INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING Metrologia 41 (2004) 314318

METROLOGIA PII: S0026-1394(04)81454-3

High-heat-ux sensor calibration using calorimetry

J Ballestr n1 , C A Estrada2 , M Rodr guez-Alonso1 , 2 3 C P erez-R abago , L W Langley and A Barnes3
1 2 3

CIEMATPlataforma Solar de Almer a, Aptdo. 22, E-04200 Tabernas, Almer a, Spain UNAM Privada Xochicalco s/n, Col. Centro. AP 34, 62580 Temixco, Morelos, Mexico Vatell Corporation, PO Box 66, Christiansburg, VA 24073, USA

Received 19 April 2004 Published 30 June 2004 Online at stacks.iop.org/Met/41/314

doi:10.1088/0026-1394/41/4/013

Abstract This paper demonstrates a calorimetric procedure for calibrating high-heat-ux sensors. The results are in agreement with calibrations obtained using black-body radiation. However, the proposed method has the potential of being more accurate than traditional approaches. This new procedure calibrates sensors to measure correctly under conditions of concentrated solar radiation. At present, the thermal balance calibration technique in the laboratory is limited to solar irradiances of approximately 100 kW m2 . The next step is to demonstrate this methodology to higher irradiances under non-laboratory conditions in the CIEMAT solar furnace at Plataforma Solar de Almer a.

1. Introduction
Measurement of high solar irradiance on large areas is required in a growing variety of research elds and technical applications, such as photovoltaic and solar thermal energy. Different methods may be used for such measurement, but all of them are based on one or several sensors [1]. The most common gauge used for this purpose is the circular foil or Gardon-type gauge [2]. Its small size and short response time (<1 s) make it a versatile device that may be used for many applications involving the concentration of solar radiation without interfering with test procedures. Other advantages of this instrument are (1) its suitability for measurement of irradiance values up to 50 MW m2 ; (2) mechanical robustness; and (3) a signal that can be recorded, which makes the calibration of the sensor possible. At present, there is no international standard providing traceable heat-ux measurements for calibrating heat-ux sensors such as the two popular types of gauge, Gardon and SchmidtBoelter [3]. Therefore, several manufacturers and laboratories have made an effort to do so during recent years, using a pyrometric temperature measurement traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to determine the heat ux, but the calibrations of the same sensors may vary by as much as 8% [3, 4]. This paper presents a
0026-1394/04/040314+05$30.00

calibration procedure for these sensors that is based on thermal balance.

2. Gardon sensor and black-body calibration method

At the present time, there are only a few commercial suppliers of the Gardon-type gauge [5]. The transducer is a differential thermocouple that measures the temperature difference between the centre and the circumference of a thin circular foil disc, the diameter and thickness of which vary with the irradiance range. The disc is bonded to a circular opening in a 2.54 cm long cylindrical heat sink with a 0.79 cm to 2.54 cm front-face diameter. The standard foil is made of constantan, and the heat sink is copper. These materials produce an EMF output that is directly proportional to the heat ux absorbed. The usual signal is 0 mV to 10 mV, regardless of the heatux range, which means a constantancopper temperature difference of up to 214 C. The exposed face of the sensors is sprayed with a high-absorptance black coating to achieve good absorption to generate a signicant signal. Zynolyte [6] is the preferred coating because it creates a rough surface that improves the heat absorption; however, when the heat ux is over 3500 kW m2 , colloidal graphite is a better option
Printed in the UK

