Optimizing the Design of Radiator using Genetic Algorithms ( Real World Application )

Puneet Saxena Graduate Student Industrial Engineering Dept. The University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 Email: saxen001@bama.ua.edu Phone: (205) 348 1659

Charles L. Karr Associate Professor Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics Dept. The University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, AL Email: ckarr@coe.eng.ua.edu Phone: (205) 348 0066

Keith A. Woodbury Associate Professor Mechanical Engineering Dept. The University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, AL Email: woodbury@me.ua.edu

Abstract

overall heat transfer coefficient and the total heat transfer area. The design optimization problem involves both explicit constraints (such as fixed frontal area) and implicit constraints (such as those specifying the heat transfer coefficient). Once the geometry is selected, additional constraints such as minimum and maximum values for the fin pitch, minimum and maximum number of tubes and the cross-section of the tubes are imposed, and thereafter the problem reduces to that of solving the problem within the ranges of variables specified to achieve the optimal design. The overall heat transfer coefficient is dependent on the number of tubes; in general, as the number of tubes increases the heat transfer coefficient improves. However, additional factors such as vibration damage (if the tubes are very close together), the need to access the outer surface of tubes for cleaning, and the limit on pressure drop across the radiator affect the decision on the number of tubes. Fins are attached to the tubes by brazing or soldering, thereby imparting strength to the whole assembly and enabling the exchanger to withstand high pressure. Fins not only enhance the overall heat transfer coefficient but also significantly increase the total heat transfer area and thus help enhance the performance of a radiator. However, if the fin pitch is high, the fluid in between the fins will move at a lower velocity (for constant pumping power) giving more time for fouling to occur and it further becomes difficult to clean the assembly. It is costly to have high fin pitch. Thus, fouling, maintenance, manufacturing, and cost considerations limit the fin pitch. The profile of the tube plays an important role as it affects the contact area between the two fluids without adding much cost, but the manufacturing process again limits the kinds of profiles that can be adopted economically. The factor most often used to evaluate the performance of the radiator is the product of overall heat transfer coefficient, U, and the total heat transfer area, A. The overall heat transfer coefficient is a function of the heat

This paper describes the application of genetic algorithms to achieve the optimal design of a radiator used in automobiles so as to achieve not only the required performance but also to find a cost effective solution. The performance of an automobile radiator is a function of overall heat transfer coefficient and total heat transfer area. The basic thermodynamic equations are utilised to enable the calculation of the overall heat transfer coefficient of the vehicle radiator core and thereafter the genetic algorithm is used for manipulating the design parameters to achieve the optimal solution.

INTRODUCTION

Radiators are heat exchangers responsible for controlling engine-operating temperatures. The heat carried by the cooling water jacket is generally 30% of the total energy produced in the engine. This energy must be removed constantly through the use of a heat exchanger, or a radiator. A suitable radiator is used to achieve not only the efficient performance of the engine but also the costeffective solution for the cooling system. In radiators, heat carried by the coolant fluid is transported by convection and conduction to the fin surface and from there by thermal radiation into the atmosphere-free space. The hot and cold fluids are separated by an impervious surface and hence they are also referred to as surface heat exchangers. In the case of a radiator, the hot fluid flows inside the tubes and so the hot fluid is unmixed. However, the cold fluid flows over the tubes and is free to be mixed. The mixing tends to make the fluid temperature uniform in transverse direction; therefore, the exit temperature of a mixed stream exhibits negligible variation. The total heat transfer rate between the fluids is dependent on the

transfer coefficient and a fouling factor. The fouling factor is a constant for given environmental conditions while the heat transfer coefficient can be calculated by using the following set of equations:

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Heat Transfer Coefficient, h =

[ St Pr ] [G c ] Pr
2/3 2/3 p

Reynolds Number, Re

Dh G A' v AC

Mass Velocity, G

where cp is specific heat at constant pressure, A' is frontal area of radiator, is density of air, v is velocity of air at inlet, Ac is free-flow area of radiator, Pr is Prandtl number, Dh is hydraulic diameter, St is Stanton number, and is the dynamic viscosity of the radiator fluid. The total surface area through which heat exchange occurs is dependent on the profile of both the tubes and the fins, the number of tubes, the fin pitch and the number of rows. The configuration of fins and tubes also affects the performance, but the current study is confined to only straight fins and inline tubes. Figure 1 shows the radiator core having straight fins and tubes.

