresses his gratitude
to his wife6 Dee AnnB for her time and effort in typing
the thesis.

ill
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

, Page
LIST OP ILLUSTRATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . , « vi
. .
o . vii
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . .......
, . . » viil

NOMENCLATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
ABSTRACT 1
1
CHAPTER 2
6
I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 8
1.1 Description of the. Problem . . , . o 8
«
1.2 Previous Work . . . . . . . . . .
.
1.3 Approach
IX ANALYSIS
2.1 Idealized Problem. . . . . . . . .
.
2.2 Energy Generation for a Thin Wall With
out Attachments 9
2.3 Temperature Distribution in a Thin Wall
with Energy Source Attached
11
2.4 Application of Solution.to Thermocouple
Attachment
14
2.5 Comparison to the Solution of Schneider 16
2.6 Prediction of h^g for a Radiating
Thermocouple Attachment . . . . . . . .
21
2.7 Calibration from Experimental Data...............25
III METHODS OP TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2?
3.1 Description of Apparatus . . . . . . . 2?
3.2 Procedures 37
3.3 Data Reduction Techniques . . . . . . . 43
IV EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS..........................................................4?
4.1 Results of Present'Experiment . . . . . 4?
4.2 Results of Earlier Experiment . . . . . 50
 4.3 Discussion of Experimental Results................51
V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . 55
5.1 Conclusions 55
5.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . .57

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS—
Continued

APPENDIX
Page

A Seduced Data .o..........................60

B Temperature Distribution Through Tube . . . ?
0 C Computer Program Based on Selected
Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . 72
D Computer Program Based on Manufacturers0
Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
75
E Tabulation of Pertinent Material
Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a . . . 79
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

figure : TITLE PAGE

1 Attached thermocouple acting as a sink „ 3
2 Thin9 infinite plate with constant
energy generation without source . „ . „ 10
3 Thin9 infinite disk with constant
energy generation with source , . . . = 12
4 Source caused by attached thermocouple . 15
5 Schneider8s nondimensionallzed solution
versus the ratio of disk to thermocouple
conductance o e e o o e o o e e o e * 1® 1^
6 Correction factor for significant con
vection on opposite surface . . . . . .

? 19
Correction factor for the case without
8 f1ow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Thermocouple attachment acting as a
9 radiating fin . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10 22
11 Schematic of experimental apparatus...............28
12 Photograph of the experimental apparatus 29

13 Thermocouple arrangement for test section 33

14 Thermocouple probe assembly . . . . . . 36
Electric circuit for the test section , 38
Thermocouple conduction error versus
wall temperature for the predicted and
measured case using the parallel-
tangential type of thermocouple. . . . . 48
 LIST OF TABLES

TABL TITLE PAGE

E 1 Test section details 3®
2 Summary of experimental results.........................^9

vii
 NOMENCLATURE

QUANTITY UNITS
p
Ar Cross-sectional area In the r-dlrectlon ft
As Surface area of disk ft^
O
Lg,t Surface area of thermocouple ft
Ax Cross-sectional area in the redirection ft^
d Diameter of thermocouple wire ft
h4 Total heat transfer coefficient for top Btu
of disk hr f
h0 Total heat transfer coefficient for Btu
"bottom of disk "hr ft2
°P
hipQ Total heat transfer conductance
for the thermocouple attachment
I0 Modified Bessel9s function of the first
kind of order zero
K0 Modified Bessel6s function of the
second kind of order zero
Ki Modified Bessel9s function of
the second kind of order one
k-y. Thermal conductivity in the r-dlrectlon -----—
1 hr ftop
k-v Thermal conductivity in the x-dlrection ....
hr ft op
P Perimeter . ft
p Transformation function "QF
ft
q Heat transfer rate
Bt
u
hr
viii
 NOMENCLATURE— Continued

SYMBOL QUANTITY UNITS

q»oe ■Volumetric energy generation rate Btu
hr
r ftP"*
Radial coordinate
ft
r0 Effective radius of attachment
T ft
Temperature
- op
Average surrounding temperature
on bottom of disk
Tb O p
Average surrounding temperature
on top of disk
To Op
Thermocouple conduction error
o (9), (T(r0 ) - Tw)
O p
Wall temperature at distance
from attachment
Tq ( O p
Spatial coordinate
^ Tw ft

x Nondimenslonalized solution
given by Schneider
GREE
Thickness of
K ft
disk Emissivity
r Constant for use in Bessel’s
equation,

X
'fkL+Jti'P i
kr 5 / ft
Stefan-Boltzman constant (0,1714 x 10""°) - --
.i,
hr ft^H*
Thermocouple conduction error
(T(r0) - Tw )
 ABSTRACT

The chazige in the temperature of a thin heated

body, as produced by thermal conduction in attached
instru mentation such as thermocouples, pressure taps, and
voltage leads, is predicted by an analytical approach
based on the "thin fin" idealization. Previous analyses
for this change, commonly called thermocouple conduction
error, are extended to treat the particular ease where
thermal radia tion is the only mode of energy loss from
the thermocouple. The solution is phrased to include
consideration of energy generation within the body and
significant heat transfer from either surface of the
body, .
An experiment was performed to compare the
predicted thermocouple conduction error with the error for
tangential thermocouple attachments over a range of
temperatures from 200-1480 degrees Fahrenheit in a vacuum
environment. In this range it was found that the
thermocouple conduction error varied from one to two per
cent of the thermocouple output during the course of the
experiment. Parameters were determined to permit
application of the experimental results to comparable
geometry with significant convection from the opposite
side of the thin body.
x
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTIO

1.1 Description of the Problem

Interest in the problem of thermocouple conduction

error was initiated by the investigation of forced con
vective heat transfer for the internal flow of gases in
reslstively heated tubes. In the parent experimental work
the tube was in a vacuum environment to reduce and
localize radial heat loss| tube wall temperatures were
measured with thermocouples welded to the external
surface.
A problem caused by the attachment of instrumenta
tion such as thermocouples9 pressure taps, etc. to a
heated wall surface is that the instruments themselves
can in crease the heat loss at the point of attachment by
.increas ing the surface area. The local temperature may
thereby be reduced causing a phenomenon referred to as
thermocouple conduction, error. The thermocouple
conduction error (6) may thus be defined as the
difference between the tempera ture at the point of
attachment and. the temperature at the same point without
a thermocouple. The thermocouple wire may appear to act
as a sink or a source depending on the
environment in which it is exposed* on the resistance to
heat transfer from its surface9 and on Its axial
conduction resistance. As shown in Figure 1, the
thermocouple Is act ing as a sink.
In past analyses considering heat transfer in the
thermocouple$ it has been necessary or convenient to
neglect certain energy terms such as conduction along the
thermocouple 9 radiation from i t o r convection from the
in side of the surface to which it is attached. In other
cases the heat loss by radiation has been linearized. In
space or in laboratory vacuum systems in which temperature
levels and temperature difference levels may become very
large3 the main heat loss is due to radiation which can
not be neglected and, in many cases, should not be
linearized.
Since temperature measurements by means of thermo
couples are among the most accurate in certain ranges, it
is necessary to know precisely the error introduced by
the instrument itself.

1.2 Previous Work

Thermocouple error is a problem which has been.

studied many times in the past. There are two distinct
(
methods of approach to the problem. One is to minimize
or eliminate the error by using a) different types of
thermocouple designs and b) different methods of
attachment of thermocouple to the heated wall. Examples
of a)
 3

Too <

Conduction Heat
Transfer
Attached
Thermocouple

Radiation
Heat
Heated Transfer
wall
Figure 1. Attached thermocouple acting as a sink.
different types arei 1 ) shielded thermocouples (1 , 2)5 v
2) heated shields (2)1 3) heated thermocouples (3)? and 4)
thermocouples of zero diameter (4). These methods are of
limited use■and in some cases are very difficult to con
struct and apply. Concerning b) different methods of
attachment9 Moen (5) and White (6) proved that if each
wire was attached directly to the wall (so called parallel
type junction) instead of the junction of the two wires
attached to the wall (so called cross type junction), the
error would be reduced due to the elimination of the
temperature gradient through a distance equal to one wire
diameter.
This is accomplished as long as the two wires themselves
are attached in a plane of constant temperature,
Under certain test conditions (low temperature$,
low temperature differences, high pressures). and certain
thermo couple conditions (small size, low emissivity),
Moffatt (3) notes that thermocouple errors can be
minimized.
The second method of attacking thermocouple errors
is to calculate the error Introduced by the attachment and
to apply it as a correction to the measurement (7, 8 ,
21), In the most readily available treatment, Schneider
(7) gave one analytical approach to this problem; however,
in his solution he neglected heat loss on the side of the
wall opposite the thermocouple attachment and did not
explicitly consider internal heat generation in the wall.
He also assumed that the heat loss due to the attachment
greatly
■ • . : 5
exceeded the heat transfer that would occur at that point
without the attachment. West and Westwater (8) gave an
analytical solution to the problem including thermal
radia tion* but the heat loss due to radiation was
linearized since their solution applied to gas stream
temperature
measurement in which convection heat loss was more important
- than the radiation heat loss.
The pertinent literature to date has primarily
con sidered. the prediction of thermocouple errors in
measuring the temperature of a gas stream (1, 2, 3» 8* 9)«
Most of the problems encountered, in gas temperature
measurement* such as conduction errors, stability errors,
and errors in temperature - emf relationship, apply also
to temperature measurement of a heated wall surface.
In the analyses of thermocouple errors, the use of
first power heat transfer rate equations has been a con
venient assumption (3$ 9$ 10). Such a treatment is usually
possible for applications with convection as the dominant
mechanism and/or with low temperature differences between
radiating surfaces (11).
. As stated by Oetken (10), in any type of thermo
couple measurement the validity of the readings depends
on three things ?
1) ) the accuracy of the thermocouple, e.g.,
thermo couple emf output versus temperature
compared to the standard emf output•versus
temperature *
 2) the difference between the thermocouple reading
and the true surface temperature at the point
of attachment* e.g.$ junction physically not
co incident with the surface9 and
3) the difference between the true surface tempera
ture at the point of attachment and the
temperature that would occur in the absence of
the thermo couple $ i.e,9 the thermocouple
conduction error.

