Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Passive solar building design wikipedia , lookup
Copper in heat exchangers wikipedia , lookup
Solar air conditioning wikipedia , lookup
Thermoregulation wikipedia , lookup
Heat equation wikipedia , lookup
Hyperthermia wikipedia , lookup
Thermal comfort wikipedia , lookup
R-value (insulation) wikipedia , lookup
Application of POD-RBF technique for retrieving thermal diffusivity of anisotropic material W.P. Adamczyk, Z. Ostrowski, Z. Buliński, A. Ryfa Silesian University of Technology, Institute of Thermal Technology, Gliwice, Poland [email protected] Abstract. The knowledge about thermal diffusivity is essential in wide range of applications. It is often used as the parameters, which describe the quality of the materials or plays crucial parameter in numerical simulations where heat transfer process need to be evaluated. The method presented in this paper was developed based on the classical Parker flash method which is classified as the transient measurement technique. The idea of measurement procedure is to locally heat up a small portion of a sample surface by a laser flash and record the resulting transient temperature field by an IR camera. In contrary to classical flash method in proposed paper the laser and IR camera are located in the same said of the sample. The measurement/inverse procedure presented in this work treats the thermal conductivity components as decisive variables which are retrieved by minimization of the difference between experimental and numerical data. In presented work as the low dimensional model of the considered system based on proper orthogonal decomposition technique (POD) extended by radial base function (RBF) for finding relations between snapshots was used as the direct solver. The numerical simulation results were validated with experiments conducted by the use of commercially available Parker’s flash method. 1. The first section in your paper Robustness, relatively low cost and rapidness made numerical simulations a primary technique of engineering analysis. Numerical models can replace expensive and time consuming experimental methods. The reliability and accuracy of the numerical results depends strongly on the input data. In case of simulation of heat transfer within a solid body, the exact definition of the material properties, for instance heat diffusivity is extremely important. There is a vast and constantly increasing literature on the available experimental techniques of determining TC [5]. Detail information can also be found in position [6]. The most popular techniques are those which fits to the transient one. Extensive study covering the transient techniques can be found in [9,11,10] where advantages and disadvantages of different measurement concepts have been widely discussed. One of the most popular, and widely used 1D transient technique for measuring of the TD is the laser flash method [1,17]. This method has found application in commercial Laser Flash Apparatus (LFA). Other examples of transient method application can be found in [4,12]. The method presented in this work also belongs to the transient laser flash technique and should be seen as continuation of works [2,3,13] which ultimately should lead to development of the procedure capable for rapid measurement of the TC of the body with arbitrary shape and with anisotropic structure. Reference [13] presents the development process of the analytical model capable to retrieve thermal conductivity of the large solid body with anisotropic structure. Presented model allows to calculate thermal conductivity of the cuboid large carbon blocks in couple of minutes based on the in situ collected experimental data. Analytical model assumes that the carbon block due to its large size in contrary to laser emission spot and duration of the experiment (less than 3s) can be treated as semiinfinity space which considerable simplified the model formulation. In [2,3] the simple analytical model was replaced by numerical solver which allows also for taking into account heat losses from observation surface on the retrieved thermal conductivity. The possible application of numerical method combined with inverse technique for retrieving thermal properties of the solid body has been discussed. The major drawback in case of using numerical models is long simulation time which considerable limits it’s practical application. To speed-up the simulation an application of a reduced order technique described in this paper can be applied. In presented work, the