International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Thermal Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijts

Review

Applications of artificial neural networks for thermal analysis of heat

exchangers e A review
M. Mohanraj a, *, S. Jayaraj b, C. Muraleedharan b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hindusthan College of Engineering and Technology, Coimbatore 641032, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Calicut, Calicut 673601, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Artificial neural networks (ANN) have been widely used for thermal analysis of heat exchangers during
Received 5 May 2014 the last two decades. In this paper, the applications of ANN for thermal analysis of heat exchangers are
Received in revised form reviewed. The reported investigations on thermal analysis of heat exchangers are categorized into four
22 October 2014
major groups, namely (i) modeling of heat exchangers, (ii) estimation of heat exchanger parameters, (iii)
Accepted 20 November 2014
Available online 7 January 2015
estimation of phase change characteristics in heat exchangers and (iv) control of heat exchangers. Most
of the papers related to the applications of ANN for thermal analysis of heat exchangers are discussed.
The limitations of ANN for thermal analysis of heat exchangers and its further research needs in this field
Keywords:
Artificial neural networks
are highlighted. ANN is gaining popularity as a tool, which can be successfully used for the thermal
Modeling analysis of heat exchangers with acceptable accuracy.
Heat exchangers © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
Thermal analysis

1. Introduction heat exchangers can be correlated using ANN with minimum

Heat exchangers are widely used in engineering applications
such as refrigeration and air conditioning systems, automobiles,
thermal power plants, chemical and textile processing industries,
etc. Heat exchangers are the devices facilitating effective heat
transfer between the two fluids by virtue of their temperature
differences. The complexity in the analysis of heat exchangers shall
be due to its geometry and the physical phenomena involved
during the heat exchange between the fluids. In general, the heat
exchangers are studied both analytically and experimentally using
first and second laws of thermodynamics [1]. The theoretical heat
exchanger analysis involves more assumptions and complicated
equations, whereas the experimental methods are more expensive
due to its initial investment required in developing an experimental
setup [2]. To overcome these difficulties, ANN models were devel-
oped for simulation, optimization and performance prediction of
thermal systems involving heat exchangers [3e5]. ANN establishes
the correlations based on some training data, which does not
require any specific analytical equations and system descriptions.
Non-linear parameters involved in the heat transfer processes of
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ91 9486411896.
E-mail address: mohanrajrac@yahoo.co.in (M. Mohanraj).
errors.
Some of the studies on heat exchangers reviewed earlier are
reporting the design and development of plate type heat ex-
changers [6], ceramic based heat exchangers [7], applications of
compact heat exchangers [8], fouling of heat exchangers in aircraft
air conditioning systems [9], the application of nanofluids in heat
exchanger [10] and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) applica-
tions in heat exchanger design [11]. Similarly, many researchers had
reviewed the applications of ANN for refrigeration, air conditioning
and heat pump systems [12], heat transfer problems in nuclear
engineering [13], sizing of solar photovoltaic systems [14],
modeling and control of combustion processes [15], modeling of
energy systems [16], modeling of renewable energy systems [17]
and for chemical process control [18]. The previously cited re-
views of heat exchangers and engineering applications of ANN
confirmed that, there is no specific review reported on the usage of
ANN for heat exchanger applications.
The three main objectives of the present review are as follows: (i)
to summarize the studies related to thermal analysis of heat ex-
changers accomplished by ANN, (ii) to make a comparison among
the network architectures for heat exchanger analysis and (iii) to
identify the limitations and further research needs of ANN for the
thermal analysis of heat exchanger. The remaining part of this paper
contains following six sections: An overview of thermal analysis of
heat exchangers is described in Section 2. The Section 3 provides an

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2014.11.030
1290-0729/© 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
overview of ANN modeling of heat exchangers. The articles reviewed
are consolidated in Section 4. The limitations of ANN modeling for
heat exchanger analysis and further research needs in this area are
highlighted in Section 5 and Section 6, respectively. Section 7 pro-
vides the conclusion arrived by this study.
2. Thermal analysis of heat exchangers e an overview
An overview of thermal analysis of heat exchangers by theo-
retical and experimental methods is presented in this section. Also
the CFD and ANN analysis of heat exchangers are discussed.
2.1. Theoretical and experimental analysis of heat exchangers
The logarithmic mean temperature difference (LMTD) and
effectiveness-number of transfer units (ε-NTU) methods are the
commonly used methods of heat exchanger analysis [19]. The LMTD
method requires mass flow rates, inlet and outlet temperatures of
both hot and cold fluids, whereas, ε-NTU method requires the heat
capacity rate of hot and cold fluids for the heat exchanger analysis.
The assumptions made in the conventional methods of heat
exchanger analysis include the following: (i) constant overall heat
transfer coefficient (U) and specific heat capacity, (ii) no heat loss
between the heat exchanger and its surroundings, (iii) negligible
kinetic and potential effects and (iv) steady state conditions exists.
However, in many heat exchanger applications, the properties and
composition of the fluids (in case of using zeotropic mixed fluids)
may vary with time and the value of U is continuously varying [20].
Hence, the assumptions are not strictly valid for the analysis of heat
exchangers operating with mixed fluids. As a result, the evaluation
of heat exchanger performances using LMTD and NTU methods
would require correction factors. Whereas the experimental anal-
ysis of heat exchanger analysis requires major investments in
developing an experimental facility and its instrumentation.
2.2. Heat exchanger analysis using computational fluid dynamics
(CFD)
CFD is another methodology used for investigating the flow,
heat transfer, pressure drop, design, optimization, troubleshooting
and fouling of heat exchangers. CFD methodology involves solving
of mathematical equations with the help of a selected numerical
procedure [10]. CFD modeling employs the conventional fluid dy-
namics equations by resolving the entire domain in small grids or
elements and applying the governing equations on these discrete
20
18
Number of studies reported
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Year
Fig. 1. Applications of ANN for heat exchanger analysis reported in this review.
151
elements for finding the solutions. However, the CFD analysis in-
volves often multiple number of equations and assumptions. The
CFD method of heat exchanger performance predictions is found to
be closer to the experimental values, yielding good agreement,
usually in the range between 2% and 10%. But in some cases, it may
deviate even up to 36%, which is not really acceptable [10].
2.3. Heat exchanger analysis using ANN
The heat exchanger analysis using ANN overcomes the limita-
tions associated with LMTD, ε-NTU, CFD and the experimental
approach [21]. The ANN can establish the nonlinear relationship
between input and output based on a set of available training data.
The time distribution of the number of studies reported using the
ANN methodology of heat exchanger analysis is illustrated in Fig. 1.
From Fig. 1, it is clear that the number of investigations reported in
this area is gradually increasing during last two decades. Thermal
analysis of heat exchanger using ANN is becoming popular with
researchers working in this area.
3. Modeling of heat exchangers using artificial neural
networks
The commonly used ANN architectures for thermal analysis of
heat exchangers are multilayer feed forward network (MLFFN),
radial biased function network (RBFN), generalized regression
neural network (GRNN) and adaptive neuro fuzzy interface systems
(ANFIS). The basic information on ANN architectures is not dis-
cussed in this paper, since it is very much available and dealt in
detail in the open literature [14e17].
3.1. Selection of the ANN parameters
The ANN parameters such as, the number of neurons in the
input, hidden and output layers, network architecture, transfer
function, learning algorithm, momentum factor and learning rate
are to be selected for developing an ANN model. Proper data se-
lection also plays a major role in the success of ANN architecture
used. The number of neurons in the input layer is usually equal to
the number of parameters that affect the performance of heat ex-
changers. The input layer distributes the values to each neuron in
the hidden layer. A layer(s) of processing neurons between the
input and the output layers is called as the hidden layer(s). The
number of hidden layers and the number of hidden neurons may
vary depending on the accuracy required. The number of neurons
152 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172

in the hidden layer, number of hidden layers, momentum factor
and learning rate values are to be optimized to attain the results
with required accuracy. The number of neurons in output layer is
usually equal to the number of parameters selected for predicting
the heat exchanger performance.
3.2. Training of the ANN
ANN is trained with a set of known inputeoutput data and
suitable learning method to perform a function by adjusting the
values of weight coefficient between the processing neurons. The
training process continues until the network output matches with
the desired output. Changing the weights and biases shall reduce
the error between the network output and the desired output. The
training process is terminated automatically when the error falls
below a determined value or the maximum epochs is exceeded.
Fig. 2 depicts the steps involved in training of ANN used for the
thermal analysis of heat exchanger [14e17]. The steps involved in
this are listed as follows:
(i). Before collecting the training data, a good representation for
the input and output parameters has to be found.

Fig. 2. Flow chart of ANN training processes [14e17].

 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172 153

Identification of parameters that influence the performance exchangers are also consolidated and presented in the form of
of heat exchangers (neurons in the input layer) and the Tables (Tables 1e10).
performance parameters of a heat exchanger to be investi-
gated (neurons in the output layer) are to be selected for
4.1.1. Modeling of condensers
network training. Constant parameters are neglected.
The applications of ANN for modeling of condensers used in
(ii) For the second law analysis of heat exchangers, the influence
refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump systems are reviewed
of the dead state (ambient conditions) should be considered.
and presented in Table 1. In related work, Islamoglu [22] predicted
(iii) Since the networks are trained under supervision, the 
inputeoutput data are collected from experiments or from the Q of a natural convection wire on tube heat exchanger using

numerical simulation. The collected data were divided into MLFFN. The Q was obtained with reference to twelve parameters
three data sets (training data set, validation data set, testing 
data set). The data for training, validation and testing are to (At, Aw, dt, dw, Lt, Lw, mref , Tref at the inlet, volumetric flow rate of air,
be selected in the entire experimental range. Ta at condenser inlet, total area of tube and wire, and Tcond of

