Heat and Mass Transfer SI Edition 2nd

Edition Rolle Solutions Manual

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankdeal.com/dow
nload/heat-and-mass-transfer-si-edition-2nd-edition-rolle-solutions-manual/
 Heat and Mass Transfer, SI Edition
Solutions Manual
Second Edition

This solutions manual sets down the answers and solutions for the Discussion Questions, Class
Quiz Questions, and Practice Problems. There will likely be variations of answers to the
discussion questions as well as the class quiz questions. For the practice problems there will
likely be some divergence of solutions, depending on the interpretation of the processes,
material behaviors, and rigor in the mathematics. It is the author’s responsibility to provide
accurate and clear answers. If you find errors please let the author know of them at
<rolle@uwplatt.edu>.

Chapter 7
Discussion Questions

Section 7-1

1. What is radiosity?
Radiosity is the amount of radiation leaving an opaque surface. That is, it is the
emitted radiation from the body plus the reflected radiation from an irradiation.
2. What is meant by thermal resistance at a surface?
Thermal resistance as it applies to radiation heat transfer is an algebraic result
of solving for the net radiation leaving a surface, the net radiation being the
radiosity minus the irradiation from some other surface or surfaces. The thermal
resistance is such that when multiplied by the net radiation leaving a surface is
equivalent to the difference between a black body radiation and the radiosity.
An often used way to use it is to divide it into the difference between a black
body radiator and the surface radiosity to predict the net radiation leaving the
surface
3. What are the units of radiosity?
Radiosity has units of power per unit area, such as Watts per square meter or
Btu per hour-square foot.

Section 7-2

4. Identify some two surface radiation configurations other than those shown in Figure 7-
4.
An object placed inside of a room or container will be a two surface problem.
5. How does a shield affect radiation?

239
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 A shield decreases the radiation between two interacting surfaces and it
increase the thermal radiation resistance.

Section 7-3

6. What is the difference between re-radiating surfaces and black body surfaces?
A reradiating surface is a perfect reflector in that it reflects the spectral
radiation precisely as it was received. A black body radiator absorbs all of the
radiation and then emits spectral radiation at the surface temperature of the
black body. If the spectral character of radiation is needed then the reradiating
surface does not change the irradiation while the black body will conceivably
change the radiation. Also, a black body will have an external heat transfer to or
from it to satisfy steady state, while a reradiating surface and an adiabatic
surface have no heat transfers to or from them.
7. What is meant by an adiabatic surface?
An adiabatic surface is one which does not allow any heat transfer, whether it is
conduction, convection, or radiation.

Section 7-4

8. What does the extinction coefficient describe?

The extinction coefficient is the parameter used to quantify the attenuation or
exponential reduction of radiation through a gas or vapor. It is the exponent of
the exponential function and is usually modelled as dependent on the partial
pressures of the various gas components. Water vapor and carbon dioxide seem
to strongly affect the extinction coefficient and therefore the radiation
attenuation.
9. Why would the pressure of a gas affect the extinction coefficient?
Pressure of a gas affects the density, concentration, or amount of a gas so that a
high pressure of a gas in a mixture increases the magnitude of the extinction
coefficient.
10. What is meant by the mean beam length?
The mean beam length is used as an approximation of the distance through a
gas which radiation must pass and is used when a precise distance or length
cannot be defined.

Section 7-5

11. Does radiation affect the measurement of temperature with a thermocouple?

Radiation can affect the sensing of a gas, vapor or liquid when measured with a
thermocouple. In particular it can affect the sensing of temperature if the
radiation is directed to the thermocouple. If the radiation is from a surface that
is at a higher temperature than the surroundings it will make the thermocouple
reading higher than it should be. If the radiation comes from a surface that is at

240
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 a lower temperature than the surroundings, the thermocouple will sense a
lower value.
12. What does the mean radiant temperature represent?
The mean radiant temperature is the average or mean temperature of the
surrounding surfaces of an observer or sensor. As a first approximation it is an
arithmetic average or mean of the product of the surrounding surface
temperatures divided by 3600 of observation or contact.

Class Quiz Questions

1. What is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant?

The Stefan-Boltzmann constant is the parameter that, when multiplied by the
fourth-power of the absolute temperature of a surface, predicts the total
thermal radiation emitted from the surface for a unit area.
2. A gray opaque body having surface temperature of 600 K and subjected to 1 kW/m2
irradiation has an emissivity of 0.8. What is its radiosity?
The radiosity is the emitted radiation from the surface plus the reflected portion
of the irradiation. In equation form

m ⋅K )
(
J = εσ T 4 + (1 − ε ) E irr = ( 0.8 ) 5.67 x10 −8 W ( 600 K ) + (1 − 0.8 ) (1000W m ) = 6078.7 W m
i
4
2 4 2 2

3. What is the radiosity of a black body at 1000 K?

For a black body the radiosity is the emitted radiation,

( m ⋅K )
(1000 K ) = 56, 700W m
4
J = σ T 4 = 5.67 x10−8 W 2 4 2

4. Two parallel surfaces are separated by 1 m. One of the surfaces has a temperature of
1770C and the other surface is 270C. A heat shield is placed midway between the two
surfaces. Estimate the shield temperature.
One can use an arithmetic average of the temperatures to arrive at a rough
estimate of the shields temperature.

1
Tave = [177 + 27] = 1020 C
2

A better estimate can be made by noting that radiation is affected by the

fourth-power of temperature. Thus

1
 4 1
4
=  (177 + 273) + ( 27 + 273)  
4
Tave = 396 K = 1230 C
   2

241
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 5. Sketch the circuit or network between four opaque body surfaces.

6. A gas in a furnace has an extinction coefficient of 0.01m-1 and a mean beam length of 10
m. What is the transmissivity of radiation through the gas?
The transmissivity is related to the extinction coefficient by

τ r , g = e− Kλ L = e −( 0.01)(10) = 0.9

Practice Problems

Section 7-1

1. A gray opaque surface has an emissivity of 0.8 at 2000C. Determine the radiosity if it is
irradiated at 30 W/m2.

Solution

The radiosity is the total radiation leaving a surface. For a gray opaque surface this is the
sum of the reflected and the emitted radiation. Thus,

242
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
  

=   +  = 0.8 × 5.67 × 10  (473 ) + (1 − 0.8) 30  
 ∙  

= 2276.5


2. For the surface of Example Problem 7-1, where  = 0.6 − 0.0002 and for
temperatures less than 2600 K, if the irradiation is decreased to 200 W/m2, determine
the temperature at which maximum net emitted heat transfer occurs.

Solution

The net maximum emitted heat transfer occurs at %
⁄% = 0. This is

  d 
dJ d
( ) ( ) d
[ ]
i i
= εσ T 4
+ 1 − ε E irr = σ 0.6T 4
− 0.0002T 5
+ 1 − 0.6 + 0.0002T E
dT dT   dT   dT irr

which reduces to, for = 200 /

dJ
= 2.4σ T 3 − 0.001σ T 4 + 0.04 = 0
dT

This equation gives, as a positive real answer for the temperature,  = 2400

Section 7-2

3. A 50 cm diameter exhaust pipe at 700 K has an opaque outer surface and emissivity of
0.9. A galvanized gray sheet iron tube of 15 cm diameter is placed concentrically around
the pipe. If the tube is to have a temperature of no more than 350 K, determine the
maximum heat transfer that can be dissipated per unit length of the pipes.

