Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

A variational approach to ecological-type optimization criteria for finite-time thermal engine

models

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.

2002 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 35 1089

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0022-3727/35/10/319)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:

IP Address: 132.239.1.231
This content was downloaded on 14/06/2017 at 04:51

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

You may also be interested in:

Optimization of heat engines including the saving of natural resources and the reduction of thermal
pollution
S Velasco, J M M Roco, A Medina et al.

A general property of non-endoreversible thermal cycles

F Angulo-Brown, L A Arias-Hernndez and R Pez-Hernndez

Comment on A general property of non-endoreversible thermal cycles

Zijun Yan

Thermal fluctuations in nonlinear systems

N Snchez Salas and A Calvo Hernndez

On the efficiency at maximum cooling power

Y. Apertet, H. Ouerdane, A. Michot et al.

Feynman's ratchet optimization

S Velasco, J M M Roco, A Medina et al.

A non-endoreversible Otto cycle model: improving power output and efficiency

F Angulo-Brown, J A Rocha-Martnez and T D Navarrete-Gonzlez

A Mser - Curzon - Ahlborn engine model for photothermal conversion

T D Navarrete-Gonzlez, J A Rocha-Martnez and F Angulo-Brown

Optical fibres for a mini-dish/Stirling system

O A Jaramillo and J A del Ro
INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING JOURNAL OF PHYSICS D: APPLIED PHYSICS
J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 35 (2002) 10891093 PII: S0022-3727(02)32912-7

A variational approach to ecological-type

optimization criteria for finite-time
thermal engine models
F Angulo-Brown1 , G Ares de Parga and L A Arias-Hernandez
Departamento de Fisica, Escuela Superior de Fisica y Matematicas, Instituto Politecnico
Nacional, Edif. #9, 2o. Piso, UP Zacatenco, 07738, Mexico DF, Mexico
E-mail: angulo@esfm.ipn.mx

Received 22 January 2002

Published 30 April 2002
Online at stacks.iop.org/JPhysD/35/1089
Abstract
In this paper we apply variational calculus procedures for the optimization
of a CurzonAhlborn thermal cycle under the so-called modified ecological
criterion. Our result for the optimum efficiency is the same that Velasco et al
(2000 J. Phys. D 33 355) previously obtained by means of the method of the
saving functions. Besides, we show that both the saving functions and the
modified ecological criteria are equivalent.

1. Introduction These authors propose two objective functions, one of them

One of the main issues of finite-time thermodynamics (FTT)
has been the optimization of models of energy-converting
processes, in particular, heat engine models [1, 2]. The
approach of FTT to this subject is based on the analysis
of general process thermodynamic properties rather than
on system technical details. Thus, the FTT approach can
be thought as one in the spirit of Carnot thermodynamics.
Although several criticisms have been made on the FTT
procedures [3,57], nowadays it can be considered as a branch
of nonequilibrium thermodynamics which can contribute to the
understanding of the role of global losses over the performance
of energy-converting processes of several classes [8, 9]. Many
of the FTT studies have been inspired by the aim of conceiving
general guides of a less dramatic interaction between power
plants and the environment [1, 2, 10, 11]. For example, in a
recent paper, Velasco et al [2] proposed the use of the concept
of a saving function as a measure of possible reductions of
undesired side effects in heat engine operation (of the Curzon
Ahlborn (CA) type). They introduced two saving functions,
one associated with fuel consumption and another associated
with thermal pollution; then they constructed plausible
objective functions = (w, qin , qout ) to be optimized, where
w has to do with the production of useful energy (w = W /Wmp ,
W being the engines power output and Wmp the engines
maximum power output respectively), qin is the fuel saving
function and qout is the thermal pollution saving function.
1 Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
defined on the basis of a linear formalism supported by the
first law of thermodynamics, given by
A = a1 w + a2 qin + a3 qout , (1)
where a1 , a2 and a3 are weight coefficients measuring the
participation degree of the corresponding process in the
optimization criterion. The other objective function was
constructed on the basis of a power-law formalism and it is
defined by
B = (wqin qout )b , (2)
where b is a constant [2]. When A is put on in an explicit
form in terms of the efficiency (see equation (41) below), by
means of dA /d = 0, one immediately obtains
A = 1 3/4 , (3)
with = TC /TH , being TC and TH the absolute temperatures
of the cold and hot thermal reservoirs respectively. When B
is expressed explicitly and then maximized, the result is [2],


