The CKN Knowledge in Practice Centre is in the early stages of content creation and currently focuses on the theme of thermal management.
We appreciate any feedback or content suggestions/requests using the links below

Content requests General feedback Feedback on this page

Heat Transfer Coefficient - A248

From CKN Knowledge in Practice Centre
Foundational Knowledge - A3Heat Transfer Coefficient - A248
Heat Transfer Coefficient
Foundational knowledge article
Material properties-UakV3h9hweWZ.svg
Document Type Article
Document Identifier 248
Themes
Relevant Class

Equipment

Prerequisites


Introduction[edit | edit source]

The heat transfer coefficient (HTC), h is used to characterize the heat flux across an interface. It is defined as the proportionality constant that determines the amount of heat flux across an interface for a given temperature difference across the interface.

Scope[edit | edit source]

This page defines the heat transfer coefficient, explains its significance in composites processing, and provides some typical values. Typical methods for measurement and use in process modelling are also briefly discussed.

Significance[edit | edit source]

The accuracy and usefulness of a process simulation framework depends on the sufficient knowledge of the initial and boundary conditions. In the context of thermal management models, the HTCs are used to characterize convective boundary conditions. These thermal models are useful in designing appropriate cure cycles, tool and part thermal profiling as well as evaluating mitigation strategies for large exotherms in parts during a manufacturing process.

Prerequisites[edit | edit source]

Recommended documents to review before, or in parallel with this document:

Definition[edit | edit source]

The convective heat transfer coefficient \(h\) is the proportionality constant between the heat flux and the temperature difference between a fluid and solid surface. It can be expressed by Newton’s law of cooling [1][2] (the same expression applies for heating):

\(q = h\, \Delta T\) Newton’s law of cooling, where:<br />\(q\) = Heat flux [W/m<sup>2</sup>],<br />\(h\) = Convective heat transfer coefficient (HTC) [W/m<sup>2</sup>·K], and<br />\(\Delta T\) = Temperature difference between fluid and solid surface [K],<br />

Terminology and Symbol Notation[edit | edit source]

Convective heat transfer coefficient vs overall heat transfer coefficient
The convection heat transfer coefficient is used to characterize the heat flow across a fluid-solid interface. The overall heat transfer coefficient is used to represent the effective heat transfer coefficient of a composite system that involves heat exchange between multiple fluid and solid bodies.

In composites process simulation, the overall heat transfer coefficient is used to lump the effects of various consumables (like vacuum bags, breathers etc.) while modelling the heat exchange between tool-part configurations and the surroundings. Henceforth, in the remainder of this article and the other articles in the KPC, the terms "heat transfer coefficient" or "HTC" or \(h\) have been used interchangeably to represent the overall heat transfer coefficient.

Units[edit | edit source]

The general units of the heat transfer coefficient can be represented as

\(h=\frac{Power\, unit}{Area\, unit \cdot Temperature\, unit}\)

The following are common International System of Units (SI) and US Customary Units found in the literature for specific heat capacity:

SI Units US Customary Units
Base units W/m2·K BTU/s.ft2·°F

Typical Values[edit | edit source]

Typical HTC values for different equipment setups#

Stagnant air Outdoors with wind or indoors with airflow Oven Autoclave
2-10 W/m\(^2\)K[3][2] >15 W/m\(^2\)K depending on airflow velocity[2][4] 15-50 W/m\(^2\)K[5][6] 60-200 W/m\(^2\)K[7][8]

#Note: These values depend on the conditions in which they were measured according to the factors described on the Level II. It's possible that values outside these ranges exist under different system conditions.

Factors influencing HTCs[edit | edit source]

HTCs are mainly affected by the following factors:

Fluid flow[edit | edit source]

The velocity and direction of the fluid flow around the interface has a significant effect on the HTC. The higher the velocity of the fluid, the higher would be the HTC. In general, more turbulent flow patterns lead to higher HTCs. The HTC within a system such as an autoclave may vary drastically from location to location (ie. top of tool vs bottom of tool). In composites manufacturing, the shape of the tool and substructure as well as the shape and size of the equipment affect the air flow pattern which ultimately influences the HTCs. Thus, tooling and equipment design are important factors that can determine the HTCs during process cycles. Additionally, the HTCs can be used to quantify the tool-equipment interactions of different tooling and equipment configurations.

To learn more about how the tool design influences the HTCs, refer to the following links: effect of tooling in a thermal management system - substructure and HTC effects.

Pressure and Temperature[edit | edit source]

The fluid pressure and temperature are key parameters affecting the heat transfer coefficient. Their effects are commonly represented by expressing the HTC as a direct function of these variables. In the context of autoclave processes, a simple relationship was observed for turbulent gas flow by Johnston et al. [9].

\(h \varpropto \left ( \frac{P}{T} \right )^{\frac{4}{5}}\) Relationship between pressure, temperature and convective heat transfer coefficient for turbulent flow:<br />\(h\) = Convective heat transfer coefficient (HTC),<br />\(P\) = Pressure, and<br />\(T\) = Temperature

Estimating HTCs[edit | edit source]

HTCs can be estimated by a number of ways that involve different levels of complexities and experimental effort, which are useful at different phases of the design to manufacturing path. The methods to determine the HTCs can be broadly classified into two types:

  • Simulation methods: Simulating the airflow using tools like Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is one of the popular ways to estimate HTCs for a given tool-equipment configuration. These methods are specifically beneficial in the preliminary design stages of initial tooling and equipment design.