Solution

Referring to the sketch, denoting surface 1 as the exhaust pipe and surface 2 as the
shield,

the pipe has emissivity of 0.9 and its

area is

243
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 A1 = π ( 0.05m ) L
where L is the pipe length. Also, its temperature is 700 K. For
the shield, the temperature is 350 K, its emissivity may be taken as 0.28 from appendix
Table B-5, and its area is
A2 = π ( 0.15m ) L
.
For a very long pipe, the view factor of the pipe to the shield is 1.0. The heat transfer is
i σ (T14 − T24 ) σ (T14 − T24 )
Q1− 2 = =
1 − ε1 1 1− ε2 1 − ε1 1 1− ε2
+ + + +
ε1 A1 A1 F12 ε 2 A ε1π ( 0.05m ) L π ( 0.05m ) LF12 ε 2π [ 0.15m] L
the heat transfer per unit length is
i σ (T14 − T24 )
qL , 1− 2 =
1 − ε1 1 1− ε2
+ +
ε1π ( 0.05m ) π ( 0.05m ) F12 ε 2π [ 0.15m ]
For an emissivity of 0.28 for the wrought iron,
i
qL , 1− 2 = 1018.0 W
m
For an emissivity of 0.8 for the wrought iron
i
qL , 1− 2 = 1677.5W
m
For an emissivity of 0.15 for the wrought iron
i
qL , 1− 2 = 667.9 W
m

4. An oven has inside walls with emissivity of 0.6. When the oven is at 2000C the door is
opened and the oven is turned off, as shown in the figure. Determine the net radiation
from the oven to the surrounding room. Assume that the room acts as a black body at
200C.

Solution

This is a two surface problem between the oven and the surroundings and the circuit
model is shown.

244
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 The oven temperature is 473 K, its emissivity is 0.6, and its area is 1.25 m2 (0.25 m 2 x 5).
The door can be visualized as surface two and its area is 0.25 m2, its temperature is 293
K, and its view factor to the oven is 1.0. The net heat transfer from the oven to the
surroundings is
i σ (T14 − T24 )
Q net = = 533.77W
1 − ε1 1
+
ε1 A1 A2 F21

5. A solar collector is at 250C and is facing the night sky at -500C. If the collector emissivity
is 0.9 and its absorptivity is 0.85, determine the net radiation of the solar collector.

Solution

The net radiation is the sum of the emitted radiation and the radiation from the night
sky to the collector. That is

q A, net = q A,out − q A,in (+ out) = σ ( ε r ,cTc4 − α r ,cTr4 )

i i i

The night sky temperature is 223 K and the collector is 298 K. Then
 W 
(
q A,net = q A,out − q A,in (+ out) =  5.669 x10−8 2 4  ( 0.8 )( 298 K ) − ( 0.85 )( 223K ) = 283.2 W 2 )
i i i
4 4

 m ⋅K  m
Notice that the reflected radiation could be included here. It would be out from the
collector and equal to the term (1 − ) ,+ ,(223) .

6. A 7 cm diameter heat exchanger rod at 4000C is surrounded by a 15 cm diameter heat

shield. If the surroundings are a black body at 200C, determine the equilibrium
temperature of the shield if (a) both rod and shield are black bodies, (b) emissivity of
both is 0.7, and (c) the rod is a black body and the shield has emissivity of 0.7.

245
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Solution

For the situation where both the rod and the shield are black bodies, (a) the net
radiation per unit length of rod between the rod and the surroundings will be, for black
bodies and noting that the view factors F12, F13, and F23 are all 1.0,

i σ (T14 − T34 ) σ (T14 − T34 )

q L ,1−3 = = = 1681W
1 1 1 1 m
+ +
A1 F12 A2 F23 π ( 0.07 m ) π ( 0.15m )
Also, the heat transfer from 1 to 3 is the same as from 1 to 2 (the shield). Thus
σ (T14 − T24 )
= σ A1 (T14 − T24 ) = 1681W
i
q L ,1−3 =
1 m
A1 F12 Solving for the shield
temperature, T2  = 515 
(b) When the emissivities of the rod and the shield are 0.7 we need the equivalent
circuit model

The heat transfer from 1 to 3 will be

i σ (T14 − T34 )
q L ,1−3 = = 1074 W
1 − ε1 1 1− ε2 1− ε2 1 m
+ + + +
ε1 A1 A1 F12 ε 2 A2 ε 2 A2 A2 F23
This is also the heat transfer from 1 to 2, so that

246
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 i σ (T14 − T24 )
q L ,1− 2 = = 1074 W
1 − ε1 1 1− ε2 m
+ +
ε1 A1 A1 F12 ε 2 A2 and the shield temperature T2 from this
equation is 505 K
(c) When the rod is a black body and the shield has emissivity of 0.7 the heat transfer
from the rod to the surroundings is

i σ (T14 − T34 )
q L ,1−3 = = 1320.4 W
1 1− ε2 1− ε2 1 m
+ + +
A1 F12 ε 2 A2 ε 2 A2 A2 F23 and the shield
temperature is

 = 528 

Section 7-3

7. A solarium is approximated by the rectangular parallelogram shown. The floor is well

insulated and all walls and ceiling have emissivity of 0.2. The floor temperature is 50C,
the wall and ceiling temperature is 200C, and the window temperature is -100C.
Construct an equivalent circuit for the solarium and determine the heat loss by
radiation.

Solution

The equivalent circuit is shown in the sketch. Since the floor is insulated, its radiosity will
be zero. The heat loss is

i σ (T24 − T34 )
Q Loss =
1− ε3 1− ε2
+ Req +
ε 3 A3 ε 2 A2 and the equivalent resistance Req is

247
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
  1  1 1 
  + 
AF AF A1 F12 
Req =  3 32   3 31
1 1 1
+ +
A3 F31 A1 F12 A3 F32
The shape factor between the window (3) and the
floor (1) can be determine by using Figure 6-22 with L = 3m, D = 8 m, and W = 5 m. This
gives that W/D = 0.625 and L/D = 0.375. From Figure 6-22 the shape factor -./ = 0.3
and -./ + -. = 1.0 so that -. = 0.7. By reciprocity,
A   24 
F13 = F31  3  = ( 0.3)   = 0.18
 A1   40 

Then, since -/. + -/ = 1.0, we have that -/ = 0.82, and the thermal resistances are
 1  1 1 
  + 
 24 ( 0.7 )  24 ( 0.3) 40 ( 0.82 ) 
Req = = 0.044045m −1
1 1 1
+ +
24 ( 0.7 ) 24 ( 0.3) 40 ( 0.82 )
and the heat loss is then
i σ (T − T )
2
4
3
4
σ (T − T ) 2
4
3
4

Q loss = = = 1.552kW
1− ε3 1− ε2 0.09709
+ Req +
ε 3 A3 ε 2 A2

8. A pizza oven is approximated as a cubic container with upper surface heated, a door
that conducts heat out, and all sides and bottom well insulated and reradiating. The
inside dimensions of the oven are 1.5 m on a side. When in operation with the door
closed the burner surface is at 500 K, and 3 kW of power are used by the heater.
Assuming the emissivity of the heater and the inside surface of the door is 0.8, (a)
determine the equilibrium temperature of the inside surface of the door and (b) if the
door is opened and the room is at 300C, estimate the equilibrium temperature of the
heater, assuming that 3 kW of power is still used.

248
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Solution

Referring to the sketch of the oven, the heater is surface 1 with a temperature of 500 K,
an emissivity of 0.8, and a surface area of 2.25 m2. The sides and bottom are surface 3
and are well insulated.

The door is surface 2, having a surface area of 2.25 m2 and an emissivity of 0.8. The
heater is using 3 kW of power. The equivalent circuit can be visualized, and is shown in
the following figure.