(iv) Normalization of inputs and outputs is done either in the refrigerant). The network with a 12-5-1 configuration predicts Q
range between 0 and 1 or between 1 and 1 (depending on with MaRE of 5.56% and 7.94% for training and testing, respectively
the type of training data). Normalization of inputs and out- 
puts enhances the learning speed of the network. with MRE of 4%. In a similar application, Q of a wire on tube heat
(v) Development of an ANN model and the definition of the exchanger was predicted using ANFIS and compared with MLFFN
inputs and outputs. [23]. The MaRE and MREs using ANFIS were 8.98% and 2.54%,
(vi) Selection of network architecture according to the applica- respectively. On the other hand, MLFFN has MaRE of 7.94% and MRE
tion involved. of 4%. In another work, Ertunc and Hosoz [24] compared the per-
(vii) Training of the network with normalized input and output formance predictions of an evaporative condenser using MLFFN
values using neural network toolbox of MATLAB. and ANFIS techniques. They predicted the condenser heat rejection
(viii) The network parameters (such as training data requirement, rate, the refrigerant temperature leaving the condenser, DBT and
number of hidden layers, number of hidden neurons, WBT of the leaving air with reference to seven parameters (DBT and
  
learning rate and momentum factor) are to be optimized to WBT of air at the inlet to the condenser,ma ,mref , mw , absolute pref
attain results with good accuracy. and Tref at the inlet to the condenser). Their results showed that,
(ix) Extraction of results from the trained network. both MLFFN with a 7-5-4 configuration and ANFIS predictions are
within 5% deviation of the experimental values. The accuracy of
The training data set is used to train the weights in the neural ANFIS predictions was higher when compared to MLFFN pre-
network to produce the desired output. The validation data set is dictions for the performance prediction of condensers.
used to find the best configuration and training parameters. The In similar work, two MLFFN models were developed for pre-
test data set is used to evaluate the parameters of the trained neural dicting the exergy destruction and exergy efficiency of a direct
networks. About 70% of the randomly selected data sets are expansion solar assisted heat pump with reference to solar in-
assigned as training data sets and remaining data can be used for tensity and ambient temperature [25,26]. In this paper, the exergy
testing and validating the network. performance of a condenser alone is discussed. The MLFFN pre-
dictions of exergy destruction are closer to the experimental results
3.3. Testing of network with good R values of 0.9898 and COV values of 1.043. Similarly, the
exergy efficiency of the condenser is closer to experimental values
The performance of the network is evaluated using statistical with R values of 0.9957 and COV values of 0.7996. In another work,
parameters, such as the absolute fraction of variance (R2), correla- Zhao and Zhang [27] predicted the performance of an air cooled
tion coefficient (R), root mean square values (RMS), mean absolute condenser using two ANN configurations and compared with each
error (MAE), mean absolute relative error (MARE) and coefficient of
variance (COV) by changing the network parameters. The network
parameters were optimized either trial and error method or by Table 1
Modeling of condensers.
novel optimization techniques to achieve better results.
Authors Network Type of Parameters
4. Reviewing applications of ANN for the analysis of heat [references] architectures heat exchanger predicted

exchangers Islamoglu [22] MLFFN Wire on tube Q
condenser 
Hayati et al. [23] ANFIS Wire on tube Q
The reported studies for thermal analysis of heat exchangers are
condenser
categorized into four subsections based on the applications of ANN Ertunc and ANFIS Evaporative Condenser heat
as follows: (i) modeling of heat exchangers [22e91], (ii) estimation Hosoz [24] condenser rejection rate, Tref
of heat exchanger parameters [92e118], (iii) estimation of phase leaving the condenser,
change characteristics in heat exchangers [119e159], and (iv) DBT and WBT of air
leaving the condenser.
control of heat exchangers [160e172]. Additionally, the comparison
Mohanraj MLFFN Fin and tube Exergy destruction
among the network architectures is discussed in this section et al. [25,26] condenser and efficiency
[173e197]. Zhao and MLFFN Fin and tube Heating capacity,
Zhang [27] condenser Dps in refrigerant
and air sides.
4.1. ANN modeling of heat exchangers
Tian et al. [28] MLFFN Parallel flow Capacity of heat
condenser exchanger, air and
The successful applications of the ANN approach for modeling of refrigerant side Dps, Tref
heat exchangers are reviewed in this subsection. The reviewed in- Yang et al. [29] MLFFN Fin and tube Heating capacity,
vestigations are categorized into twelve subsections based on its condenser air side and refrigerant
side Dps,
applications. A summary of investigations on modeling of heat
154 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172

Table 2 Table 4
Modeling of cooling coils and liquid line suction heat exchangers. Modeling of plate type heat exchangers.

Authors [references] Network Type of Parameters Authors Network Type of Parameters predicted
architectures heat exchanger predicted [references] architectures heat exchanger
 
Islamoglu et al. [31] MLFFN Liquid line suction Tref and mref Selbas et al. [41] MLFFN Plate type Q, 3
heat exchangers 
Peng and Ling [42] MLFFN Plate type Dp on cold and hot side,

Heimel et al. [32] MLFFN Liquid line suction Q , mref total weight and total cost.
heat exchangers 
Peng and Ling [43] MLFFN Plate type j and f factors
Kumlutas et al. [33] MLFFN Evaporator Tsur and Q
Yigit and Ertunc [34] MLFFN Wire on tube Ta and RH
cooling coil
Tahavvor and MLFFN Evaporator Frost thickness compression based refrigeration and air conditioning systems to
Yaghoubi [35] and density improve its performance [30]. In a related work, Islamoglu et al.
[31] successfully used MLFFN for predicting the Tref at suction line

outlet and mref of a non-adiabatic capillary tube suction line heat
other. One is a multi-input single output (MISO) configuration and exchanger used in refrigeration systems. A MLFFN with seven
the other is a multi-input multi-output (MIMO) configuration. In neurons in the input layer (representing the degree of sub cooling,
MISO configuration, the MIMO configuration is divided into three suction line inlet temperature, internal diameter of a capillary tube,
MISO configurations for ANN training and afterward the trained internal diameter of the suction line, length of the capillary tube,
MISO configurations are combined into a single MIMO configura- length of the heat exchanger and adiabatic inlet length) and two
tion. Another network is MIMO approach, which is modeled neurons in the output layer (representing refrigerant suction line
  
directly. The network inputs aremref , ma , refrigerant Ti, Tsat and outlet temperature and mref ) was developed. It was reported that, a
entering DBT of air. The outputs of the network consist of heating 7-7-2 network configuration predicts the Tref suction line outlet and

capacity and pressure drop (Dp) on both refrigerant and air sides. mref with MRE of 1.94% and 2.26%, respectively when compared to
Their results showed that the MISO approach requires less training the experimental results. Similarly, MLFFN was used for predicting
data than that of MIMO, which becomes more valuable when the the performance of suction line heat exchangers [32]. The network
training data are extracted from experimentations. The deviations has ten neurons in input layers representing inlet p, pressure dif-
of the heating capacity, the refrigerant-side and air-side Dp pre- ference, length, diameter and inlet enthalpy from the capillary tube

dicted by both MISO and MIMO are within 5% deviation when side, p, mref , inlet enthalpy, length and inner diameter of the coaxial

compared to the experimental values. heat exchanger side. The outputs are mref through the capillary
Tian et al. [28] predicted the thermal performance of a parallel tube and enthalpy of the suction line outlet. The MLFFN with 10-30-

flow condenser working with R134a as refrigerant using the 15-2 predicts the mref through capillary tube and enthalpy of suc-

MLFFN. In their work, DBT, WBT, inlet va, mref , Tref and pref of the tion line outlet within 15% deviations.
refrigerant entering the condenser were considered as input pa- Kumlutas et al. [33] developed a MLFFN model for predicting the
rameters. It was reported that a MLFFN with 6-9-5 configuration temperatures of evaporator surface at three locations, average
predicts the condenser capacity, Tref leaving the condenser and Dp temperature and amount of heat absorbed by the evaporator sur-
for both air side and the refrigerant side with RMS errors between face with reference to three parameters such as the gap between
0.0015 and 0.0060, R values of 0.9999 and MREs in the range of evaporator surface and glass shelf, evaporator height and Tsur of a
0.2414e1.3194%. In another work, the heating capacity, refrigerant domestic refrigerator. The network was optimized for 3-15-5
side and air side Dp of a condenser were predicted using MLFFN configuration. It was reported that, the optimized network predicts
[29]. In their work, seven dimensionless p-terms have been used the temperatures at points 1, 2 and 3, and Tavg with MREs of 2.62%,
for predicting the h values. Similarly, four dimensional p-terms 2.99%, 2.81% and 2.96%, respectively. The MRE of evaporator heat
have been used for predicting refrigerant side Dp and two dimen- absorption rate is 1.42%. Similarly, the MLFFN technique was used
sionless p-terms have been used for predicting the air side Dp. The to predict the temperature and RH of air at the outlet of a wire-on-
MLFFN was optimized to 7-5-1, 4-3-1 and 2-3-1 configurations for tube type cooling coil [34]. They developed a MLFFN with nine
predicting the heating capacity, refrigerant side Dp and air side Dp, neurons in the input layer (representing Tair enters the cooling coil,

respectively. The standard deviations of trained dimensionless RH, vair, frost weight, coil Tsur, mref and its temperatures at inlet and
neural networks are 0.66%, 4.83% and 0.11% for heating capacity, outlet and Tab) and two neurons in the output layer (representing Ta
refrigerant side Dp and air side Dp, respectively. and RH at the outlet). The input and output values were normalized
in the interval between 1 and 1. The network with a 9-9-20-2
configuration was identified as the optimal topology. The MLFFN
4.1.2. Modeling of liquid line suction heat exchangers and predictions yield a maximum R value of 0.999 and 0.982 for tem-
evaporators perature and RH, respectively, with their errors less than 1% and 2%.
The applications of ANN for modeling of liquid line suction heat Similarly, Tahavvor and Yaghoubi [35] predicted the frost
exchangers and evaporators are reviewed and the details are listed
in Table 2. Liquid line suction heat exchangers are widely used in
Table 5
Modeling of fin and tube condensers.
Table 3
Modeling of run-around heat exchangers. Authors Network Type of Parameters predicted
[references] architectures heat exchanger
Authors [references] Network Type of heat Parameters predicted 
Pacheco-Vega MLFFN Fin and tube Q
architectures exchanger
et al. [45] 
Akbari et al. [37,38] MLFFN Run-around Sensible and latent Pacheco-Vega MLFFN Fin and tube Q
membrane heat effectiveness. et al. [46]
heat exchanger 
Ding et al. [47] MLFFN Fin and tube heat Tref and Ta
Tan et al. [39] MLFFN Compact Over all Q Wu et al. [48] MLFFN Fin and tube cooler TCO2 , pressure raise,
Ermis [40] MLFFN Compact Dp, h and Nu Tair, Q
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172 155

Table 6 Table 8
Modeling of shell and tube heat exchangers. Modeling of mixtures.

