Applied Thermal Engineering: Mir Majid Etghani, Mohammad Hassan Shojaeefard, Abolfazl Khalkhali, Mostafa Akbari
Applied Thermal Engineering: Mir Majid Etghani, Mohammad Hassan Shojaeefard, Abolfazl Khalkhali, Mostafa Akbari
Applied Thermal Engineering: Mir Majid Etghani, Mohammad Hassan Shojaeefard, Abolfazl Khalkhali, Mostafa Akbari
h i g h l i g h t s
Effects of castor oil biodiesel blends have been examined on the diesel engine performance and emissions.
Modeling engine performance and emissions by articial neural network with back-propagation algorithm accurately.
2 and 6-objective optimization has been applied by the modied NSGA-II.
Trade-off optimum design points are determined by applying TOPSIS.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: This paper addresses articial neural network (ANN) modeling followed by multi-objective optimization
Received 26 September 2012 process to determine optimum biodiesel blends and speed ranges of a diesel engine fueled with castor oil
Accepted 24 May 2013 biodiesel (COB) blends. First, an ANN model was developed based on standard back-propagation algo-
Available online 3 June 2013
rithm to model and predict brake power, brake specic fuel consumption (BSFC) and the emissions of
engine. In this way, multi-layer perception (MLP) network was used for non-linear mapping between the
Keywords:
input and output parameters. Second, modied NSGA-II by incorporating diversity preserving mecha-
Performance
nism called the -elimination algorithm was used for multi-objective optimization process. Six objectives,
Emissions
Castor oil biodiesel
maximization of brake power and minimization of BSFC, PM, NOx, CO and CO2 were simultaneously
ANN considered in this step. Optimization procedure resulted in creating of non-dominated optimal points
NSGA-II which gave an insight on the best operating conditions of the engine. Third, an approach based on TOPSIS
TOPSIS method was used for nding the best compromise solution from the obtained set of Pareto solutions.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1359-4311/$ e see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2013.05.041
310 M.M. Etghani et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 59 (2013) 309e315
!
1 X tj oj
p
Table 4
100 (3) Three standard criteria obtained from the ANN.
p 1 tj
R RMSE MAPE
where t is the target value, o is the output value and p is the pattern Train Test Train Test Train Test
number [18].
Power 0.999995 0.999956 0.000772 0.002223 0.216595 0.532047
The goal is to maximize correlation coefcient to obtain a BSFC 0.999998 0.999957 0.001158 0.0047 0.12151 0.51145
network with the best generalization. Many different network PM 0.999995 0.996709 0.000719 0.008131 0.733854 4.15107
models were tried and their R, RMSE and MAPE values were NOx 0.999996 0.999955 0.001303 0.004254 0.169048 0.538951
calculated. Based on this analysis, the optimal architecture of the CO 0.999978 0.999937 0.001472 0.002437 0.396388 0.664076
CO2 0.999983 0.999931 0.001968 0.003807 0.350319 0.685741
ANN was constructed as 2e15e6 neural network architecture
312 M.M. Etghani et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 59 (2013) 309e315
X
n
5. Technique for ordering preferences by similarity to ideal wj 1 (9)
solution (TOPSIS) j1
TOPSIS is used to rank the given alternatives of the Pareto so- 4) Determine S and S as follow:
lutions got by MOPs introduced by Hwang and Yoon [26]. The basic
concept of TOPSIS determines the positive ideal solution (S) as
S maxb
s ij jjJ1 ; minb
s ij jjJ2 ; i 1; 2; .; m (10)
well as the negative ideal solution (S-), and then nds the best
compromise solution, which is the closest to S and the farthest
from S-, from the Pareto set according to the decision makers S minb
s ij jjJ1 ; maxb
s ij jjJ2 ; i 1; 2; .; m (11)
Fig. 2. BSFC vs. power in six-objective optimization. Fig. 4. PM vs. power in six-objective optimization.