The view factors need to be determined and using Figure 6-22, with L = 1.5 m, D = W =
1.5 m, L.D = 1, and W/D = 1 the view factor between 1 and 2 is -/ = 0.2 and then
0
-/. = 1 − -/ = 0.8. Using reciprocity, -/ = -/ 01 = 0.2 so that -. = 1 −
2
-/ = 0.8. The heat transfer is

249
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 i σ (T24 − T34 )
Q=
1 − ε1 1− ε2
+ Req +
ε1 A1 ε 2 A2 and the equivalent resistance is

 1  1 1 
  + 
 2.25 ( 0.2 )  2.25 ( 0.8 ) 2.25 ( 0.8 ) 
Req = = 0.741m −1
1 1 1
+ +
2.25 ( 0.2 ) 2.25 ( 0.8 ) 2.25 ( 0.8 )
Then

i σ (T24 − T34 ) 5.669 x10 −8 ( 5004 − T24 )

Q= = = 3000W
1 − ε1 1− ε2 0.111 + 0.741 + 0.111
+ Req +
ε 1 A1 ε 2 A2 and from this equation
the temperature of surface 2, the door, is  = 328

(b) With the door opened and the door having an effective temperature of 303 K,

i σ (T24 − T34 ) 5.669 x10−8 (T14 − 3034 )

Q= = = 3000W
1 − ε1 1− ε2 0.111 + 0.741 + 0.111
+ Req +
ε1 A1 ε 2 A2 gives for the heater
temperature, / = 494

9. A toaster, sketched in the figure, has two heating elements on either side of a slice of
bread when toasting the bread. The element temperature is 4500C and its emissivity is
0.85 when bread is toasted. If the bread is at 1000C, the bread’s emissivity is 0.65, and
the surroundings reradiate heat, determine the net heat transfer to the bread.

250
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Solution

Referring to the figure, call surface 1 the toaster element and surface 2 the slice of
bread. The heater element is at 723 K, its emissivity is 0.85 and its area is 0.0048 m2. The
bread is 373 K, its emissivity is 0.65, and it too has a surface area of 0.0048 m2. An
equivalent circuit is shown in the following sketch. The view factor between the element
and the bread slice is determined by using Figure 6-21 where W = 6 cm, D = 1.5 cm, and
L = 8 cm. Then W/D = 6/1,5 = 4 and L/D = 8/1.5 = 5.33 so that -/ = 0.66 and -/. =
0
1 − -/ = 0.34. By reciprocity -/ = -/ 1 = 0.66. From this -. = 1 − -/ = 0.34
0 2
and then

i σ (T14 − T24 )
Qnet =
1 − ε1 1− ε2
+ Req +
ε1 A1 ε 2 A2 and the equivalent resistance is

 1  1 1 
  + 
 0.0048 ( 0.66 )  0.0048 ( 0.34 ) 0.0048 ( 0.34 ) 
Req = = 250m −1
1 1 1
+ +
0.0048 ( 0.66 ) 0.0048 ( 0.34 ) 0.0048 ( 0.34 )
and the net heat
transfer

The heat transfer for both sides of the bread would be twice this, or 72.2 W

10. Determine 4567 for the toasting bread in Problem 7.9, if the surroundings act as a gray
surface with emissivity of 0.45 and temperature of 850C.

251
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Solution

The equivalent circuit for this problem is sketched here.

From problem 7.9, the surfaces 1 (toaster element), and 2 (bread), are the same but
surface 3 is now a g ray surface having emissivity of 0.45, an effective temperature of
358 K, and a surface area of 8. = (1.5 9)(28 9) = 0.0042 / . For node J1

ε r ,1 A1
1 − ε1
( σ T14 − J1 ) + A1 F12 ( J 2 − J1 ) + A1 F13 ( J 3 − J1 ) = 0
which reduces to

421.34 + 0.0032 J 2 + 0.0016 J 3 − 0.032 J1 = 0 . Similarly, for node J2

ε r ,2 A2
1 − ε r ,2
( σ T24 − J 2 ) + A1 F12 ( J1 − J 2 ) + A1 F13 ( J 3 − J 2 ) = 0
which reduces to

9.782 + 0.0032 J1 + 0.0016 J 3 − 0.0137 J 2 = 0 For node J

3

ε r ,3 A3
1 − ε r ,3
( σ T34 − J 3 ) + A1 F13 ( J1 − J 3 ) + A2 F23 ( J 2 − J 3 ) = 0
which reduces to

3.20 + 0.0016 J1 + 0.0016 J 2 − 0.006636 J 3 = 0 Solving these three equations

simultaneously for the radiosities,

/ = 1,493 : 


252
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

 = 1,195 : 


. = 1,130 : 

from which the heat transfer to the bread is

ε r ,2 A2
( J 2 − σ T24 ) = 0.87W
i
Qnet =
1 − ε r ,2
and for both sides

4567 = 1.74 

11. Consider the radiation heat transfer from an open fireplace that has a fire in it, as shown
in the figure. The effective surface temperature of the fire is 3150C and the fire has an
effective emissivity of 0.95. The surroundings act as a black body at 150C. Determine the
net heat transfer to a person sitting in front of the fireplace and the equilibrium surface
temperature facing the fireplace. Neglect radiation from the back side and assume a
shape factor of 0.15 for the opening of the fireplace to the person and an emissivity of
0.8.

Solution

The equivalent circuit for heat transfer from the fireplace to the sitting person is

setting surface 1 as the fireplace, surface 2 is the person, and surface 3 is the
surrounding, the view factor between the fireplace and the person is given as 0.15.

253
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 01
Then -/. = 0.85 and by reciprocity, -/ = -/ = 0.075.. Then -. = 0.925. By
02
summing heat flows to the two nodes we get

A11 J1 + A12 J 2 = B1 and

A21 J1 + A22 J 2 = B2 where

1
A11 = = 20
1 − ε1

A12 = − F12 = −0.15

A21 = − F21 = −0.075

1
A22 = = 5.0
1− ε2
and
< >.?@
;/ = /<=,1 (/ ) + -/. . = >.>@ (5.67 × 10 )(588 ) + 0.85(5.67 ×
=,1

10 )(288) = 1.291 × 10@

< >.
; = /<=,2 ( ) + -. . = >. (5.67 × 10 )(300 ) + 0.925(5.67 ×
=,2

10 )(288) = 2198

These equations can then be written

20
/ − 0.15
 = 1.291 × 10@

−0.075
/ + 5
 = 2198

and the radiosities are then

/ = 6459.5

 = 536.5

and the net heat transfer is then

< 0
4 = /<
=,2 2
(
 −  ) = 179 W
=,2

254
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 12. A radiant heater element is made so that it is concentric about a copper tube, as shown
in the figure. The heater is 1 cm thick, 10 cm OD, and 8 cm ID. The copper tubing is 4 cm
in diameter, has an emissivity of 0.05, and is at 2000C. The heater tubing has an
emissivity of 0.9 on the inside, and 0.04 on the outside. The heater is at 10000C. If the
surroundings are taken as a black body at 300 K, determine the power per unit length of
the heater needed for steady state operation.

Solution

Assume that the heater and tube are very long so that it is then treated as a two surface
problem. A circuit diagram is shown in the following sketch.

The heater will radiate to the tube and the surroundings. Thus, for the heater,

i i i σ (T14 − T34 ) σ (T14 − T24 )

Q heater = Q13 + Q12 = +
1 − ε r ,1out 1 1 − ε r ,2 1 1 − ε r ,1in
+ + +
ε r ,1out A1,out A1F13 ε r ,2 A2 A2 F21 ε r ,1in A,in
and
substituting values,

i i i σ (12734 − 3004 ) σ (12734 − 4734 )

Q heater = Q13 + Q12 = + = 2770W
0.96 1 0.95 1 0.1 m
+ + +
( 0.04 )( 0.1π ) ( 0.1π )(1) ( 0.05 )( 0.04π ) ( 0.04π )(1) ( 0.9 )( 0.08π )

255
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 13. A steam generator is a device that converts water into steam by capturing radiant heat
from hot gases. Consider a 5 m cubed steam generator, all sides made up of water tubes
and a “fire ball” 2 m in diameter at 22000C at the center. If the water tubes have a
surface temperature of 3150C and an emissivity of 0.7, determine the heat transfer to
the water from the combustion gases. Assume the fire ball acts as a black body.