Authors Network Type of Parameters predicted Authors Network Heat exchanger Parameters predicted
[references] architectures heat exchanger [references] architectures configuration
 
Xie et al. [50] MLFFN Shell and tube Q , DT between oil and water. Hosoz et al. [70] MLFFN Cooling tower Heat rejection rate, m
Mandavgane MLFFN Shell and tube T of cold and hot water outlet of makeup water, Tw at
et al. [51] tower outlet, DBT and RH
Pandharipande MLFFN Shell and tube T of cold and hot water outlet of air leaving the stream
et al. [52] Gao et al. [71] MLFFN Cooling tower Outlet Tw, DTw, hCT
Kashani et al. [53] MLFFN Shell and tube Rfo Gao et al. [72] MLFFN Cooling tower Air gravity, cooling DT,
Duran et al. [54] MLFFN Shell and tube Cost estimation cooling efficiency, h,
mass transfer coefficient
and evaporation loss
Islamoglu MLFFN Cooling tower COP
et al. [73]
deposition on a horizontal circular tube under natural convection Qi et al. [74] MLFFN Cooling tower Outlet Tw
using MLFFN. In their work, the network consists of five neurons in Wu et al. [75] MLFFN Cooling tower Heat absorption capacity,
input layer representing Tab, cold surface temperature, RH, dt and heating efficiency, ration
of sensible and latent
time of operation and two neurons in the output layer representing
heat transfer, outlet air
frost thickness and frost density. It was reported that MLFFN with DBT, outlet aqueous
5-10-20-20-20-2 configuration predicts both frost thickness and solution temperature,
frost density with R2 values of 0.9999. ratio of sensible to total
heat transfer, humidity
difference between
inlet and outlet.
4.1.3. Modeling of run-around heat exchangers Hosoz et al. [76] MLFFN Evaporative cooler DBT and RH, mass of
A run around heat exchanger is a heat recovery system which water evaporated,
combines two recuperators heat exchangers by a third fluid sensible cooling rate
exchanging the heat with each fluid in turn [36]. The applications of and effectiveness
Kiran and MLFFN ANFIS, Evaporative cooler Outlet Ta and 3 .
ANN modeling of run-around heat exchangers are reviewed in this
Rajput [77] FIS
subsection. Table 3 summarizes the ANN applications of run-
around and compact heat exchangers. Akbari et al. [37] predicted
the sensible and latent effectiveness of a run-around membrane
energy exchanger using two separate MLFFN models. Training data effectiveness. The sensible and latent effectiveness were predicted
sets of about 140,000 points were predicted using a finite difference with reference to twelve parameters such as NTU, heat capacity
model. The sensible and latent effectiveness was predicted with ratio, outdoor temperature and humidity ratio at the current time
reference to five input parameters, such as, number of heat transfer and its difference with the outdoor temperature and humidity ratio
units, heat capacity rate ratio, difference between the inlet and during last 4 h of the system operation. The MLFFN was optimized
outlet Ta, humidity ratio of indoor and humidity ratio of outdoor air. to 12-16-16-1 structure. It has been reported that MAE between
In their work, a MLFFN with 5-10-10-1 configuration predicts both transient numerical model and MLFFN are 0.5  C for sensible
sensible and latent energy transfers in the run-around membrane effectiveness and 0.2 gv/kga for the latent effectiveness.
energy exchanger with RMSE values of 0.05  C and 2  105 kgv/kga,
respectively and their corresponding average absolute errors are 4.1.4. Modeling of compact heat exchangers
0.03  C and 1.4  105 kgv/kga. In further work, the transient heat The heat exchangers with large surface area per unit volume are
and mass transfer performance of a run-around heat membrane known as compact heat exchangers. Tan etal. [39] have applied the
heat exchanger was predicted using MLFFN [38]. Two separate MLFFN model for predicting the overall Q of a compact fin-tube
models were developed for predicting the sensible and latent heat exchanger using air and water/ethylene glycol anti-freeze
mixtures as the working fluids. The network was trained with
 
inlet temperature of the liquid, inlet Ta, ml , ma , inlet obstructions,
Table 7
and ethylene glycol anti-freeze mass concentrations

were consid-
Modeling of solar energy collectors.
ered as inputs to the MLFFN. The overall Q between the two test
Authors [references] Network Application Parameters predicted fluids was considered as an output parameter. It was reported

that
architectures

6-6-1 network configuration predicts the overall Q of a heat
Kalogirou et al. [57] MLFFN SWH (Flat plate) Q , DTw exchanger with a high degree of accuracy compared to conven-
Kalogirou [58] MLFFN SWH (Flat plate) Solar energy output,
tional non-linear regression models. The MAE of the MLFFN pre-
Quantity of hot water
per month
dictions reported in their work was 0.6%, 0.9% and 0.9%,
Kalogirou et al. [59] MLFFN SWH (Flat plate) Tw
Kalogirou et al. [60] MLFFN SWH (Flat plate) Energy performance
and Maximum Tw Table 9

Facao et al. [61] MLFFN, SWH (Flat plate) Q Modeling of earth to air heat exchangers.
RBFN
Authors [references] Network Heat exchanger Parameters predicted
Sozen et al. [62] MLFFN SWH (Flat plate) hthe
 architectures configuration
Cetiner et al. [63] MLFFN SWH (Flat plate) Q mw
Dikmen et al. [64] MLFFN, SWH hthe Kumar et al. [79] MLFFN Earth to air Heating and
ANFIS (Evacuated tube) heat exchangers cooling performance
Farkas and MLFFN SWH (Flat plate) Tw at eight locations. Zhang and MLFFN Earth to air Nu at three locations
Gecy-Vig [65] Haghighat [80,81] heat exchangers
Caner et al. [66] MLFFN SAH hthe Gang and Wang [82] MLFFN Geothermal Exit temperature of
Esen et al. [67] MLFFN SAH hthe and Ta heat exchangers geothermal heat
Benli et al. [68] MLFFN SAH hthe exchanger
156 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
Table 10
Modeling of power plant heat exchangers.
Authors [references] Network Heat exchanger Parameters predicted
architectures configuration
Krzywanski and MLFFN Super heaters h 0.112%. The second test gave estimated and actual errors as 23.3%
Nowak [83]
Hakeem et al. [84] MLFFN Thermosiphon To of the boiler
reboiler  exchanger were predicted using ANN [47]. It was reported that
Prieto et al. [85] MLFFN Condenser Q
respectively, for the training, test and validation data sets. Similarly,
Ermis [40] developed a MLFFN for predicting the Nu, h and Dp of a
compact heat exchanger. In their work, the input layer consists of
seven neurons representing the ratio of rib spacing to height, Re, va,
inlet Ta, outlet Ta, heat transfer area and dh. The network with 7-11-
3 configuration was identified as an optimum topology. It was re-
ported that MLFFN predicted Dp, h and Nu were closer to the
experimental results with R values of 0.9952, 0.9995 and 0.9993,
respectively. The MREs of all predicted values are less than 6%.
4.1.5. Modeling of plate type heat exchangers
A summary of ANN applications for modeling of plate type heat
exchangers are listed in Table 4. Selbas et al. [41] used MLFFN model
for heat transfer analysis of plate heat exchangers. In their work, Q
and 3 values of the plate heat exchanger were predicted with
 tion of shell and tube heat exchangers [49]. Table 6 summarizes the
reference to inlet hot and cold water temperatures and its m.
Experimentally observed data were used for training and testing
the network. Their results indicate that ANN predicted results are
closer to experimental
 results with good R values of 0.9994 and
0.9976 for Q and 3 , respectively. Peng and Ling [42] used hybrid AI
technique (GA and MLFFN) for optimal design of plate-fin heat
exchanger and compared with the conventional approach. It was
reported that GA assist with back propagation algorithms provides
significant improvement in the optimization when compared to
other traditional design procedures. The convergence iterations
were reduced from 33 to 15 and its processing time was also
reduced by 40.6% (from 412.325 to 293.324 s) using the new hybrid
technique. Further, they have developed a MLFFN to predict the j
and f factors of plate-fin heat exchangers [43]. In their work, j and f
factors were predicted with reference to fin height, fin pitch, fin
thickness, fin length and Re at the air side. The MLFFN with a 5-6-4-
2 configuration predicts the j and f factor values with MSEs less
than 1.5% and 1%, respectively.
4.1.6. Modeling of fin and tube heat exchangers
Fin and tube heat exchangers are widely used in refrigeration,
air conditioning and heat pump applications [44]. A summary of
ANN applications for modeling of fin and tube heat exchangers are
discussed in this subsection and also listed in Table 5. Pacheco-

Vega et al. [45] predicted the Q in humid airewater heat ex-
changers using conventional correlations and MLFFN. The inputs
to the network are Re, inlet air DBT, inlet air WBT, inlet Tw and fin
 advance with the MRE of about 8%. Moreover, the prediction
spacing. The outputs are sensible heat, total heat and Q . The
MLFFN with 5-5-3-3 configuration predicts the outputs within
10% deviation, whereas the correlation predictions have more
than 10% deviation. In another work, a MLFFN was successfully

applied to predict the Q of a fin and tube refrigerant heat
 head factor. The output layer consists of one neuron representing
exchanger [46]. In their study, Q was predicted with reference to

eleven parameters, namely, ma , DBT, humidity ratio, inlet Tref, fin
spacing, width, number of rows, number of columns, number of
circuits and tube spacing in longitudinal and transverse directions
and diameter. The network configuration was optimized by a 11-
11-7-1 configuration. Three sets of test data were considered for
comparison, in small, medium and large error range. The result
reported for the first test was 0.761%, while the actual error was
and 6.19%, respectively, while 48.78% and 14.21% were the values
for the third test. Similarly, outlet Tref and Tair of a fin and tube heat
ANN model predicts both outlet Tref and Tair with average error
values less than 0.2  C.
Wu et al. [48] used MLFFN for the performance prediction of a
gas cooler (3-row staggered wavy-fin heat exchanger) in a carbon
dioxide (CO2) based trans-critical heat pump. They developed a
network with five neurons in the input layer (representing the
temperature of CO2 at the gas cooler inlet, pressure of CO2 at the gas

cooler inlet, m of CO2 through the gas cooler, Ta passing through the
cooler and va) and four neurons in the output layer (representing
the temperature of the CO2 at the cooler

outlet, pressure raise in the
cooler, Ta at the cooler outlet and Q ). Their results indicate that 5-5-
4-4 network configuration predicted the performance with
maximum deviations of 1.81%, 5.4%, 8.5% and 7.03% for temperature
of CO2 at the cooler  outlet, pressure raise in the cooler, Tair at the
cooler outlet and Q , respectively.
4.1.7. Modeling of shell and tube heat exchangers
ANN modeling was successfully used for performance predic-
application of ANN for modeling of shell and tube heat exchangers.
Xie et al. [50] predicted the performance of a shell and tube heat
exchanger (using oil and water as working fluids) using MLFFN and
compared with 
experimental results and correlation results. In
their study, Q , DT in oil and water were predicted with reference to
the respective Re values, inlet temperatures of oil and water, total
number of tubes, diameter of center tube, total number of baffles
and its pitch. The network was optimized with a 8-6-5-3 configu-
ration. It was reported that ANN predicted results are closer to the
experimental results within 2% deviation, whereas correlations
predictions can have about 8% deviation. Similarly, a MLFFN was
developed for modeling a shell and tube heat exchangers [51,52]. A
MLFFN with four neurons in the input layer (representing cold