B = 41 (5 (1 + 2 ) + 12 ). (4)
These two efficiencies A and B are located between the
(C = 1 ) and the CA efficiency
Carnot efficiency
(CA = 1 , see figure 1 of [2]) such as it is required
for optimum efficiencies from an economical point of view
[11]. Moreover, although A < B , both efficiencies are
practically indistinguishable. That is, the application of both

0022-3727/02/101089+05$30.00 2002 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK 1089

F Angulo-Brown et al

the linear and power-law formalisms to a CA engine leads to
practically the same optimum efficiency: opt = 1 3/4 .
Another optimization criterion for CA engines proposed in
the spirit of reaching a good compromise between high power
output and low entropy production is the so-called ecological
criterion [13, 14], which consists in the maximization of the
function E given by
E = W TC , (5)
where W is the power output, in general TC = T0 being T0 the
environment temperature and T0 is the rate of exergy (being
the entropy production). As remarked by Velasco et al [2],
the ecological function given by equation (5) is equivalent to
the profit function (equation (2) of [2]) for P = 1, where
P = PA /PW , PA being the price of exergy and PW the price
of power output in the profit function introduced by Salamon
and Nitzan [15], given by
 = PW W PA T0 . (6)
2. The modified ecological criterion
The modified ecological criterion consists of the maximization
of the function E () given by equation (8).In 1979, Rubin
[19] recovered the CA efficiency (CA = 1 ) by means of
the application of variational calculus to the maximization of
the CA cycles power output treated as the objective functional
subject to the endoreversibility restriction. In his 1979 paper,
Rubin used a linear heat transfer law. With this same formalism
in [20] the ecological function (without ) was maximized,
obtaining equation (7). Later, in [21] a variational approach
was employed for the ecological optimization of a CA engine
with a nonlinear heat transfer law. In all these papers the
endoreversibility restriction was written as
 C
q
Sw = dt = 0, (10)
0 T
where T is the working fluid temperature, C is the cycling
time of the engine taken as fixed an q is the heat flux into the
working fluid given by a linear law

The efficiency E , where the ecological function reaches its q = (TR T ), (11)
maximum value is given by [2, 16]
where is the thermal conductance of the diathermic walls, and
 TR is the absolute temperature of a heat reservoir. Applying
(1 )
E = 1 (7) the first law of thermodynamics to the working fluid,
2
q = U + p V , (12)
and this value satisfies, CA < E < A < B < C .
In fact, as remarked by Velasco et al [2], the values of E where U is the rate of change of the internal energy of
and opt = 1 3/4 are close, but E < opt (see figure 1 the working fluid and p, V are its pressure and volume,
of [2]). Recently, in [17, 18], a new ecological criterion respectively, one can write for the work done by the engine
was introduced by means of the maximization of a modified in one cycle (C fixed),
ecological function given by  C  C
W = pV dt = q dt = 0. (13)
E () = W () T0 () , (8) 0 0

