PROOF COPY 260502RSI

REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS 76, 1 (2005)

A concept to determine the true temperature of opaque materials

using a tricolor pyroreflectometer
D. Hernandez
Procds, Matriaux et Energie Solaire (PROMES), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS),
B.P. 5, 66125 Font-Romeu Cedex, France

(Received 11 June 2004; accepted 3 December 2004)

OF

O
PR

Despite the existence of several possible optical pyrometric methodologies, the determination of the
true temperature has still not received a universal and perfect solution. We present here an analysis
of our theoretical simulations and experimental measurements that have been carried out in order to
validate a three-color method. Our goal is to test a pyroreflectometer (working wavelengths 0.84,
1.3, and 1.55 m) equipped with an optical fiber probe. This apparatus has been developed for in
situ measurements in severe conditions (high temperature, difficult accessibility, controlled
atmosphere, vacuum,) to determine the true temperature of opaque materials. The method is based
on three monochromatic measurements proportional to the emitted radiance; three monochromatic
measurements proportional to normal reflectivities; the hypothesis of the same bidirectional
reflectivity distribution function (BRDF) for the instrumented sample at the three working
wavelengths. Using the six simultaneous measurements, the diffuse factor and the apparent
diffuse factor are introduced to determine the convergence temperature T that is assumed to be
equal to the true temperature T. After theoretical simulation, the method has been experimentally
verified on several materials and an analysis of the causes of errors and their impact on the method
accuracy and the operator modus, is discussed. The quality of the results obtained demonstrates the
utility of the tricolor pyroreflectometer in a situation where fundamental parameters, such as the
temperature and radiative properties, are difficult to measure. 2005 American Institute of Physics.
[DOI: 10.1063/1.1851497]

PY

CO

I. INTRODUCTION

II. THEORETICAL BASES AND SIMULATION

SI

R
02

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

First, we emphasize that in this work we have chosen the

Wien approximation to express the Planck law, and we have
considered that the the radiative parameters have axial symmetry.
These simplifications make the writing and the understanding of the equations easier, without complicating the
demonstration. The extension to Plancks law and ordinary
surfaces are possible.
In monochromatic optical pyrometry, the temperature
measurement principle is based on the spectral radiance of a
blackbody (used for calibration), and its comparison with the
samples spectral radiance.
For an opaque sample and for a normal-incidence observation, at thermal equilibrium, the spectral radiance can be
expressed as follows:

05

0034-6748/2005/76(2)/1/0/$22.50

A. Theoretical bases and fundamental hypothesis

26

Optical pyrometry requires knowledge of the emissivity

of the measured material. Unfortunately, the emissivity is a
complex function of many parameters including temperature,
direction, wavelength and physical state of the surface. Thus
its determination for in situ conditions is so difficult that one
of the practices is to assume a value for the emissivity and
this decreases the accuracy of temperature determinations.
Some methods and instruments have been developed to reduce the errors such as a bichromatic1 or polychromatic
analysis of thermal radiation,2 indirect determination of
emissivity by measurement of the reflectivity3 or absorption,4
analysis of the radiation emitted and reflected using
polarization,5 and the utilization of reflecting modules to increase the apparent emissivity.6
This article presents a new tricolor pyroreflectometer
and an associated method to determine the true temperature.
The basic assumption is made that the variation of the normal normal reflectivity with wavelength is the same as the
variation of the total reflectivity.7 The radiometer is an improvement of a bicolor pyroreflectometer previously
developed.8
In Sec. II, the method and the basic hypotheses are detailed and illustrated with theoretical simulations. In Sec. III,
the setup and experimental validation results are presented
and discussed.

L0T, = 0T,L0T, = 1 0,T,L0T,. 1

Consequently a radiance TR temperature, which is the parameter directly measured by a pyrometer, can be defined as
follows:
L0T, = L0TR,.