water inlet and outlet temperatures and m of cold and hot water)
and two neurons in the output layer (representing cold and hot
outlet water temperatures) was developed. The network was
optimized to a 4-15-15-15-2 configuration. Their network pre-
dictions are reported to be 98e99.5% closer to the experimental
values.
Kashani et al. [53] developed a MLFFN model for online
monitoring and prediction of crude oil fouling behavior for in-
dustrial shell and tube heat exchangers. In their study, three
variables such as tube side crude oil flow rate, tube side inlet
temperature of oil and shell side inlet temperature of oil were
considered as the network input variables, while the only output
variable is Rfo. The network was optimized to a 3-5-1 configura-
tion. This network is capable of estimating the Rfo two days in
ability of the network can be extended to about 10 days with the
MRE of about 11%. In another work, a MLFFN was developed for
cost estimation of shell and tube heat exchangers [54]. This
network configuration consists of an input layer with five neurons
representing tube pitch, dt, ds, rear head factor and stationary
the cost per exchange area. The LM learning algorithm and log
sigmoid transfer function were used in their work. It was reported
that network configuration with 5-10-10-1 has good prediction
capability with an R value of 0.97. In a similar work, Fadare and
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
Fatona [55] predicted the Nu of a staggered cross flow tube-type
heat exchanger using MLFFN with reference to Re and row num-
ber. It has been reported that the MLFFN with a 2-5-5-1 config-
uration predicts the Nu with MARE less than 1% and 4%,
respectively for training and testing data sets.
4.1.8. Modeling of solar energy collectors
Solar energy collectors are special kind of heat exchangers,
which transfers the thermal energy obtained from solar radiation to
the transport fluid medium as the internal heat energy [56]. A
summary of investigations reported on solar collectors is consoli-
dated in Table 7. Kalogirou et al. [57] predicted the performance of a
thermosiphon SWH using MLFFN. In their work, the performance
parameters such as, the amount of energy extracted and the
maximum temperature raise were predicted with reference to
storage tank heat transfer coefficient, storage capacity (in terms of
liters), system type (open or closed), total radiation, diffuse radia-
tion, Tab and initial temperature. It was reported that the network
having 7-24-2 configuration predicted the amount of energy
extracted and maximum temperature raise with maximum de-
viations of about 1 MJ and 2.2  C, respectively. In a further work
Kalogirou [58] developed two MLFFN models for predicting the
long term energy performance of a solar water heating system. The
first network predicts the solar energy output and the second
network predicts the solar energy output and the average quantity
of hot water output per month. The first network consists of thir-
teen neurons in the input layer (representing, month, daily solar
radiation, mean ambient temperature during day time and night
time, three coefficients of the system, normalized temperature
profile as a function of volume during low and high radiation
conditions, mixing draw off normalized temperature, heat loss
coefficients, temperature of the cold water from mains, specific
volume of the system and maximum draw off temperature) for
predicting the solar energy output of the system. The second
network consists of fourteen neurons representing similar to the
first network, additionally, the water demand temperature was
considered. The first MLFFN with a 13-5-1 configuration predicts
the solar energy output with R2value of 0.9972. The second MLFFN
with a 14-7-2 configuration predicts the solar energy output and
average quantity of hot water output per month with R2 values of
0.9878 and 0.9973, respectively.
Further, Kalogirou et al. [59] have developed eight MLFFN
models for predicting the temperatures at four typical locations in a
solar water heating system for two different meteorological con-
ditions corresponding to Cyprus and France. The authors predicted
the temperatures for fault diagnosis. The inputs to the network are
global solar radiation, beam radiation, Tab, incidence angle, wind
speed, ambient RH, flow availability and inlet temperature. A
MLFFN with 8-19-1 architecture predicts the temperatures with
good R2 in the range of 0.92e0.999 and 0.8823e0.9996 for training
and validation, respectively. Recently, the energy output of a large
scale solar systems were predicted using a MLFFN [60]. The three
inputs to the network are day time average Ta, daily total radiation
falling on solar collector and storage Tw at the start of the day. The
two outputs are daily energy output and maximum Tw in the tank.
It was reported that MLFFN predicts the daily energy performance
and maximum Tw with good R2 values of around 0.95.
Facao et al. [61] predicted the heat output of a hybrid SWH using
two ANN models (MLFFN and RBFN) with reference to nine pa-
rameters such as solar radiation, Tab, Tgi, Twi, evaporator length,
 
condenser length, mg , mw and U. It has been reported that, MLFFN
with 9-6-1 configuration predicts the collector heat output with a
very good R value of 0.998. The prediction accuracy of MLFFN was
found to be better, when compared with RBFN. Similarly, the hth of
a SWH was predicted using MLFFN with reference to seven input
157
parameters such as date, time, Tsur, solar radiation, declination
angle, azimuth angle and tilt angle [62]. The network was opti-
mized by a 7-20-20-1 configuration. It was reported that, this
MLFFN predicted hth are closer to the experimental results with a
maximum and minimum deviations of 2.558 and 0.0019, respec-
tively. In another work, Cetiner et al. [63] predicted the perfor-
mance of the solar hot water generator using a MLFFN. Their
network consists of four neurons in input layer representing Tab,
inlet Tw entering the absorber, wind velocity and direct radiation
with two neurons in the output layer representing flow rate and
heat quantity. It was reported

that a MLFFN having 4-7-2 configu-

ration predicts m and Q with MRE ratio of about 1.2% and 9.1%,
respectively. In another work, Dikmen et al. [64] predicted the hth of
an evacuated tube solar collector using MLFFN and compared with
ANFIS. In their work, the network inputs are Tab, solar radiation,
collector tilt-angle and mean storage tank temperature and the
output of the network is hth of the system. It was reported that the
network with a 4-12-1 configuration predicts hth of the SWH with
R2 values of 0.8119, whereas ANFIS predicts hth with R2 values of
0.6817. Their results confirmed that MLFFN predictions are better
than that of ANFIS predictions. Similarly, Farkas and Geczy-Vig [65]
developed a MLFFN for predicting the thermal performance of a
solar water heater. In their work, the temperature distribution in
the storage tank was predicted at eight locations along the height of
the storage tank. The input layer consists of twelve neurons rep-

resenting solar radiation, Tab, mw , load and the temperature of
layers at eight time intervals. The output layer consists of eight
neurons representing the temperatures at eight different locations
inside the storage. The network with 12-19-8 configuration using
tan-sigmoid transfer function predicts the temperature distribution
with average deviations of 0.22  C during the training and 0.24  C
during the validation.
Caner et al. [66] predicted the hth of a SAH with a zig-zag
absorber surface using MLFFN. The network developed in their
work consists of eight neurons in input layer representing Ti and To
of air passing through the collector, solar intensity, quantity of
stored water, Tab and Tsur of collector, model number and date with
one neuron in the output layer represents hth of the collector. The
RMS errors of the ANN predicted hth are 1.67% and 1.78%, respec-
tively, for model-I and model-II and solar collectors with corre-
sponding statistical R2 values of 0.9984 and 0.9994. Similarly, Esen
et al. [67] predicted the performance of a SAH using MLFFN and
WNNs. In their work, six neurons in input layer represent the Ta
entering the collector, the temperatures at four different points at
the absorbing plate and solar radiation with two neurons in the
output layer representing hth and Ta leaving the collector unit. It
was reported that, a 6-4-2 network configuration predicts the
performance with RMS errors of 0.004 and 0.0099 for Ta and hth ,
respectively. They also concluded that WNNs have better prediction
capability compared to MLFFN. Benli [68] predicted hth of a SAH
using MLFFN. The hth was predicted with reference to six param-

eters, such as inlet and outlet Ta, solar radiation intensity, ma , Ta and
Tsur of collector. It was reported that the network with 6-3-1
structure predicts hth of a SAH with R2 values of 0.9971.
4.1.9. Modeling of direct contact type heat exchangers
In direct contact type heat exchangers (otherwise known as
mixtures), both hot and cold fluids get mixed together and transfer
the heat by direct contact [69]. Heat exchangers like cooling towers,
evaporative coolers and jet condensers are categorized under this
classification. Many investigators have applied ANN approach for
predicting the performance of direct contact type heat exchangers,
as listed in Table 8.
Hosoz et al. [70] predicted the performance of a cooling tower
using MLFFN. In their network, five input neurons represent the
158 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
DBT and RH of the air stream entering the tower, Tw entering the

tower, air volume flow rate and mw . The output neurons represent

the heat rejection rate in the cooling tower, m of makeup water, Tw
at tower outlet, DBT and RH of air stream leaving the tower. The
network was optimized to a classic 5-5-5 configuration. It was re-
ported that network predictions were closer to the experimental
data with R values of 0.992, 0.981, 0.994, 0.994 and 0.975, respec-

tively, for heat rejection rate in the cooling tower, m of makeup
water, Tw at cooling tower outlet, DBT and RH of the air stream
leaving the tower, corresponding RMS errors of 43.83 W, 0.09 kg/h,
0.31  C, 0.31  C and 0.78%. The MREs were reported in the range
between 0.89% and 4.64%.
Gao et al. [71] predicted the thermal performance of a natural
draft counter flow cooling tower under crosswind conditions using
MLFFN. The parameters such as circulating outlet Tw, DT and effi-
ciency of the cooling tower were predicted with reference to DBT and

