Sentences with phrase «emissivity set»

Set emissivity set to 1, a BB, then q = Q and p = σT ^ 4.

Even with emissivity set to 0.967, the average Aa / Ed ratio is 0.9953.

IR picture showing painters tape (bright spot at 72.4 F) on the twinwall glazing with emissivity set to 0.95.

Well, on the picture taken with the camera emissivity set to 0.95, the twinwall temp shows 54.4 F and the painters tape 72.4 F.

Again, there is no way to adjust the emissivity setting to get the twinwall temperature up more than about 1F.

Or, if one believed that the tape emissivity was about 0.95, one could read the tape temperature with the camera set at 0.95, then change the emissivity setting until the surrounding twinwall showed the same temperature.

Not exact matches

... For example, the formula given by JBS that T = (e + f - ef) / (e * (2 - e)-RRB--RRB- **.25 * TB can't really be correct since setting the solar input fraction f to zero does not reproduce temperature of the earth TB unless the emissivity e is equal to unity.

Now with absorptivity (the proportion of incident radiation absorbed) set at 0.8, while the emissivity varies.

The emissivity and absorptivity of the ocean are set to 1, there are no ocean currents, the atmosphere doesn't heat up and cool down with the ocean surface, the solar radiation value doesn't change through the year, the top layer was 5 mm not 1μm, the cooler skin layer was not modeled, a number of isothermal layers is unphysical compared with the real ocean of continuously varying temperatures..

If the atmosphere contained no IR - absorbing substances, then all the IR emitted by the earth's surface would escape into space and radiative balance would dictate that the earth's average surface temperature (or really the average of emissivity * T ^ 4 where T is the absolute temperature and the emissivity of most terrestrial materials in the wavelength range of interest is very close to 1) is set by the condition that the earth must radiate as much energy as it absorbs from the sun.

Also the emissivity was set to the same value, but in this example it could be different.

whereF is radiant - energy flux at the emitting surface; εis emissivity, set at 1 for a blackbody that absorbs and emits all irradiance reaching its emitting surface (by Kirchhoff's law of radiative transfer, absorption and emission are equal and simultaneous), 0 for a whitebody that reflects all irradiance, and (0, 1) for a graybody that partly absorbs / emits and partly reflects; and σ ≈ 5.67 x 10 — 8 is the Stefan - Boltzmann constant.

So now let's consider what happens when we set emissivity, ε, to a more realistic surface value = 0.967 (this is the value in the spreadsheet — in the paper it is set to ε = 0.96).

To set the lower bound assume the other 30 % of the earth has an emissivity of 0.0 the total emissivity of te earth would be 0.95 * 0.7 +0.0 * 0.3 = 0.665.

In the case of gases the emissivity limits the radiation to some wavelengths while solid and matter emits IR at all wavelengths within limits set by the temperature.

«One possible (repeat possible) answer to your question about the cotton field example is that the calibration of the instruments have been set to «assume» that CO2 has an emissivity of 1»