The relation between the true temperature and the radiance

temperature of an opaque surface expressed using the Wien
approximation is given by the following equality, the radiance function:

76, 1-1

2005 American Institute of Physics

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

1-2

D. Hernandez

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 76, 1 (2005)

O
PR

FIG. 1. Simulation for a gray surface. 0,0T , v = 0,0T , b = 0,0T , r

= 0 , 2 Tc = 1000, TRr = 920, TRb = 968, TRv = 979.

FIG. 2. Simulation for a surface with reflectivity increasing versus .

0,0T , v = 0 , 18, 0,0T , b = 0 , 2 , 0,0T , r = 0 , 22 Tc = 1023, TRr = 958,
TRb = 968, TRv = 980.

1
1
1

+
ln0T, =
+
ln1 0,T,.
=
T TR C2
TR C2

OF

CO

This equation clearly shows the central dilemma of optical

pyrometry: measurement of the radiance temperature only is
not sufficient to determine the true temperature; this requires
the knowledge of additional thermal radiation parameters.
T is always higher than TR except for a blackbody
where both temperatures are equal:
T TR .

0,0T,fcosd

fcosd.

fcosd,

the relation between the true and radiance temperature becomes

1
1

=
+
ln1 T,0,0T,.
T TR C2

For diffuse surfaces, . For specular surfaces 0 and

the measurement of the normal normal reflectivity is difficult
because 0,0 + (0,0 is expressed in str1). For an oriented surface, in a direction r, depends strongly on 0,r
and can have a value higher than . In all cases, there is an
important physical limit which must be noted:
PROOF COPY 260502RSI

10

Consequently, the thermal radiative properties 0,T , and

0T , can also be determined. At this step of the demonstration it is useful to introduce two other parameters.
First, it is important to add a third radiance temperature
TRv measured for another wavelength v to demonstrate the
uniqueness of the solution:
1
1
v
=
+
ln1 T0,0T,v.
T T Rv C 2

11

SI

To determine the normal hemispherical reflectivity, we must

perform a multidirectional or integrating measurements,
which is difficult to realize for in situ conditions, while the
normal normal reflectivity can be more easily measured.
Defining a diffuse factor as

T, =

1
1
b
=
+
ln1 T0,0T,b.
T TRb C2

R
02

= 0,0T,

05

0,T,cosd

1
1
r
+
ln1 T0,0T,r,
=
T TRr C2

26

In many cases of practical interest in near infrared pyrometry, particularly on a narrow spectral range, the assumption
that is independent of can be considered as valid.7 This
statement constitutes the basic hypothesis of the presented
method. In the case of simultaneous measurements of the
radiance temperature, normal normal reflectivity, and using
the bicolor technique at r and b, the radiance functions
become a solvable system of two equations:

PY

The normal hemispherical reflectivity can be expressed by

the following relations:

0,T, =

T,0,0T, 1.

Second it is convenient to introduce for physical and mathematical analysis the color temperature Tc ordinary used in
bichromatic measurements:
L0T,r L0Tc,r
=
.
L0T,b L0Tc,b

12

The relation between the true temperature and the color temperature expressed using the Wien approximation is given by
the following equalities (color function):

1 T0,0T,r
1 1
= + ln
T Tc
1 T0,0T,b

C2

1
1

r b

13
Tc is related to TRr and TRb:

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

1-3

Tricolor pyroreflectometer

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 76, 1 (2005)

Tc = Tc,R =

O
PR

FIG. 3. Simulation for a surface with reflectivity decreasing versus .

0,0T , v = 0 , 22, 0,0T , b = 0 , 2 , 0,0T , r = 0 , 18 Tc = 978, TRr = 966,
TRb = 968, TRv = 976.

1
1

r b

For r chosen as b we have

a T = Tc if 0,0T,r

= 0,0T,b gray body behavior,

c T Tc if 0,0T,r 0,0T,b.