WBT of inlet air, inlet Tw, mw , and va. The network with a 5-6-3
configuration predicts the performance of the cooling tower with R
values of 0.999, 0.998 and 0.995 for temperature at the outlet, DT and
efficiency of the cooling tower, respectively with corresponding RMS
errors of 0.044, 0.066 and 0.53. Further, Gao et al. [72] have also
developed a MLFFN with four neurons in input layer representing
RH, circulating inlet water temperature, water spraying density and
Fr for predicting air gravity, cooling temperature difference, cooling
efficiency, h, mass transfer coefficient and evaporation loss propor-
tion. The MLFFN was optimized for a 4-8-6 configuration. The MREs
of the MLFFN predicted outputs are in the range of 0.48e3.92% with
R values varying between 0.992 and 0.999.
The COP of a cooling tower was predicted with reference to four
 
parameters such as mw =ma ratio, the inlet Tw, the outlet Tw and the
inlet WBT of air using MLFFN [73]. The output layer has one neuron
representing the COP. The network was optimized with a 4-15-1
configuration. It was reported that MRE of MLFFN predicted COP
was less than 0.2% compared to the experimental values. It was also
concluded that, MLFFN method of COP predictions provides fast,
accurate and consistent results when compared to conventional
methods. In another work by Qi et al. [74], the performance of the
cooling tower was predicted using MLFFN. In their work, a MLFFN
was developed with eight inputs, namely nozzle height, equivalent
diameter of water droplets, initial velocity of water droplets, va,
ratio of air to water, DBT of inlet air, RH of inlet air and inlet Tw. The
only output variable was outlet Tw. The results predicted by the
MLFFN model were compared with the experimental data. It was
reported that, the ANN model with 8-17-1 configuration predicts
the Tw values with a MAE of 1.31%, when compared to the experi-
mental results. In similar work, the performance characteristics of a
cooling tower (using aqueous solution) were predicted using
MLFFN [75]. In their work, a MLFFN with five neurons in input layer
(representing inlet DBT and WBT of air, inlet temperature of an
 
aqueous solution, m of an aqueous solution and ma ) and nine
neurons in output layer (representing heat absorption capacity,
heating coefficient of efficiency, ratio of sensible heat transfer to the
latent heat transfer, outlet air DBT, outlet aqueous solution tem-
perature, ratio of sensible to total heat transfer and humidity ratio
of moist air difference between inlet and outlet) was developed.
The MLFFN using 5-11-9 configuration predicts the performance
characteristics closer to experimental results with R values in the
range of 0.9249e0.9988 and MREs between 0.0008% and 0.54%.
The performance of an evaporative cooler was predicted using
MLFFN by Hosoz et al. [76]. The performance parameters (such as
DBT and RH of the leaving air, mass of the water evaporated into the
air stream, sensible cooling rate, and effectiveness) of an evapora-
tive cooler were predicted with reference to four parameters such

as DBT, RH of the air stream entering the cooler, water mw and air
volume flow rate. A MLFFN with 4-4-5 configuration predicts the
performance of an evaporative cooler with R values in the range of
0.969e0.993, MREs in the range from 0.66% to 4.04%. Kiran and
Rajput [77] compared the performance prediction capability of an
indirect evaporative cooling system using three AI techniques such
as MLFFN, ANFIS and fuzzy interface systems (FIS). The inputs to

network are primary and secondary ma, ambient DBT and WBT,
while the outputs are outlet Ta and effectiveness. It was reported
that MLFFN predicts the performance of an indirect evaporative
cooling system with better accuracy when compared to other AI
techniques such as ANFIS and FIS.
4.1.10. Modeling of earth to air heat exchangers
Earth to air heat exchangers are widely used for space heating
and cooling applications in buildings as elaborated by Bisoniya et al.
[78]. Table 9 gives the consolidated details of the studies reported
with earth to air heat exchangers. A summary of reported in-
vestigations are discussed in this subsection. Kumar et al. [79]
predicted the heating and cooling performance of earth to air
heat exchangers using ANN. Two ANN models, namely determin-
istic and intelligent have been developed in their work. Six vari-
ables (length, humidity, Tab, ground surface temperature, ground

temperature at burial depth and air ma ) affecting the thermal
performance of the earth-to-air heat exchangers were considered
in their work for predicting the outlet air temperature of a heat
exchanger. It was reported that the intelligent model predicts the
outlet air temperature with an accuracy of ±2.6%, whereas, the
deterministic model predicts with an accuracy of ±5.3%. In a similar
work, Zhang and Haghighat [80,81] predicted the Nu in large
rectangular cross-sectional area earth-to-air heat exchangers using
MLFFN. In their work, the input layer consists of six neurons
namely, length, height, width, inlet size, DT between the surface
and inlet air and bulk air speed, whereas the output layer consists of
three neurons namely average Nu over the duct ceiling, wall and
floor. The network was trained with thirty CFD simulation cases.
The network with 6-15-3 configuration was identified as an opti-
mum topology for predicting the Nu. It was reported that MLFFN
predicted results are more accurate when compared to that ob-
tained using CFD simulations. Similarly, the static and dynamic
models based on MLFFN were developed by Gang and Wang [82] to
predict the temperature of the water at the outlet of the ground
heat exchanger. In their work, two MLFFN models were developed
for predicting the temperature under static and dynamic modes. It
was reported that the dynamic model performs better than the
static model. The dynamic ANN model was capable of predicting
the exit temperature of the ground source heat exchanger with an
absolute error less than 0.2  C.
4.1.11. Modeling of heat exchangers used in power plants
The studies reported with power plant heat exchangers are
summarized and presented in Table 10. Krzywanski and Nowak
[83] successfully predicted the h of two super heaters used in a
circulating fluidized bed boiler using ANN. The ranges of inputs to
the network for predicting the h include the load of the boiler
(40e100%), distance from the gas distributor (6.2e41.7 m), velocity
of the fluid (2.1e6.0 m/s), average bed voidage (0.97e0.99) and bed
temperature (930e1298 K). It was reported that the h predicted
using the MLFFN with 5-1-5-1 configuration for the first super
heater yields R2 values of 0.9968 with MAE of 0.48. The network
with 5-2-5-1 configuration was reported as an optimum topology
for predicting the h of the second super heater. The R2 and MAE
values are 0.9981 and 0.75, respectively, for predicting the h values.
In similar application, Hakeem et al. [84] predicted the temperature
profiles as well as temperatures at various operating conditions in a
vertical thermosiphon reboiler. The network consists of three input
parameters, namely heat flux, distance and submergence with one
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172 159

output parameter representing the outlet temperature. The Hc/Dh,, flow parameter (Re) and heat transfer parameter (q). The Dp
experimental data obtained from the literature were used for was predicted with reference to Ht/Dh, Hc/Dh and Re. Their results
training the MLFFN with the error back propagation algorithm. The indicate that, network predictions of Nu and Dp are closer to the
MLFFN with 3-10-10-1 configuration predicts the outlet tempera- corresponding experimental results with acceptable accuracy.
ture with MARE less than 4.3% when compared with the experi- Similarly, Wijayasekara et al. [91] predicted the heat transfer rate,
mental results. pressure drops in on the cold and hot side of the printed circuit heat
Two similar MLFFN models were developed for forecasting the exchangers. In their work, the over-training problem of ANN model
performance of a condenser used in a thermal power 
plant [85]. In was alleviated by introducing an error back propagation and LM
their work, the performance parameters

such asQ , h and cleanli- algorithms for over training resilience (EBaLM-OTR) technique. The
ness factor were predicted. The Q was predicted with reference to input layer consists of five neurons namely, cold side inlet pressure,
nine parameters such as temperature of water at the inlet and cold side inlet temperature, hot side inlet pressure, hot side inlet
outlet, level of sea water load chamber, differential pressure loss in temperature and mass flow rate. The network predicts the pressure
the circulating water, temperature of drainage, hot well tempera- drops in hot and cold side and Q with acceptable error limits be-

ture, m of the condensate, condenser pressure and Tsat of the tur- tween 105 and 103.
bine exhaust. In the case of h and cleanliness factor, the Tsat of water
was included. The average test errors of ANN predicted Q , h and 4.2. Estimation of heat exchangers parameters
cleanliness factor are within a deviation of 1%, 17% and 8%,
respectively. Heat transfer coefficient (h), fouling factor (Rfo) and friction
factor (f) are the three important parameters pertaining to any heat
4.1.12. Modeling of special purpose heat exchangers exchanger in operations. Many investigators using ANN have aimed
Applications of ANN used in the special purpose heat ex- at the estimation of these heat exchangers parameters in better
changers are listed in Table 11. Vortex heat exchangers are the de- accuracies. A review of the studies in this area is elaborated here.
vices where a gas is fed with positive pressure undergoes mass and
temperature division, forming two separate flows [86]. While one 4.2.1. Estimation of heat transfer coefficient
flow becomes cooled and dried, the other gets heated and moist. In The applications of ANN for predicting the heat transfer co-
a related work, a MLFFN model was developed for predicting the efficients are summarized in Table 12. Jambunathan et al. [92]
performance of counter flow vortex tube [87]. The network with evaluated the convective h using a MLFFN with reference to non-
four neurons in the input layer (representing the inlet pressure, dimensional temperature distribution, a and time. It was reported
mass flow rate, cold mass fraction and nozzle number) and one that MLFFN with a 3-6-3-1 configuration predicts the convective h
neuron in the output layer (representing the DT between hot and with about ±2.7% deviations. In the worst-case, average error of
cold outlets) was developed for predicting the cooling and heating ±6.5% was obtained from a 3-4-3-l configuration, which confirms
performance of the vortex tube. It was reported that network with that network converged faster with increasing number of nodes in
4-7-1 configuration yields good statistical performance such as R2, the first hidden layer. In another work by Ghajar et al. [93], an
RMSE and RAE values of 0.9989, 0.5016 and 0.0540, respectively. In improved correlation was developed for predicting the h of a hor-
a similar work, the effect of nozzle number, inlet pressure and cold izontal heat exchanger tube (with three inlet configurations such as
mass fraction of heating and cooling performance (temperature reentrant, square-edged and bell-mouth inlets under uniform wall
gradient between the cold and hot outlets) of a counter flow type heat flux boundary condition) using MLFFN. In their work, the h
vortex tube was predicted using MLFFN [88]. The back-propagation values were predicted with reference to Re, Pr, Gr, X/d and mbl/mwa. A
learning algorithm with LM variant and Fermi transfer function was total of 1290 data points (441 for reentrant, 416 for square-edged,
used in this study. It was reported that network predictions of the and 433 for bell-mouth) were used as training data for the
temperature gradient between hot and cold junctions are closer to network. It was reported that 5-11-1 MLFFN configuration predicts
experimental values with R2 of 0.9947, RMS error of 0.1882% and the h values within 5% deviation.
the MAE percentage of 0.0460. The performance of a counter flow Islamoglu and Kurt [94] estimated the Nu using a MLFFN model.
RanqueeHilsch vortex tubes was predicted using MLFFN with The heat transfer analysis was made in a heat exchanger having
limited experimental data [89]. In their work, the DT was predicted corrugated channels. Four inputs of the network representing,
with reference to four parameters such as, inlet pressure, ratio of corrugation angle, axial length of cycle, dh and Re. The output of the
length of vortex tube to internal diameter of vortex tube, number of network was Nu. The network with 4-5-1 configuration predicts
nozzles and fraction for cold flow. It has been reported that MLFFN
with a 4-50-1 configuration predicts the DT between the output Table 12
streams are closer to that of the experimental results. Estimation of heat transfer coefficients.
The Nu and Dp of micro-channel heat exchangers are predicted
Authors Network Tube configuration Parameters
using GMDH neural networks by Amanifard et al. [90]. The Nu was [references] architectures predicted
predicted with reference to geometrical parameters such as Ht/Dh,
Jambunathan MLFFN Flow over tubes (air) hcon
et al. [92]
Ghajar et al. [93] MLFFN Horizontal tube with h
Table 11 three inlet configurations
Modeling of special purpose heat exchangers. Islamoglu MLFFN Corrugated channels Nu
and Kurt [94]
Authors [references] Network Heat exchanger Parameters
Colorado et al. [95] MLFFN Helical coil Nu
architectures configuration predicted
Mehrabi et al. [96] ANFIS Double pipe h, inside and
Kocabas et al. [87] MLFFN Vortex tube DT heat exchangers outside Dps
Uluer et al. [88] MLFFN Vortex tube DT Kamble et al. [97] MLFFN, Horizontal tube h and Nu
Dincer et al. [89] MLFFN Vortex tube DT Thaseen et al. [98] ANFIS Flat bundle tubes Nu and Dps
Amanifard et al. [90] GMDH Micro-channel Nu