Proper Orthogonal Decomposition (POD) method is proposed. This approach uses POD empirical vectors as approximation basis, while dependency of reduced model on input parameters is obtained by means of Radial Basis Functions (RBF). This technique, introduced by co-author of current research [14] is known as truncated POD-RBF approximation [15]. The core of this technique is the expression of the temperature field in a form of a linear combination of space dependent basis vectors (modes), being vectors of truncated POD base. The amplitudes of this approximation are then expressed as linear combination of RBFs, being a function the parameters to be retrieved by the inverse technique. The usage of POD modes as approximation basis makes this approximation optimal, i.e. for given approximation order, POD base produces minimal error. This comes from the fact that the approximation vector basis is not chosen arbitrary, but is derived from approximated data. Thanks to proposed approach, the inverse technique which is used to retrieve the TD can be accelerated by several orders of magnitude. The results presented in this work should be seen as the preliminary study of the POD-RBF technique for retrieving components of the TD tensor. 2. Experimental setup The initial tests were performed using steel cuboid samples. The developed in-house apparatus for collecting experimental data is shown in Fig. 1. As the heat source the IPG Photonics laser is used. It can operate in power range from 20 W to 200 W with adjusted emission time period. Both parameters ensure that the power of the laser pulse can be appropriately adjusted to the expected material properties. The spatial and temporal temperature distribution after laser emission is recorded by the Infrared (IR) camera (FLIR A325, Flir Systems, Inc., USA) working with 60 frames per second frequency. The measurement and data acquisition processes are controlled using an in-house PC application written in LabVIEW environment (National Instruments Corp., USA). To reduce the geometrical distortion of the spot of the laser ray and the image of the temperature field, the optical axis of both devices are orthogonal to the heated spot. To achieve this effect the laser ray impinges the probe in the direction of the local normal surface of the sample, and then the probe is rotated back to the optical axis of the camera. The construction of experimental rig allows also smooth regulation of the leaser head distance from emission surface. Base on that feature the size of the laser spot can be also adjusted for specific condition, for instance to prevent measured material overheating. The measurement procedure was organized as fallow • positioning the sample horizontally to camera lens, • recording initial temperature field, • rotating the sample to bring the local normal to a position parallel to the laser optical axis , • heating the sample by laser pulse, • moving sample back to previous position with sample normal cantered at the camera lens, • recording spatial and temporal distribution of the temperature on the heated surface (see Fig. 2 where selected IR diagrams are shown), • • converting the IR intensity diagrams to temperature one, retrieving the thermal conductivity components by fitting the measured data to calculated temperature field using the generated POD base. Figure 1: Experimental test rig Figure 2: Recorded temperature distribution at the observation surface in three selected times The thermal diffusivities (TD) of the tested materials were measured using the Netzsch Laser Flash Apparatus (LFA) 457 (NETZSCH-Geratebau GmbH). The measurements were conducted within temperature range 30 − 40oC using cylindrical sample with thicknesses 3 mm and diameter of 12.66 mm. The measured thermal diffusivities for samples C16 and C20, were equal to 4.28 ∙ 10*+ m2/s and 6.25 ∙ 10*+ m2/s, respectively. The accuracy of the LFA device is ±3 − 5%. The material thermal conductivity was calculated using the Cowan model (Cowan 1963), where the heat capacities of material was measured using the Netzsch STA 409 PG (NETZSCH-Geratebau GmbH, Germany) device. The STA records mass changes of a sample (Thermogravimetry (TG)) and the heat flow rate between a sample and furnace (Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC)). Based on this information, 𝑐0 𝑇 can be calculated. The temperature measurement range was set between 25oC and 130oC. Measured specific heats for sample C16 and C20 are illustrated in Fig. 3. The density of both samples C16 and C20 were 7668 kg/m3 and 7886 