Solution

Referring to the sketch and the equivalent circuit, calling area 1 the four sides of the
boiler, surface 2 top and bottom, and surface 3 the fireball, situated in the center of the
cube, the net heat transfer can be written,

i σ (T34 − T14 ) σ (T34 − T14 )

Q heater = =
1 − ε r ,1  1  1 1 
Req + +
ε r ,1 A1  A3 F31  A3 F32 A2 F21 
 
1 1 1
+ +
A3 F31 A3 F32 A2 F21

The fireball view factor to the sides is 2/3 and to the top and bottom is 1/3. Thus, -./ =
2: and - = 1: . The view factor of surface 2, which can see itself is - = 0.2
3 . 3 
(without the fireball) and -/ = 0.8 (without the fireball). By reciprocity,

256
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 0B / D(/ E)2
-. = -. = C F = 0.0838
02 . @>E2
As a first approximation, surface 2 is obstructed by 8.38% from seeing surface 1. Then
-/ = (0.8)(1 − 0.0838) = 0.732. With this information the equivalent resistance is
0.0091 and
I(JBK J1K )
4G6H76 = 1PQ=,1 = 2.1 × 10S W
LMN O
Q=,1 R1

14. Two parallel disks shown in the figure have emissivity of 0.6. If one of the disks is at 200C
and the other one is at 300C, (a) determine the net heat transfer between the two disks
if the surroundings re-radiate heat and (b) determine the net heat transfer between the
two disks if the surroundings are a black body at 2000C.

Solution

For the situation where the surroundings reradiate to the disks, the equivalent circuit is

The areas of the disks, surfaces 1 and 2, are 8/ = 8 = T(0.04 ) = 0.005  . The
emissivities are 0.6 for both disks and disk 1 is at 2000C while disk 2 is 300C. The view
factors can be determined by using Figure 6-23. Here L = 0.8 m, U/ = U = 0.04 ,
U 1: = 2.0 and V = 0.5. From Figure 6-23, - = 0.17
V/ = /:W = 0.5 XY V/  /

and by summation, -/. = 0.83 and also -. = 0.83. Referring now to the equivalent

257
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 circuit
i σ (T14 − T24 )
Q12 =
1 − ε r ,1 1 − ε r ,2
+ Req +
ε r ,1 A1 ε r ,2 A2
with the equivalent resistance
 1  1 1 
  + 
 A1 F12  A1 F13 A2 F23 
Req = = 341.88m −2
1 1 1
+ +
A1 F12 A1 F13 A2 F23
so that
i
Q12 =
( 5.669 x10 )( 473
−8
− 3034 )
4

= 3.878W
1 − 0.5 1 − 0.6
+ 341.88 +
0.6 ( 0.005 ) 0.6 ( 0.005 )
(b) When the surroundings act as a black body the equivalent circuit is

and there will be heat flows at all three surfaces. Summing the heat flows to the two
radiosity nodes,
ε r ,1 A1
1 − ε r ,1
(σ T14 − J1 ) + A1F12 ( J 2 − J1 ) + A1F13 (σ T34 − J1 ) = 0
for node J1. For node J2
ε r ,2 A2
1 − ε r ,2
( σ T24 − J 2 ) + A1 F12 ( J1 − J 2 ) + A2 F23 (σ T34 − J 2 ) = 0

These two equations reduce, noting that A1 = A2

A11 J1 + A12 J 2 = B1
A21 J1 + A22 J 2 = B2 where 8 = 1 = 2.5, 8 = 1:1 −  = 2.5,
// :1 − 
,/ ,
8/ = −-/ = −0.17, and 8/ = −-/ = −0.17. Also
ε r ,1
B1 =
1 − ε r ,1
( σ T14 ) + F13 (σ T34 ) = 4603.2
and
ε r ,2
B1 =
1 − ε r ,2
( σ T24 ) + F23 (σ T34 ) = 1063.53
Solving the two equations

258
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 2.5 J1 − 0.17 J 2 = 4603.2
−0.17 J1 + 2.5 J 2 = 1063.53 gives for the radiosities,

/ = 1878.9 and
 = 553.2 and the heat transfer to surface 2 (at 300C)
ε r ,2 A2
( J 2 − σ T24 ) = 0.565W
i
Q2 =
1 − ε r ,2

Section 7-4

15. On a particularly foggy day the visibility is 0.5 km. This means that 95% of the visible
light is absorbed after traveling 500 meter. What is the extinction coefficient for the
atmosphere?

Solution

Since 95% of the visible light is absorbed, the transmissivity is 5% or 0.05. Thus

τ r , g = e− Kλ L = 0.05
For L = 0.5 km
.??@S
Z = >.@ [E = 5.99 km/

16. Determine the effective emissivity of a bank of air 80 cm thick at 200C, 80% relative
humidity, and 1 atmosphere pressure.

Solution

The effective emissivity for a bank of air can be determined from Figure 7-21. The partial
pressure of the air is

 2.3kPa 
pw = 0.8 pg @ 200 C = 0.8   = 0.0182atm
 101 kPa 
 atm  so that the pressure length
product is

pW L = ( 0.0182atm )( 0.8m ) = 0.0145atm ⋅ m = 0.0478 ft ⋅ atm

. From Figure 7-21

ε w, g = 0.09

259
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 17. Determine the absorptivity of radiation through a 1.6 m-wide plume of exhaust gases at
800C and 101 kPa pressure. The gases are a mixture of air with relative humidity of 15%
and carbon dioxide having mole fraction of 20%.

Solution

Assume the gases are non-reflecting so that

α r ,g = ε r , g = 1 − τ r.g
. For the air, with relative humidity of 15% water vapor and 0.20
mole fraction of carbon dioxide

^_ = 0.15^` = (0.15)(47.4 kPa) = 7.11 kPa and

^+ = (0.20)(101 kPa) = 20.2 kPa. For L = 1.6 m
^_ W = 11.38 m ∙ kPa and from Figure 7-21, _,` = 0.22. Also,
^+ W = 32.32 m ∙ kPa and from Figure 7-22, +,` = 0.15. The emissivity of the gas
is ` = _,` + +,` + c. The correction is determined from Figure7-24, with the
parameter
pw 0.0765
= = 0.277
pc + pw 0.2765
de S.//
= = 0.26
df Ode >.OS.//
so that c = 0 from Figure 7-24 and then
` = 0.37

18. A 60-m high by 20-m wide building is on fire, and one of its walls is at 8150C. Air at 400C
and 40% relative humidity is near the building as shown in the figure. Estimate the net
heat transfer to the air from this burning wall if the wall’s emissivity is 0.85.

Solution

As a first approximation, assume a two surface problem; the air and the burning building
wall. An equivalent circuit is sketched.

260
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Assume the same area for the air and the wall, 60 x 20 = 1,200 m2. Use a view factor of
1.0 for surface 1 to surface 2, that is, -/ = 1.0. The air, at 400C = 3130K, has a partial
pressure of the water vapor of

^_ = 0.4^`@>h = 0.0259 ij

Since the air mass is 20 m wide, L = 20 m and ^_ W = 1.555 ij ∙ kj. From Figure 7-21
the emissivity is

ε w, g = 0.38 = ε r ,2
since no information is available on the molar fraction of carbon
dioxide in the air. It is probably significant but here it assumed to be zero.

I(J1K J2K )
4 = 1PQ=,1 1 1PQ=,2 = 31.94 × 10m W
O O
Q=,1 R1 R1 l12 Q=,2 R2

Section 7-5

19. A mercury-in-glass thermometer reads 200C when hanging outside in the shade on a
calm summer day. Another thermometer hangs in a sunny location and registers 450C.
Assuming a convective heat transfer coefficient of 10 W/m2∙K and the emissivity is 0.2
for both thermometers, determine the effective surrounding surface temperature in the
sun.