and Dp Karami et al. [99] ANFIS Air cooled condenser with Nu
Wijayasekara et al. [91] Hybrid Printed circuit Q and Dp twisted tube inserts
heat exchanger Akdag et al. [102] MLFFN Oscillating induced tubes Nu
160 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
the Nu with maximum and minimum relative errors of 10% and
0.25% and MREs less than 3.36%. Similarly, a MLFFN based physical-
 representing dt, crude velocity and tube surface temperature. It was
empirical model was developed for predicting the Q in a helical coil
using oil and glycerol/water solution as working fluids [95]. A
MLFFN model with four neurons in input layer representing Pr, Ra,
helical diameter and number of coils turns was developed for
predicting Nu of oil and glycerol/water solution. The network with
4-4-1 configuration predicts the Nu with R value of 0.98 when
compared to the experimental results.
Mehrabi et al. [96] used ANFIS for predicting U and Dp charac-
teristics of helicoidal double-pipe heat exchangers with reference
to five input variables such as inner and annular dean number,
inner and annular Pr and pitch of the coil. Their results showed that
ANFIS predicts the U, inner Dp and annular Dp with R values of
0.994, 0.995 and 0.951, respectively, and the corresponding RMS
errors of 13.61%, 5.08% and 13.81%. Similarly, Kamble et al. [97]
predicted the h and Nu using MLFFN with reference to particle
size, DT between bed and immersed surface and fluidizing velocity.
Their results reported that MLFFN with a 3-5-2 configuration pre-
dicts both h and Nu with R values of 0.9999. ANFIS was also used to
predict the Nu and Dp characteristics in a flat bundle tubes with
reference to Re, longitudinal pitch-to-small diameter ratio, and the
transverse pitch-to-small diameter ratio [98]. The accuracy be-
tween numerical values and ANFIS model results were obtained
with a MRE for average Nu and Dp less than 1.9% and 2.97%,
respectively. Karami et al. [99] predicted the Nu with reference to
Re and the twist ratio in an air cooled condenser heat exchanger
equipped with twisted tape inserts using ANFIS. It was reported
that, the maximum errors of training and testing data were found
to be 0.111% and 2.378%, respectively. The MRE of the training and
test data are correspondingly 0.011% and 1.316%.
The oscillation induced heat transfer enhancements have been
widely used in compact heat exchangers [100] and wire on tube
heat exchangers [101]. In a related work, the Nu was predicted for
an oscillating annular flow with reference to four parameters,
namely, kinetic Re, dimensionless amplitude, filling heights, and
heat flux [102]. The network structure was optimized for 4-5-1
configuration. The network predictions of Nu by ANN are closer to
the experimental values within a deviation of about 5%.
4.2.2. Estimation of fouling factor
Material deposits on the surfaces of heat exchanger tubes will
influence its thermal performance [103]. The factor considered for
material deposits are called as the fouling factor (Rfo). ANN has been
successfully used for predicting the Rfo in heat exchangers
[104,105]. Table 13 consolidates the applications of ANN for pre-
dicting the Rfo. The thermal efficiency of a heat exchanger obtained
using the conventional analytical approach is higher than that of
the experimental values due to the effect of fouling [106]. The ANN
based estimation of Rfo provides a flexible approach by simulating
the actual experimental operating conditions. Aminian and Shah-
hosseini [107] used MLFFN model for predicting the Rfo of crude oil.
Table 13
Estimation of fouling factor.
Authors [references] Network Heat exchanger Parameters
architectures configuration investigations
Aminian and MLFFN Pre heat exchangers Rfo
Shahhosseini [107]
Aminian and MLFFN Pre heat exchangers Rfo
Shahhosseini [108]
Lalot and Palsson [109] MLFFN Cross flow Rfo
Garcia [110] MLFFN Coil type Control of Rfo
Romeo and Gareta [111] Hybrid Boiler heat exchanger Control of Rfo
Training data sets were extracted from the experimental results
reported in literature. The network consists of three input neurons
reported that the network configuration with a 3-5-6-1 structure
predicts the Rfo having a MRE of 26.23% when compared to the
experimental results. In a further work on this topic, Rfo in crude oil
pre-heaters were predicted using MLFFN with reference to Re, Pr,
and Tsur [108]. It was reported that, MLFFN with 3-8-1 configuration
predicts the Rfo with less absolute MRE of 14.05%, 22.47% and
15.83% for training, testing and overall database, respectively.
Lalot and Palsson [109] predicted the Rfo of a cross-flow heat
exchanger using ANN. A numerical model was used to generate the
training data for the network under clean and fouling conditions.
The five inputs to the network are Ti and To of the cold fluids, Ti of

hot fluid, m of cold and hot fluids. The output layer has only one
neuron representing the Rfo. It was concluded that, ANN modeling
is quite sensitive for predicting the Rfo with less computational
time, when compared to the conventional method of estimation. To
overcome the drawback of heat exchanger fouling, a novel super-
vision strategy using ANN was proposed by Garcia [110]. The pro-
posed supervision strategy can detect, isolate and accommodate
the faults in a closed loop temperature control of a heat exchanger
on the basis of static and dynamic ANN techniques. The developed
strategy was divided into three modules. The first module checks
the consistency of the supervision system. The second module
monitors the heat exchanger for fouling condition with the ability
to diagnose the probable causes of fouling. A third module predicts
the remaining operating time under acceptable conditions, asso-
ciated to a decision making task to schedule the supervision flow
chart. The developed supervision strategy is a novel application of
ANN for detecting, isolating and predicting heat exchanger fouling
with good accuracy. In another work, Romeo and Gareta [111] used
ANN and fuzzy logic hybrid approach for controlling the Rfo in
biomass boiler heat exchangers. It was reported that, the power
production can be improved by about 3.5% using a hybrid ANN
approach to control the fouling rate in boilers.
4.2.3. Estimation of friction factors
The summary of ANN studies reported for the estimation of
friction factor (f) is listed in Table 14. Beigzadeh and Rahimi [112]
predicted the Nu and f in helical coiled tubes. The experiments
were carried out with hot fluid flowing through coiled tubes which
is immersed in a cold bath. Two ANN models were developed for
predicting Nu and f. The MLFFN model for estimating Nu had four
input parameters, namely Re, Pr, curvature ratio, and coil pitch. In
another MLFFN model for predicting f has three input parameters
such as Re, curvature ratio and coil pitch. The predicted Nu and f
from MLFFN models were compared with the experimental results
Table 14
Estimation of friction factor.
Authors [references] Network Heat exchanger Parameters
architectures configuration investigations
Beigzadeh and MLFFN Helical tubes Nu and f
Rahimi [112]
Beigzadeh and ANFIS Helical tubes Nu and f
Rahimi [113]
Zdaniuk et al. [114] MLFFN Straight tube j factor and
with internal fins f factor
Xie et al. [115] MLFFN Vortex generators Nu and f
Nasr et al. [116] MLFFN Wire coil inserts Nu and f
Nasr and Khalaj [117] MLFFN Corrugated tubes
with twisted
tape inserts
Khalaj et al. [118] MLFFN ANFIS Wire coil inserts Nu and f
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
as well as the theoretical predictions reported in literature. The
MLFFN model with 9 hidden neurons was selected for predicting of
Nu with R2 of 0.9993, MSE of 2.46, and MRE of 12.95%. Similarly, the
MLFFN model with 12 hidden neurons predicts f in the tubes with R2,
MRE and MSE of 0.9997, 1.26% and 4.36  107, respectively. In
further work, two ANFIS models were developed for predicting Nu
and f in coiled tubes [113]. The first network had four inputs, namely,
Re, Pr, curvature ration and coil pitch for predicting the Nu values.
Whereas, second network had three inputs representing Re, cur-
vature ratio, and coil pitch for predicting the f values. The MRE of the
two ANFIS models for predicting Nu and f are 6.24% and 3.54%,
respectively.
Zdaniuk et al. [114] used the feed forward network approach for
predicting the j and f for water flow in straight tubes with internal
helical fins. The four inputs considered in their work are helix an-
gles (between 25 and 48 ), number of fins (between 10 and 45), fin
height-to-diameter ratios (between 0.0199 and 0.0327), and Re
(between 12,000 and 60,000). The networks were trained with
experimental results obtained from literature. It was reported that
network with log-sigmoid functions in the first layer and a linear
node function in the output layer are the most advantageous ar-
chitecture for prediction of j and f within acceptable error limits.
Similarly, Xie et al. [115] used a MLFFN to correlate Nu and f for
three types of heat exchangers using plain, slit and fins with lon-
gitudinal delta-winglet vortex generators. The MLFFN configura-
tion used in their work consists of twelve inputs representing the
geometrical parameters (Re, N, dt, fin pitch, tube pitches longitu-
dinal and transverse tube pitches, height, width and length of the
slit, length and height of the vortex generator and angle of attack)
with two output neurons representing Nu and f. The network is
optimized to a 12-9-5-2 configuration. The maximum MRE and
RMS errors between ANN predicted and experimental data are
within 5% and 1.44% deviations, respectively.
Nasr et al. [116] enhanced the performance of heat exchangers
using wire coil inserts. In their work, Nu and f were obtained using
two MLFFN models. The MLFFN with four input parameters in the
input layer representing Re, Pr, e/dh and p/dh were used for pre-
dicting Nu. The structure of ANN for predicting f consists of three
input parameters in the input layer (Re; p/dh; e/dh) and f is the only
output term in the output layer. The MLFFN with a 4-4-1 configu-
ration predicts the heat transfer coefficient with an excellent R value
of 1 and MRE of 1.78%. The network with a 3-4-2-1 architecture
predicts the f with MRE of 3.26 and R2 of 0.9936. In a further work,
the h and f in corrugated tubes combined with twisted tape inserts
were predicted using two MLFFN models [117]. Two MLFFNs were
developed with five neurons in the input layer (representing Re,
height of the corrugation/tube diameter, pitch of the corrugation/height
of corrugation, b and pitch of the twisted tape/diameter of the tube) and
one neuron in the output layer (representing h and f). The MLFFN
was optimized to 5-13-5-1 and 5-9-8-1 configurations for predict-
ing h and f, respectively. The MLFFN predictions are closer to the
experimental results with good MRE and R2 values (2.80% and
0.9966) and (0.36% and 1) for h and f, respectively. In a similar work,
the Nu and f were predicted using MLFFN and ANFIS of wire coil and
twisted tape inserts [118]. It was reported that the MRE between
predicted results and experimental data were found to be less than
3% for MLFFN and 1.5% for ANFIS.
4.3. Phase change characteristics in heat exchangers
The accurate predictions of boiling and condensation heat
transfer coefficient values are highly essential for optimal design of
heat exchangers such as evaporators and condensers [119,120]. The
conventional method of predicting the phase change characteris-
tics involves complicated analytical equations and assumptions. To
161
overcome this difficulty, ANN models were introduced by many
researchers for predicting the hb and hcond. A survey of ANN used in
predicting the phase change characteristics are consolidated and
presented in Tables 15e19.
4.3.1. Boiling characteristics
The ANN applications for predicting the boiling heat transfer
characteristics (hb) are reviewed and summarized in Table 15.
Balcilar et al. [121] investigated the pool boiling characteristics of
TiO2 nano-fluids using MLFFN, GRNN and RBFN models. The
network consists of seven dimensional input parameters, namely k,
r, m, cp, particle size, surface roughness of heating surface and wall
superheat and concentration of the nano-particle. The output layer
consists of hb and qb. The R2 of the predicted heat flux for MLFFN,
GRNN and RBFN models are 0.916, 0.8846 and 0.8989, respectively.
The corresponding values for hb are 0.8638, 0.8795 and 0.8472. The
results confirmed that, MLFFN has more prediction accuracy when
compared to RBFN and GRNN models. Similarly, a generalized
correlation for predicting the hb of two pure fluids (R22 and R134a)
and two mixed refrigerants (R407C and R410A) was developed
[122]. Four dimensionless parameters from existing generalized
correlations are selected as inputs, while Nu is the output to the
network. A MLFFN with 4-8-1 configuration and log-sigmoid
transfer function in hidden and output layer predicts the Nu with
an average, mean and RMS deviations of 2.5%, 13.0% and 20.3%,
respectively. About 74% of the deviations are within 20%, which is
much better than that of the existing generalized correlations.
Scalabrin et al. [123] proposed a new correlation for predicting
hb of pure fluids using MLFFN. Boiling heat transfer coefficients of
eight pure fluids and a ternary refrigerant mixture were predicted
in their work. The hb of the refrigerants is predicted using MLFFN