Learn more about estimating HTCs by simulating the airflow: How to simulate airflow in a thermal system

  • Experimental methods: Experimental methods used to estimate HTCs involve measuring the temperatures of a tool-part configuration (and in some cases, the local air temperature) using temperature sensors. The temperature data can be analyzed using several methods of different complexities ranging from lumped mass analysis to Bayesian inference.

Learn more about estimating HTCs by experimental methods: How to experimentally determine the HTC

Usage of HTCs[edit | edit source]

HTCs are used as boundary conditions in process simulation models for thermal management practices. In composites manufacturing, autoclave processes rely on convective heat transfer from the pressurized gas to the tool-part configuration. Even in out-of-autoclave processes like room temperature curing, managing the exotherm of resins depends on the surrounding air conditions. For such processes, using HTCs to understand the potential temperature distributions in the part is important to prevent thermal degradation of resins during cure.





References

  1. [Ref] Bejan, Adrian (2013). Convection heat transfer, fourth edition. Wiley. ISBN 9780470900376.CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link) CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 [Ref] Karwa, Rajendra et al. (2020). Heat and Mass Transfer. Springer Singapore. ISBN 9811539871.CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link) CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  3. [Ref] Kumar, Suresh; Mullick, S. C. (2010). "Wind heat transfer coefficient in solar collectors in outdoor conditions". 84 (6). Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.solener.2010.03.003. ISSN 0038-092X. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  4. [Ref] Kumar, Subodh et al. (1997). "Wind induced heat losses from outer cover of solar collectors". 10 (4). doi:10.1016/S0960-1481(96)00031-6. ISSN 0960-1481. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  5. [Ref] Carson, James K. et al. (2006). "Measurements of heat transfer coefficients within convection ovens". 72 (3). doi:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.12.010. ISSN 0260-8774. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  6. [Ref] Balk, O. D. et al. (1999). "Heat transfer coefficients on cakes baked in a tunnel type industrial oven". 64 (4). doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.1999.tb15111.x. ISSN 0022-1147. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  7. [Ref] Slesinger, N. et al. (2009). "Heat transfer coefficient distribution inside an autoclave" (PDF). Cite journal requires |journal= (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  8. [Ref] Slesinger, Nathan Avery (2010). Thermal Modeling Validation Techniques for Thermoset Polymer Matrix Composites (Thesis). doi:10.14288/1.0071063.CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  9. [Ref] Johnston, Andrew et al. (1998). An Investigation of Autoclave Convective Heat Transfer.CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link) CS1 maint: date and year (link)



About-hpWrZW97CxCB.svg
Help-hlkrZW15CxCB.svg
About Help
CKN KPC logo

Welcome

Welcome to the CKN Knowledge in Practice Centre (KPC). The KPC is a resource for learning and applying scientific knowledge to the practice of composites manufacturing. As you navigate around the KPC, refer back to the information on this right-hand pane as a resource for understanding the intricacies of composites processing and why the KPC is laid out in the way that it is. The following video explains the KPC approach:

Understanding Composites Processing

The Knowledge in Practice Centre (KPC) is centered around a structured method of thinking about composite material manufacturing. From the top down, the heirarchy consists of:

The way that the material, shape, tooling & consumables and equipment (abbreviated as MSTE) interact with each other during a process step is critical to the outcome of the manufacturing step, and ultimately critical to the quality of the finished part. The interactions between MSTE during a process step can be numerous and complex, but the Knowledge in Practice Centre aims to make you aware of these interactions, understand how one parameter affects another, and understand how to analyze the problem using a systems based approach. Using this approach, the factory can then be developed with a complete understanding and control of all interactions.

The relationship between material, shape, tooling & consumables and equipment during a process step


Interrelationship of Function, Shape, Material & Process

Design for manufacturing is critical to ensuring the producibility of a part. Trouble arises when it is considered too late or not at all in the design process. Conversely, process design (controlling the interactions between shape, material, tooling & consumables and equipment to achieve a desired outcome) must always consider the shape and material of the part. Ashby has developed and popularized the approach linking design (function) to the choice of material and shape, which influence the process selected and vice versa, as shown below:

The relationship between function, material, shape and process


Within the Knowledge in Practice Centre the same methodology is applied but the process is more fully defined by also explicitly calling out the equipment and tooling & consumables. Note that in common usage, a process which consists of many steps can be arbitrarily defined by just one step, e.g. "spray-up". Though convenient, this can be misleading.

The relationship between function, material, shape and process consisting of Equipment and Tooling and consumables


Workflows

The KPC's Practice and Case Study volumes consist of three types of workflows:

  • Development - Analyzing the interactions between MSTE in the process steps to make decisions on processing parameters and understanding how the process steps and factory cells fit within the factory.
  • Troubleshooting - Guiding you to possible causes of processing issues affecting either cost, rate or quality and directing you to the most appropriate development workflow to improve the process
  • Optimization - An expansion on the development workflows where a larger number of options are considered to achieve the best mixture of cost, rate & quality for your application.