Thus, to maximize the total work W (equivalently the power

where is a parameter that depends on the heat transfer law
output W for C fixed) subject to the endoreversible constraint,
used to model the heat fluxes in a CA engine. This parameter
Rubin used the following Lagrangian:
arises from a function of compromise given by [17]
L = W Sw , (14)
W (ME ) (ME )
C() = , (9)
W (MP ) (MP ) where is a Lagrange multiplier. Equation (11) provides both
the heats entering and leaving the working fluid by means of
where the subscripts ME and MP mean maximum ecological the useof the Heaviside step function, e.g. the entering heat is

function depending on the parameter and maximum power Q1 = 0 C q(TR T ) dt with (x) = 1 if x > 0, (x) = 0 if
output respectively. In [17] it was shown that the maximum x < 0. Then, by using equations (10)(12) in equation (14),
modified ecological efficiency for a CA engine with linear heat one obtains
exchanges between the working fluid and its thermal reservoirs  C  
(TR T )
is given precisely by E N = 1 3/4 , which is the same result L= (TR T ) dt. (15)
given by Velasco et al [2]. In this paper, we again obtain E N = 0 T
1 3/4 for the linear case, but using an alternative approach Thus, by means of the first variation equalled to zero, L = 0,

by means of variational calculus, and we also calculate the Rubin obtained CA = 1 . In [20], for the optimization
explicit form of by means of the maximization of the of the ecological function the following Lagrangian
function of compromise (equation (9)). Besides, we calculate  C  
(TR T ) (T TR )
both the efficiency and for the ecological regime but by LE = (TR T ) T0 dt
0 T TR
considering internal losses by means of a non-endoreversibility
parameter I . Finally, we show that our modified ecological (16)
criterion and the Velasco et al criterion of saving functions are was used, where the objective function is E = W T0 subject
equivalent for the case of a linear heat transfer law. to the endoreversibility constrain given by equation (10).

1090
 Variational approach to ecological-type optimization

Now, our objective is the maximization of the modified and

ecological function given by equation (8), also subject to the (C )2
T0 = 0 (27)
endoreversibility constraint, thus the Lagrangian is 1
(with W0 and 0 constants) respectively, we obtain
L = W T0 Sw , (17)
(1 CA ) (C ) (1 CA ) (C )2
C() = ,
which becomes CA (1 ) (C CA ) (1 ) (C CA )2
 C  
(TR T ) (T TR ) (28)
L = (TR T ) T0 dt.
0 T TR where is given by equation (25). By the maximization of
(18) the function C(); i.e. dC()/d = 0, we obtain
For simplicity, we take the thermal conductances 1 = 2 = 
TH
for the both couplings between the working fluid and its two = = 1/2 . (29)
thermal reservoirs at fixed temperatures T0 and TH . Taking the T0
first variation over L , we have
 C  
If we substitute equation (29) into equation (25), we
T0 (TR T )
L = TR 1+ T0 immediately obtain
0 TR T TR2