14

(iii)
15

CO

b T Tc if 0,0T,r 0,0T,b,

16

17

PY

B. Simulation results

1
1

.
rTRr bTRb

OF

To realize the measurements needed by the above hypotheses and for in situ conditions a novel tricolor pyroreflectometer has been developed. It is an improvement of a
previously reported bicolor pyroreflectometer.8

R
02

A. Description

The device, shown in Fig. 4, can be divided in three

units: the measuring probe, the emission module, and the
reception module. It is a flexible system which uses small
integrated components particularly suitable for in situ measurement in the case of a hostile environment (high temperature, controlled atmosphere, difficult access, ).

SI

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

III. THE THREE-COLOR PYROREFLECTOMETER

05

(ii)

In the case of a gray surface (Fig. 1), the color temperature is equal to the true temperature so the three
radiance temperatures converge to Tc = T = T. Because
the color function (13) is constant, only one point of
convergence is possible with increasing radiance
functions (9)(11). Classical optical bichromatic pyrometry is sufficient to determine the true surface
temperature.
In the case of a decreasing value of reflectivity versus
wavelength (Fig. 2), the color temperature is higher
than the true temperature and all calculated temperatures converge toward T such as Tc T = T TR.
Because the color function (13) is decreasing, and radiative functions (9) and (10) increasing, only one solution is possible. Bichromatic pyroreflectometry is
sufficient to determine the true temperature of the surface.

In the case of an increasing value of reflectivity versus

wavelength (Fig. 3), the color temperature is lower
than the true temperature and all temperatures converge to T such as T Tc and T TR. Because the
color (13) and the radiance functions (9) and (10) are
continuously increasing, two calculated solutions can
be obtained with bichromatic measures at r and
b : T = T = 1000 C, = 1 and T = 1100 C, = 2.9.
Thus, it is necessary to use the convergence with the
third radiance function (11) at v to determine the true
temperature T. Three-color pyroreflectometry is necessary to obtain the true temperature of the surface.

26

We have chosen to solve Eqs. (9)(13) with a graphical

method. Once the temperatures and the normal reflectivities
are measured, we calculate the corresponding temperature T
versus in the range 0 , Theoretically, the four curves
have to converge to a temperature T (convergence temperature) and T = T, the true temperature.
To illustrate the convergence method, three different
cases corresponding to Eqs. (15)(17), are simulated and presented in Figs. 13. For Figs. 13, the values given in the
legends are measurements simulated from the temperature
and diffuse factor taken as T = 1000 C and = 1.
(i)

FIG. 4. Pyroreflectometer diagram. (A) Emission device, (B) detection device, (C) probe protection, (E) hostile environment, (P) sample, (Z) measurement area, (OF) optical fibers, (L) lenses, (S) beamsplitter, (M) mirror,
(F) monochromatic filter. (1) Optical fiber coupler to emission (2) separator
for monochromatic detection (3) laser diodes (4) photodiodes (5) laser diode
drivers (6) switch (7) delay generator (8) and (8) analog memories (9)
optical fiber connections (v,b,r) index to distinguish the three wavelengths
(De) emission measurement (Dr) emissionreflection measurement.

(i)

The probe has a small sheath (5 mm in diameter by

60 mm in length) for mechanical and thermal cooling
protection. It is equipped with two silica optical fibers
which have the following characteristics: step index
and multimode, numerical aperture= 0.21, core diameter 400 or 200 m. The two fibers are set in a parallel configuration along the axis of the probe and are
used without a focusing device. One of the fibers is
connected to three pulsed laser diodes in order to illuminate the zone of measurement. The second is con-

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

1-4

D. Hernandez

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 76, 1 (2005)

FIG. 5. Diagram of the solar furnace associated with the pyroreflectometer

(1) Sample (2) Solar concentrator (3) Solar flux modulators (4) Moving
device (5) Reflectivity reference (6) Optical fibers probe (7) Optical fibers
(8) Pyroreflectometer (9) Computer (10) Heliostat.