M.M. Etghani et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 59 (2013) 309e315 313
7) Choose the best compromise solution whose relative closeness A population of 80 individuals with a crossover probability of 0.6
Di is the closest to 1. and mutation probability of 0.08 was used in 400 generations for
such 6-objective optimization problem.
Fig. 6. CO2 vs. power in six-objective optimization. Fig. 8. NOx vs. BSFC in six-objective optimization.
314 M.M. Etghani et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 59 (2013) 309e315
functions. Thus, there are some points in each plane that may
dominate others in the same plane. However, these individuals are
all non-dominated when considering all six objectives simulta-
neously. If the design variables (Engine speed and Biodiesel percent
in blends) are selected, based on the Pareto sets, it leads to the best
possible combination of those six objectives. Moreover, it can
readily be observed that the results of such six-objective optimi-
zation include those of the two-objective optimization and,
therefore, provide more optimal choices for the designer. Such an
overlay graph in which the results of the independently got two-
objective optimization lie on the boundary of the six-objective
optimization indeed exhibits the correctness of the Pareto frontiers.
It is now desired to nd a trade-off optimum design points out of
all non-dominated six-objective optimization process compro-
mising all objective functions. This can be achieved by TOPSIS
Fig. 9. CO vs. BSFC in six-objective optimization.
method described in section 6. TOPSIS method is applied on the
individuals obtained in six and some of two-objective optimization
process separately. In this way, equal weights are used to consider
non-preference for all objective functions. Consequently, optimum
design point A is got by applying TOPSIS on the results of two-
objective optimization problems of power and BSFC. Similarly,
considering conjugation of Power or BSFC with the emissions as
objective functions and applying TOPSIS, optimum design points B
to I are got. Finally TOPSIS is employed to get trade-off optimum
point P from the six-objective optimization problem. Design points
A to P are depicted in Figs. 2e10 and the values of design variables
and objective functions for these points are depicted in Table 5.
Optimum points J to O represented in Table 5 and Figs. 3e10 are
the results of the single objective optimization which show the best
values of each objective. It means that if someone looks for improve
on only one of the six-objective functions, one of the points J to O.
As it is expected, biodiesel percent reduction in blend to 0 and
Fig. 10. CO2 vs. BSFC in six-objective optimization. engine speed increase to about 2000 rpm, maximum power was
achieved (See point K). Moreover, for gaining minimum NOx, en-
gine speed was set to the lower bound (point L).
A total 1274 non-dominated optimum design points were gotten Moreover, another trade-off design point Q can be simply
during optimization process. The non-dominated individuals of the recognized from Figs. 2e10. This point is closely near to the Pareto
six-objective optimization in the plane of power and BSFC together fronts in all planes and also has good power about 50 kW. This issue
with the results of a separately run two-objective optimization of shows that it is worthy from the view point of all objective
the same two objectives were depicted in Fig. 2. Such non- functions.
dominated individuals of six and two-objective optimization Consequently, there are some important optimal design facts
were shown on the other planes in Figs. 3e10. It should be noted among the objective functions which discovered by the multi-
that there is a single set of individuals as a result of the six-objective objective optimization of the ANN meta-models obtained using
optimization that are shown in different planes of objective the experimental analysis of the diesel engine. Such important
Table 5
The best compromise solution determined by TOPSIS.