1.3 Approach

The idealized case was solved with all

appreciable energy terms included to predict the
thermocouple conduc tion error. This solution was then
compared to the one given by Schneider (7)9 and from the
comparison a factor was derived for correction of his
plot.
In order to compare the predicted results with
those of the actual cases an experiment was constructed.
The experiment involved electrically heating an Inconel
tube with attached thermocouples in a vacuum. The purpose
of the vacuum was to eliminate heat loss due to
convection. Located along the outside of the tube were
thermocouples which were exposed to an environment at a
lower temperature than the tube temperature; thereby
inducing a conduction error, A thermocouple was placed
Inside the tube at a
location which .was not affected by the outside
thermocouples to determine the true wall temperature
reading. The
information obtained from the experiment was then used to
evaluate some of the variables in the idealized case for
general application.
Thermocouple errors due to instability and
quality of the thermocouple were not studied. The errors
due to instability in the range of temperature and of
time in operation in this particular experiment were
initially believed negligible (11).
 CHAPTER II

ANALYSIS

2,1 Idealized. Problem

The attachment of a thermocouple to a heated wall

surface will induce a thermocouple conduction error in the
recording of the wall temperature if the thermocouple leads
are at a temperature different from that of the heated
wall. The idealized problem of thermocouple conduction
error will be approached by considering the case of a
thin, infinite disk with constant internal
energy:generation. The error will be analytically
predicted as a function of the rate at which heat is
conducted through the thermocouple leads at the point of
attachment. Prom this predicted error it will then be
possible to determine the actual wall temperature by
correcting the temperature recorded by the thermocouple,
The disk will be examined for two .situations. In
case 1 the disk will be assumed heated to a steady state
wall temperature (Tw ) in order to calculate the internal
energy generation rate needed to obtain that wall tempera
ture. In. case 2 the same power will be assumed
generated, but a. source will be placed at the origin of
the disk to simulate the presence of a thermocouple, The
disk will be considered thin enough to assume that the
temperature will
be a function of the radius only. The temperature of the
surroundings on the top and bottom of the disk will be
and Tbs respectively.
This solution will follow the treatments given by
Schneider (7) and by Boelter et al. (21). It will differ
from Schneider*s solution since both heat transfer to the
side opposite the thermocouple attachment and internal
energy generation will be considered. Also, no assumption
will be made regarding the relative magnitude of the heat
transfer due to the attachment compared to that from the
bare surface. The solution will differ from Boelter et
al. in the calculation of the heat loss via the
thermocouple.

2.2 Energy Generation for a Thin Wall Without Attachments

The case of energy generation for a thin disk with-*

out a source, Figure 2$ Is solved as follows. It is possible
to write an energy balance for the differential ring

q” ' dV = qQ + q±

where q*11 is the rate of energy being generated per

unit volume. The rate equations for the above are found
by defining total heat transfer coefficients, hQ and h^,
for the top and bottom sides, respectively$

q0 - h0 Aq (Tw - Tqq ) heat loss from the top of

the
differential element, and
 /K q°

I As
/
5 qe” dV
\
— |<— dr
\
<1

Figure 2„ Thin, infinite plate with constant energy

generation without source.
 11
Ag (Tw - T-j) heat loss from the bottom
of the differential
element. The heat transfer coefficients are left in
general form to permit accounting for radiation or
convection or both.
Substituting the rate equations into the energy balance
gives an expression which determines the power generation
needed for a given wall temperature

q" > dV - hG As <TW - Tro ) + ht As (!„ - Tb) (2-1)

2.3 Temperature. Distribution in a Thin Wall with

Energy Source Attached

The case of temperature distribution in a thin

disk with an energy source, Figure 3* is solved next.
The source introduces conduction heat transfer in the
plane of the disk into the previous energy balance

q?*8 dV + qr = qr + dr + qQ +

q1 The rate, equations are 1

d T radial conduction into

= -kr -y = ™~
.the differential element;
q^ 4.d_r ~ ly. ^ dr radial conduction out of
the differential element
qQ = hQ Ag (T - Tqq 9
)
heat loss from the top
of the differential
elements and
 12

00

source

\k

Figure 3. Thin, infinite disk with constant energy

generation with source.
 ' 13
• " hj. Ag (T - T-j-,) heat loss from the bottom
of the differential element,
Substituting the rate equations Into the energy balance,
substituting for the areas,A g = 2rrr dr and Ar = 2rrr 6,
performing the indicated differentiation, recalling equation
(2-1), and simplifying givest

- A - + A _&r_ , h8 + hi (I .
Tw) dr10 r dr kr6

Defining X2 = -J2s~-±_^L»,
error, ICpand
O thewall temperature
T0 = T - Tw , givesi

- X2 T
o — 0 (2-2)

The above equation is a modified Bessel8s equation

of order zero; it has the general solution (12)

Tq = l0(Xr) + C2 K0 (Xr)

The first boundary condition is applied as the

radius approaches infinity, (r^> oo). Knowing that T0
must remain defined and since I0 (Xr) is undefined as r
->oo, one sees must be zero. Therefore, the
solution iss

T0 = C2 K0 (Xr) (2-3)

The second, boundary condition is applied at r =

r0 by idealizing the source as a cylinder of radius r0
in the
 14
plate„ In case 1» with the absence of an external energy
source, no heat was conducted In the disk. Therefore,
any temperature gradient must be caused by the energy
source, so at .r .=•r0 :

qs = -kr Ar -^r- = -kr Ar J

L - - — /rc
o

Recalling equation (2-3)9 one may relate the source to the

temperature distribution

qg = -kp Ar ("^2 4) Kj(Xr0)

The above equation can be solved for Cg which then gives

the wall temperature error distribution

To » - * i r (2-4)

2.4 Application of Solution to Thermocouple Attachment

If the source Is now replaced by a thermocouple

attachment assumed to be conducting heat ( q ^ ) from the
wall, as shown in Figure 4, it is possible to calculate
the error introduced by the attachment, performing an
energy balance on the cylinder gives:

q ee6 dV — q^ t q^ h

qrpQ The rate equations are:

qrpQ =: hrpQ Ag (T - T^ ) where hp^ is defined as a

 15

Figure 4. Source caused by attached thermocouple

 16
heat transfer conductance
for the thermocouple,
dT* = qg conduction In the radial
qr = -kr Ar —
\
direction^ and
~ hj_ Aq (T - T^) heat transfer to the side
opposite the .thermocouple.
Recalling equations (2-1) and (2-4) and that the heat
transfer due to conduction in the radial direction is
caused by the energy source qg, substituting the rate
equations into the energy balance, and simplifying, one
finds the thermocouple conduction error

2.5 Comparison to the Solution of Schneider

The solution given by Schneider (?)

isi

T° <ro) ■ i +
^ T C As K o U i ~

A plot of this thermocouple conduction error,

nondimension- allzed as (T(r0 )> Tw) / (T^ - Tw)$ versus
the ratio of disk to thermocouple conductance is given in
Figure 5»
The reason for the difference in the two equations is
that in the development by Schneider the heat loss on the
side opposite, the thermocouple was neglected, i.e., h^ =
0, and
uncorrected
1.0

solutio
n
nondimensionalized

01T

0.4
Schneider'

0.1
s

H 0 . 0 L—
>- 0.01 0.1 1.0 10.0

^TCa
s
Figure 5* Schneider's nondimensionalized solution versus the rat^o of H
disk to thermocouple conductance. (?). \ - I x
 18
the heat'transfer due to the attachment was assumed to
greatiyioaiceed the heat transfer at that point without the
attaoEBezffe-*.-1"i.e,, h0 <(<( hm^. This latter assumption
intro- . duces 'nn incongruity : if h ^ were equal to
h0$ there would still be a thermocouple.conduction error
predicted| whereon physically no effect would be
expected*
If the two solutions are compared, it is
possible' to generate a correction factor which when
multiplied by Schneider8s solution will give the more
general solution, equation (2-5)9