kg/m3, respectively. Figure 3: Measured specific heat 𝑐0 (𝑇) for samples C16 and C20 using STA device 3. Numerical model The computational geometry used for producing set of snapshots for POD model is shown in Fig. 4. To reduce cost of numerical simulations only the one-quarter of the model was used during simulations. The heat transfer within sample and movement of gas above the observation surface were modelled using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) applying the Ansys Fluent solver extended by user defined function implemented into the solution procedure. To run the numerical summation, several parameters need to be defined i.e. specific heat, density, initial temperature, emission time and amount of heat provided to the sample. To give answer which of mentioned parameter has the biggest influence on evaluated data the uncertainty quantification should be carried out, which is the subject of future research. Here to minimize the influence of exact definition of the amount of absorbed energy by the sample on the evaluated TC a tricky definition of the objective function Eqs. (1,2,3) was proposed. Taking the ratio of two temperature fields Θ in two times instance 𝜏 the surface emissivity 𝜖 and amount of absorbed energy 𝑞by the body are simplified. Detailed description of the objective function definition can be found in earlier author [3], where all heat losses from observation plane were neglected by using simple numerical model limited to solid body and treating the observation surface as perfectly insulated. The POD-RBF base was generated using external procedure which controls the snapshots calculation strategy, collects the numerical data and builds the snapshot base. Once the POD base was generated for given material it can be used as the direct solver for retrieving TC of various samples made from the same material. The objective function used in this study was defined as D min Θ<=>,@ − ΘAB<,@ C 1 @EF where 𝑁 stands for the total number of sampling points used by inverse analysis to retrieve TC of the material. The Θ<=> and ΘAB< are defined as Θ<=>,H = 𝑇 𝑥@ , 𝑦@ , 𝜏F , 𝑘MM , 𝑘NN , 𝑘OO , 𝑞, 𝜖 − 𝑇P (𝑥@ , 𝑦@ , 𝜖) 𝑇 𝑥@ , 𝑦@ , 𝜏C , 𝑘MM , 𝑘NN , 𝑘OO , 𝑞, 𝜖 − 𝑇P (𝑥@ , 𝑦@ , 𝜖) 2 ΘAB<,H = 𝑇 𝑥@ , 𝑦@ , 𝑞, 𝜏F , 𝜖 − 𝑇P (𝑥@ , 𝑦@ , 𝜖) 𝑇 𝑥@ , 𝑦@ , 𝑞, 𝜏C , 𝜖 − 𝑇P (𝑥@ , 𝑦@ , 𝜖) 3 where 𝑇P (𝑥@ , 𝑦@ ) is the initial temperature within sampling point 𝑖 located at the observation surface, 𝑘MM , 𝑘NN , 𝑘OO are the thermal conductivity components, 𝑥@ , 𝑦@ stands for the coordinates of sampling point, 𝑞 is the heat flux, 𝜖 defines the surface emissivity. The objective function is minimized using the Levenberg-Marquardt [16] optimization which is implemented within MatLAB. Figure 4: Numerical model 4. POD-RBF The idea is to solve a sequence of direct problems within the body under consideration by changing input data upon which the field depends on. In current research, numerical technique is used to obtain the output fields, further referred to as snapshots. The solutions are sampled at a predefined set of points (e.g. nodes of numerical grid). The snapshots are stored as subsequent columns of snapshots matrix 𝑈. The aim of POD analysis is to construct a small set of orthonormal vectors 𝜙 resembling the original matrix 𝑈 (all snapshots 𝑢) in an optimal way [14.15], i.e. 4 ∅=𝑈∙𝐴 where 𝐴 is matrix of amplitudes of expansion and ∅ stands for truncated POD base. The base ∅ is orthonormal, so the amplitudes matrix can be immediately evaluated as 𝐴 = ∅W ∙ 𝑈 5 The amplitudes 𝐴 are then expressed as a linear combination of RBFs. First, all the input parameters used for generation of snapshot matrix 𝑈 are chosen as the nodes of RBF network, i.e. 6 𝐴 =𝐵∙𝐺 where 𝐵 is matrix storing the unknown coefficients of the combination and 𝐺 stands for known matrix whose entries are defined as 𝐺 Z @ = fH { p − p ^ } 7 with 𝑓@ being the j-th function (thin plate spline RBF function) 𝑓@ 𝑝 = 𝑓@ 𝑝 − 𝑝 @ C = 𝑝 − 𝑝 @ ln |𝑝 − 𝑝 @ | 8 Having in mind that 𝐴 matrix is known (5), the sought for 𝐵 matrix can be evaluated by a solution of linear set (6). The experience of using the POD-RBF method shows that when the number of the RBF’s becomes large, the accuracy of the network sometimes decays (being opposite to expected trend). The investigations show that the reason for this behaviour is the ill-posedness (or nearly illposedeness, in numerical sense) of the 𝐺 matrix. To alleviate this, standard Gaussian solver is replaced by a Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) [8] procedure used to solve the set of equations