O
PR

(ii)

OF

nected to photodetectors in the detection module

which quantifies the thermal emission and the reflected radiation versus the laser diode illumination.
The emission module includes the light sources required for reflection measurements. It consists of
three pulsed laser diodes of working wavelength centered at v = 0.84 m, b = 1.3 m, r = 1.55 m. The
three diodes are linked to the emission fiber through
an optical fiber coupler. The pulses are controlled by a
delay generator and the injected fluxes are checked
and stored in analog memories (sample and hold amplifiers).
The detection module uses an optical unit in conjunction with a stage of optoelectronic conversion. The
optical unit, coupled to the receiving fiber has two
major functions: it separates the flux guided by the
fiber (dichromatic beamsplitters) and selects radiation
through monochromatic filters centered at v, b, and
r. The optoelectronic conversion stage simultaneously quantifies the three monochromatic fluxes by
means of InGaAs and Si photodiodes.

The DET , and DE+RT , signals and comparison

with DR0 T0 , measurement on a reflectivity reference (under the same conditions) allow one to determine the normal
normal reflectivity for the working wavelengths v, b, and
r:

0,0T, = DE+RT, DET,/DR0 T0,

0,0
0 T0,.

18

IV. EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION

To validate the method and the apparatus, the pyroreflectometer has been used with a solar thermal source. The tested
materials are opaque and all samples are disks (30 mm diameter and 3 mm thick).

PY

CO

(iii)

FIG. 6. Experimental results obtained with AlN.

26

The set up used to validate the pyroreflectometry method

is presented in Fig. 5. The sample (1) is heated on the front
face with a solar concentrator (2) and instrumented on the
rear face. The incident flux can be modulated with panels (3)
placed between the heliostat (10) and the concentrator (2) to
control the temperature level. The water cooled optical fiber
probe (6) is mounted on a moving mechanism (4) so it can
be located in front of the reflectivity reference (5) or the
sample itself (1). Optical fibers (7) link the probe to a pyroreflectometer (8) outside of the solar radiation area. Measurements of radiance, color temperatures and normal normal reflectivies are recorded and treated with a computer (9)
connected to the pyroreflectometer.

SI

R
02

05

Both the emission and the detection modules are commanded by the same delay generator. Therefore, when the
quantified signals are synchronized with the laser diode
pulses, they correspond to the characteristic measurements of
the reflection from the sample. When they are obtained outside this phase of synchronization, they correspond to the
characteristic measurements of its thermal emission. The signals are selected and then stored in the corresponding analog
memories.

A. Experimental set-up

B. Measurement process
B. Measurement method

The pyrometer combines the function of a pyrometer and

a reflectometer. With this assembly two types of monochromatic signals are quantified: DET , when the laser diode is
off and DE+RT , when the laser diode is on. The first corresponds to the thermal emission of the sample, the second
one to the thermal emission plus the reflected flux from the
laser diode. The DET , signals and the calibration of the
apparatus allow one to determine the radiance and color temperatures as defined by Eqs. (7) and (13) for the working
wavelengths v, b, and r.
PROOF COPY 260502RSI

In the first step, the optical support is positioned in front

of a reflectivity reference of known reflectivity 0,0T0 , at
room temperature and the computer records the three signals
delivered by the pyroreflectometer DR0 T0 , at v, b,
and r.
In the second step, the probe is positioned in front of the
sample heated by the solar concentrator that has reached a
stable temperature T. The computer stores the three monochromatic signals corresponding to the self-emission
DET , and the three signals of emission plus reflection
DE+RT , .

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

1-5

Tricolor pyroreflectometer

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 76, 1 (2005)

FIG. 7. Experimental results obtained with Inconel.

FIG. 9. Experimental results obtained with AlO3 semitransparent sample.