Gorr,

where y is the nondimensionalized solution given by

Schneider. For the case without heat transfer from the
side opposite the thermocouple attachment on the thin
plate, hi equals zero, so the correction factor reduces
to

Corr. = -4^2— „ 1
nTG

This will be the configuration used in the experimental'

part of this thesis, i.e., an electrically heated Incone1
tube in a vacuum with no Internal.flow in the tube. The

correction factors, both with and without flow,across

the opposite surface, are shown in Figure 6 and Figure
7«
Facto
r
Correctio
n

0.001 0.01 1.0

Figure 6. Correction factor for significant convection on

H
opposite surface. vo
 mmmmiwiMiwimai

■ ■ ■ ■
&
Mit >ȣ!

rn

0.01 1.0

Figure ?• Correction factor for the case without flow

r o
o
 21
Prediction of wall temperatures in the area of
attachments other than thermocouples, such as pressure
taps si voltage taps, etc,, can be made by properly
evalu ating the source term in deriving equation (2-5)
from equa tion (2-4). This evaluation will involve changes
in the attachment heat transfer representation, the exposed
sur face area, and the energy generation volume as
consequences of the change in geometry of the attachment,

2.6 Prediction of h-p^ for a Radiating

Thermocouple Attachment

The temperature distribution In a thermocouple wire,

considered as a fin of radius r0 , will be investigated to
determine the heat transfer conductance for the thermo
couple , (bpc)• In the intended application the heated
surface and the thermocouple are located in a vacuum, The
vacuum is used to eliminate the heat losses from the fin
and heated surface due to convection, so the heat losses
from the surfaces are by thermal radiation alone. The
physical set up is shown in Figure 8 with the thermocouple
considered as a single perpendicular fin. .Performing an
energy balance on the circular differential element gives?
 22

00

qr« ^ dx

Figure 8. Thermocouple attachment acting as a

radiating fin.
 23
The rate equations are %

qx = ~kx ky. d

T conduction in the differ

ential element
qx 4. ax " qx dx conduction out of the
differential element,
and
q_ = o c A (T^ - T radiation to the surround-
X S *v

ings.
The radiation rate equation is based on the grey body
approximation for a small body enclosed by much larger
surroundings and on the assumption that the View factor
between the fin and its base surface may be taken as
zero. Recent investigations by Sparrow and Eckert, Haller
and Stockman, and Bartas and Sellers could be taken as a
basis for eliminating the latter assumption if further
sophisti cation were necessary (13, 22, 23)«
Substituting the rate equations into the energy
balance, performing the Integration, and. simplifying gives:

2rL?2L- _ „ 1m 4 m 2 _o G
t V = a(T' - T» "> where a - - %cx- v

The above equation is similar to the second order

differen tial equation for a radiating fin treated by
Reynolds (14), Since the above equation is nonlinear, the
solution is a difficult one. However, only the temperature
gradient is needed. By using the transformation,
 24

it Is possible to integrate the equation once. This is

done by separating variables, integrating, and applying
the boundary condition that as x approaches infinity, (x
—> to)* the temperature of the thermocouple approaches
that of the surroundings (T—> T# ) so there is no heat
transfer, i.e.8 (dT / dx)^ = 0. The temperature
dependence of the emissivity is neglected. The temperature
gradient is then given as

dT (T5 - 5T ^ ^ + 4 ^ 5) ^ (2="6)
d

The above equation.provides an expression which

allows the prediction of the heat loss conducted through
the thermocouple leads for the case of Interest.
Recalling that the expression used In the -previous section
to define the heat loss due to the attachment was

dTC - hTG As (T «” To, }

and noting qmX nw ■

= q- one may calculate hmn from
X.
) _ ^ equation
(2^6). The areas As and Ax at r = rQ are equal, so
 25
The thermocouple conduction error {0) may now be
calculated from equation (2-5) by substituting h^g from
equation (2-7) to account for the radiating
thermocouple.

2.7 Calibration from Experimental Data

While the proceeding analysis makes possible the

prediction of thermocouple conduction error$ there are
several conditions $ which occur in the use of
thermocouples that interfere with its direct- use.
Junctions are usually made by attaching two wires so the
representation as a single, circular fin is inaccurate.
Further, the wires
are often not attached as square, perpendicular joints but
rather are affixed in an approximate tangential manner.
Thus, it is difficult to choose an appropriate value for
the effective junction radius, r0. The emissivlty of the
thermocouple materials is often not well known and may
vary strongly along the wires if the junction is made by
welding in air. This also hinders the prediction of hrp^«
Un certainty of the emissivlty of the heated surface
intro duces uncertainty in h0$ which is necessary for the
calculation.
The equations derived in the proceeding section
may be used in conjunction with an experiment to be
described later in order to improve the prediction of
radiating thermocouple conduction error. From the experi
mental data it will be possible to measure the total heat
transfer coefficient to the outside (hQ ) and to
calculate hrpc with equation (2-7) based on the measured
temperature at the junction. The experimental
arrangement will be such that the total heat transfer
coefficient for the in side (hi) will be zero. The
measured thermocouple con duction error can be compared
to predictions based on various values of r0 to
determine the most appropriate
value of the effective radius for the type of
thermocouples checked. With these parameters and
knowledge of the thermal conductivities of the materials
involved $ it will be possible to predict the thermocouple
conduction error for the same geometry and non zero hj_ by
using equation
 CHAPTER III

METHODS OF

TESTING

3.1 Description of Apparatus .

An overall schematic diagram of the apparatus is

included as Figure 9 9 while a photograph is added as
Figure
10. Test section details are listed in Table 1.
The vacuum vessel consists of a six inch l.d., four
foot long section of Kimax glass pipe„ The top and bottom,
aluminum flanges are connected to the Kimax aluminum
flanges with eight 2 3/^ inch long bolts, and the vacuum
seals are made with Viton "0-rings."
An 1/4 inch o.d., thin walled Inconel 600 tube is
used as the test section between the two electrodes. The
electrodes are made from 1/4 inch copper bar and are
silver soldered to the Inconel tube. .Support of the test
section is accomplished by connecting the top electrode
directly to one of the Conax electrical conductor sealing
glands, catalog number EGT-187-A-cu-T. The other Gonax
electrical conductor is connected to the bottom copper
electrode by using a flexible piece of copper wire. Thus,
thermal ex pansion is accommodated,
 Spot welded along the test section are eight
Chromel P-Alumel parallel type thermocouples of 36 gauge
wire. All
2?
 28

Inside probe TC
wires Inconel tube

Iron pipe

Veoco
vacuum
Needle valve
valve — >
TO <r~ 6
vacuum pump vacuum
Electrode gauge
<-Amphen<?
glands l
or
Aluminum flange
<- Plexiglas disk
— Top electrode
20 gauge TC
wire

36 gauge TC wire Test section

— Bottom electrode
Plexiglas disk

fKlmax glass pipe

]^Aluminum blank
Figure 9. Schematic of experimental apparatus.
 TABLE 1

Test Section Details

Position Length Axial Circumferential.

Displacement
(Inches Displacement Between Leads
) Between Leads
Top Electrode (± 0.0005 (X 1/64 in.)
Thermocouple .3/16
in.)
#1 1/8
0.0000 1/16
#2 1/8
#3 0.3831
1.7800 3/16
#5 3.2874 3/16
6.2783 1/8
#6
#7 10.2956 3/16
#8 13.2350
16.6200
22.2125

Length of test section

25.79 Z 0.03 in.
Outside diameter of test
0.2508 t'.O.OOOl in.
section Inside diameter of test
0.2303 t 0.0005 In.
section
 31
thermocouples and extension wires are premium, grade, bare
wire Chroittel P-Alumel from the Hoskins Manufacturing
Company, For the spot welds a special thermocouple welding
rig made of copper was constructed in the laboratory to
use in conjunction with the Model VTW-29B "stored energy
weld ing power- supply" manufactured by Hughes Aircraft
Company. The welding rig was designed so that the part
which con tacted the test section did so over an extended
areaj as a result, there were no marks from the contact
with the weld ing electrode. To assure uniform
attachments, the rig also had spring operated contacts to
apply the same pressure when performing all spot welds. A
setting of two watt seconds was used for attaching the
thermocouples to the
tube, using the parallel type of junction with a radial
dis placement of approximately 1/8 inch between leads. Each
36 gauge wire was placed along the tube and spot welded
such that the attached area was approximately tangent to
the tube over a distance one to two wire diameters. Care
was taken to locate the two wires for each thermocouple as
close, as possible to the same axial position. These
wires are' approximately three inches long with the other
ends spot welded at a setting of two watt seconds to 20
gauge Chromel P or Alumel wire as appropriate. The 20
gauge wires pass from the vacuum system through a Conax
transducer gland, ' catalog number T6-20-A16-T. The 20
gauge wires are equally separated around the inside of the
glass pipe at a radius
 32
of approximately 5 3/^ inches by passing them through two
plexiglas;''s'plates placed just beyond the heated region
of the tube. The top plate is supported by the two Conax
electrical conductors $ and the bottom plate is supported
by the 20,-gauge wires. After the 20 gauge wires pass
through the Gonax fitting, they are then attached to a 16
prong Amphenol connector. The arrangement of the
thermocouple wires is shown schematically in Figure 11,
All thermo couple readings were taken with reference to
an ice bath.
The arrangement as shown in Figure 11 was used for
approximately half of the runs. A 36 point Honeywell Elec
tron!k 18 Potentiometer system with an Adjustable Range
Unit replaced the 12 point switch and the Leeds and
Northrop "8686" Potentiometer for the later runs. The
accuracy of the Honeywell system was checked as follows $
after standardizing the Leeds and Northrop Potentiometer,
a
given emf output from it was measured with the Honeywell
system. In the range from 0,00 to 95*0 millivolts, the
Honeywell system indication agreed to within four hundredths
of a per cent with the emf output.
The vacuum pump line was constructed from 1/2
inch copper tubing connected to a Genco oil diffusion
pump, model number 93330-1, and a Welch mechanical pump,
model number 1402B. The diffusion pump was placed directly
in front of the mechanical pump to aid in obtaining
pressures in the region of interest, i.e., 75 microns down
to seven
 33