defined in eq. (6). Using this approach, the resulting matrix of coefficient is expressed as 𝐵 W = 𝑅 ∙ 𝑊 *F ∙ 𝐿W ∙ 𝐴 9 where orthogonal 𝑅, 𝐿 and diagonal 𝑊 matrices are the result of a SVD of 𝐺 W matrix. By setting to zero small entries of the diagonal matrix 𝑊 (i.e. singular values) the influence of the superfluous nodes of the RBF network is eliminated. After the coefficient matrix 𝐵 is evaluated, a low dimensional model of the temperature field can be set as 𝑢(𝑝) = 𝜙 ∙ 𝐵 ∙ 𝑓(𝑝) 10 where 𝑢(𝑝)stands for temperature field (snapshot) for arbitrary parameter vector 𝑝 and 𝑓(𝑝) stands for the vector of above defined 𝑓@ functions (8). This approximation, hereafter referred to as the PODRBF network approximation, is capable of reproducing temperature fields that correspond to an arbitrary set of parameters 𝑝. For transient cases, the parameters vector p contains time, thus the time variable is built into the approximation formula. Hence, both the temporal and spatial variation of the temperature field can be reproduced by formula (10). 5. Sample results To validate proposed calculation algorithm using the POD-RBF technique, the steel isotropic samples were used. To ensure stable and accurate solution appropriate times τF , τC have to be selected as the input for objective function definition Eq. (1). Other important issue is to select pixels where the objective function can be calculated. The possible answer for both formulated questions can be obtained by using an analytic model developed in work [13]. This model quickly calculates the TCs for different times ratios and defines the position of pixels based on the isotherm shapes and sensitivity, saying in which time ratio the TC values do not significantly changes. Figure 5 illustrates changes of TCs calculated for different time ratios using analytical model. It can be seen that for late times between 0.6s and 0.85s the calculated TC assume almost uniform value. The same tendency is expected when the generated POD-RBF base is used as the direct solver. Moreover, Fig. 6 shows the plot of the sensitivity functions evaluated for several combinations of time ratios. The region where the sensitivity function attains large values is the external circular ring located at a certain distance from the heated area (cf. Fig. 6). Thus, it is natural to use locations within this ring in the definition of the objective function (1). Figure 5: Calculated thermal conductivity for different time ratios 𝜏F /𝜏C Pixelsusedforobjective functiondefinition Rangewheretemperature excessisverysmall Figure 6: Calculates sensitivity function for several time ratios Created POD-RBF bases consist temperature fields (snapshots) generated in thermal conductivity ranges 10 − 20 W/mK, 20 − 30 W/(mK) for the C16 and C20 samples, respectively. Defined TC ranges were divided into 20 subregions. First set of calculations was performed for sample C16 using for several combinations of time ratios. Calculated data is listed in Table 1. 𝜏F /𝜏C 𝜏F /𝜏C 𝜏F /𝜏C 𝜏F /𝜏C 𝜏F /𝜏C : 0.683/0.700 : 0.683/0.716 : 0.683/0.733 : 0.683/0.750 : 0.683/0.766 𝑘NN , 𝑘MM , 𝑘OO , 𝑘ijk , W/(mK) W/(mK) W/(mK) W/(mK) 15.99 15.99 15.99 15.99 15.78 15.64 15.46 15.62 15.46 15.46 16.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 15.46 15.39 15.03 15.88 15.43 Table 1: Calculated TC for sample C16 𝑎, m2/s 4.10E-06 4.00E-06 3.96E-06 3.96E-06 3.96E-06 PODRBF/LFA, % 4.2 6.4 7.4 7.4 7.5 For sample C20 different strategy was used. The simulations were run using measurement data collected during three experiments. The set of retrieved TCs for different time ratios (𝜏F /𝜏C ) is illustrated in Fig. 7. It can be seen that for tests 1 and 3 in time range 0.675 − 0.775s the solutions fluctuate around some average value, while for test 2 such tendency was not observed. Using the retrieved TCs from specified time range, the average TCs can be calculated. For tests 1 and 2 the average TCs were equal to 27.0 (4.41%) and 27.1 (4.53%), respectively. Is worth to mention here that these calculations were run for case without analysing the optimal position of pixels. It can be seen that in such case it was very difficult to find stable solution. To overcome this problem, always the solution of analytical model, together with sensitivity function study need to be used to determine optimal pixels position and time ratios. Figure 7: Calculated thermal conductivity for different time ratios using the POD-RBF base as the direct solver for C20 sample 6. Summary A non-destructive technique for measuring TC was presented in this work. The TC