COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL AND INDUSTRIAL

ENGINEERING

MECH344-B01 / Heat Transfer

Semester: Spring 2023

Lab Report # 2

Heat Convection

Student Information
Name: Mazen Almahjari 201709335
Amine Mchanna 201808514
Mohammed 201908376

Date

4/10/2023

Coordinator Information

Eng. Ben Pratheesh

Page 1 of 8
Introduction:
The experiment would be done to show how power input and the surface
temperature differential during free convection over a vertical plate are related.
The measured data will be used to determine the heat transfer coefficient.

Objectives:
To demonstrate the relation between power input and surface temperature
difference in free convection over a vertical plate. To calculate the heat transfer
coefficient from the measured values.
Theory:
Natural convection heat transfer on a surface depends on the geometry of the surface as well
as its orientation. It also depends on the variation of temperature on the surface and the
thermophysical properties of the fluid involved. A heated surface dissipates heat primarily
through a process called convection. Heat is also dissipated by conduction and radiation;
however, these effects are not considered in this experiment. Air in contact with the hot
surface is heated by the surface and rises due to reduction in density. The heated air is
replaced by cooled air which is in turn heated by the surface and rises. This process is called
free convection. Due to conduction of the fluid, the temperature of the fluid drops the further
away it is from the surface. The following illustration shows a vertical plate that transfers heat
to the surrounding fluid. The temperature is shown by the color gradient A layer is formed in
which the heat penetrates the fluid. This is called the temperature boundary layer. There is also
an additional velocity boundary layer caused by buoyancy forces. The buoyancy forces only
affect the heated fluid layers. Due to the no slip condition, the hottest fluid layer on the surface
is stationary. In the adjacent fluid layers, the velocity increases up to a maximum and then
decreases. The viscosity of the fluid influences the thickness of the velocity boundary layer. It
ranges up to the undisturbed fluid. Only fluid layers that rise due to heating can transport the
heat. Temperature and velocity boundary layers have a significant influence. The hotter the
temperature of the surface, the greater the convective currents and more heat (power) will be
dissipated. If more power is supplied to a surface, the temperature of the surface must rise to
dissipate this power. After enough time has passed, an equilibrium is established where the
values no longer change. The heat transfer coefficient can be determined from the equation:
𝑄̇
𝛼=
𝐴(𝑇4 − 𝑇1 )

Page 2 of 8
Experimental Setup:

Fundamental heat transfer experiments may be performed with the WL 440

instrument. It provides a whole apparatus for examining the thermal conductivity
of metal samples. In order to measure the data from the data gathering system, a
PC is connected to the device. Using the included measurement data acquisition
program, measurements may be represented visually and attributes can be
recorded.
The interface between the set up and the PC is a microprocessor. It receives
every measurement signal from the experimental setup and computes the
measured variables using those signals. These are transmitted over the USB port
to the PC and seen there. The simultaneous display of measured values on the
PC is made possible by a continual modification of the data flow. All modifying
variables are reset to zero if the USB connection between the PC and the device
is broken.
The electricity is managed by software. Using the power supply's internal power
measurement, it controls the USB power supply's altering value.

Experimental Procedure:
1. Start the device and software.
2. If necessary, tare the measurements.
3. Attach the "Plate" heater insert to the device.

Page 3 of 8
 4. In the "Modules" menu, open "Chart recorder".
5. Supply 2 W to the heater insert.
6. Once the measured values in the graph of the chart recorder have stopped
fluctuating, record the measuring point.
7. Increase heating power (4, 6, 8, 10, 12W).
8. Repeat steps 6 and 7.
9. A minimum of 4 measuring points are recommended for a meaningful
illustration.
[Link] the measured values.
[Link] the plate horizontally for the last power setting and collect steady state
data.
[Link] off the heater and turn the power control knob fully anti-clockwise.
[Link] off main power supply after the plate has cooled down to room
temperature.
Results:
Vertical Plate:
Power(W) T1 ( C ) T4 ( C ) Area (m^2) del T ( C ) det T (K) Exp h(w/m^2*k)
12 24.4 84.2 0.01 59.8 332.95 3.604144766
10 24.6 77.8 0.01 53.2 326.35 3.064194883
8 24.6 70.1 0.01 45.5 318.65 2.510591558
6 24.6 60.2 0.01 35.6 308.75 1.943319838

Tf ( C) Tf( K) B K(W/mk) Pr v (m^2/s) g (m/s^2) L (m)

54.3 327.45 0.003054 0.027664 0.721682 1.84014E-05 9.81 0.1
51.2 324.35 0.003083 0.027438 0.722488 1.80976E-05 9.81 0.1
47.35 320.5 0.00312 0.026799 0.724789 1.72456E-05 9.81 0.1
42.4 315.55 0.003169 0.026798 0.724828 1.72504E-05 9.81 0.1

Ra Gr Nu Theo h(w/m^2*k) Q dot Error %

3818294 5290826 23.87132 6.603738176 3.949035 45.42266
3549404 4912751 23.39694 6.419558171 3.415205 52.26782
3393965 4682694 23.11828 6.195513751 2.818959 59.47727
2695799 3719225 21.69855 5.814777247 2.070061 66.57963