Ice
reference
Ch
"CPT

Copper
wire
TC 12-polnt L.& N.."8686"i
wires - TC switch Potentiometer
Amphenol
connector

Figure 11. Thermocouple arrangement for test section.

microns,..4n,1/2 inch o.d. Vecco vacuum valve, catalog ■
number,■L-5Q~S 9 was inserted in the vacuum pump line so
that the diffusion pump and the mechanical pump could be
removed from the system.
The vacuum gauge line was also constructed from 1/2
inch copper tubing with an 1/2 inch o.d. Vecco vacuum valve
$ catalog number L-50-S. The gauge used is a Consolidated
Vacuum Corporation Pirani vacuum gauge, type GP-110, with
a range of zero to 2000 microns. In addition to the
vacuum valves there is also a needle valve in the line
for the purpose of relieving the vacuum when necessary.
The thermocouple used for measuring the temperature
Inside the test section was made by spot welding 30 gauge .
Chrome1 P and Alumel Thermocouple wires together at a
setting of five watt-seconds. The two wires are insulated
in the region of the test section by a 2 1/2 foot long
section of 1/8 inch o.d. two-hole vitreous refractory
mulllte insulating tubing from McDaniel Refractory Porcelain
Company. Above it is a three foot long section of 1/4 inch
o.d. In cone1 600 tube. The two thermocouple wires run
through
the inside of this tube and are electrically insulated with
vinyl sleeving. A two inch gap of the flexible insulated
thermocouple wire exists between the top of the ceramic
tubing and the Incone1 tube to allow easy replacement of
the probe thermocouple. The thermocouple wires pass through
an Electronics Industries two-wire lead-through, catalog
number
 35
4703-2/060, and then sealed with solder. The inside thermo
couple probe arrangement is shown schematically in Figure 12.
Above the top flange and connected to it by means
of an one inch o-seal "Swagelok" fitting is a three foot
long section of 3/4 inch i.d. iron pipe for mounting the
probe assembly. The inside of the pipe is open to the
vacuum to evacuate it with the system. A teflon spacer
placed at the bottom of this pipe, inside the "Swagelok"
fitting, centers the test section. This assembly allows the
probe thermo couple to be moved over the length of the
test section.
The 1/4 inch Incone1 tube with the insulated
thermo couple wire inside it is manually operated through a
Hbored- out” 1/4 inch "Rubbemek" connector, catalog number
R700-4. This connector is soldered in a one inch cap
mounted on top of the 3/4 inch iron. pipe.
The test section was heated by passing a.c.
current through it. A General Electric power transformer,
catalog number 61 G75» was used to step down the voltage
while stepping up the current. An Ohmite Manufacturing
Company variable transformer, catalog number VT 20 B, was
used in order to vary the power generated inside the test
section. To measure the current on a zero to five amp
range Weston
370 ammeter, a Weston 327 current transformer was used in
the line. The voltage developed across the test section
was measured on Weston 341 volt meters with ranges of 0-
3,
 36

Electronics
Industries 2-wire
lead-through 1/4 "
Smgelok reducer
1/4” Copper tube
1/4” Rubbemek
connector
1/4” Rubbemek
connector
4"1" Swagelok cap
— 1/4" Inconel 600
tube 3/4” Iron pipe

30 gauge TC wires
with vinyl
Insulation
1/8" Ceramic tubing
1/4” Inconel 600 tube
1" Swagelok o-
seal connector
--------- Top flange

Figure 12. Thermocouple probe assembly

 3?
0-7„5* and 0-15 volts. The circuit for the system is shown
schematically in Figure 13°

3.2 Procedures

Upon completion of the vacuum system, it was

tested for leaks, and the leaks were corrected before any
runs were taken. The system was then evacuated to a
pressure of 13 microns, filled to approximately atmospheric
pressure with dry nitrogen, and evacuated again. This
was done three times in an effort to drive out of the
system as much atmospheric air as possible. Whenever the
system vacuum was relieved thereafter, dry nitrogen was
used instead of air.
After the last evacuation with dry nitrogen,
hydro gen was added until the pressure increased to 100
microns. The system was evacuated, and hydrogen was
again.added until the pressure increased to 50 microns.
At this time the power to the test section was turned on,
and the test section was heated to approximately 700
degrees Fahrenheit. This was done in an effort to avoid
oxidation of the test section. During all the test runs,
the system was con tinually purged at a low rate with
hydrogen. This was accomplished by opening the vacuum
gauge line needle valve, which was connected to the
hydrogen supply cylinder and regulator, until the PIrani
vacuum gauge read from three to four microns above the
reading with the needle valve closed.
 Current
Transformer

Power
Supply
Variable Power HS)—
Transformer Transformer

Test Section

Figure 13, Electrical circuit for the test section.

 39
Steady flow was assumed after the PIrani gauge read a
constant value for at least 15 minutes. The flow setting
was accomplished while the test section was unheated.
The position of the Inside probe thermocouple was
determined by a pointer attached to part of the sliding
probe outside the vacuum. A mark was made on an aluminum
bar when the probe was just visible at the bottom of the
test section tube. The aluminum bar was positioned along
side the sliding probe $ and by use of Dykem layout
fluid and a scribe, it was possible to locate the
position of the two copper electrodes and the eight
outside thermo couples on the bar.
During all the runs, the readings were taken with
the sliding probe positioned midway between two outside
thermocouples, so the probe would be in a position which
was not effected by the temperature drop caused by outside
thermocouples. In an effort to observe this effect,
during one run the probe thermocouple readings were
recorded at
1/8 inch increments as the probe traversed directly
opposite an outside thermocouple. This showed the
affected region to be confined to a small distance, 3/8
inch or less, surrounding the outside thermocouple.
For each run the following readings were
recorded; the current transformer setting, the current
through the test section, the voltage across the test
section, the vacuum pressure, the time, and the
thermocouple readings.
 40
The reduced data are listed in Appendix A„ In the higher
regions of tube temperatures s an extra thermocouple was
placed on the outside of the glass pipe to insure that
the thermal limit of the glass was not exceeded.
During the first three runs (19 2, 3)» the probe
thermocouple reading was recorded at each probe position9
i<>e,9midway between each pair of outside thermocouples.
The readings recorded by the probe in the region above
the third outside thermocouple from the top were lower
than the readings recorded by the outside thermocouples.
It was assumed that the probe was in a region of a very
large temperature gradient* thereby inducing conduction In
the ceramic probe| and the probe thermocouple could "see”
a lower temperature. It was also observed that the probe
would require five to ten minutes in approaching steady
state when moved from one position to another. Since in
the region above thermocouple three the test section
temperature was not uniform, the probe readings there were
not needed and were neglected in latter runs. Elimination,
of these readings resulted in reduced time for the probe
to reach steady state after each move since the wall
temperature was approximately constant.
It was also observed during the first three runs
that the temperature recorded by the thermocouples was
de creasing with time for a constant power setting. This
was probably due to increasing tube emisslvity.as the
tube
 41
oxidized slightly in 'spite of the hydrogen purge. In
order to compensate for this decreasing temperature
reading with times'the'iiext four runs (4, 5s 6® 7) were
conducted in the following manner. The inside probe
thermocouple was read only at positions between the third
"outside thermo
couple and the.bottom electrode. This was the region where
temperature of the test section was approximately constant
- with respect to position. The following- readings were
recorded for each probe positions the probe reading, the
two outside thermocouple readings immediately above and
below the probe position, the current, the voltage, and the
pressure of the system. During run 7® the Leeds and
Northrop Potentiometer and the Honeywell system were con
nected in parallel across the probe thermocouple. The two
gave readings which agreed to within less than one degree
Fahrenheit, The remainder of the thermocouple readings
were recorded using the Honeywell system.
The above procedure was found to be too time con
suming i therefore, the following procedure was used for
the final seven runs (8, 9® 10, 11, 12, 13, 14). The
probe
was moved to only three different positionsi midway
between outside thermocouples four and five (position
five), midway between outside thermocouples five and six
(position six), and midway between outside thermocouples
six and seven (position seven). At each of these three
probe positions, the probe thermocouple was read first,
then the eight
 42
outside thermocouples8 the voltage and the current, the
pressure of the vacuum system5 and finally the probe thermo
couple was read again.
It was observed that the probe thermocouple
reading and the top three outside thermocouple readings
were more stable if the probe were started at the lowest
position (position seven) and pulled up the test section.
This was due to the fact that the part of the probe near
the top • three outside thermocouples had not been heated
and when it was pushed into the test section, it cooled
the tube in this region. This was found to be the case for
runs 8 and
10 in which the probe was pushed.into the test section.
Time was wasted while waiting for the thermocouples near
the top of the test section to reach steady state %
therefore, for the other runs the probe was always started
at position seven and pulled up the test section.
During run 12, the fifth one using the last
procedure$ the bottom half of the test section was a
brighter shade of red than the top half indicating a
higher temperature. The thermocouple readings indicated
the same phenomenon. This was believed due to one of
several reasons. The bottom plexiglas plate was beginning
to melt? and after it cooled, it was observed that the
plate had be come attached to the bottom electrode. A 20
gauge thermo couple wire for outside thermocouple six was
touching one
for thermooouple eight, and the 36 gauge thermocouple Mires
for thermocouple three were also crossed. These shorted
thermocouples then gave a reading which was 10-30 degrees
Fahrenheit higher than the adjacent thermocouples.
Before the last run was taken, the JO gauge
thermo couple wires within the ceramic insulator for the
inside probe thermocouple were replaced with new
thermocouple wires. The thermocouple junction was formed
by twisting the two wires together to eliminate any
instability effects caused by the spot welding. This was
done in order to test the stability of the old inside
probe thermocouple. The difference between the outside
wall thermocouple and the inside thermocouple for probe
position five for the new thermocouple was found to be
approximately the same as previously at the same wall
temperature, indicating that the original probe
thermocouple had suffered no observable loss of emf output
due to aging during its use (15),