with reference to five parameters such as Tr, m, qb, vapor quality (x)
and tube di. For eight pure fluids (R11, R12, R22, R32, R134a, R290,
R600a and argon) and a mixture (R407C), altogether 5236 data
points have been considered for training and validation. Out of
5236 data points, 4803 data points were used for training with an
overall absolute average deviation of 7.72% and a bias of 1.62%,
while the remaining data points were used for the purpose of
validation. By excluding the two pure fluids (R12 and argon), the
remaining 3791 data points with six pure fluids and the mixture
(R407C) were used for training with MAE of 4.45% and a bias
of 0.44%. The accuracy of the results predicted from the ANN
model was reported with acceptable error limits.
In further work, Scalabrin et al. [124] developed two MLFFN
models for predicting the hb of mixed refrigerants. In the first
model, the controlling of physical quantities is considered as inputs
for predicting the hb values of pure fluids. While in the second ANN
model, the values of hb of two individual pure fluid and mixture
composition were considered as inputs for predicting hb of the
Table 15
Prediction of boiling heat transfer coefficients.
Authors [references] Network Parameters
architectures predicted
Balcilar et al. [121] MLFFN, GRNN, hb and qb
RBFN
Wang et al. [122] MLFFN hb of pure and
mixed fluids
Scalabrin et al. [123] MLFFN hb
Scalabrin et al. [124] MLFFN hb
Scalabrin et al. [125] MLFFN hb
Liu et al. [126] MLFFN hb
Alizadehdakhel et al. [127] MLFFN Dp
Porto et al. [128] Hybrid hb
Wei et al. [129] Hybrid qb
Wen et al. [130] RBFN hb
162 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172

Table 16 Table 18
Prediction of critical heat flux. Flow regime identifications.

Authors [references] Network architectures Working fluid Authors [references] Network Regions identified
architectures
Mazzola et al. [132] MLFFN Water
Vaziri et al. [133] MLFFN, RBFN Water Mi et al. [150,151] MLFFN Bubbly, slug, churn
Nafey [134] MLFFN Steamewater mixture and annular
Cong et al. [135] MLFFN Water, R113, R12 Tambouratzis and MLFFN Bubbly, slug, churn
Zaferanlouei et al. [136] ANFIS Water Pazsit [152,153] and annular
Chen et al. [137] Hybrid Water Timung, and Mandal [154] PNN Bubbly, slug, churn
Wei et al. [138,139] GNN Distilled water and annular
Moon et al. [140,141] MLFFN Water Roshani et al. [155] MLFFN Bubbly, slug, churn
Guanghui et al. [142] MLFFN Water and annular

mixed refrigerants. The hb values predicted by ANN were reported

with satisfactory accuracies for the R290/R600a and R32/R134a
mixtures. The authors also used ANN for modeling of flow boiling
characteristics of pure fluids [125]. In their work, the input layer

consists of five neurons representing Tr, mref , q, x and dt. One neuron
is used in the output layer representing hb. They also proposed a
new modeling technique for the fluid dynamics conditions along
the tube. The actual flow conditions observed in the experiments
were directly linked with a conventional real number called SF
factor (form of flow), ranging in a standardized interval. It was re-
ported that the ANN has been successfully used for predicting the
flow boiling characteristics and also the flow pattern in two phase
boiling conditions. Liu et al. [126] also have evaluated qb using ANN.
In their experimental work, the qb was enhanced using additives.
The effects of thirty additives tested by other researchers were
analyzed in their model. The input layer consists of four neurons
representing the number of carbon atoms inside the straight car-
bon chain in the non polar group, ratio between the atomic weight
of the non-polar and polar groups, type of additive used and the
kind of polar group with one neuron in the output layer repre-
senting qb. The network with a 4-6-3-1 configuration predicts the
qb with 90% accuracy when compared to the experimental results.
Alizadehdakhel et al. [127] predicted the Dp using CFD and
MLFFN during two phase flow inside the tube. In their work, the Dp
was calculated using MLFFN with reference to the gas velocity
number, liquid velocity number and tube slope. The network with a
3-20-1 configuration predicts the Dp with good R2 values of 0.9985.
Their results also indicate that, CFD predictions are better than
MLFFN predictions. Porto et al. [128] predicted the two phase heat
transfer coefficients using a hybrid AI approach (GA and MLFFN) in
evaporators. In their work, the network was trained with 690 data
points covering a wide range of saturated two phase flow regimes
for R-22, R-134a and R-404A refrigerants. In their work, GA was
used to optimize the network parameters. It was concluded that GA
integrated MLFFN predicts the two phase heat transfer coefficient
with acceptable accuracy when compared to the experimental re-
sults. Wei et al. [129] predicted the boiling heat flux (qb) using GA
based MLFFN. In their work, the qb was predicted with reference to
heated length, system pressure, wall superheat and G. Their results
reported that GA based MLFFN, which predicts the qb within 15%
deviation. Similarly, Wen et al. [130] predicted the hb of R407C
mixture inside horizontal tubes using RBFN with reference to five
inputs such as G, q, x, Tsat and d. It was reported that, this network
predicts hb within 10% deviation.
4.3.2. Critical heat flux
CHF is an important parameter considered in the design of heat
exchangers in which evaporation or boiling phase change occurs
[131]. Many investigators used the ANN approach for predicting the
CHF. Table 16 gives consolidated details of the applications of ANN
for predicting CHF.
Mazzola [132] integrated ANN modeling with mathematical
correlation for predicting water cooled q of a heat exchanger. The
datum-dependent parameter (z) was predicted with reference to G,
dt, Lt, vl, vg and the x using MLFFN. Based on the predicted constant
value z, the CHF was predicted using the correlations. The predicted
CHF was found to be closer to the experimental results with a MAE
of 8.9% and RMSE of 12.1%. Vaziri et al. [133] predicted the CHF
using RBFN and compared the result with MLFFN. The CHF was
predicted at fixed inlet conditions, local conditions and fixed outlet
conditions. It has been reported that RBFN structure has superior
performance in prediction of CHF when compared to the MLFFN.
RBFN predicts CHF with RMS errors of 0.24%, 7.9%, 0.16% and MLFFN
predicts CHF with RMS errors of 1.29%, 8.31% and 2.71%, in fixed
inlet conditions, local conditions and fixed outlet conditions,
respectively.
Nafey [134] used MLFFN for predicting the CHF of steamewater
mixture flowing through the heat exchanger pipes. The neurons in
input layer represent Lt, inside diameter, wall thickness, p, T, mass
velocity and quality of steam. The MLFFN configuration was opti-
mized to 7-9-1 for predicting CHF. The learning rate and mo-
mentum coefficients were optimized as 0.75 and 0.85, respectively.
Experimental results of CHF are compared with the results obtained
by the developed MLFFN based correlation. The comparison is also
made with the results obtained by a best-fit correlation. The de-
viations between MLFFN results and experimental results are found
to be less than 5.5% with correlation coefficients of 0.998. In
another work, Cong et al. [135] predicted CHF of water, R113 and
R12 using ANN. The network consists of four input neurons rep-
resenting rl =rv , the ratio of the characteristic dimension of the
heated surface to the diameter of the impinging jet, reciprocal of
the We, and the number of impinging jets. The MLFFN was opti-
mized to 4-9-1 configuration. The network predicts CHF with RMS
error of 17.39% and MRE of 11.89%.
Table 19
Prediction of condensation heat transfer coefficients.