2004 BIPM and IOP Publishing Ltd

314

High-heat-ux sensor calibration

because the centre of the foil gets so hot that the Zynolyte would burn off. These water-cooled circular foil heat-ux sensors are designed for applications with longer measurement times. The main heat-ux measurement applications of these sensors were originally in plasma diagnostics and combustion research. These applications have to deal with dissimilar spectral radiances, and therefore compatibility with solar radiation is not given as the spectral absorptance of these two coatings is not constant over the whole electromagnetic spectral range. In 2000, the Vatell Corporation began calibrating its gauges following its own calibration procedure instead of the NIST standard, which led to changes in their calibration [3, 4]. The Vatell procedure for calibrating these sensors is based on a dual-cavity black body, which is basically an electrically heated double-ended cylindrical graphite tube with a centre partition that allows its internal temperature to be measured using a NIST-traceable pyrometer while the reference transducer is being calibrated. When the selected temperature of 850 C has stabilized, the transducer is quickly inserted into the cavity opposite the pyrometer until its sensing surface is very close to the central partition, and the output is continuously recorded. After a brief peak that represents a small contribution from the convective heat ux from its quick passage through the cavity, the heat-ux signal levels off, and it is at this point that the measurement is made. The heat ux then begins to decrease because the cavity is cooling down in the presence of the cooled transducer, and the transducer is withdrawn. The StefanBoltzmann law supplies the resulting irradiance value of about 90 kW m2 on the front face of the sensor, assuming hemispherical irradiation. The calibration of the reference calorimeter is transferred to the commercial sensors by comparison in a calibration furnace that uses a graphite plate that radiates homogenously and symmetrically when an electrical current passes through it. The calibration constant obtained using this method translates the voltage to the irradiance on the front face of the sensor. The manufacturer states that the accuracy of gauges calibrated this way is within 3% with a repeatability of 1% [6]. It is important not to mix coating types during calibration due to the differences in their spectral absorptance. Several standard sensors are placed in the 850 C black-body furnace, each with a specic coating. In this manner, every sensor can be calibrated against a standard that has the same coating and systematic errors due to the use of dissimilar coatings can be avoided. At 850 C, the spectral radiance of a black body is signicantly different from the solar spectral distribution, the maximum of which, according to Wiens law of displacement, is 2580 nm. A systematic error arises due to the difference in power absorbed by the coatings under these two dissimilar electromagnetic spectral distributions [6, 7]. If the sensor coating is Zynolyte , the sensor overestimates the solar irradiance by 3.6% and the calibration constant supplied by the manufacturer must be multiplied by a dimensionless factor of 0.965 [6]. However, if the coating is colloidal graphite, the overestimation of solar irradiance is 27.9% and the constant must be multiplied by a factor of 0.782 [6]. It should also be kept in mind that these heat-ux sensors are calibrated according to their hemispherical absorptance.
Metrologia, 41 (2004) 314318

Any alteration in this would mean a smaller solid angle of vision and possible consequent change in absorptance, which would have to be considered for every specic application of the gauges [5, 7]. However, this discussion lies outside the scope of this paper.

3. Thermal balance calibration method

A 2.54 cm front-face Gardon sensor from Vatell was used for this experiment. The gauge range is about 1200 kW m2 , the coating is Zynolyte and the calibration constant obtained by the method described earlier is 113.16 kW m2 mV1 . The calibration constant corrected for solar use is (109 3) kW m2 mV1 [6]. Approximately 95% of the front face of the Gardon sensor is copper (gure 1). The excellent thermal conductivity of this metal allows the use of this sensor as a calorimeter because its thermal time constant is about 1 s. The principle of calorimeters is based on the measurement of the power input to a cooling medium following equation (1): =V Q
Tout

(T )cp (T ) dT ,
Tin

(1)

, and cp are the volume ow, the density and the where V specic heat of the cooling medium, respectively. Tin and Tout are the inlet and outlet temperatures of the coolant. When the temperature difference is only a few degrees Celsius, the following equation can be employed with a negligible error: =V (Tav )cp (Tav ) T , Q (2)

where T is the temperature increment in the coolant and Tav the average temperature between Tin and Tout . The heat ux absorbed per unit area on the front face of the sensor is Q Ins Q q= , (3) A Ins the power where A is the front area of the calorimeter and Q from the insulation to the calorimeter. Assuming this absorbed power to be solar, it is possible to obtain the hypothetical solar irradiance on the front face of the sensor using E= q , (4)

where is the solar hemispherical absorptance of the coating. Eight samples of mirror and three metal plates painted with Zynolyte [6] were analysed in detail to obtain the absorptance of this coating under concentrated solar radiation using =
2500 300 Gb d , 2500 300 Gb d

(5)

where is the wavelength, 300 nm to 2500 nm is approximately the solar spectral band; Gb is the direct solar spectral irradiance; is the spectral specular reectance of the mirror; and is the spectral hemispherical absorptance of Zynolyte . The value of the solar hemispherical absorptance of Zynolyte estimated using equation (5) is 95.39%, with a standard deviation of 0.03% [6]. 315

J Ballestr n et al

Figure 1. Gardon sensor and calibration set-up.