3.3 Data Reduction Techniques

The experimentally measured thermocouple conduction

error was calculated by subtracting the average outside
thermocouple temperature from the average inside probe
thermocouple temperature for the region of approximately
constant wall temperature.
Appendix D contains a computer program which was
used to predict thermocouple conduction error using the
 44
value of tube emlssivlty given by International Nickel
Companyg Inc. (18) and the temperature of the
surroundings (rfq-j ) equal to room temperature, This
program contains a step which calculated the
thermocouple conduction error while varying the effective
radius (r0 ) from half to twice an attached thermocouple
diameter* It was found that the experimentally measured
thermocouple conduction error correlated best with the
error obtained from the computer program using an
effective radius (r0 ) equal to an attached
thermocouple diameter.
The average of the Inside probe thermocouple read
ings 9 from the region of approximately constant wall
temper ature s was taken as the outside wall temperature of
the test section. The temperature difference through the
tube wall was neglected since it was smalls calculations
in Appendix B show it to be a maximum of 0.075 degrees
Fahrenheit.
The readings of the thermocouples were accepted
without a. correction for their deviation from the
standard emf versus N'.B.S. #2? platinum wire, since in the
tempera ture range of the experiment, the deviation was
certified as less than one degree Fahrenheit by Hoskins
Manufacturing Company,
The outside Kimax glass temperature was given by a
30 gauge Chrome1 P-Alumel thermocouple attached to the out
side of the glass at a position approximately midway
between the test section electrodes for runs 8, 9? 10, 11.
For runs
3s 5» 6g"7 the outside glass temperature was taken from
the data of Swearingen (16) for the same tube wall
tempera ture in d comparable apparatus. Prom this outside
glass temperature and knowledge of the thermal
conductivity of the glass given by Kimax, it was possible
to determine
the inside glass temperature. Knowing this temperatureg
the tube wall temperature9 and the power input to the
test sections the total heat transfer coefficient for the
out side of the test section (hG) was calculated. The
total heat transfer coefficient for the inside of the tube
(hjJ was zero since there was no flow inside the tube.
The
heat transfer due to convection and conduction was
neglected for the calculation of hip^ since the ratio of
heat loss due to convection and conduction to that due to
radiation was always less than about eight per cent. The
vacuum pressure for this condition was calculated in
preliminary work to be
.less than 180 microns.
An improved prediction was based on physical
informa tion obtained from the experiment. The value of h^Q
was cal culated for each wire using the average wall
temperature $ T(r0 ), from the central four thermocouples
and r = d/2 in equation (2-7)I the two values were summed
to give an over all hipc. Prom the calculation and using a
thermocouple diameter as the effective radius$ r0 „ the
 thermocouple con-
,duetion error was predicted by using equation (2-5)°
 46
In order to perform, the calculations for prediction
based on the experiment information, another computer pro
gram was written. The program also includes a step which
calculates the emlsslvity of the test section. This program
is described in Appendix C.
A tabulation of the pertinent properties for the
operation of both of these programs is included in Appendix
E,
 CHAPTER IV

EXPERIMENTAL

RESULTS

4.1 Results of Present Experiment

The experimental data were recorded, and reduced

as described In Chapter III? Methods of Testing. Table 2
summarizes the results with the runs listed In the order
in which they were taken. The data taken for runs 1 and
2
were not used in the experimental reduction since they
were taken primarily to aid in acquainting the operator
with the procedure of the experiment. The data taken for
runs 12, 13, and 14 were also omitted due to the
inconsistancy of the data, which was believed to be
caused by the attached plexlglas disk and the shorted
thermocouples.
The predicted thermocouple conduction error obtained
by using the computer program of Appendix C and the experi
mental data as listed in Appendix A is shown in Figure 14
and Table 2. Included in this figure and In the table are
'the measured thermocouple conduction errors obtained from
the experiment. The uncertainty of this temperature differ
ence is estimated to be less than two degrees Fahrenheit.
This uncertainty was obtained by considering the following
1 the deviation of the various thermocouple wires from the
National Bureau of Standards table, calibration of the
Honeywell system, variation of ice junction temperature,
4?
 48. i T r
tv , : i4 .u
, 0 Q t H T iprtxij
2d
O rnr .. r n: q r
.
I E r
„ ri . Tn
t
:
;i'-.;:;
r:tCL. rlnge '• »>f— •-f-- -*tTf—;—“l»-t•—*'

n
i 40.0 :Tnfuir*-
E -f
♦:•rLZ]r^r
I ra~+' /

„ 32.0
S
h
o =
: .x :n
r.5
§ 24.0 '-»f—'4 * - • ■—. r4 »- * •^

v
4 -Tangent1^1. X
4 mu
^ 3temoc$upl$
O ■
r4 1 -«
* M-* •

--
- v •»
• -4 . .

♦
i4 -- r

r.
16.0
ID . • / , .

8.0 0.0
m d
:-L :rilm iu U -:•»um ■irld d
400 600 800
lw* Undisturbed '/all
 :e'
ne:
00
for the nredlcted

o
1000 1200.
’lure Ther ooou ile conduction error verms
1- and measured case using: the parallel-tan .3iti?l t;r:e thermocouple. Golid
line is based on exnorinental emissivity and the dash lines :re based on c
aaiiufacturer1s e issivity (17).
 TABLE 2

Experimental Results

Run Tw T(r0) 6 Tube

Pressure hTCg
Keas Pred.* total Emissivlty
(Op). (°F) , (°P) Btu
(A) (°Pj h T r t ^
P

3 19.0 694,0 690.0 4.0 9.912 1.200 346.23 0.248

4 12.0 210.0 210.0 0.0 1,684 0.381 201.82 0.245 '
5 12.0 730.0 722.0 8.0 10.57 1.197 357.93 0,230
6 13.0 85O.O 839.O 11.0 12.58 2.315 412.03 0.342
7 2?.0 1077.0 1066.0 11.0 17.96 3.102 503.26 0.310
8 27.0 IO5O.O 1035.0 15.0 17.06 3.223 490.84 0.336
9 70.0 1276.0 1249.0 25.0 21.22 7.008 596.59 0,541
10 24.0 985.0 965.0 20.0 15.19 3.445 462.72 0.400 ■
11 185.0 1480.0 1450.0 30.0 25.32 11.510 724.19 0.595 -
—

Temperature Profile with Respect to Distance Near Thermocouple

#6

1 Distance 1,1....

<1
(above TC 4 1/2 + 3/§l 4 1/4 4 1/8 0
+•)
(inches)
Temperature I1482.0 1452.0 1481.0 *1481.0 1482,0 1482,

J2.
1480.5

U-
L jse)
_J
* Prediction based on r0 = d. \Q
 50
and variation of the temperature in the ”isothermal” box
at the Amphenol connector. All lengths of a specific wire
size and material were taken from the same spool. The un
certainty of the actual temperature level is estimated to
be less than 0.5 par cent of the emf output. The predicted
thermocouple conduction errors obtained by using the com
puter program based on manufacturers* information are
shown in Figure 14 for several values of the effective
radius (r0 ).
Table 2 lists the values of the total heat transfer
coefficient to the outside (h0)s of the total heat
transfer conductance for the thermocouple attachment
(h.j>Q), and of the test section emissivity for each run.
Also included in Table 2 are the temperature readings for
the inside probe thermocouple for a traverse opposite
outside thermo couple six. The readings were taken at
every 1/8 inch
increment starting 1/2 inch above and continuing to 1/2
inch below outside thermocouple six.