  3/4
T0 TR T0
+T 1 + 2 dt, (19) = 1 = 1 3/4 , (30)
TR T TH
which can be written as which is the same result obtained by Velasco et al [2] for the
 C
optimum efficiency of a CA cycle with linear heat transfer
L = [TR g (T , TR , T0 , , )
0 exchanges at the couplings between the working fluid and its
+ Tf (T , TR , T0 , , )] dt, (20) thermal reservoirs. When numerical results are obtained from
equation (30) for several power plants (see table 1 of [2]),
where systematically occurs that > obs . This discrepancy is
T0 T
g(T , TR , T0 , , ) = 1 + 2 (21) solved by Velasco et al [2] by means of the consideration of
T TR
internal irreversibilities in the CA engine model through the
and expression
T0 TR Qin Qout
f (T , TR , T0 , , ) = 1 + 2 . (22) I = 0, (31)
TR T Th Tc
Equalling to zero the first variation given by equation (20), we where I is a phenomenological parameter representing the
have two solutions. The first one is obtained by setting g = 0, ratio of two entropy differences [24]. From equation (31),
which is an unilateral constraint [22] that leads to a nonphysical Velasco et al [2] obtain Qout /Qin = Tc /I Th = /I ; then
solution and it is discarded. Thus, we keep our attention over they assume I as a -independent parameter, such that internal
the second solution, f = 0, which gives irreversibilities can be taken into account by replacing the
 1/2 temperature ratio in opt = 1 3/4 by  = /I that is,
TH 
TR = TH , Th = (23) opt = 1  3/4 . With this procedure they obtain the values
1 + T0 /TH of their table 1 [2], where they show that opt 
, with I
in the interval [0.8, 0.9]. Now, we attack this problem with a
and  1/2
T0 variational procedure. As a first step, we construct the non-
TR = T0 , Tl = . (24) endoreversible Lagrangian LI ,
1+
 C  
Here, Th and Tl are the working fluid temperatures at the hot and (TR T ) (T TR )
LI = (TR T ) I T0 dt,
cold isothermal branches of the CA cycle respectively. As the 0 T TR
internal CA cycle is an endoreversible one, then its efficiency is (32)
 where we have used equation (8) as the objective function
Tl (1 + ) subject to the restriction given by equation (10) but adapted to
= 1 =1 , (25) equation (31), which is now the non-endoreversible constraint.
Th 1+
By taking the first variation and equalling to zero, LI = 0,
where we have used equations (23) and (24) for Th and Tl and following the same procedure that in the previous case
respectively. The function of compromise (equation (9)) was (equation (19) equation (22)), for f = 0, we obtain,
proposed in [25, 23] as a manner to measure the compromise
between high power output and low entropy production. If in I TR TR + T0
2
= , (33)
equation (9) we substitute the corresponding expressions for T TR
power output and entropy production, in the case of a linear
which leads to the following two solutions: if TR = TH then
heat transfer law given by [12, 23]

(C ) Th =
TH
(34)
W = W0 (26) 1 + T0 /TH
,
1

1091
F Angulo-Brown et al

where we have taken I = 1 for the hot isothermal branch of the

working fluid in a non-endoreversible CA engine according to
both equation (31) and the entropy trapezius of a TS diagram
for a non-endoreversible CA engine [26]. On the other hand,
if TR = T0 , then  A
I T0
Tl = . (35)
1+
E
As the interior CA engine is a Carnot-like one, then its
efficiency is [2]
 
Tl T0 (1 + T0 /TH ) 1/2
= 1 =1 . (36)
I Th I TH (1 + )

For this case, we calculate by means of the compromise
C
A

2
function given by equation (9) and using the corresponding 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7


non-endoreversible expressions for W and , which are given
by [25] Figure 1. Comparison between the functions A and E , where C
TH [I (1 ) ] is the Carnot efficiency and 2A is such that A (2A ) = 0. Vertical
W (, I ) = (37) axis in arbitrary scale.
1+I 1
and
The fact that the functions A (, ) and E (, ) are
TH (1 )[I (1 ) ] maximal for the same value of is a consequence of the
(, I ) = . (38)
1+I 1 following identity:
When these equations
are evaluated in (equation (36)) 1 2
and in MP = 1 /I [17] and then C() is maximized A (, ) = E (, ) + 1, (43)
2a TH (1 )2
(C()/ = 0), we obtain
 1/2  such that the equations A / = 0 and E / = 0
1 I 1/2
= 1/2 . (39) automatically have the same solution (see figure 1). Thus, we
1 (I )1/2 can assert that both optimization criteria based on the functions
A (, ) and E (, ) are equivalent.
Thus the modified ecological efficiency given by equation (36)
becomes  3/4
= 1 (40) 4. Conclusions
I
which reproduces the expression used by Velasco et al [2] for a In spite of its simplicity, the thermal engine models provided
non-endoreversible CA engine, but by means of a more formal by FTT can proportion general guidelines on the performance
procedure. of such processes, say, in the spirit of Carnot thermodynamics.
One important problem in FTT optimization has to do with
3. Equivalence between A and the modified conceiving rough power plant models with less contaminating
ecological function interaction with their surroundings. In this line, several
optimization criteria have been proposed in the FTT context,
The explicit form of the objective function given by such as the saving function and the modified ecological
equation (1) obtained by Velasco et al [2] is criteria. In the present paper we have recovered the optimum
efficiency expression opt = 1 3/4 of both methods
2a(1 ) by means of a variational procedure. Besides, we have
A = , (41)
(1 )(1 )(1 ) also obtained an expression for the optimum efficiency
corresponding to both methods applied to a CA engine model
which is valid only if, in equation (1), a1 = a2 = a3 = a, a with internal irreversibilities, also by means of variational
being a constant. The function A (, ) shows a maximum at calculus. Furthermore, we have showed that both the saving
= opt = = 1 3/4 and two zeros, one at = 0 and at functions and the modified ecological methods are equivalent
= 1 3/2 > C . for the case of a CA engine model with a linear heat transfer
The explicit form of the ecological function (equation law for describing the heat exchanges between the working
(8)) is fluid and its thermal reservoirs.
  