3.1. Experimental set-up and measurement equipment The sensor is placed in a stainless steel housing. This enclosure is lled with low-conductivity insulation, and all the surfaces of the gauge are insulated except that the entire front face is left exposed to the radiation (gure 1). A thermocouple measures the temperature of the insulation, and a differential thermocouple measures the temperature increment between inlet and outlet water. Two PT-100 sensors also measure both temperatures independently. The differential thermocouple and the two PT-100 sensors are calibrated using methods specic to each. An uncertainty of less than 2% in the measurement of the temperature difference is obtained after inclusion of the data acquisition system (DAS) error. The higher the temperature increment, the lower its uncertainty. An offset adjustment is performed before starting measurements to eliminate possible thermal input from water friction [8]. An electromagnetic ow meter, expressly selected for this experiment, measures the ow volume with an uncertainty of 0.25% in the range 0.2 litre min1 to 4 litre min1 , rising to 0.75% after the DAS error has been included. The uncertainty in measurement of the heat-ux density absorbed can be calculated using equations (2) and (3) and is given in gure 2. The higher the ow volume, the lower the uncertainty. A 16-bit resolution DAS card connected to a PC receives the signal. A DASYLab program handles the data transfer, visualization, online calculations and storage. A calibration furnace similar to the one used by Vatell was used at the Plataforma Solar de Almer a (CIEMAT). In this heating system, a graphite plate (77 mm 36 mm 3.4 mm) radiates when an electrical current passes through it. The current passing through the plate is gradually increased. An optical pyrometer (pyrometer 1) ensures the temperature stability of the plate. The absolute temperature of the plate is not needed, and a relative value is sufcient for this purpose. When the temperature has stabilized, a period of 316

approximately 3 s is necessary to bring the sensor to no more than 36 mm from the plate (gure 3) to minimize convection from the radiation source. The sensor is kept at this distance for up to 6 s (gure 3), which is long enough to obtain the stationary value of the absorbed power and the equivalent solar irradiance on the front face of the sensor using equations (2)(4), and the sensor is withdrawn to a non-radiated position. After this, the insulation temperature starts to rise non-homogenously, impeding the estimation of its contribution to the thermal balance. The sensor remains in the non-radiated position for approximately 60 s while the temperature of the insulation returns to its original value. This cycle is repeated at different plate temperatures, and the voltage generated by the transducer is recorded. Operating in this manner, the radiant power density in this experimental set-up is limited to a maximum of 100 kW m2 . 3.2. Heat ux conduction from the insulation to the calorimeter The heat-ux transfer between the insulation and the calorimeter is calculated assuming heat conduction between two concentric cylinders in a stationary state. The inner and outer radii are the radius of the calorimeter and the distance from the insulation thermocouple to the centre of the gauge, respectively. The average cooling water temperature, obtained from the inlet temperature, TI , and the outlet temperature, TO , is considered to be the sensitive measure of the insulation contact temperature. The thermal emission loss of the outer enclosure is neglected. With an insulation thickness of 7.3 mm, the heat transfer coefcient of the insulation 0.1 W m1 K1 and the insulation temperature TIns , the estimation of this reduced power is considered continuously in the thermal balance obtained by equations (2)(4) following the equation Ins = 3.51 102 TIns TI + TO Q 2 . (6)

Metrologia, 41 (2004) 314318

High-heat-ux sensor calibration

Figure 2. Calculated measurement uncertainty of the absorbed heat-ux density using the Gardon sensor at different cooling water ows.

Figure 3. Solar irradiance estimated using the thermal balance when the Gardon sensor has approached the radiant plate.

Figure 4. Calibration of a Gardon sensor using the thermal balance method.

During all the tests, the average cooling water temperature (<20 C) is lower than the temperature of the insulation (<30 C). 3.3. Calibration constant, linearity, uncertainty and repeatability The cycle described earlier (gure 3) is repeated at different plate temperatures, obtaining 7 to 11 irradiance values on the front face of the Gardon sensor and the corresponding voltage supplied by the transducer. With this information, a linear t of the data is made (gure 4) as the sensor calibration. This hypothesis is conrmed by the correlation coefcient, R (table 1).
Metrologia, 41 (2004) 314318

This procedure has been systematically repeated at different water ow rates (table 1) with less than 1% uncertainty for a calibration constant (gure 4) and repeatability of 0.7%. This repeatability in different cooling conditions conrms the reduced contribution of convective and thermal effects on the front face of the sensor to the thermal balance. A signicant loss of heat to the environment (convection, thermal) would signicantly modify the constant calibration under different cooling conditions. The thermal balance calibration constants fall within the margin of error for the calibration constant supplied by Vatell after correction for solar use, (109 3) kW m2 mV1 . 317