4,2 Results of Earlier Experiment

An earlier thermocouple conduction error experiment

was performed in an alternate test assembly to check the
thermocouple conduction error and the effect of the thermo
couple attachment (cross-type versus parallel-type) (16).
The assembly was similar to the present experiment as it
Involved electrically heating an Inconel tube with attached
 51
thermocouples in a vacuum„ Three fixed internal thermo
couples measured the tube wall temperature * Tw» For this
earlier experiment the resulting test section emissivity
was higher than in the present apparatus. The parallel-
.type thermocouple data are plotted on Figure 14,

4.3 Discussion of Experimental Results

A comparison of the experimental thermocouple con

duction errors to the predictions based on the
manufacturer9s listing of emissivity in Figure 14 shows that
the choice of an effective radius equal to the diameter of
one of the attached thermocouples gives approximate
agreement for the present work. The prediction of the
thermocouple conduction error is improved slightly when
experimental results $ h0 , T(r0 ) and T^ 9 are used in
conjunction with the analysis.
However, the experimentally measured thermocouple conduction
errors do show scatter and a maximum deviation, from pre
diction, greater than their uncertainty. The agreement could
be stated as about one per cent of the thermocouple emf out
put, or fifty per cent of the thermocouple conduction error.
For the higher temperature runs the higher pressure
would increase natural convection so that the heat loss via
the thermocouple would be greater, thereby increasing the
thermocouple conduction error. This is estimated to have
approximately a ten per cent effect on the temperature
difference for the worst case; it would be considerably
 52
less at lower pressure. Prom Table 2 It Is seen that the
test Sbbtlon:emlssivlty varied chronologically In the
same manner, as the experimentally measured thermocouple
con duction errors. This result would suggest either an
in crease in effective thermocouple emisslvity, hence
h^j, or a drop in the thermocouple emf output with aging.
Figure Ik also shows that the experimentally
measured thermocouple conduction errors by Swearingen (16)
appear to give approximate agreement with a choice of
effective radius of half an attached thermocouple diameter,
rather than one diameter. His tube emisslvity was higher
. than that of the present experiment; this has an effect
of lowering the thermocouple conduction error. The earlier
experiment was in operation two to three times longer than
the present one, allowing longer aging of the
thermocouples; but this effect would increase the error
rather than reduce it. Although the same method of
attaching the outside thermocouples (parallel-type) was
used in the two experi ments, a different welding jig was
used; so it is not evident that the thermocouple
attachments for the two achieved the same attached
dimensions.
The area affected by the thermocouple attachment
was shown by the experiment to be confined to a small
region surrounding the attachment. The thermocouple probe
read ings were recorded at 1/8 inch increments for a probe
traverse opposite outside thermocouple six. The accuracy
 53
of the probe position was known to within plus or minus
1/8 inch. The difference in thermal expansion of the
tube and the ceramic probe is approximately 1/8 inch at
the temperature for this particular run. This difference
was neglected. The traverse measurements showed a dip of
1,5'
0 degrees Fahrenheit in the probe reading to occur directly
opposite the outside thermocouple position. This depression
in the probe reading vanished completely when the probe was
moved 1/4 to 5/8 inch, either up or down, from the outside
thermocouple. As given by Schneider (?) in his Figure 8-2,
which is a plot of temperature distribution around a local
heat source; at a distance of 3/8 inch away from the
thermocouple attachment., the difference between the wall
temperature at this point with and without the attachment
is less than 0.4 per cent for the conditions of this test.
This confirmed, the previous assumption that the probe
thermo couple readings were not affected by the outside
thermo couples when read at a position midway between two of
them.
The magnitude of the predicted heat transfer
con ductance for the attached thermocouple (h^) for
this particular experiment was approximately 100 times
larger than the total heat transfer coefficient for the
outside (hD ). The derived correction factor. Figure 7,
indicates a change from Schneider’s solution of less
than two per cent of y« Since the problem of
thermocouple conduction error was initiated by the
investigation of forced
convection heat transfer for the.internal flow of gases
in resistlvely heated tubes$ it is of Interest to note
the change in the correction factor when convection Is
intro duced, For this particular case the heat transfer
co efficient to the inside (hi) is expected to range from
20 to 200 Btu/hr ft^ °F. The appropriate prediction of
the thermocouple conduction error can be calculated from
equa tions (2-5) and (2-7) and the experimental
determination of r0. Included in the computer program of
Appendix D$ based on manufacturer’s listing of
emlssivitles, is an additional step which varies the heat
transfer coefficient for the Inside (hi), from zero to
ten Btu/hr ft^ °F in increments of one and from 10 to
100 Btu/hr ft^ °F in increments of ten, while
calculating the thermocouple con duction error.
Interpolation in this resulting table for a given hi
could be used to determine the thermocouple conduction
error without the additional calculation. How ever, it is
seen in Figure 6 that the resulting reduction in 9 would,
be less than 10 per cent from non flow value; for liquid
flow, with higher hi, the reduction could be more
significant.
 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusions

Thermocouple conduction error Is a problem

which must be taken into consideration in accurate
temperature measurements. The results from the
analytical case as
well as the experiment confirm the importance of this
error. In the comparison of the two9 an improved means of
deter mining the error for a particular experiment was
derived
as described in Section 3-3» Data Reduction Techniques.
In the case of the experiment the error averaged 30 degrees
Fahrenheit, or about two per cent of the wall temperature,
when operating at a wall temperature of 1480 degrees
Fahrenheit for the parallel-tangential type of thermo
couple , This error will be greater at higher
temperatures, but the experimental investigation was
limited by the melting of the plexiglas disks.
For the present experiment the effective thermo
couple radius was determined to be approximately equal
to the diameter of the actual, thermocouple wire. With
this choice and material properties estimated from
available literature, it was found that the predicted
undisturbed wall temperature agreed with the actual
value within
55
 56
approximately one per cent for the thermocouples used. By
Including 'the tube heat transfer coefficient, h0 , and
the thermocouple base temperature, T(r0 ), obtained from
the experiment, the prediction of the wall temperature was
Im proved ■slightly. These experimental results showed a
drift with aging of approximately one per cent of the
wall temperature„
Data by Swearingen, with comparable thermocouple
geometry, agreed with the prediction when based on an
effective radius equal to the actual radius. Thus, it
appears that calibration for thermocouple conduction error
should be accomplished with the thermocouples in place on
the equipment with which they are to be ultimately used.
The analytical results indicate that in
situations Involving flow across the base surfaces, the
solution or calibration obtained without flow may be used
whenever the thermocouple conductance, Impcs is large in
comparison to the wall heat transfer coefficients. In
particular, for most cases involving forced convection
of gases, the additional reduction in thermocouple
conduction error is slight, about ten per cent of the
error or 0.1 per cent of the wall temperature.
As shown by the analytical approach, the thermo
couple conduction error is a function of the heat
transfer through the attachment. The heat transfer was in
turn found to be a function of the temperature at the
point of
 57
attachment $ the temperature of the surroundings 9 the
emlssivity and thermal conductivity of the thermocoupleg
and the geometry at the point of attachment0.
Therefore, the factors which tend to reduce thermocouple
conduction errors are: low temperature levels and low
temperature difference levels, thermocouples of low
emlsslvlty and thermal conductivity, and thermocouples
of small size,

5.2 Recommendations

An improvement in the reliability and perhaps

accuracy of the experiment would be to increase the
number of Inside probe thermocouples. In this particular
experi ment there was no check as to the reliability or
accuracy of the inside thermocouple. As stated by Moffatt
(3)»
the use of as many probes as possible should be exercised
whenever possible, and check runs should be taken so that
the miscellaneous and consistant errors of the thermo- '
couples can be eliminated..
If the two leads for the inside probe
thermocouple
were led in from opposite ends of the test section and
centered so that they did not touch the tube itself, the
ceramic insulating probe could, be eliminated. This would
eliminate any erroneous readings due to the probe
touching the inside of the tube and would also aid in
reducing the time for steady state to be reached after
moving the probe.
 Separation of the 20 gauge thermocouple lead out
wires should be accomplished either by placing the plexi-
glas disks sufficiently beyond the heated region so that
they will not reach melting temperature, or by using a
material whose melting point is much higher than that of
plexiglas and is still suitable for the purpose8 With
this improvement9 higher tube temperatures could be obtained
therefore, included in the experiment should be a means of
calibrating or checking the error due to instability and
inaccuracy of the thermocouple emf output at these higher
temperatures„
The emissivity of the test section was obtained
from a calculation using values recorded from the
experiment It was found to be continually increasing. This
effect is shown by comparing runs 7, 8, and 10 in Table 2.
The emissivity should decrease with a decrease in
temperature once the surface is stable; but as shown in
Table 2, it in creased with a decrease in temperature. It
thus appears that the emissivity of the test section was
Increased with use. This additional experimental
variation could be eliminated either by more reliable
means of eliminating oxidation or by completely oxidizing
the tube so that the emissivity at a given temperature
will be constant.
The value used for the thermocouple emissivity near
the weld should be more reliably known than the one used
in this experiment, or a means of checking it should be
devised. The values used were single values given for both
oxidized Chromel P and Alumel wire. Another improvement
would be to maintain the vacuum pressure below 20 microns.
During the high temperature runs of this experiment, the
vacuum.pressure was greater than 20 microns and the
effects of conduction and natural convection were stronger
than desired. Increasing the vacuum would eliminate these
latter effects and, if taken to a sufficiently low
pressure, might eliminate tube and thermocouple emissivlty
change and inhibit thermocouple aging.
 APPENDIX-
A