1 1 (1 + ) + 1
E (, ) = TH . (42)
2 1
Acknowledgment
The function E (, ) shows a maximum at = opt = =
1 3/4 and two zeros, one at = (1 )/(1 + ) and one This work was supported in part by COFAA, EDD and EDI
at = 1 = C . IPNMexico.

1092

References
[1] Calvo A, Medina A, Roco J M M, White J A and Velasco S
2001 Phys. Rev. E 63 037102-1-4
[2] Velasco S, Roco J M M, Medina A, White J A and
Calvo-Hernandez A 2000 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 33 355
[3] Bejan A 1996 J. Appl. Phys. 79 1191
[4] Bejan A 1997 Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics 2nd
edn (New York: Wiley)
[5] Gyftopoulos E P 1997 Energy Convers. Mgmt. 38 1525
[6] Moran M J 1998 Energy 23 517
[7] Sekulic D P 1998 J. Appl. Phys. 83 4561
[8] Hoffmann K H, Burzler J M and Shubert S 1997
J. Non-Equilib. Thermodyn. 22 310
[9] Chen L, Wu C and Sun F 1999 J. Non-Equilib. Thermodyn.
24 327
[10] Bejan A 1996 Entropy Generation Minimization (Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press)
[11] de Vos A 1995 Energy Convers. Mgmt. 36 1
[12] de Vos 1992 Endoreversible Thermodynamics of Solar Energy
Conversion (Oxford: University Press)
[13] Angulo-Brown F 1991 J. Appl. Phys. 69 7465
Variational approach to ecological-type optimization
[14] Yan Z 1993 J. Appl. Phys. 73 3583
[15] Salamon P and Nitzan A 1981 J. Chem. Phys. 74 3546
[16] Arias-Hernandez L A and Angulo-Brown F 1994 Rev. Mex.
Fs. 40 866
[17] Angulo-Brown F and Arias-Hernandez L A 2001 J. Appl.
Phys. 89 1520
[18] Yan Z 2001 J. Appl. Phys. 89 1518
[19] Rubin M H 1979 Phys. Rev. A 19 1272
[20] Ares de Parga G and Santillan M 1998 Rev. Mex. Fs. 44 373
[21] Ares de Parga G, Angulo-Brown F and
Navarrete-Gonzalez T D 1999 Energy 24 997
[22] Kilmister C W and Reeve J E 1966 Rational Mechanics
(New York: American Elsevier)
[23] Arias-Hernandez L A and Angulo-Brown F 1997 J. Appl.
Phys. 81 2973
[24] Wu C and Kiang L 1992 Energy 17 1173
[25] Arias-Hernandez L A 2000 Algunas Propiedades y
Aplicaciones del Criterio de Optimizacion Ecologico en
Termodinamica Fuera de Equilibrio Tesis Doctoral
(Mexico: ESFM-IPN)
[26] Ozkaynak S, Goktun S and Yavuz H J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 27
1139
1093