Solution

Calling thermometer 1 the shaded thermometer, then

T1 = 200 C = T∞ Ambient air

and the thermometer 2 the thermometer in the sun,
>
 = 45 n. Then

Q convection = hA (T2 − T∞ ) = Q radiation = σε 2 A (Ts4 − T24 )

i i

where Ts is the effective

2
surrounding temperature. For the values of 10 W/m K for the convective heat transfer
coefficient and 0.2 for the emissivity, solving for the effective surrounding temperature,

261
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Ts = 424 K = 1510 C

20. It is desired to study the radiation heat loss (or gain) from the surface of an automobile
engine. Assume that the engine is a gray opaque convex surface radiating with a heat
exchanger for cooling engine coolant (called a radiator) on one side. Assume that the
radiator is also a gray opaque flat surface. The engine also radiates with the road surface
underneath (a black body), the hood and fender wells (assume these are one re-
radiating surface) and the firewall (a black body). Construct a circuit to describe these
processes and identify all of the radiosities, black body emitters ( o ), and resistances in
terms of the emissivities, areas, and shape factors.

Solution

Referring to the sketch, the various components are listed. An equivalent circuit could
look like that shown in the following sketch. Then, the various thermal resistances can
be identified.

262
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 1 − / 1 − 
(b) V/ = : 8 , V = : 8 , V/ = 1:8 - V/. = 1:8 -
/ /   / / / /.
1 1
V/ = :8 - , V/@ = :8 - 1 1
.V. = :8 - . V = :8 - ,
/ / / /@  .  
V@ = 1:8 - , V. = 1:8 - = 1:8 - , V.@ = 1:8 - = 1:8 - ,
 @ . .  . . .@ @ @.
1
V@ = :8 -
 @

21. For the plan view shown in the figure, determine the mean radiant temperature at the
location shown.

263
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Solution

The mean radiant temperature (MRT) is

1
MRT = ( 60 )( 75 ) + ( 30 )( 72 ) + ( 80 )(15 ) + ( 300 )( 68 ) + ( 80 )( 25 ) + ( 70 )(105 )  = 104.50 C
3600 

22. A steam generating unit burns coal, with the combustion gases at 9000C filling the
combustion chamber. The combustion chamber is a right circular cylinder 10 m in
diameter and 15 m tall. Estimate the heat transfer to the walls if the walls are at 5000C
and have emissivity of 0.9.

Solution

Since the chamber is filled with the combustion gases, as a first approximation use a two
surface model sketched.

264
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 with an equivalent circuit

As a surface area, assume the inside surface of the cylinder plus the top and bottom,

D2
A = A = π DL + 2π = 628.3m 2
4 and assume the view factor between the gas and
the sides of the chamber is 1.0. Then, as an approximation, assume that the gases are
50% water vapor and 50% carbon dioxide. Thus, the partial pressures are, for a total
pressure of 1 atmosphere,

pc = pw = 0.5atm From Table 7-1, the characteristic length L can be approximated by

Lm = 0.6 L = 0.6 (15m ) = 9m − 29.5 ft

Then the partial pressure length products are

pw Lm = pc Lm = 14.75 ft ⋅ atm

At a temperature of 9000C = 16500F, from Figure 7-22,

265
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 _,` = 0.5 and from Figure 7-22, +,` = 0.24

Using Equation 7-44 the emissivity of the gases can be estimated. The correction factor
Δε can be determined from Figure 7-24. For a the ratio

pw
= 0.5
pw + pc
the correction factor is about 0.55. Then from Equation 7-44

ε r ,1 = ε w, g + ε c , g − ∆ε = 0.5 + 0.24 − 0.055 = 0.685

, calling the gases surface 1. The
heat transfer is then

i σ A1 (T14 − T24 )
Q12 = = 34.8MW
1 − ε r ,1 1 1 − ε r ,2
+ +
ε r ,1 F12 ε r ,2

23. An opaque gray surface having reflectivity of 0.5 at 270C is exposed to irradiation of
1000 W/m2. Air at 70C flows over the surface and the convective heat transfer
coefficient is 15 W/m2K. Determine the net heat transfer per unit area from the surface.

Solution

The net heat transfer from the surface is the reflected component of the irradiation plus
the emitted radiation plus the convective heat transfer, minus the irradiation,

q net = ρ r E irr + εσ T 4 − E rr + h (T − T∞ ) = ( 0.5 )(1000 ) + ( 0.5 ) σ ( 300 ) − 1000 + (15 )( 20 ) = 29.635W

i i i
4

m2

24. An opaque horizontal plate is insulated on the backside. The plate irradiation is 2500
W/m2 of which 500 W/m2 is reflected. The plate temperature is 2270C and has an
emissive power of 1200 W/m2. Air at 1270C and with a convective heat transfer
coefficient of 12 W/m2 K flows over the plate. Determine (a) emissivity, absorptivity, and
radiosity of the plate and (b) the net heat transfer per unit area.

266
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 Solution

From the problem statement, the reflectivity is

 = 6pq
r = 500:2500 = 0.2. The emissivity is

1200 W 2
i
E emit m
ε= = = 0.338
σT 4 5.669 x10(−8 W
m2 ⋅ K 4
( 500 K )
4
)
The absorptivity is

α r = 1 − ρ r = 0.8

and the radiosity is

i i
J = E emit + E refl = 1200 + 500 = 1700 W
m2

The net heat transfer is

q net = J − E irr + h (Ts − T∞ ) = 1700 W ( ) (100K ) = 400W m

i i
− 2500 W + 12 W
m2 m2 m2 ⋅ K 2

267
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 25. A thermocouple having emissivity of 0.5, total specific heat of 0.34 J/kgK and surface
area of 0.8 cm2 is placed in a large heated duct to measure the temperature of a gas
flowing through the duct. The duct walls are at 3000C and they behave as black body
radiators. Estimate the value of the convective heat transfer coefficient of the
thermocouple in the duct if the indicated temperature is 1700C initially and 2900C 8
minutes later, when it has just reached equilibrium. Also determine the gas
temperature.

Solution

The condition when the thermocouple reaches equilibrium with the gas flow is

ε r , s Asσ (Tr4 − Ts4, f ) = h∞ As (Ts , f − T∞ )

where Ts,f is the sensed thermocouple
temperature at equilibrium, or the final state. Substituting into this equation,

( 0.5 ) ( 0.8 x10−4 m 2 ) σ ( 5734 − 5634 ) = h∞ ( 0.8 x10−4 m 2 ) ( 563K − T∞ ) and this reduces
to

207.785 = 563h∞ − T∞ h∞ Equation A. Also, to reach equilibrium assuming that

the heating is convective so that

∆Es mc p (Ts , f − Ts ,i )
= = h∞ As (T∞ − Ts ,ave )
∆t ∆t The value of mcp for the thermocouple
is given as 0.34 J/K. The time interval to reach equilibrium, Δt, is 8 minutes and the
average surface temperature of the thermocouple is

1
( Ts , f + Ts ,i ) = 230 = 503K
0
Ts , ave =
2

With these values the energy balance equation reduces to

268
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 1062.5W = h∞T∞ − 503h∞
m2 Equation B. Solving the equations A and B gives that

ℎt = 21.17 : 
 

t = 553 = 280> n

26. Bricks have been made for centuries by baking them in direct sunlight. Determine the
time required to complete the baking if water is driven off at 350C and it requires 7.4 MJ
for each brick. Each brick is 10 cm by 15 cm by 20 cm and the surface emissivity is 0.4.