component was calculated applying combination of experimental work, numerical modelling and advance inverse technique based on the POD-RBF low order approximation. The numerical model used for generation POD base was built using Ansys code, where the calculation algorithm was fully controlled by external procedure. The developed measurement procedure accommodates the finite dimension of laser spot diameter, heat loses due to the convection and radiation and emission time. Furthermore, main advantage of the developed measurement procedure is its possibility of future application for fast evaluation of the TC of the material within isotropic and orthotropic structure without necessity of specified sample preparation. Presented results should be seen as the preliminary one where the calculation procedure still need to be improved to ensure more reliable and stable solution. Nevertheless, presented method and its application has high application potential and should be deeply studied and developed. It is also planned to run the uncertainty and quantification analysis using the Latin Hypercube sampling technique to determine influence of input date on accuracy of the numerical model. Moreover, the simulation for material with real anisotropic structure need to be run. Acknowledgments The research has been supported by National Science Centre within SONATA scheme under contract Nr. 2014/15/D/ST8/02620. References [1] ASTM 1461 – 13, Standard Test Method for Thermal Diffusivity by the Flash Method, 2013 [2] W.P. Adamczyk, R.A. Bialecki, T. Kruczek, Retrieving thermal conductivity of isotropic and orthotropic materials, Applied Mathematical Modelling 40(4):1-12, 2015 [3] W.P. Adamczyk, R.A. Bialecki, T. Kruczek, Measuring thermal conductivity tensor of orthotropic solid bodies, Measurement, 101:93-102, 2017 [4] N. Bianco and O. Manca. Theoretical comparison of two-dimensional transient analysis between back and front laser treatment of thin multilayer films. International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 43:611–621, 2004 [5] F. Cernuschi, P.G. Bison, A. Figari, S. Marinetti, and E. Grinzato. Thermal diffusivity measurements by photothermal and thermographic techniques. International Journal of Thermophysics, 25(2):439–457, 2004 [6] A. Cezairliyan, K.D. Maglic, and V.E. Peletsky. Compendium of Thermo- physical Property [1] Measurement Methods. Volume 2: Recommended mea- surement Techniques and Practices. New York, 1992 [7] R.D. Cowan. Pulse method of measuring thermal diffusivity at high temperatures. Journal of Applied Physics, 34:926–927, 1963. [8] G.H. Golub and C.F. Van Loan, Matrix computations, 1989 [9] S.E. Gustafsson, E. Karawacki, and M.N. Khan. Transient hot-strip method for simultaneous measuring thermal conductivity, thermal diffusivity of solids, liquids. Journal of Applied Physics, 12:1411–1421, 1979 [10] Germany NETZSCH-Gerätebau GmbH. www.netzsch-thermal-analysis.com [11] U. Hammerschmidt and W. Sabuga. Transient hot strip (ths) method: Uncertainty assessment. International Journal of Thermophysics, 21:217– 248, 2000 [12] N.D. Milosevic, M. Raynaud, and K.D. Maglic. Simultaneous estimation of the thermal diffusivity and thermal contact resistance of thin solid films and coatings using the two-dimensional flash method. International Journal of Thermophysics, 24:799–819, 2003 [13] T. Kruczek, W.P. Adamczyk, and R.A. Bialecki. In situ measurement of thermal diffusivity in anisotropic media. International Journal of Thermophysics, 34(3):467–485, 2013 [14] Z. Ostrowski, R.A. Bialecki, and A.J. Kassab. Estimation of constant thermal conductivity by use of Proper Orthogonal Decomposition. Computa- tional Mechanics, 37(1):52–59, 2005 [15] Z. Ostrowski, R.A. Bialecki, and A.J. Kassab. Solving inverse heat conduction problems using trained POD-RBF network inverse method. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 16(1):39– 54, 2008 [16] W. Press, S. Teukolsky, W. Vetterling, B. Flannery, Numerical Recipes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007 [17] J.W. Parker, R.J. Jenkins, C.P. Butler, and G.L. Abbott. Flash method of determining thermal diffusivity, heat capacity and thermal conductivity. Journal of Applied Physics, 32(9):1679–1684, 1961 [18] L. Vozar, W. Hohenauer, Flash method of measuring the thermal diffusivity. High TemperaturesHigh Pressures, 35/36: 253-264, 2003/2004 [19] H. Watanabe. Further examination of the transient hot-wire method for the simultaneous measurement of thermal conductivity, thermal diffusivity. Metrologia, 39:65–81, 2002