Reduced Data

Thermocouple Run Run

#1 Run
OF) #2 #3
(0P) (6F)
362.0
644.0 353.0 372.0
695.0 626.0 640.0
704.5 670.5 680.0
705.0 687.0
707.0 695.0 692.0
705.0 692.0 691.0
694.0 692.0 690.0
679.0
robe
Position
184.0
138.0

2.001
60
 Run #4

>robe Voltage Current Pressure

Position Temp. Adjacent
Thermocouples No.
(°F) Temp. No. Temp. (volts teSEil
(°F)
)
1 81.5
2 83.0 1 9
063 I 167.0 11.0
.95.0 2 176.0 198.0 10.0
3 184.5 3 207.0 220.0 16,0
193.0 4 205.0 210.0 13.0
6 201.0 5 207.0 208.5 14.0
7 203,0 6 207.0 205.0 12.0
8 203.0 7 203=0 193.5 12 = 0
9 185,0 8 196.5 11=0

Run #5

Probe Voltage Current Pressure

Position Temp "Adjacent
Thermocouples” No.
1 M Temp. No. Temp.

■138.5 713.5
335.5 382.5 673.5
699.0 674.0 715.0
729.0 713.0 721.5
730.0 719.0 721.0
730.5 723.0 723 =0
727.5 723.0
662.0 721.0
1
5
.
6
0
1
5
.
5
6
1
5
.
5
4
1
5
=
4
8
9
8
15.50
1
5
.
6
0
1
5
.
5
6
15.6
0
0\
H
 Run
#6

probe” Voltage Current

Position Adjacent Thermocouples Pressure
Ter No. Temp. No. Temp.
n (°F) (°F) (volts) (amps) (4)
1 (°F
1
2 177.0 482.0 2 808.0 2.540 27.30 13.0
405.0 807.0 839.0 2.538 27.28 13.0
I 830.0 836. 2 839.0 2.51 27.12 13.0
848.0 0 838.0 8 26.92 13.0
6 850.0 836. I 840.0 2.502 27.06 13.0
7 848.0 0 7 838.0 2.518 26.92 13.0
8 839.0 840.0 8 825.0 2.508 26.84 13.5
9 775.5 839.9 2.496 26.80 13.5
832. 2.490
0
825.0
Bun
#7

Probe Adjacent "Voltage | Current"

Position Temp. T1 No.
Temp.
(OP) (? (volts -Jamgsj
F) )

1 1 736.0
3 " 2 1085.0 1076
4 1090.0 | 3 IO75.O 1067 3.98 29.60 27.0
5 1079.0 4 11066.0 1067 4.00 29.75 27.0
6 1077.5 5 1066.5 1064 4.01 29.80 27.0
7 10.72.0 6 1059.0 1054 3.99 29.70 27.0
8 1068.0 7 1053.0 1052 4.00 29.75 27.0
11041,0 8 1049.0 4.00 29.70 27.0
9 !
 Run #8

Probe Probe Probe

in #5 in #6 in #7
Position
(°F) Position Position
(°F)
Probe 1054.0 1050.0 1046.0
723.5
Before #1 723.0 714.0
rhermocouple #2 1063.0 1058.0 1051.5
#3 1047.5 1046.0 1040.5
#4 1032.0 1037.0 1033.0
1033.0
1038.0 1037.0
1038.0 1035.0 1030.5
#? 1030.0 1029.0 1025.0
1023.0
Probe #8 1029.0
1053.0 1027.0
1ju
After cuh

Glass TC (°F) 120.0

Voltage (volts) 4.01
Current (amps) 29.8

Pressure (y) 27,0

 Run #9

Probe Probe Probe

in #5 in #6 in #7
Position _ Position Position
,0Z L (°F (°g)
3robe 1274.0 1271.0 1274.5
Before
thermocouple #1 IO38.5 1046.0 1041.0
1258.0
#2 1038.0 1304.0 1304.0
1262 1258.0
=:o 1247.0 1247.0
1244.0
1251.0
#5 1249.5 1246.5 1245.5
#6 1248.0 1245.0 1274.0
#7 1239.5 1236.0 1235.0
I #8 1236.0 1234.0 1233.0
Probe After . JI 1273.0 1271.0

Glass TG (°F) 171.0 .... _ 171.0 . _ .171.0

1
Voltage (volts) 6.26 _ — ..6/21 .- _ -6,71
Current (amps) 47.0 46.8 46.8
 Run
#10

Probe Probe In Probe In

In #5 Position Position
Position #6 #7
(OF) (°F) (°F)
Probe Before 985.5 980.0 980.0
Thermocouple #1: 706.5 705.0 706.0
#2 1003.0 1001.5 • 1003.0
#3 975.0 975.0 979-0
#4 965.5 965.0 967.0
#5 963.5 963.0 965.0
#6 962.0 961.0 962.5
#? 955.5 955.0 956.0
#8 | 953.0 952.0 954.0
Probe After iI 984.0 ..... . . .... ■980.0

Glass TG (°F) 140.0 ■

-
Voltage (volt s) 3.99 .. 3.99 _ 4.00
.
Current (amp s) 29.8 30.0 . 30.0 .. .
Pressure {/j) 24.0 24.0 " 24.0

Os
Ux
 Bun
#11

Probe In Probe In Probe In

Position #5 Position #6 Position #7
fOt?)
— -------1
Probe Before 1482.0 1480.0 1487.0
Thermocouple #1 1266.5 1266.5 1273.0
#2 1468.0 1469.0 1482.0
#3 1454.0 1454.0 1464.0
#4 1445.0 1445.0 1455.0
#5 1449.0 1450.0 1459.0
#6 1446.0 1447.0 1456.0
- #7 1444.5 1446.0 1451.0
#8 1441.0 1444.5 1449.0
Probe After ■ 1482.0 1481.0 1483.0
"— -— — — — — —
Glass TC (°P) . 238.0 .....235-5 ....
7oltage (volts) 8.90 8.91 - 8.91
Current (amps) 65.4 6.1.5 __ _ _ 61.6. ..

pressure {#) 190.0 , 190=0 _ 125-0

CO
H

(above TO
+

+) -1/2

o\
82.0 C
 Run #12

Probe In Probe in Probe in

Position #5 Position #6 Position #7
(O f.)
(°F) (°P)
.

jProbe Before 1732.0 1776.0 1787.5

(Thermocouple #1 1400.5 1405.0 1401.0
#2 1617.0 1611.0 1599.0
#3 1695.5 1687.5 1671.0
1679.5 1678.5 16 7 1 . 0

#5 1731.5 I73I.5 1727.5

#6 1758.5 1757.5 1754.0
#? 1820.0 - 1818.0 1811.0
#8 1847.0 1845.0 I838.5
(Probe After 1731.5 . 1778.0 .. 1223.0

Glass TC {°P5 ......... ......... 281.5 _

Voltage (volts) 1 1 . 0 11.02

O
H
H
H
Current (amps) 81.6 81.8 82.0
Pressure {j u ) 850.0 800.0 800.0

G\
•<?
 Run
#13

Probe in Probe in Probe in

Position Position #6 Position #7
#5 (°F) (°F)
.-.1°£)
IProbe Before 1576.0 1607.5
?hermocouple #1 1550.0 1331.0 1329.5
#2 1329.0 1495.0 1499.5
#3 1492.0 1516.5 1521.5
1515.0 1502.0 1507.0
#5 1500.0 1535.5 1538.0
#6 1538.5 1572.0 1569.5
#7 1583.0 1534.0 1537.0
#8 1538.5 1540.0 1542.0
1550.0
Probe After 152^0. 1574.0 1613.0

Glass TO 260.0 260.0

Voltage 10.02 10.05
(volt
Current
pressure . 290.0 100.0

o\
00
 Run

Probe in Probe in Probe in

Position #5 Position #6 Position #7
(°F) (°F) . L°F) -

Probe Before 1478.0 1497.0 1532.5

thermocouple #1 1285.0 1287.0 1286.0
#2, 1434.0 1436.0 1436.0
#3| 1445.0 1449.0 1449.0
1438.0 1440.5 1440.0
#5 1463.0 1470.0 1471.0
#6 1490.0 1497.0 1497.0
#7 1454.0 1461.0 1461.0
[ • #8 1460.0 1468.0 1468.5
Probe After 1478.0 1502.0
_......_______________________
Glass TC (°F) 286.0 272±i_
Voltage (volts) 9.48 9.42 9.47
Current (amps) 71,4 _ 71.2 71.6
Pressure (/) - _ _ 180.0 180.0