Solution

The amount of solar energy needs to be determined. From Figure 6-37 the rate of
energy reaching the earth from the sun through 1 air mass (when the sun is directly
overhead) is 956.1 W/m2 or 303.3 Btu/hr∙ft2. The energy available to dry one brick is

7.4 × 10m
= uv 4wxqH ∙ %jy8o +z o +z The solar heating will approximately vary
during one sunny, clear day by the sketch

If the solar intensity is assumed to vary sinusoidally then the average solar intensity is

269
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
 /
4wxqH ,H{6 = (956.1 W/m ) = 676.1 W/m
√

and using the face area for the brick, 8o +z = 20}15 cm = 300 cm = 0.03 m the
time can be determined through the energy balance

7.4 × 10m
= uv 4wxqH ∙ %jy8o +z o +z = 4wxqH ∙ 8o +z ∙ o +z ∙ ∆j

and then the time is

cj = 244.8 ℎY€UX Since there are approximately 12 hours/day of sun,

cj = 20.4 %iX

270
© 2016 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 (Larger)

Map of Plymouth Harbor, Massachusetts, adapted from a

modern chart for comparison with Champlain’s map of Port St.
Louis, to which it is adjusted as nearly as possible in scale,
extent, and meridian
Reproduced from the Champlain Society edition of The Works of Samuel de
Champlain, plate LXXIV. The compass is Champlain’s, which is supposed to
be set to the magnetic meridian, but the true north is shown by the arrow.

Champlain’s Plymouth visit occurred in 1605, two years after

Pring’s expedition. He had spent several days in Gloucester Harbor
and a night in Boston Harbor, where he had watched the building of
a dugout canoe by the Indians. Coming down the South Shore, his
bark grounded on one of the numerous ledges that dot that portion of
Massachusetts Bay. “If we had not speedily got it off, it would have
overturned in the sea, since the tide was falling all around, and there
were five or six fathoms of water. But God preserved us and we
anchored” near a cape, which perhaps was Brant Rock. “There
came to us fifteen or sixteen canoes of savages. In some of them
there were fifteen or sixteen, who began to manifest great signs of
joy, and made various harangues, which we could not in the least
understand. Sieur de Monts sent three or four in our canoe, not only
to get water but to see their chief, whose name was Honabetha.—
Those whom we had sent to them brought us some little squashes
as big as the fist which we ate as a salad like cucumbers, and which
we found very good—We saw here a great many little houses
scattered over the fields where they plant their Indian corn.”
The expedition now sailed southward into Plymouth Harbor. “The
next day [July 18] we doubled Cap St. Louis, so named by Sieur de
Monts, a land rather low, and in latitude 42° 45’. The same day we
sailed two leagues along a sandy coast as we passed along which
we saw a great many cabins and gardens. The wind being contrary,
we entered a little bay [Plymouth] to await a time favorable for
proceeding. There came to us two or three canoes, which had just
been fishing for cod and other fish, which are found there in large
numbers. These they catch with hooks made of a piece of wood, to
which they attach a bone in the shape of a spear, and fasten it very
securely. The whole thing has a fang-shape, and the line attached to
it is made out of the bark of a tree. They gave me one of their hooks,
which I took as a curiosity. In it the bone was fastened on by hemp,
like that in France, as it seemed to me. And they told me that they
gathered this plant without being obliged to cultivate it; and indicated
that it grew to the height of four or five feet. This canoe went back on
shore to give notice to their fellow inhabitants, who caused columns
of smoke to rise on our account. We saw eighteen or twenty
savages, who came to the shore and began to dance.” Was this a
reminiscence of dancing to the guitar for Pring’s sailor, perhaps?
“Our canoe landed in order to give them some bagatelles, at which
they were greatly pleased. Some of them came to us and begged us
to go to their river. We weighed anchor to do so, but were unable to
enter on account of the small amount of water, it being low tide, and
were accordingly obliged to anchor at the mouth. I went ashore
where I saw many others who received us very cordially. I made also
an examination of the river, but saw only an arm of water extending a
short distance inland, where the land is only in part cleared up.
Running into this is merely a brook not deep enough for boats except
at full tide. The circuit of the Bay is about a league. On one side of
the entrance to this Bay there is a point which is almost an island,
covered with wood, principally pines, and adjoins sand banks which
are very extensive. On the other side the land is high. There are two
islets in this bay, which are not seen until one has entered and
around which it is almost dry at low tide. This place is very
conspicuous from the sea, for the coast is very low excepting the
cape at the entrance to the bay. We named it Port du Cap St. Louis,
distant two leagues from the above cape and ten from the Island
Cape [Gloucester]. It is in about the same latitude as Cap St. Louis.”
 (Larger)
New England

CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH’S MAP OF NEW ENGLAND, 1614