Point Objectives Speed (rpm) Bio percent Power (kW) BSFC (g/kW-h) CO2 (% Vol) CO (% Vol) NOx (ppm) PM (mg/m3)
Two-objective optimization A Power-BSFC 1000.0 35.35 53.16 214.07 14.15 0.24 566 601.15
process Topsis B Power-PM 1356.6 2.15 41.24 235.28 11.36 0.40 1363 0.84
C Power-NOx 1000.2 37.83 50.45 205.10 14.49 0.25 383 600.01
D Power-CO 1901.6 45.45 40.36 316.49 1.92 0.08 1316 58.56
E Power-CO2 1917.4 46.60 38.13 325.03 1.48 0.07 1429 62.47
F BSFC-PM 1312.1 0.34 31.68 227.56 11.66 0.47 1500 8.00E-05
G BSFC-NOx 1000.2 38.52 49.35 207.55 14.41 0.24 365 599.89
H BSFC-CO 1846.3 46.37 38.37 316.88 1.79 0.075 1381 54.85
I BSFC-CO2 1858.5 48.35 35.11 329.13 1.22 0.06 1555 63.05
Single objective optimization J BSFC 1353.9 36.1 29.46 203.78 12.17 0.36 761 0.013
K Power 1996.1 0 61 255.0 8.92 0.31 927 47.5
L NOx 1000.3 39.41 48.36 211.37 14.21 0.24 355 600.39
M PM 1299.4 7.37 29.83 232.85 11.28 0.46 1539 0.00003
N CO 1897.5 49.67 32.68 336.64 0.86 0.05 1659 62.25
O CO2 1969.6 49.43 30.92 340.45 0.69 0.06 1662 67.80
Six-objective optimization P 6-objective 1394.8 37.96 47.23 216.11 11.37 0.30 580 27.79
process TOPSIS
- Q e 1831.3 35.894 67.02 249.0671 7.64429 0.21931 658 27.82
M.M. Etghani et al. / Applied Thermal Engineering 59 (2013) 309e315 315
optimal design points could not be found without the multi- [6] N. Kara Togun, S. Baysec, Prediction of torque and specic fuel consumption of
a gasoline engine by using articial neural networks, Appl. Energy 87 (2010)
objective optimization approach of such diesel engine.
349e355.
[7] Shivakumar, P. Srinivasa Pai, B.R. Shrinivasa Rao, Articial Neural Network
based prediction of performance and emission characteristics of a variable
7. Conclusions
compression ratio CI engine using WCO as a biodiesel at different injection
timings, Appl. Energy 88 (2011) 2344e2354.
Feed forward neural network approach was used successfully to [8] M. Glc, Y. Sekmen, P. Erduranl, M. Sahir Salman, Articial neural-network
derive models of the performance and emissions of the diesel en- based modeling of variable valve-timing in a spark-ignition engine, Appl.
Energy 81 (2005) 187e197.
gine fueled with castor oil biodiesel blends. The derived models [9] S. Orun Mert, Z. zelik, Y. zelik, I. Diner, Multi-objective optimization of
were then used in an evolutionary multi-objective Pareto based a vehicular PEM fuel cell system, Appl. Thermal Eng. 31 (2011) 2171e2176.
optimization process so that some interesting and informative [10] P. Ahmadi, I. Dincer, Thermodynamic and exergoenvironmental analyses, and
multi-objective optimization of a gas turbine power plant, Appl. Thermal Eng.
optimum design aspects revealed for the diesel engine with respect 31 (2011) 2529e2540.
to the control variables of biodiesel percent and engine speed. For [11] N. Srinivas, K. Deb, Multiobjective optimization using nondominated sorting
getting better results, common NSGA-II algorithm was modied. in genetic algorithms, Int. J. Evol. Comput. 2 (1994) 221e248.
[12] A. Jamali, N. Nariman-zadeh, A. Darvizeh, A. Masoumi, S. Hamrang, Multi-
This optimization led to the discovering of some important trade- objective evolutionary optimization of polynomial neural networks for
off points among those objective functions. Such multi-objective modelling and prediction of explosive cutting process, Int. J. Eng. Appl. Art
optimization of diesel engine could unveil very important design Intel 22 (2009) 676e687.