It is generally desired to find a solution for radiator design that simultaneously meets both the performance requirements and cost targets. Since a number of parameters affect both the performance and the cost, it is important to evaluate the search space thoroughly to obtain the best possible solution. The radiator heat transfer model is linearized about a known configuration from a flattened tube / fin array (surface 9.68 0.87)14. This paper presents a solution approach in which a genetic algorithm manipulates the parameters to find a near-optimum solution. This study reveals the details of the approach that solves the problem of searching the cost-effective design of an automotive radiator for a predefined level of performance of a radiator. This is accomplished by providing the details of the configuration of the tubes and the fins along with the details of the cross-section of the tube for the specific design problem.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The automobile industry is a field in which an abundance of research has been conducted. Since radiators play an integral role in the operation of an automobile, these devices have been explored extensively. The concentration has always been on evaluating the radiator together with the cooling system of the engine 4. A work in the early 1970s focused on heat dissipation from a radiator to cool vehicle engines1. Further, during that time a computer program for selecting a radiator to provide a desired level of engine cooling and for predicting the engine cooling performance with a given radiator was formulated2. Simulations were developed for evaluating the performance of a radiator as a single part of an entire cooling system. As time passed researchers started analyzing the material of the radiator and now aluminum is considered to produce the best performance based upon the statistics available because of a better method of manufacturing and new metallurgical combinations 3. Chiou 9 conducted a study to understand the effect of the tube length on the heat transfer capability of a heat exchanger. Further, Emmaenthal and Hacho10 presented a method to design the cooling system of an automobile where the individual components were first described using experimental data and then the study was carried out to achieve the low cost design. But, genetic algorithms have not been previously applied to the problem of optimizing the design of a radiator.

Figure 1: Radiator core showing the straight fins and tubes with air and water flowing at right angles to each other.

GENETIC ALGORITHM PARTICULARS

CODING SCHEME

Minimise {k1*[(UA - UAdesired)2 +1]1/2 + k2*nt + k3* pf + k4*(17 -lt) + k5*(5-wt) } (1) where UAdesired = desired value of UA for radiator performance k1 = a weighting factor of 107 k2 = a weighting factor of 105 k3 = a weighting factor of 103 k4 = a weighting factor of 10 k5 = a weighting factor of 1 The difference between the UA and UAdesired is weighted by maximum factor as radiators under-performance and over performance is highly undesired, while the higher weightage is given to number of tubes represented in the string, pf represents the fin pitch value in the string while the higher weightage is given to the number of tubes as compared to the fin pitch the number of tubes affect the cost more severly. The profile of tube is given a low penalty for poor design. In the solution of this problem, a genetic algorithm first generates a population of strings of given length using the user-defined constraints. Each string is decoded to yield actual parameters. The fitness of each string in the population is found by evaluating the fitness function as defined in Equation (1). Then, reproduction using tournament selection, single-point crossover, and mutation are used to generate subsequent generations and search for acceptable values for nt, pf, lt and wt which minimise the fitness function of Equation (1). Tournament selection is executed by picking 15% of the strings from the current population at random and comparing their fitness values. The string with the lowest fitness value is placed into the mating pool for the new population. Single-point crossover is accomplished by randomly picking two strings from the mating pool; then randomly picking the crossover location in the string length based on a probability of crossover of 0.9 and crossing the strings at the location. A mutation operator with a probability of 0.01 is used to introduce new genetic material into the population.