Graph 1: Temperature difference Vs Electrical Power

Page 4 of 8
 Delta T ( C ) vs Power (W) y = 4.015x + 12.39
R² = 0.9914
70

60

50
Delta T (Celisus)

40

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Power (Watt)

Graph 2: Experimental Heat Transfer Coefficient Vs Electrical Power

Exp heat transfer coeff (W/m^2.K) vs Power (W)

4

3.5

3
h (W /m^2.k)

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Power (Watt)

Graph 2: Theoretical Heat Transfer Coefficient Vs Electrical Power

Page 5 of 8
 theo heat transfer coeff (W/m^2.K) vs Power (W)
6.7
6.6
6.5
Theo h (W/m^2.k)

6.4
6.3
6.2
6.1
6
5.9
5.8
5.7
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Power (Watt)

Horizontal Plate:

length
of Area Tf v g(
Power( T1 (c T4 plate( (m^2 delt (Celicu Tf( K(W/mk (m^2/ m/s^2
w) ) (c) m) ) aT h(w/m^2*k) s) Kelvin) B ) Pr s) )
24. 0.0 48. 16.597510 322.0 0.0031051 0.0272 1.79E
8 8 73 0.1 1 2 37 48.9 5 08 7 0.723 -05 9.81
24. 81. 0.0 17.543859 326.5 0.0030623 0.0275 0.721 1.83E
10 9 9 0.1 1 57 65 53.4 5 18 9 9 -05 9.81

Page 6 of 8
Sample calculations:
For the vertical plate (1st row):

𝐷𝑒𝑙𝑡𝑎 𝑇 = 𝑇4 − 𝑇1 = 84.2 − 24.4 = 59.8 °𝐶

𝑇4 + 𝑇1 84.2 + 24.4
𝑇𝑓 = = = 54.3 °𝐶
2 2

1 1 1
𝐵= = = = 0.00305
𝑇𝑓 54.3°𝐶 327.45 𝑘

Experimental heat transfer:

𝑄 12 𝑊 𝑊
ℎ= = = 3.60414 ( )
𝐴 ∗ 𝐷𝑒𝑙𝑡𝑎 𝑇 0.01 𝑚2 ∗ (59.8 + 273.15)𝐾 𝑚2 . 𝐾

Using the table A-15 (table of air at 1 atm pressure) and the interpolation
method we get:

𝑊
𝑘 = 0.02766 ( );
𝑚. 𝐾
𝑃𝑟 = 0.72168;
𝑚
𝑣 = 1.84014 ∗ 10−5 ( 2 )
𝑠

Rayleigh number:

𝐷𝑒𝑙𝑡𝑎 𝑇 ∗ 𝐿3 ∗ 𝑔 ∗ 𝐵 ∗ 𝑃𝑟
𝑅𝑎𝐿 =
𝑣2
332.95𝐾 ∗ 0.13 ∗ 9.81 ∗ 0.00305 ∗ 0.72168
= = 3818294
(1.84014 ∗ 10−5 )2

Nusselt number:

Page 7 of 8
 1
2 2
1
0.387∗𝑅𝑎𝐿6 0.387∗3818294 6
𝑁𝑢 = [0.825 + 9 8
] = [0.825 + 9 8
] =23.8713
0.492 16 0.492 16
(1+( ) ))27 (1+( ) ))27
𝑃𝑟 0.72168

Theoretical heat transfer:

𝑁𝑢 ∗ 𝑘 23.8713 ∗ 0.02766 𝑊
ℎ= = = 6.60374 ( 2 )
𝐿 0.1 𝑚 .𝐾

3.60414 − 6.6037
%𝑬𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒓 = ∗ 100 = 45.42%
6.6037

Discussion and conclusion:

The outcomes of this experiment were rational and remarkably close to
expectations. And based on the findings, we were able to confirm that the horizontal
plate had a lower heat transfer coefficient than the vertical plate. Due to the fact
that, in contrast to the vertical plate, which transfers heat smoothly, the horizontal
plate does not. Throughout this experiment, there were a few mistake causes that
will be discussed that contributed to the minor variances. The experimental values
of h were greater than the theoretical values of h, despite the error percentages not
exceeding 45.42% As the predicted h values ranged around 6.6 w/m2 * k, and the
experimental values ranged from around 1 𝑡𝑜 3.60414 w/m2 * k
The mistakes were brought about is because of neglecting the radiation. The air
velocity must be perfectly zero, however in our experiment, it was not exactly zero
m/s. This is another major cause of mistake. The major lesson learned theoretically
and confirmed empirically is that the horizontal plate has a lower heat transfer
coefficient than the vertical plate. This means that the goals of this lab were
achieved. The experiment was conducted correctly because the experiment's errors
did not exceed 0.5498%. Not to mention that the graphs and results were logical and
as one would anticipate from learning the theory.

Page 8 of 8