J Ballestr n et al

Table 1. Calibration of a Gardon sensor using the thermal balance method. Convective and thermal effects are not considered. Water ow/ litre min1 0.5 1 1 1 1 1.6 Inlet temperature/ C 15.5 12.5 14.5 14 13 15 B/ kW m2 mV1 110.1 109.9 111.9 111 110 110.5 B/ kW m2 mV1 0.9 0.5 0.3 1 1 0.7

100 Uncertainty 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.9 0.9 0.6

R2 0.9954 0.9985 0.9995 0.9902 0.9932 0.9980

100 Repeatability

0.7

Table 2. Empirical estimates of the convective and thermal losses on the front face of the Gardon sensor. The water ow is 1 litre min1 and the inlet water temperature is 14 C. Test no Measurements and losses Incident heat ux/kW m Sensor temperature/C Gap temperature/C Convective heat-ux loss/kW m2 Thermal heat-ux loss/kW m2 Convective loss 100 Thermal loss 100 Total loss 100
2

4. Conclusions and future plans

An alternative method of calibrating Gardon gauges by thermal balance has been presented. The results are in agreement with the calibration constant obtained using the black-body technique after being corrected for solar use. However, the proposed method has the potential to be more accurate than traditional approaches. At present, the thermal balance calibration technique in the laboratory is limited to approximately 100 kW m2 . The next step is to prove this methodology at higher irradiances under non-laboratory conditions in the CIEMAT solar furnace at Plataforma Solar de Almer a.

1 39 77 61 0.16 0.14 0.4 0.4 0.8

2 39 75 67 0.08 0.07 0.2 0.2 0.4

3 40 90 67 0.23 0.22 0.6 0.5 1.1

4 54 86 56 0.30 0.26 0.6 0.5 1.0

Acknowledgments
3.4. Thermal and convective losses and gains The thermal and convective effects on the front face of the sensor are difcult to analyse experimentally, and during midrange calibrations are usually assumed to be negligible [9]. Any change in cooling conditions, ambient temperature or incident heat ux can modify the contribution of these factors to the thermal balance. As this contribution to the balance may be negative (losses) or positive (gains) during calibration and subsequent use of the gauge, their contributions to the calibration process are difcult to estimate. However, such contributions should be an additional random uncertainty in the calibration. Detailed thermal simulation of the gauge and the context is required to quantify properly the thermal and convective losses/gains on the front face of the sensor. This specic study will be the goal of future work. At the present time, some experimental estimates of the thermal and convective effects have been performed in the laboratory (gure 1). A pyrometer (pyrometer 2) takes measurements of the temperature of the front face of the gauge, while a radiation-protected thermocouple measures the temperature in the gap between the radiant graphite plate and the sensor. With these two temperatures some estimates of the convective and thermal losses have been performed (table 2) with a water ow of 1 litre min1 and an inlet water temperature of 14 C. A heat transfer coefcient of 10 W m2 K1 for the convective contribution [10] and an emittance of 95.39% [6] for the thermal contribution are assumed. The order of magnitude of the convective and thermal contributions to the uncertainty of the constant calibration is about 1% (table 2). This work received nancial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology under the Mepsocon project (Ref. DPI2003-03788).

References
[1] Ballestr n J and Monterreal R 2004 Hybrid heat ux measurement system for solar central receiver evaluation Energy 29 91524 [2] Gardon R 1953 An instrument for the direct measurement of intense thermal radiation Rev. Sci. Instrum. 24 36670 [3] Murthy A V, Tsai B K and Saunders R D 1998 High-heat-ux sensor calibration using black-body radiation Metrologia 35 5014 [4] Murthy A V, Tsai B K and Saunders R D 2000 Radiative calibration of heat ux sensors at NIST: facilities and techniques J. Res. Natl Inst. Stand. Technol. 105 293305 [5] Diller T E 1999 Heat ux The Measurement, Instrumentation and Sensors Handbook ed J G Webster (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press) chapter 34, pp 115 [6] Ballestr n J et al 2003 Systematic error in the measurement of very high solar irradiance Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 80 37581 [7] Ulmer S et al 2004 Calibration corrections of solar tower ux density measurements Energy 29 92533 [8] Groer U and Neumann A 1999 Development and test of a high ux calorimeter at DLR Cologne Proc. 9th International Symp. on Solar Thermal Concentrating Technologies (Les Ulis, France: EDP Sciences) J. Phys. IV 9 6438 [9] Bryant R et al 2003 Radiative heat ux measurement uncertainty Fire Mater. 27 20922 [10] Incropera F P and De Witt D P 1996 Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer 4th edn (USA: Wiley)

318

Metrologia, 41 (2004) 314318