Re: [ATM] ATM Digest, Vol 50, Issue 21

["Robert Houdart" <robert.houdart@cruxis.be>]

Hi Arjan,

Both sides are indeed assuming an effective temperature of 200 K for the
radiation effect. To simulate the radiation from a warmer background you
could use a very small positive or negative emissivity value.

For the next release I will consider adding an "Advanced Options" panel
that might include the effective background temperatures for radiation.

But I intentionally refrain from adding too much parameters - after all
it's a simplified analysis with rather ill-defined boundary conditions. 

Best regards,
Robert
www.cruxis.com/scope/scope1100.htm


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arjan te Marvelde [mailto:Arjan.te.Marvelde@hetnet.nl]
> Sent: dinsdag 19 februari 2008 13:30
> To: atm@atmlist.net
> Cc: robert.houdart@cruxis.be
> Subject: Re: ATM Digest, Vol 50, Issue 21
> 
> Robert,
> 
> One more thing: If I fill in anything other than 0 for back side
> emissivity, this will influence cooling considerably.I suspect that
> for this side you also took 200K as remote temperature. Realistically
> this should be more like 270-290K range, and hence radiation loss is
> closer to 0, or even negative.
> Normally backside bare glass emissivity will be much higher than the
> 0.04 for the Al coated frontside. Would it be an idea to be able to
> add a parameter to control the effective remote temperature, both
> front and back?
> 
>    Arjan


_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/