4.1

As described above the goal of the current effort is to find a cost-effective design of the radiator having a desired performance using a genetic algorithm. In this study the parameters that define the performance and cost are the number of tubes (nt), the fin pitch (pf), the length of the cross-section of tube (lt) and the width of the cross-section of tube (wt). The length of the binary string, which represents these four parameters using standard binary concatenated coding, is found by specifying the accuracy of each parameter. The minimum and maximum values for each parameter are problem specific and depend on the constraints that exist on the design. Table 1 shows pertinent information about the coding used in this study. Table 1: Sub-string length for each parameter based on chosen accuracy and maximum and minimum values. SUBSTRING PARAMETER Ap Umin Umax LENGTH nt 1 29 60 5 pf (per inch) 1 8 11 2 lt (mm) 1 8 15 3 wt (mm x 10-1) 1 15 30 4

The sub-string lengths of each of the four parameters are concatenated, resulting in the total string length of fifteen. Each string represents one possible solution to the problem. The number of tubes and the fin pitch significantly affect the performance and cost of the radiator. Thus, these two parameters are placed adjacent to one another to reduce the likelihood of destroying good combinations of these two parameters by crossover. Therefore the binary string obtained is described in Table 2. Table 2: Position of each parameter in string. PARAMETER nt pf lt wt Positioning in string 1 - 5 6 - 7 8 - 10 11 - 14 4.2 FITNESS FUNCTION

RESULT

The parameters are sent to a mathematical model for evaluation of the performance and the cost effectiveness of the radiator, and in return a fitness value is assigned defining the quality of solution represented by a given binary string. The genetic algorithm then attempts to achieve the desired performance with the minimum number of tubes and fin pitch combination together with the best profile of the cross-section of the tube. Here the fitness function is defined as

The accuracy of the genetic algorithm is tested by comparing the solution obtained using a genetic algorithm to the known practical result; one that is implemented successfully in 1998 in India. The goal set for the of the genetic algorithm was to provide a cost-effective solution for the radiator, when the performance desired from the radiator is 817 WC (product of overall heat transfer coefficient and total heat transfer area). The genetic algorithm was run for twenty-five generations, using single-point crossover and a simple mutation operator. An initial population of 100 strings was randomly selected, where each string represented one

possible solution. The fitness value of the best string in a generation is plotted against the function evaluations. The results of this case are displayed in Figure 2.

Figure 3: Comparison of online and offline performance of genetic algorithm vs. function evaluation When the genetic algorithm was run and compared to the known practical solution the following results were obtained (Table 3): Table 3: Comparison of genetic algorithm to the known practical solution for the 3-row radiator with straight fins and inline tubes. (population size=100, number of generations=25, probability of crossover=0.9, probability of mutation=0.01) GENETIC PARAMETER PRACTICAL ALGORITHM Number of Tubes 48 51 Fin pitch (per inch) 10 11 Length of cross12 11 section of tube Width of cross2.5 1.8 section of tube Fitness Value 1481052.5 1511163.2 The configuration resulting from the genetic algorithm is slightly less economical than the practical known solution. However, the result is near optimal and hence the genetic algorithm is successful in providing a nearoptimal solution to the problem. Based on these results, the genetic algorithm can be used to determine the configuration of a radiator, for which we have no solution, when the performance desired from the radiator is know, say 1500 WC (product of overall heat transfer coefficient and total heat transfer area). Here a genetic algorithm is run for forty generations with a population size of 50, initially selected at random. The results of this case are displayed in Figure 4.

