Cost and Entropy Generation Minimization of a Cross-Flow Plate Fin Heat Exchanger Using Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present work, a thermal modeling is conducted for optimal design of compact heat exchangers in order to minimize cost and entropy generation. In this regard, an ε−NTU method is applied for estimation of the heat exchanger pressure drop, as well as effectiveness. Fin pitch, fin height, fin offset length, cold stream flow length, no-flow length, and hot stream flow length are considered as six decision variables. Fast and elitist nondominated sorting genetic algorithm (i.e., nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II) is applied to minimize the entropy generation units and the total annual cost (sum of initial investment and operating and maintenance costs) simultaneously. The results for Pareto-optimal front clearly reveal the conflict between two objective functions, the number of entropy generation units and the total annual cost. It reveals that any geometrical changes, which decrease the number of entropy generation units, lead to an increase in the total annual cost and vice versa. Moreover, for prediction of the optimal design of the plate fin heat exchanger, an equation for the number of entropy generation units versus the total annual cost is derived for the Pareto curve. In addition, optimization of heat exchangers based on considering exergy destruction revealed that irreversibilities, such as pressure drop and high temperature difference between cold and hot streams, play a key issue in exergy destruction. Thus, more efficient heat exchanger leads to have a heat exchanger with higher total cost rate. Finally, the sensitivity analysis of change in the optimum number of entropy generation units and the total annual cost with change in the decision variables of the plate fin heat exchanger is also performed, and the results are reported.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".