O
PR

OF

In the third step, the signals are analyzed by a computer

to obtain seven parameters: three normal normal reflectivities
0,0T , r, 0,0T , b, 0,0T , v and four temperatures Tc,
TRr, TRb TRv. These three steps are realized on line.
In the fourth step, the results are analyzed to solve the
equations presented in Sec. I to determine the apparent diffuse factor , the convergence temperature T, and associated emissivities 0T , r, 0T , b, 0T , r.
The solution T does not appear as a single convergence
point. This result can be explained by imprecision in the
seven experimental parameters and perhaps, a variation of
versus if the assumption of constant BRDF is not valid.
The given temperature T is the average between the four
temperatures T calculated, from TRr, TRb TRv, Tc, and with
Eqs. (9)(11) and (13). The apparent diffuse factor is
determined minimizing, versus , the sum of the T absolute
differences for the four equations.

PY

CO

optical properties correspond to the case 0,0T , r

0,0T , b and so: T Tc. A bicolor technique is sufficient
to determine the true temperature and the diffuse factor. It is
important to note that in this example * 1 because the
surface is specular. For Er2O3, Fig. 8, the numerical solutions
correspond to increasing curves. Because 0,0T , r = 0.072
and 0,0T , r = 0.216 the difference between color and radiance temperature is large. However, the solution is clear and
all the measurements are in good agreement. In this case,
even though all curves are increasing, three color measurements are not necessary as in the simulation of Fig. 3. More
experimental results have been obtained and they are gathered in Table I. The principal outcome of these results is that
we can conclude that the measurements are in very good
agreement and so validate the convergence method. The following conclusions can be drawn:

SI

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

R
02

FIG. 8. Experimental results obtained with Er2O3.

05

Several samples have been tested to validate our pyroreflectometry method. Figures 69 present typical curves obtained for materials taken as examples: AlN (massive ceramic, surface Rq = 1.26 m), Inconel (massive metal alloy,
surface Rq = 0.28 m), Er2O3 (powder coated by plasma process on the rear face of a metal disk, surface Rq = 4.52 m).
For AlN (Fig. 6) we approach the case of a gray body. The
color temperature can be taken as the true temperature with
respect to the error measurements. The second sample (Fig.
7) is a metallic alloy used in aeronautical applications. The

(1) The curves shown the uniqueness of the solution.

(2) In Table I, the last column gives T, the largest differences between T and the true temperatures
TTR , 0,0T , , T calculated by Eq. (7) for each
of the three working wavelengths. The low values indicate that the results are in agreement together and so, we
consider that the precision of the method is satisfactory
for in situ measurements.
(3) For the diffuse samples, LaCr2O3 and Cr2O3, the measured normal normal reflectivities are very low. The apparent diffusivity factor is equal to zero and the accuracy of the method is not sufficient to determine the
diffusing factor . However, we can consider that reflectivity measurements allow one to verify that the emissivity can be assumed to be near from one. So, the true
temperature is satisfactorily approximated through direct
measurements [Eq. (1)]. The convergence temperature
T given in Table I is an average between the measured
color and radiance temperatures.
(4) The diffusing factor appears to be clearly related to the
surface roughness: increases versus the Rq of the surface.
(5) For all the samples tested a two-color system provided
accurate temperature measurements. So the three-color
method does not appear to be necessary in most cases.
However the use of the third color greatly increases our
confidence in the measurements indicating the unique-

26

C. Experimental results

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

1-6

D. Hernandez

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 76, 1 (2005)

TABLE I. Compilation of experimental results.