Reproduced from the Pequot Collection, Yale University Library

Champlain’s map of Plymouth Harbor, which is reproduced

herewith, was a quick sketch which he drew from the end of Long
Beach after his vessel went aground there, probably during the
afternoon of their arrival. Since the expedition stayed in Plymouth
Harbor only over one night, too much accuracy of detail must not be
expected of it. Saquish Head is represented as an island, and no
distinction is made between Eel River and Town Brook. Plymouth
Harbor has probably shoaled a good deal since the early
seventeenth century, since it would now be impossible to find a
seven-fathom anchorage anywhere except immediately around
Duxbury Pier Light; yet Champlain’s anchorage in the middle of
Plymouth Bay is so designated. Martin Pring had even described a
landlocked anchorage in seven fathoms. The chief value of
Champlain’s little map, aside from confirming the locality, is its
evidences of very extensive Indian houses and cornfields occupying
much of the slopes above the shore all the way around from the Eel
River area through Plymouth and Kingston to the shores of Duxbury
Bay.
The expedition left Plymouth on July 19 and sailed around the
shores of Cape Cod Bay before rounding the Cape and arriving the
next day at Nauset Harbor in Eastham. During several days’ stay
there, a French sailor was killed by the Indians in a scuffle over a
kettle. The following year, when Champlain returned to Cape Cod, a
more serious disaster occurred. Four hundred Indians at Chatham
ambushed and massacred five Frenchmen in a dawn raid, then
returned and disinterred their bodies after burial. The French took
vengeance by coolly slaughtering half a dozen Indians a few days
later. But, like the English adventurers, the French then abandoned
Massachusetts and never returned. Champlain reported that in all
his travels he had found no place better for settlement than Nova
Scotia. Two years later, changes of plans in France transferred him
to Quebec, where he spent the remainder of his career laying the
foundations of French Canada along the St. Lawrence.
Massachusetts Indians had again rebuffed the threat of European
penetration.
We have already noted that while Champlain was in
Massachusetts, George Waymouth and Martin Pring had been
exploring Maine. The coördination of these exploratory voyages was
largely the work of Sir Ferdinando Gorges, a diligent organizer of
New England colonial preparations. In 1606 the administrative
architecture of the English colonial movement in America was built.
King James gave charters to two companies, the London Company
and the Plymouth Company, providing for settlements respectively in
what came to be known as “Southern” and “Northern” Virginia. The
successful colony at Jamestown was founded by the London
Company in 1607. The coincident attempt by the Plymouth
Company, organized by Gorges, and the Popham and Gilbert
families, to found a colony on the Kennebec River in Maine failed
after a year’s trial. This Sagadahoc Colony failure was a blow to New
England colonization, the effects of which lasted for a generation,
since the impression of New England as a subarctic area, impractical
for settlement, remained in English minds for many years. It needs to
be emphasized, however, that despite this setback to English hopes,
the loss of fortunes invested in the enterprise, and the breakdown of
the Plymouth Company produced by this failure, the enterprise had
come much nearer to success than Humphrey Gilbert’s attempted
colony in Newfoundland. Much was learned about techniques of
living in the new country, getting along with Indians, and the need for
continuous replacement and supply. These ventures were
hazardous: they required courage, teamwork, strong leadership, and
personnel of heroic wisdom and tenacity.
After the Sagadahoc failure, the pattern of English activity on the
New England coast reverted for five years to the former state of
occasional trading and fishing voyages. The only events that
touched even remotely on Plymouth history were Cape Cod visits of
three men from different areas of activity. In 1609 Henry Hudson
landed briefly on Cape Cod on his way from Maine to his
explorations of the Hudson River which led to the Dutch claims in
that region. Samuel Argall from Virginia in 1610 likewise saw Cape
Cod on a voyage designed to supplement Jamestown’s failing food
supplies with New England codfish. And in 1611 Captain Edward
Harlow, sent on an exploring voyage to the Cape Cod region by the
Earl of Southampton, seems to have had five skirmishes with Indians
on Cape Cod and the Vineyard. Harlow’s vessel was attacked by
canoes while at anchor, and lost a long boat being towed astern to
the Indians, who thereupon beached her, filled her with sand and
successfully prevented the English from retaking her. Harlow
returned to England with little except five captured natives. Among
them was Epenow, an Indian whose treachery later accounted for
the death of Captain Thomas Dermer.
In 1613 the French fur-trading activities on the Bay of Fundy
were supplemented by an ambitious project to establish a Jesuit
missionary colony in that region. But this second French attempt to
colonize Maine was nipped in the bud after only a few weeks by Sir
Samuel Argall’s armed cruiser, sent from Virginia for the purpose.
This ended the threat of France as a colonial power in New England
except for occasional incursions into eastern Maine.
The year 1614 opened with a visitor to Plymouth from a new
quarter. Dutch fur traders, following in the wake of Henry Hudson’s
1609 discoveries, were already at work in the Hudson River. Two of
them, Adrian Block and Hendrick Christiansen, were about to weigh
anchor from Manhattan and depart for the Netherlands with a cargo
of furs in the fall of 1613 when one of their ships caught fire and
burned to the water’s edge. Both crews therefore stayed over the
winter on Manhattan Island, and there built a new “yacht,” the
Onrust, which they felt must be given a shakedown cruise before
attempting the Atlantic crossing. Block therefore sailed her eastward,
the first passage of Long Island Sound by a European, and explored
the Connecticut shore and rivers, Narragansett Bay and the Cape
Cod region, to all of which he laid claim for the Dutch as “Nieu
Nederlant.” Contemporary Dutch accounts offer us little of interest
about the Massachusetts phases of this voyage except some sailing
directions in Massachusetts Bay that suggest that Adrian Block
sailed from a place called Pye Bay, usually identified with Salem, to
the Lizard on the English Channel. But the Figurative Map which he
published in 1616 as a part of his report to the States General of the
Netherlands contains many additional details to which Dutch names
are applied, including a wholly unmistakable outline of Plymouth
Harbor, here called Cranes Bay. From this it seems obvious that
Block did visit Plymouth in the spring of 1614, and may be
considered as yet another of its explorers. It would be interesting to
know whether any of the Leyden Pilgrims, living in the Netherlands
for four years after the map’s publication, ever saw it before setting
out for the New World. In view of the controversy over whether the
Pilgrims were indeed headed for the Hudson River, it is interesting to
note that this map of Adrian Block’s would have been the most
accurate one available to them as a guide to the New York region,
yet there is nothing in the Pilgrim chronicles to suggest that they had
it with them on the Mayflower.
Also in 1614 there came sailing into Plymouth Harbor a man
whose map and writings were used by the Pilgrims, though he said
that they refused his advice and his leadership. Captain John Smith
would like to have been the founder of New England, but had to be
content to be its Hakluyt. He named New England, and “Plimouth,”
and Massachusetts, and the Charles River and Cape Ann—at least
he was the first to publish these names. He produced the best
known map of New England of that early period. He spent the last
seventeen years of his life writing the history of New England
voyages and pamphleteering for its settlement. Yet a succession of
misfortunes prevented him from ever revisiting the coast for which he
developed such enthusiasm during his three months’ voyage in
1614. Smith had already been governor of Virginia and had
experience in what it took to plant a successful colony. His writings
had unquestionably a strong influence on the Massachusetts colonial
undertakings, particularly since he was not afraid of Indians and
since he recognized the difference between the bleak coast of Maine
and the relatively better-situated Massachusetts area as a site for
colonial development.
John Smith arrived at Monhegan Island in Maine in April, 1614,
with two vessels. In the smaller of these he spent his time exploring
and mapping the coast from the Penobscot to Cape Cod, much as
Champlain had done nine years earlier. Thomas Hunt in the larger
vessel remained at Monhegan, fishing. Reaching “the Countrie of the
Massachusetts, which is the Paradise of all those parts,” Smith
entered Boston Harbor. “For heere are many Iles all planted with
corne: groves, mulberries, salvage gardens, and good harbours: the
coast is for the most part high clayie, sandie cliffs. The Sea Coast as
you passe, shews you all along large corne fields and great troupes
of well proportioned people; but the French, having remained heere
neere six weeks left nothing for us.” At Cohasset he wrote: “We
found the people in those parts verie kinde, but in their furie no lesse
valiant. For upon a quarrell we had with one of them, hee onely with
three others, crossed the harbor of Quonahassit to certaine rocks
whereby wee must passe; and there let flie their arrowes for our
shot, till we were out of danger,—yet one of them was slaine, and
another shot through his thigh.” His description of Plymouth, which
was variously known as Patuxet or Accomack, immediately follows
the Cohasset episode quoted above: “Then come you to Accomack,
an excellent good harbor, good land, and no want of anything except
industrious people. After much kindnesse, upon a small occasion,
wee fought also with fortie or fiftie of those; though some were hurt,
and some were slaine; yet within an hour after they became friends.”
In another passage he adds, “we tooke six or seven of their
Canowes which towards the evening they ransomed for Bever
skinnes.” Apparently Smith supplied a motive for the resumption of
friendship, knowing that the Indians could be bought off. This was
the kind of Indian policy Myles Standish used at times; in fact there is
a certain resemblance between the two men. In any case Smith left
for England with a cargo of beaver, and the Indians of Plymouth got
back their canoes.
But the next visitor to Plymouth, still in 1614, did not leave as
good an impression. With Smith departed for England, Thomas Hunt
appeared in Plymouth Harbor in Smith’s larger vessel. Not content
with a hold full of Monhegan codfish, Hunt now kidnaped twenty or
more Plymouth natives, stowed them below decks, and sailed away
to Spain, where he sold them into slavery at Malaga, “for £20 to a
man.” This was a typical seaman’s private venture, or side bet to the
profits of the codfish cargo. John Smith wrote that “this wilde act kept
him [Hunt] ever after from any more emploiment in those parts.”
