1.
Introduction
Humans, and
animals in general, are usually in a thermal steady state with respect
to their surroundings. In particular, endotherms seek to control their
body temperatures. Heat generated by metabolic processes is lost to the
environment though several mechanisms: radiation, conduction,
convection, and evaporation. Unless the organism has more heat than can
be eliminated by radiation and convection, evaporation (through
perspiration) is not required and conduction is negligible (
cf. section 2). This is
most relevant when ambient temperatures are low (e.g., winter). While
radiation is easily estimated, convection requires more effort and some
assumptions.
2. Free convection
Convection relies on the flow of a fluid to transport heat from the
object being cooled to the surrounding environment. In free convection,
this fluid motion is the
result of the buoyancy of warmer fluid in the cooler surrounding fluid.
If there is an externally imposed flow, such as a wind, the convective
rate is enhanced. At the very least, heat will be removed at the rate
due to free convection. The Nusselt number is the ratio of the
hard-to-compute convective transfer rate to the easy-to-determine
conductive rate:
1

(1)
where
Q/A is the thermal flux
(W/m
2),
L is the
characteristic length of the body,
k
is the thermal conductivity of the fluid, and Δ
T is the temperature difference
between the body and the surrounding fluid. The Nusselt number can be
found by computing the Grashof number and the Prandtl number. Those
fluid dynamicists love all their special numbers, don't they? The
Grashof number
is given by
2

(2)
where α is the thermal expansion coefficient and the other symbols have
their usual meanings, defined in the
reference. The Prandtl number is simply the ratio of the kinematic
viscosity to the thermal diffusivity. For air,
Pr is approximately 0.7, depending
slightly on temperature.
3 The product,
Gr*Pr is the Rayleigh number,
Ra, which can be used to find the
Nusselt number. The relationship between
Nu and
Ra is empirical. For this, we must
turn to a heat transfer text.
4 As we will see,
Ra is about 10
10, which
puts us at the top of the transition region and into the turbulent
region, where

(3)
This applies to vertical plates or cylinders alike, either of which is
a reasonable approximation to the human body.
Finally, it is time to plug in some numbers. Human skin temperature
5
is about 34°C. However, if the person is clothed, the
effective surface temperature will be lower, say 30°C. For 20°C
ambient
temperature, Δ
T=10°C=10K.
For an adult, L=2 m. Then
Ra=8x10
9,
resulting in
Nu of about 200.
This large value justifies neglecting conduction since
Nu is the ratio of convective to
conductive thermal transfer rates. Since
k=0.026 W/m/K for air,
3
the
convective thermal flux rate is

(4)
3. Radiation
For comparison, the radiation rate is determined by the
Stefan-Boltzmann Law,

(5)
where
T0 is the
ambient absolute temperature, ε is the emissivity, and
σ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. For skin or clothing, emissivity is
near unity. This approximation is valid when Δ
T is small
compared to the ambient temperature,
T0.
4. Comparison of convective
and radiative rates
The ratio of convective to radiative transfer is only weakly dependent
on temperature difference:

(6)
Hence, the assumed value for Δ
T
of 10°C is not critical to the comparison of the relative
importance of convection and radiation. The convective heat loss rate
is about half the radiative rate. Forced convection will
increase this ratio (
cf. Sec.
5).
5. Other work
This topic has been discussed by others. For example, Flores
6
estimates
the free convection coefficient of 2.3, compared to 2.6 in Eq. (4)
above.
Assuming a wind of 1 mph (~0.5 m/s), Flores estimates a 40% enhancement
of the
convective rate.
Lee
7 modeled a clothed human. His model
predicts that the ratio of convective to radiative heat loss is 0.7 at
an ambient temperature of 20°C, somewhat higher than predicted by
Eq. (6). This result was independent of the air gap between skin
and fabric. The model was validated by an experimental simulation
of a clothed human body by a hot plate covered with fabric. Lee's model
did
assume a slight wind, 0.2 m/s, though the experimental setup did not.
Hardy and DuBois
8 reported basal metabolic rates of two
subjects (themselves), finding a rate of about 35 kcal/m
2/hr
or 41 W/m
2. This is not consistent with the values computed
using Eqs. (4) and (5) for Δ
T>5K.
This can be explained by the fact that the (nude) subjects were not in
a steady state; they were losing energy more rapidly their metabolism
was able to replace it. As the authors note, "...both subjects were on
the point of shivering at the end of the basal periods in many
experiments in which the temperature was lower than 27°C." They
subsequently began to shiver. Curiously, these authors reported very
low convection rates (10 - 20% of the total), with the highest rates at
the smallest temperature differences. This contradicts the prediction
of Eq. (6). They did not explain how convective rates were measured.
DeDear,
et al.,
9
measured radiative and convective thermal loss rates rates using
manikins. They found the convective rate to be 3.3 W/m
2/K,
somewhat higher than Eq. (4) predicts. This is not surprising given the
uncertainties in the calculation. They also measured 4.5 W/m
2/K
for the radiative rate, rather lower than predicted by Eq. (5). This
discrepancy is likely caused by a lower emissivity than assumed in Sec.
3. The value obtained by deDear,
et
al. is consistent with emissivity 0.8. In the presence of 1m/s
wind these authors found an additional 10 W/m
2/K of forced
convective loss.
6. Conclusions
Even in the absence of wind, convection is an important mechanism in
cooling the human body. Under such conditions, convection accounts for
about 1/3 the thermal loss of the human body in cool, still air. As
other thermal loss
mechanisms
grow in importance, such as forced convection and perspiration,
radiation assumes a minor role in human thermal balance. This is
consonant with the concept of "wind-chill" factor, which accounts for
the enhanced sensation of cold when it is windy. These conclusions are
only weakly dependent on the assumed temperature of clothing or skin,
which is only estimated rather crudely.
7. Acknowledgments
I am grateful for the assistance of Edward Ruf, who provided a crucial
reference and insight into the physics of convection. I am also
indebted to Fred Kinley who also provided useful references.
8. References
1. Eric Weisstein,
World of
Physics,
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/NusseltNumber.html
2. Eric Weisstein,
World of
Physics, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GrashofNumber.html
3.
The Engineering Toolbox,
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-properties-d_156.html
4. Frank Kreith and William Z. Black,
Basic
Heat Transfer (Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. NewYork, NY
1980).
5.
Hypertextbook,
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/AbantyFarzana.shtml
Temperature Regulation in the Neutral
Zone,
http://faculty.washington.edu/brengelm/neut_zone/pg1.html
Cooling of the Human Body,
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/thermo/coobod.html
6. Juan G. Flores in
Biomedical Engineering Principles, D.O.
Cooney, ed., (Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, 1976).
http://academic.uprm.edu/~mgoyal/fluidsjuly2004/cooneychapter5.pdf
7. Bin Lee,
Theoretical Prediction
and Measurement of the Fabric Surface Apparent Temperature in a
Simulated Man/Fabric/Environment System (DSTO Aeronautical
and Maritime Research Laboratory, 1999)
http://www.dsto.defence.gov.au/publications/2135/DSTO-TR-0849.pdf
8. J.D. Hardy and E.F. DuBois, Proc. Nat Acad. Sci.,
23, 624 (1937).
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/23/12/624.pdf
9. de Dear, R. J.; Arens, Edward; Hui, Zhang; Oguro, Masayuki,
International Journal of Biometeorology,
40, 141 (1997).
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997IJBm...40..141D