ON
X0
 APPENDIX B

Temperature Distribution through Tube

Performing an energy balance on an energy

generating- differential ring in a conducting medium gives

q 096 dV 4- qr = qr ^ dr

for steady state conditions. The rate equations arei

qr = -k A —
Am heat conducted into the
differential ring, and

Lr + =^ ^+ " dr heat conducted out of

dr qr d T the differential ring,
while the boundary conditions' are

I @ r = ri — - o
dr

II @ r = ri T = T1

The general solutionfor constant thermal conductivity and

uniform energy generation is

T(r) - T, - 6 2 r^2 ln-~~ + rj_2 - r2

The highest wall temperature run was used to in

vestigate the assumption that the temperature drop through
70
through the tube wall was negligible. By applying the
conditions of that run and the known geometry in the
above equation9 the overall difference was found to be
0,075 degrees Fahrenheit,
 APPENDIX
G

Computer Program Based on Selected Experimental Results

This computer program performs the

calculations
for prediction of the thermocouple conduction error
using experimental results and an assumed value of r0 .
The flow diagram is shown as Figure C-l.
The experimental results used as input consist
of the voltage9 current9 and length of the test
section, which are used to calculate the energy
generation rate per unit length, with the assumption of
uniform energy generations and the outside glass
temperature, which is used to calculate the inside
glass temperature, Too • With these two parameters (q^.,
Tqq ), and the out side surface temperature of the test
section (Tw )» it is possible to calculate h0 and
for radiation as the only mode of
heat transfer. The measured temperature
at the outside thermocouple, T(r0), plus the
calculated Tqoand the manufacturer*s listing of
emissivity and thermal conductivity for that
temperature, are used in the calculation (equation 2-
7) of hjc Ax for each thermocouple attachment. The two
are summed to give a total hTq Ag. With A g
evaluated for an,effective
radius equal to a thermocouple diameter, h^q was
72
 73
determined and, finally, the thermocouple conduction error

is calculated from equation (2-5)=

The major output of this program is the predicted

thermocouple conduction error(s) for the given experi

mental run(s )„ Other output information Is shorn on the

flow diagramo

A listing of the program is available from the

Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Department, Univer

sity Of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.

 74

:e ad t

CALCULATE
c w* oo
^
Too » ^0 • eTS TS

CALCULATij (h'pQ A] w*
[)AL#
LT
(EQ 2-7), (h-pc A x )q h , hpQ A s,
hpQ
C

V7, Y , ^Ci'i
CALCULATE X 9, K(q, 1
K1 Y, CORR, 0 f(EQ
2-57

NO
-C]-

YES

STOP
Figure C—1• Flow diagram for program based on experimental
results.
 APPENDIX D

Program Based on Manufacturers- Information

This computer program performs the calculation

used in the prediction of the thermocouple conduction

error from manufacturers6 Information for material

properties» ■The flow diagram is shown as Figure D=l,

In this prediction, radiation is considered as

the only means of heat loss and the surrounding tempera

ture is assumed equalto room temperature„ For various

wall temperatures and effective radii, the thermocouple

conduction error is predicted for the physical con

figuration of the experiment. The properties used in

the calculation of (h^c A x )Gh and (h^c A x )a I are ob

tained from the pertinent literature at the assumed wall

temperature. The inside heat transfer coefficient (h^)

is varied from zero to one hundred Btu/hr ft^ °F for

prediction of thermocouple conduction error for the same

■configuration with heat transfer from the opposite side

of the base surface.

The prime output is the predicted thermocouple

conduction error versus wall temperature with the

selected values of rQ and h% as parameters. Additional

printed information is Indicated on the flow diagram.

75
 A listing of this program is available from the

Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Department* University

of Arizona* Tucson* Arizona.

 77

oo

CALCULATE(hTG AX)AL»
(EQ 2-7), (hTc Ax)gh, (h-jc As)TOTAL s'TOTAL

CALCULATE
h,
CORR, O

YES
hi <

YES

NO

% 2060°R

NO
 STOP

Figure D-l. Flow diagram for program based on manu

facturers* Information.
 -APPENDIX
E

Tabulation of
Pertinent Inoone!
.600 Emissivity
(1?)
Temperature Thermal Conductivity (Polished)
(19)
0.10

70 103
200 109
1 400 121
I 600 133
| 800 145
1000 158
1200 1?2 0 o20
1400 186
1600 200

Thermocouple Material
Temperature
Thermal Conductivity (20) Emissivity (18)
(°F) Alumel Chromel (Oxidized)
P Chromel P & Alumel
212 17.17 11.10 0.87
392 18.39 12.08 0.87
572. 20.22 13.18 0,87
752 22.02 14.28 0.87
932 23.21 15.38 - 0.87
78
 REFERENCES

1. Mullikin, H. F.» 81Gas Temperature Measurement and

the High Velocity Thermocouple," Temperature: Its
Measure- ment and Control in Science andTinSustry^ 19?
I» PP, 77?- BPi-,
2. Foul, Jc C., ’Thermocouple Performance in Gas
Streams,88 Instruments and Control Systems, Vol. 35s
n. 12, Dee. 1962, “pp." 104-106.
3. Moffatt, E, M., ’Methods of Minimizing Errors in the
Measurement of High Temperatures in Gases,”
Instruments, Vol. 22, n. 2, Feb. 19^9» PP. 122-132.
4. Kre Isinger, H . , and Barkley, T. P. , ’Measuring the
Temperature of Gases in Boiler Settings,w U. S. Bureau
of Mines Bulletin 145$ 1918.

5. Moen, W. K., "Surface Temperature Measurement,"

Instru- ments and Control Systems, Vol. 33? n. 1, Jan.
1966, PP. 70-73.
6. White, P. J., "Accuracy of Thermocouples in Radiant
Heat Testing," Experimental Mechanics, Vol. 2, n.
79 July 1962, pp. 264-ao.
7. Schneider, P. J., Conduction Heat Transfer,
Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1933^™”^*”
8. West, W. E., and Westwater, J. W., "Radiation-
Conduction Correction for Temperature Measurement in
Hot Gases," Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol.
45, n. 10, 0ct; i 9 5 3 ~ Po 2152^215^7“ '......

9. Scadron, Marvin D., and Warshowsky, Isidore,

"Experi mental Determination of Time Constants and
Nusselt Numbers for Bare-Wire Thermocouples in
High-Velocity Air Streams and Analytic Approximation
of Conduction and Radiation Errors," NACA TN 2599,
Jan. 1952.
10. Oetken, Edward Richard, "Evaluation of Surface-
Attached Thermocouples During Forced Convection Heat
Transfer," IDO-I6889, AEG Research and Development
Report, Reactor Technology, TID-4500 (20th Ed.), June
1963.

79
 80
IX. Surface Temperature Measurement with Thermoelectric
MaterAaX'S," Armed. Services Technical Information Agency,
.R#prSSo. ASD~TR“6l-3?3s1 AD286098, August 1962.
12. Hilde'hraiid, Francis B. , Advanced Calculus for
Applica tions , Englewood Cliffs 1" Prentlce-hall,
Inc., Jan. 1963 ,:$P:. 142-154.
13. Spafr.pWj E. M.9 and Eckert* E. R. G., "Radiation
Inter- action-.Between Fin and Base Surfaces *" Journal
of Heat Transfer«, Vol. 84* n. 1* Feb, 1962.
14. Reynolds* W. C.* "A Design-Oriented Optimization of
Simple Tapered Radiating Fins *" Journal of Heat
Transfer* Vol. 85* n. 3s August 1963.
15. Beckwith*. T. G. * and Buck* N, Lewis* Mechanical
Measure- ments. Readings Add!son-Wesley Publishing
Company* Inc., T5FT7 p. 408.
16. Swearingen* T. B.* Ph. D. Thesis in Mechanical
Engineer ing* University of Arizona* in preparation.
I?. Hartland* J. B,* Huntington Alloy Division* International
Nickel Company* Incorporated * personal communication*
October 30* l9o3»
18, Lane * L. C,* Hoskins Manufacturing Company* personal
communication* November 7* 1963.
19. Engineering Properties of Inconel Alloy 60.0, Technical
Bulletin T-17, Huntington Alloy Division*
International Nickel Company* Incorporated, 1962,
20. Chrome1 Alumel, Catalog M-61, C-A, Hoskins
Manufacturing Company* September 1962.
21, Boelter, L. M. K.* Romie$ F. E.* Guibert* A, G.* and •
Miller, M. A., "An Investigation of Aircraft Heaters
XXVIII - Equations for Steady-State Temperature Distri
bution Caused by Thermal Sources in Flat Plates Applied
to Calculations of Thermocouple Errors, Heat-Meter
Corrections, and Heat Transfer by Pin-Fin Plates," NACA
TN 1452 * August 1948.
22, Haller, Henry C ,$ and Stockman, Norbert 0., "A Note
on Fin-Tube View Factors*" Journal of Heat Transfer*
Vol. 85* Nov. 1963.
23. Baybas* j. G.* and Sellers, W. H., "Radiation Fin Effec
tiveness*" Journal of Heat Transfer* Vol. 82, Feb, i960.