Samuel Purchas termed Hunt’s “Savage hunting of Savages a new
and Devillish Project.” One can imagine what bitterness grew toward
the English among Massachusetts Indians after this demonstration
of European barbarism.
The quirks of history are at times worthy of the most fantastic
fiction. Thomas Hunt’s universally condemned crime happened to
produce one result which proved of great advantage to the Pilgrims.
Among the twenty wretched Plymouth natives whom Hunt sold at the
“Straights of Gibralter” was an Indian named Squanto. Then began a
five-year European education which trained Squanto for his
irreplaceable services to the Pilgrims as their interpreter. Squanto
was rescued by good Spanish friars, “that so they might nurture [him]
in the Popish religion.” In some unknown manner he reached
England and continued his education for several years in the
household of one John Slany, an officer of the Newfoundland
Company. His subsequent travels will appear in our discussion of
Thomas Dermer’s voyage in 1619. It is sufficient at this point to note
that perhaps the greatest blessing ever bestowed upon the Pilgrim
Fathers was the gift of a treacherous English shipmaster, a Spanish
Catholic friar, and an English merchant adventurer.
Things were going badly in another area of Massachusetts
during that eventful year of 1614. As though the expeditions of Block,
Smith, and Hunt were not sufficient for one year, Nicholas Hobson
now made his appearance at Martha’s Vineyard. Sent out by Sir
Ferdinando Gorges in an attempt to establish a fur-trading post in
that region, Hobson was using the Indian, Epenow, captured by
Harlow’s expedition in 1611, as his pilot through the shoals of
Nantucket Sound. Epenow cleverly contrived his escape, and a full-
scale battle ensued. “Divers of the Indians were then slain by the
English, and the Master of the English vessel and several of the
Company wounded by the Indians.” Hobson’s party “returned to
England, bringing nothing back with them, but the News of their bad
Success, and that there was a War broke out between the English
and the Indians.” Increase Mather later remarked that “Hunt’s
forementioned Scandal, had caused the Indians to contract such a
mortal Hatred against all Men of the English Nation, that it was no
small Difficulty to settle anywhere within their Territoryes.”
It was at this point in history that another strange series of
events took place, of much more far-reaching significance. With
English expeditions defeated and sent back to England empty-
handed, with an Indian war “broke out,” fate, or Providence, or
whatever you call that destiny which seems at times to intercede for
civilization in its remorseless quest for progress, now took a hand.
Some European disease, to which the natives had no resistance and
the Europeans complete immunity, swept the coasts of
Massachusetts clear of Indians. Suddenly it appeared in all the river
villages along the Mystic, the Charles, the Neponset, the North River,
and at Plymouth. No one knows what it was—whether chicken pox
or measles or scarlet fever. The Indians believed it was the product
of a curse leveled at them by one of the last survivors of a French
crew wrecked on Boston Harbor’s Peddock’s Island in 1615. By
analogy with what later happened to other primitive races in the
Americas and the Pacific islands, it was probably one of the
children’s diseases. The Indians died in thousands. A population of a
hundred thousand shrank to five thousand in the area from
Gloucester to New Bedford. “They died on heapes,” Thomas Morton
wrote, “and the living that were able to shift for themselves would
runne away and let them dy and let there Carkases ly above the
ground without buriall.... And the bones and skulls upon the severall
places of their habitations made such a spectacle after my comming
into those parts that as I travailed in that Forrest, nere the
Massachusetts, it seemed to mee a new-found Golgotha.”
Overnight the Indian war had vanished. Overnight the coast from
Saco Bay in Maine to Narragansett Bay in Rhode Island lay wide
open to European settlements. The cleared fields along the rivers
and salt marshes grew up to weeds, ready for the spade of the
English planter. For twenty miles inland the land was cleared of the
Indian menace in precisely the area where they had been most
agricultural, in what John Smith had called the “Paradise of all those
parts.” The choicest sites for plantations, at the river mouths and
along the tidal reaches of Boston Bay, Salem, Gloucester, and
Plymouth, were stripped of opposition. Beaver, deer, and codfish
multiplied unhindered. Smith’s description of Plymouth, “good harbor,
good land and no want of anything but industrious people,” was now
doubly true of the whole mainland shore of Massachusetts Bay.
These conditions were confirmed by Captain Thomas Dermer in
1619. Dermer had been associated with John Smith and Ferdinando
Gorges in an attempted New England voyage in 1615, and was
probably familiar with the coast. He was in Newfoundland in 1618
and there became acquainted with Squanto, who had been living in
the household of John Slany in England. Squanto’s European stay
was now completed, and someone had brought him out to
Newfoundland. Dermer appreciated how valuable he might prove to
be in a trading voyage to Massachusetts, and secured permission
from Governor John Mason of Newfoundland, and also from Sir
Ferdinando Gorges, to use him as a pilot for a Massachusetts
voyage.
Arrived in Massachusetts Bay, Dermer wrote: “I passed alongst
the coast where I found some ancient Plantations, not long since
populous now utterly void, in other places a remnant remaines but
not free of sickenesse. Their disease the Plague for wee might
perceive the sores of some that had escaped, who describe the
spots of such as usually die.” Reaching Plymouth, which, we
remember, was Squanto’s home, he goes on: “When I arrived at my
Savages native Country (finding all dead) I travelled alongst a daies
journey Westward, to a place called Nummastaquyt [Nemasket or
Middleboro], where finding Inhabitants I dispatched a messenger a
dayes journey further west to Poconokit, which bordereth on the sea;
whence came to see me two Kings; attended with a guard of fiftie
armed men, who being well satisfied with that my Savage and I
discoursed unto them—gave me content in whatsoever I
demanded.” At Poconokit he “redeemed a Frenchman, and
afterwards another at Mastachusit,” victims of shipwreck three years
before. What a chronicle these two castaways might have added to
Massachusetts history had their memoirs been preserved!
Squanto now found himself the only survivor of those two
hundred or more natives of Plymouth whom Martin Pring and
Champlain and John Smith had encountered. We note that he
brought the Englishmen of Dermer’s party into friendly association
with the sachems of Poconokit, which was Massasoit’s village at the
mouth of the Taunton River. This was the first friendly contact with
Massachusetts Indians in five years, the first since the criminal
barbarity of Thomas Hunt had aroused the enmity of the natives in
1614. We can read between the lines what a reconciliation the
homecoming of Squanto, himself a victim of that barbarous
kidnaping, must have produced among the Wampanoags. For
Dermer freed Squanto later, in 1619, and he found his way back to
Massasoit before the arrival of the Pilgrims. Whether Sir Ferdinando
Gorges or Dermer himself was responsible for this peacemaking
gesture, we have no way of knowing, but it seems to have cemented
again a long-standing peace between the English and the
Wampanoags, which was worth a whole battalion of soldiers to the
safety of New Plymouth. Captain Thomas Dermer, who probably
never heard of the Pilgrims, thus brought them peace. The Indian
war was ended.
It is therefore the more tragic that Dermer died of Indian arrow
wounds the next year after a battle with Epenow of Martha’s
Vineyard, an Indian captive who had not made peace with the
English. Had Epenow, instead of Squanto, lived at Plymouth, history
might have run quite differently. Captain Thomas Dermer may be
considered the first of the Plymouth martyrs, who lost his life after
saving a New Plymouth that did not yet exist, though the Mayflower
was on its way when he died.
It is a strange commentary on the justice of history that the men
who had spent their lives on New England colonization had almost
no share in the first successful plantation in Massachusetts. We
have seen what an outpouring of futile struggle men like Gorges and
Smith and Dermer had expended on the failures that set the stage
for the Pilgrims. It was now to fall to the lot of a group of English
exiles, who had lived twelve years in the Netherlands, to arrive by
accident in Massachusetts at the precise moment when the
merchant adventurers, whom they despised, had succeeded in
producing the conditions for success. The Pilgrim legend is well
founded, in the tribute it pays to the forthright courage and
persistence of the forefathers, but it ignores their utter dependence
on the maritime renaissance of England as the foundation on which
their success rested. The line of succession stemming from the
exploits of Drake and Hawkins and the ships that sank the Armada
carried directly on into the efforts of Gosnold, Pring, Gorges, Smith,
Hobson, and Dermer to set the stage for Plymouth. The fur trade and
the fisheries by which New Plymouth finally paid off its creditors had
been painstakingly developed by many hazardous years of
experiment by small shipowners of Bristol and Plymouth and other
smaller havens in the west of England. Faith in New England
ventures, so nearly destroyed by the Sagadahoc failure, had been
kept alive and sedulously cultivated by a little group of earnest men
around Gorges and John Smith, so that money could be available to
finance even the risky trading voyages necessary to keep a foothold
on the coast. We have seen how recently peace had been made
with the Indians.
The Pilgrims ascribed all these blessings to acts of Providence in
their behalf. But Providence has a way of fulfilling its aims through
the acts of determined men. Any visitor to Plymouth who reveres the
Pilgrims should also honor those representatives of the glorious
maritime energies of the Old World whose discoveries and
explorations prepared the way for permanent settlement. To them
also applies the phrase which Bradford used of the Plymouth
colonists:
“They were set as stepping-stones for others who came after.”
 Transcriber’s Notes
Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made
consistent when a predominant preference was found in the
original book; otherwise they were not changed.
Simple typographical errors were corrected; unbalanced
quotation marks were remedied when the change was
obvious, and otherwise left unbalanced.
Illustrations in this eBook have been positioned between
paragraphs and outside quotations.
 *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EARLY
EXPLORERS OF PLYMOUTH HARBOR, 1525-1619 ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of
this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept
and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and
may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the
terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of
the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.