[13] A. Khalkhali, N. Nariman-zadeh, A. Darvizeh, A. Masoumi, B. Notghi, Reli-
trade-offs between conicting objective functions which would not
ability-based robust multi-objective crashworthiness optimisation of S-sha-
have been found otherwise. Furthermore, it was shown that the ped box beams with parametric uncertainties, Int. J. Crashworth 15 (4) (2010)
results of six-objective optimization include those of two-objective 443e456.
[14] N. Nariman-Zadeh, M. Salehpour, A. Jamali, E. Haghgoo, Pareto optimization of
optimization in terms of Pareto frontiers and provide, accordingly,
a ve-degree of freedom vehicle vibration model using a multi-objective
more choices for optimal design. Finally, some trade-off optimum uniform-diversity genetic algorithm (MUGA), Eng. Appl. Art Intel. 23 (2010)
design points were determined and presented by applying TOPSIS 543e551.
method on the non-dominated solutions obtained through six- and [15] W.S. Lee, L.C. Lin, Evaluating and ranking the energy performance of ofce
building using technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution,
two-objective problems. Designers can use these points in the Appl. Thermal Eng. 31 (2011) 3521e3525.
engine map for getting better performance. [16] M. Boix, L. Pibouleau, L. Montastruc, C. Azzaro-Pantel, S. Domenech, Mini-
mizing water and energy consumptions in water and heat exchange net-
works, Appl. Thermal Eng. 36 (2012) 442e455.
Acknowledgements [17] S. Haykin, Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation, Mac-millan, New
York, 1994.
[18] Y. ay, A. iek, F. Kara, S. Sagiroglu, Prediction of engine performance for an
The authors would like to acknowledge Iranian Fuel Conserva- alternative fuel using articial neural network, Appl. Thermal Eng. 37 (2012)
tion Company for supporting us in doing this research. 217e225.
[19] C.A. Coello Coello, A.D. Christiansen, Multiobjective optimization of trusses
using genetic algorithms, Comp. Struct. 75 (2000) 647e660.
References [20] A. Osyezka, Multicriteria Optimization for Engineering Design, Design Opti-
mization, Academic Press, NY, 1985, pp. 193e227.
[1] A. Demirbas, Biodiesels e A Realistic Fuel Alternative for Diesel Engines, [21] C.M. Fonseca, P.J. Fleming, Genetic algorithms for multi-objective optimiza-
Springer, London, 2008. tion: Formulation, discussion and generalization, in: S. Forrest (Ed.), Proc.. of
[2] G. Knothe, J.V. Gerpen, J. Krahl, The Biodiesel Handbook, AOCS Press, Illinois, the Fifth Int. Conf. on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA,
2005. 1993, pp. 416e423.
[3] J. Starbuck, G.D.J. Harper, Run Your Diesel Vehicle on Biofuels, McGraw-Hill, [22] C.A. Coello Coello, D.A. Van Veldhuizen, G.B. Lamont, Evolutionary Algorithms
New York, 2009. for Solving Multi-objective Problems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, NY, 2002.
[4] B. Ghobadian, H. Rahimi, A.M. Nikbakht, G. Naja, T.F. Yusaf, Diesel engine [23] V. Pareto, Cours deconomic ploitique, Rouge, Lausanne, Switzerland, 1896.
performance and exhaust emission analysis using waste cooking biodiesel fuel [24] D.E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine
with an articial neural network, Renew. Energy 34 (2009) 976e982. Learning, Addison-Wesley, New York, 1989.
[5] M. Kiani Deh Kiani, B. Ghobadian, T. Tavakoli, A.M. Nikbakht, G. Naja, [25] A. Toffolo, E. Benini, Genetic diversity as an objective in multi-objective
Application of articial neural networks for the prediction of performance and evolutionary algorithms, Evol Comput 11 (2) (2003) 151e167.
exhaust emissions in SI engine using ethanol-gasoline blends, Energy 35 [26] C.L. Hwang, K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making e Methods and
(2010) 65e69. Applications, Springer-Verlag Press, Heidelberg, 1981.