80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
0 60 0 80 0 20 0 40 0 10 00

Fitness

( x 10

Minimum Fitness

12 00

14 00

16 00

18 00

0 22 0

Function Evaluation
( N u m be r o f g e n e rat i o n x P o pu l a ti on s i z e )

Figure 2: Best Fitness produced by the genetic algorithm vs. function evaluation Particulars of Simple Genetic Algorithm: Population size=100 Number of generations=25 Probability of crossover=0.9 Probability of mutation=0.01 Chromosome length=15 Tournament size =15 Desired performance of radiator =817 WC As seen in Figure 3, the offline performance shows better convergence than the online performance. This is because of the larger pool of diverse schemata are available in larger population.
900 800 700 600

24 00

20 0

70 65 60 55 50 ) 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 O f f line P e rf o rma nc e
0 0 20 0 40 0 60 0 80 1 0 00 1 0 20 1 0 40 1 0 60 1 0 80 2 0 00 2 0 20 2 0 40
5

(x 10

5)

500 400 300 200 100 0 O n line P e rf o rma nce

Fitness

Fitness F unc tio n E v aluatio n

(N u m b e r o f g e n e ra ti o n x P o p u l a ti o n s i z e )

( x 10

5 0
0 10 0 20 0 30 0 40 0 50 0 60 0 70 0 80 0 90 0 10 00 11 00 12 00 13 00 14 00 15 00 16 00 17 00 18 00 19 00 20 00 21 00 22 00 23 00 24 00

F u nc tio n E v alu atio n

( N u m be r o f g e n e ra ti o n x P o pu la tio n s i z e )

Figure 4: Best Fitness produced by the genetic algorithm vs. function evaluation

9. Jiunn P. Chiou. Correction Factor to Unit Core Heat Transfer Capability of Heat Exchanger Core Due to Variation of Tube Length, Society of Automobile Engineers 750884 10. K. D. Emmenthal and W. Hucho. A Rational Approach to Automotive Radiator Systems Design, Society of Automobile Engineers 740088 11. D. E. Goldberg (1989). Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. 12. C. L. Karr, J. C. Phillips. Scheduling and Resource Allocation with Genetic Algorithms, Presentation at the Society of Mechanical Engineers Annual Meeting. 13. B. K. Hodge, Robert P. Taylor, (3rd edition) Analysis & Design of Energy Systems. 14. W. M. Kays and A. L. London, 2nd ed. (1964), Compact Heat Exchangers.

The configuration of radiator obtained after running the genetic algorithm is given in Table 4. Table 4: Solution provided by genetic algorithms for the 5-row radiator with straight fins and inline tubes. (population size=100, number of generations=100, probability of crossover=0.9, probability of mutation=0.1) SOLUTION PROVIDED BY PARAMETER GENETIC ALGORITHM Number of Tubes 52 Fin pitch (per inch) 9 Length of cross-section of tube 10 Width of cross-section of tube 3 Fitness Value 1520972

CONCLUSIONS

A genetic algorithm was developed to search for the optimal design of a radiator with pre-defined performance characteristics and cost constraints. The validity of the approach was tested against a problem with a known solution. The genetic algorithm produced near-optimum result for the problem; a solution which matched the bestknown practical solution. Thereafter, the genetic algorithm is used for finding the optimal design parameters for a radiator with desired performance criteria and cost constraints. Therefore, it is concluded that a genetic algorithm can be used successfully to find near-optimum solutions in the realm of radiator design. References 1. R. A. Beard and G. J. Smith, A Method of Calculating the Heat Dissipation from Radiators to Cool Vehicle Engines, Society of Automobile Engineers 710208 2. Charles N. Kurland, Computer Program for Engine Cooling Radiator Selection, Society of Automobile Engineers 710209 3. Performance of Aluminium Automotive Radiators, Society of Automobile Engineers 790400 4. Engine Cooling System Design for Heavy Duty Trucks, Society of Automobile Engineers 770023. 5. J. P. Holman (1986). Heat Transfer. 6. P. L. Balaney. Thermal Engineering. 7. G. F. Hewitt, G. L. Shires and T. R. Bott. Process Heat Transfer. 8. M. Necati Ozisik (1985). Heat Transfer - A Basic Approach, New York, McGraw-Hill Inc.