Sample

Tc C

TRr C

TRb C

TRv C

0,0T , r

0,0T , b

0,0T , v

Rq
m

T C

T*

LaCr2O3

Plasma
coating
Plasma
coating
Plasma
coating
Plasma
coating
Plasma
coating
Ceramic
Ceramic
Ceramic
Metal
alloy

1026

1049

1047

1045

0.026

0.027

0.031

4.40

1042

1079

1079

1079

1086

0.048

0.047

0.043

4.35

1081

1283

1036

1063

1138

0.273

0.276

0.311

2.33

4.83

1326

30

1202

1155

1161

1145

0.052

0.050

0.091

2.25

4.61

1188

614

1046

971

1014

0.072

0.216

0.205

2.16

4.52

1089

965
953
882
770

802
916
829
737

819
921
834
742

911
938
853
753

0.325
0.262
0.166
0.265

0.329
0.268
0.168
0.239

0.280
0.217
0.174
0.220

2.04
0.77
1.79
0.65

3.01
1.02
1.26
0.28

1003
960
889
758

3
2
2
3

Cr2O
Al2TiO5
FeO
Er2O3
ZrO2
Si3N4
AlN
Inconel

O
PR

Product

V. ANALYSIS OF ERRORS

OF

ness of the solution. It is required for the very special

case presented in Fig. 3.

CO

PY

The errors can be attributed on one hand to the accuracy

of the device and the principle of the convergence method
and on the other hand to the conditions of measurement (in
situ conditions). Both are analyzed here.

uncertainty in assumed constant value, the column

gives, an average T relative uncertainty calculated value
and the corresponding average relative uncertainty in
calculated value. A diffusing surface with high emissivity S.D.E. is of course the best. The accuracy is also
satisfactory for more difficult cases such as a diffusing
surface with low emissivity S.D.R. and a specular surface S.S.. In addition to these brief conclusions, we have
to emphasize that with the pyroreflectometry method the
radiative properties are no longer estimated but measured
on line.
(ii)
Errors due to the in situ conditions: Because the
method has been developed in order to be used in situ,
the measurement may be vitiated due to the variation
of the surrounding conditions. In Table III, we present
a simulation of contaminated results for several example situations.

SI

Table II presents an analysis of the average error for three

kinds of surface S.D.E., S.D.R., S.S. in the measurement
temperature range 500 C, 2000 C. The seventh column
indicates the maximum accuracy than the convergence
method can obtain when is effectively invariant versus
. In the last column, the convergence method is compared to monochromatic measurements. For an absolute

For a correct determination of the reflectivities, the observation distance x between the head of the optical fiber
probe must be the same during the calibration on a reflectivity reference, and along the measurements. For a variation
dx, the measurements of the reflected fluxes DE+RT , have
the identical proportional error and the emitted fluxes
DET , keep the same value. Consequently the normal normal reflectivities are not true and color, radiance and convergence temperatures and emissivities are correct (second line).
The diffusivity factor determined by convergence is not
the true value. It is worth noting that the method accounts for
variation of the reflectivity factors. Thus the emivissivities
0 , T = 1 T0,0 , T are right.

R
02

19

05

T TR,
T
T, + 0,0T,.
=
+
T
TR,
C20T,

26

Errors due to the method: The method is based on

radiance temperature and normal normal reflectivity
measurements. The accuracy of the device (T and
) to determine these parameters affects directly the
global error made during the determination of the true
temperature by convergence. The principle of the convergence method itself, that is the assumption of the
invariance of the diffuse factor, is another source of
error. Equation (14) gives the relationship between
these stated points.

(i)

TABLE II. Analysis of the errors due to the convergence method.

Surface

TR,

T ,

0,0T ,

0,0T ,

T / T for
T , = 0

T , / equivalent to
T , = 0.05

S.D.R.
S.D.E.
S.S.

10
10
10

0.01
0.01
0.01

2.53
2.53
0.6

0.3
0.02
1.2

0.24
0.95
0.28

6%
1.8%
2.4%

10% on T / T 5%
2.3% on T / T 30%
8.5% on T / T 6%

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

1-7

Tricolor pyroreflectometer

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 76, 1 (2005)

TABLE III. Analysis of the errors due to in situ conditions.

Conditions

Tc C

TRr C

TRb C

T Rv C

0,0T , r

0,0T , b

0,0T , v

T C

Ideal
Variation dx = 0.1 mm
for x = 8 mm
Grey/Absorption
r , v , b : 2%
Selective/Absorption
r , v : 2 % -b : 4%
Selective/Absorption
r , v : 4 % -b : 2%
Parasitic/Radiation
r : 0 % -b , v : 20%

1000
1000

889
889

902
902

938
928

0.2
0.195

0.2
0.195

0.2
0.195

2.5
2.56

1000
1000

1000

886

900

936

0.19

0.19

0.19

2.69

1000

977

886

897

936

0.19

0.18

0.19

1.78

954

1024

883

900

934

0.18

0.19

0.18

3.08

1039

1249

889

927

953

0.2

0.2

0.2

1105

O
PR

OF

We obtain the same kind of results when the transmission of the thermal radiation is affected in the same proportion (third line). In this case, the reflectivities, the radiance
temperatures and the diffuse factor are erroneous while the
color temperature, the emissivities and the convergence temperature are true.
When the transmissions of the thermal radiations are selectively affected versus the wavelength, all the parameters
are in error (fourth and fifth line). The convergence method
always delivers erroneous values.
When the effective thermal radiation is hampered by a
parasitic flux, the method is not applicable. In Fig. 9 we
present experimental results obtained on a sample semitransparent to the solar radiation: the convergence temperature
cannot be determined.
In all cases, careful attention have to be implemented
during the application of the convergence method. The nature and the evolution of the surrounding conditions have to
be strongly controlled. Errors can be detected when: Tc
Tc,R (parasitic fluxes, erroneous calibrations, ); there is a
significant variation of the signal DR0 T0 , (evolution of the
transmission on the optical path or/and the optical face of the
fibers).

PY

CO

L0 blackbody radiance
r index when working wavelength is equal to
1.55 m
Rq surface roughness parameter: root mean square
S.D.R. reflective and diffuse sample
S.D.E. emissive and diffuse sample
S.S. specular sample
T samples temperature
TR radiance temperature determined after calibration of the radiometer
Tc color temperature determined after calibration of
the radiometer
Tc,R color temperature determined with radiance
temperatures [Eq. (14)]
T temperature determined with a convergence
method
T0 ambient temperature
T* max. of T* TTR , 0,0T , , T absolute
value for the three working wavelengths
index when working wavelength is equal to
0.84 m
x observation distance between the probe and the
sample (dx variation of x)

0,
d

1

samples emissivity in the normal direction

diffuse factor
apparent diffuse factor
wavelength m
samples bidirectional reflectivity in normal normal directions
samples reflectivity from normal direction to
direction
samples normal hemispherical reflectivity
sindd unit solid angle
solid angle of reflections

SI

PROOF COPY 260502RSI

0,

R
02

NOMENCLATURE
BRDF bidirectional reflectivity distribution function
b index when working wavelength is equal to
1.3 m
C2 second Planck constant
DE+R samples measurement related to thermal emission and reflection phenomena
DE samples measurement related to thermal emission phenomena
DR0 references measurement related to reflection
phenomena at ambient temperature
L0 samples radiance in the normal direction

05

The authors thank M. Rochereau (CEDEPE/87570

Rilhac-Rancon/FRANCE) for his technical participation in
the development of the tricolor pyroreflectometer. Dr. Jean
Murray was instrumental in improving the style of this report.

26

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Greek
0

*

0,0

G. Ruffino, Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser. 26, 264 (1975).

T. B. Coates, Metrologia 17, 103 (1981).
3
J. P. Traverse and J. M. Badie, Ed. (Ampre, Paris, 1976), pp. 914.
4
H. Kunz, Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser. 26, 273 (1975).
5
T. P. Murray, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 38, 791 (1967).
6
C. Ciaurriz and D. Hernandez, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 63, 3623 (1992).
7
J. L. Gardner and T. P. Jones, J. Phys. E 13, 306 (1980).
8
D. Hernandez, A. Beck, and E. Milcent, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 66, 5548
(1995).
2