Authors [references] Network Parameters predicted

Table 17 architectures
Prediction of void fraction. Demir et al. [156] MLFFN hc
Balcilar et al. [157] MLFFN, RBFN, hc and Dp
Authors [references] Network architectures Heat exchanger configuration
GRNN, ANFIS
Castillo et al. [143] MLFFN Geothermal heat exchangers Balcilar et al. [158] MLFFN Dps during evaporation
Zhang et al. [144] MLFFN Mini channel and condensation
Malayeri et al. [145] RBFN Experimental test rig Ermis et al. [159] MLFFN Heat storage capacity
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
Zaferanlouei et al. [136] predicted the CHF using ANFIS. In their
work, the CHF was predicted at fixed inlet, local and fixed outlet
conditions. It was reported that ANFIS model predicts the CHF with
RMS test errors of 4.79%, 5.04% and 11.39%, for the fixed inlet
conditions, local conditions and fixed outlet conditions, respec-
tively. The predicted results indicate that ANFIS has superior per-
formance in predicting CHF when compared to MLFFN. In similar
attempt, Chen et al. [137] predicted a non dimensional number
(Kutateladze number) of a concentric tube open thermosiphon
using a hybrid approach (MLFFN and GA). The network work was
trained with experimental data extracted from the literature. The
input layer consists of four dimensionless parameters, namely
density ratio, the ratio of heated tube length to the inner diameter
of the outer tube, frictional area ratio and the ratio of equivalent
heated diameter to characteristic bubble size. The output layer
consists of one neuron representing the Kutateladze number. It was
reported that MLFFN-GA hybrid approach predicts the CHF with
MRE of 8.46%. The CHF was estimated based on Kutateladze num-
ber predicted by ANN.
Wei et al. [138,139] predicted the CHF using GNN. In their work,
the CHF was predicted with reference to pressure, G and critical
quality. The developed model in their work can predict the CHF
(range of pressure between 1.08 and 3.11 MPa), G (between 56.5
and 141.6 kg/m2 s) and critical quality (between 0.694 and 0.987).
The RMS errors of the training, validation and testing data are all
lower than 0.05148, 0.07263 and 0.06594, respectively. The RMS
error of the GNN predicted results were lower than 0.15. Moon and
Chang [140] predicted CHF using MLFFN and compared with the
fuzzy theory. The CHF was predicted with reference to p, G and x. It
was reported that MLFFN predicts the CHF with better accuracy
when compared to other conventional correlations and fuzzy the-
ory. Their results reported that the RMS error of MLFFN predicted
CHF was within a limit of 20%. As an extension of their work, the
CHF was predicted for three conditions such as fixed inlet, fixed
outlet and local conditions [141]. It was reported that, MLFFN
predicts the CHF with RMS errors of 8.9%, 13.1% and 19.3% for fixed
inlet, fixed exit and local conditions, respectively. In another work,
Guanghui et al. [142] predicted the CHF under low pressure and
oscillation conditions for both natural and forced circulation con-
ditions using MLFFN. The input parameters of the network are p,

mean m, relative amplitude, inlet sub-cooling, oscillation period
and the ratio of heated length to the diameter of the tube and
overall length/diameter ratio. The output layer has one neuron
representing CHF. It was concluded that, MLFFN with a 6-10-1
configuration predicts the CHF accurately. They also reported that,
the minimum number of neurons in the hidden layer is a product of
the number of neurons in the input and output layer.
4.3.3. Estimation of void fraction
Void fraction is an important parameter used to characterize the
two-phase flow in heat exchangers. Table 17 gives a consolidated
account of the applications of ANN for the estimation of void
fraction in multiphase flow. Castillo et al. [143] developed a new
correlation using MLFFN for modeling two phase flows in the
geothermal exchangers. The network consists of eight neurons in
input layer namely wall head pressure, steam quality, wellbore
diameter, viscosity,rf , Re, We, and Fr with one neuron in the output
layer representing the void fraction. The MLFFN with 8-6-1
configuration predicts the void fraction with good R of 0.9722 with
lower values of RMS errors. Accurate prediction of frictional pres-
sure drop and void fraction during two phase flow in mini-channels
is essential. Zhang et al. [144] predicted the Dp in a mini channel
heat exchanger with reference to dh, G, p, and xeq and void fraction
was predicted with reference to jf, jg, dh, and p using MLFFN. Their
results reported that MLFFN predictions of Dp and void fraction are
163
better than that obtained using conventional correlations. Malayeri
et al. [145] predicted void fraction using RBFN with reference to the
modified volumetric flow ratio, We, and Dp. It was reported that
RBFN predicts the void fraction with average relative error of 3.6%
for the training data and 5.8% for the testing data.
4.3.4. Two phase flow regime identifications
Two phase flows commonly occur in heat exchanger applica-
tions such as condensers and evaporators of refrigeration systems,
boilers and condensers of thermal power plants, petrochemical
industries, nuclear and chemical reactors [146]. The identification
of two phase flow regimes in heat exchangers is essential to
investigate its transient behavior. The conventional methods used
for measuring the two phase flow are by visual observation [146],
or using X-rays [147] and gamma rays [148]. However, the con-
ventional methods are having many drawbacks [149]. To overcome
this difficulty, ANN method was proposed by many researchers. The
reported investigations on this topic are reviewed and the consol-
idated list is presented in Table 18.
Mi et al. [150,151] identified the four flow regimes such as
bubbly, slug flow, churn flow and annular flow based on non-
intrusive impedance void-meter input signals using supervised
MLFFN. This network identifies the flow regimes with an accuracy
of 94%. In similar work, Tambouratzis and Pazsit [152,153] used the
ANN approach for predicting four different flow regimes (such as
bubbly, slug, churn and annular flow) during the boiling phase
change phenomena. In their work, 996 KURRI images were used to
investigate the four regions of boiling phase change characteristics.
The extracted images were used as training data for the network. It
was reported that, their network predicts the two phase charac-
teristics with 98.56% accuracy.
Two phase flow patterns in a micro-channel heat exchanger
were identified using PNN and compared with the conventional
correlation models [154]. The parameters considered in their work
for predicting two phase characteristics are liquid and vapor phase
superficial velocity, channel diameter, angle of inclination and fluid
properties such as density, viscosity and surface tension. In their
work, two phase flow patterns have been divided into six categories
such as bubbly, slug, annular, churn, liquid ring and liquid lump
flows. The flow patters predicted by PNN are found to be in good
agreement for all flow patterns except for liquid lump flow. The
multiphase regime of oilewateregas multiphase phase flow was
identified using MLFFN [155]. In their work, the input parameters
are first and second full energy peaks of the detector output signal.
The two outputs of the network represent oil and water percent-
ages. It was reported that the MLFFN with a 2-7-10-2 configuration
predicts the output with MAE less than 1%.
4.3.5. Condensation characteristics
ANN has been successfully applied in predicting the condensa-
tion characteristics. A review of few reported investigations is
described in Table 19. Demir et al. [156] predicted the hcond and Nu
of R600a using MLFFN. Input layer consists of six neurons repre-

senting mref , mean vapor quality, input vapor quality, output vapor
quality, Tsat, DT between pipe wall and condensing fluid. The output
layer consists of two neurons representing the hcond and Nu.
Tangent sigmoid and linear transfer functions were used in hidden
and output layer, respectively. The network was optimized to a 6-5-
2 configuration. The network predicts the hcond and Nu with MREs
of 3.97% and 3.99%, respectively. Similarly, the hcond and Dp of R134a
inside the vertical smooth tubes were predicted using four ANN
models, such as MLFFN, RBFN, GRNN and ANFIS [157]. The network
consists of five input parameters, namely G, q, Tsat, DT between
condensing temperature and inlet tube wall temperature and
average vapor quality. Two output neurons representing
164 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172

experimental hcond and Dp. The results showed that MLFFN and dynamic behavior of heat exchangers. An internal model scheme
RBFN architectures were reported with good agreement for pre- was developed to control the over-tube air temperature with two
dicting the experimental hcond and Dp within 5% for all tested ANN models (one to simulate and another to control the heat
conditions. In further work, Balcilar et al. [158] predicted the Dp of exchanger). The results are compared with that of PI and PID
the refrigerants during evaporation and condensation in horizontal controller. The reported results confirm that, the ANN method of
smooth and micro-fin tubes using MLFFN. The refrigerants heat exchanger control performed better than the conventional PI
considered in their study are R32, R125, R410A, R134a, R22, R502, and PID control techniques. Varshney and Panigrahi [164] experi-
R507A, R32/R134a (25/75 by mass), R407C and R12. In their work, mentally controlled the temperature of a heat exchanger in a closed
two MLFFN models were developed for predicting the Dp during flow air circuit using ANN and PID controllers. The temperature
evaporation and condensation. One is having a 12-10-10-1 struc- inside the test section has been maintained at a set point value by
ture and another is of 12-40-1 configuration. The inputs of the first variation of air flow rate over the heat exchanger tube surface and
network are G, tube length, inlet and outlet vapor qualities, pc, the water flow inside the heat exchanger tubes. The performance of
latent heat of condensation, rl and rv , ml and mv , dh and all liquid Re. the controller has been investigated for multiple set point values.
The inputs for the second network configuration are G, tube length, The ANN based control has higher speed of response with less
inlet, and outlet vapor qualities, pc, latent heat of condensation, steady state error when compared to the PID control. The control
mass fraction of liquid, and vapor phases, m of liquid and vapor action based on the ANN technique has less oscillation compared to
phases, dh and two-phase density of (rTP). Results showed that the that of PID based control. Also, it was found that the dual actuations
12-40-1 configuration has better predictability than that of the 12- (air flow and water flow control) have better performance than that
10-10-1 configuration due to the use of proper input parameters in with single actuation (either air flow or water flow control).
the correlation. They also reported that MLFFN predicted Dp values Abbassi and Bahar [165] presented the details of a thermody-
are closer to actual Dp obtained with an error rate of about ±7%. namic modeling of an evaporative condenser (under steady state
Thermal energy storage capacity of a heat exchanger was esti- and transient state conditions) to control the thermal capacity us-
mated using MLFFN with four neurons in input layer representing a ing ANN and compared the results with that of PID controllers. They
heat transfer area, Re, inlet temperature of heat transfer fluid and developed an MLFFN architecture with five neurons in the input

time [159]. The MLFFN with a 4-8-1 configuration predicts the layer (representing refrigerant Tcond, mref , inlet air temperature,

thermal energy storage capacity with average MRE, standard de- inlet specific humidity and mw ) and three neurons in the output
viation and R2 values of 6.63%, 7.78 and 0.9919, respectively. layer (representing the amount of water evaporated, condenser
load and outlet specific humidity and temperature). Their results
showed that the ANN based controllers can minimize the process
4.4. Control of heat exchangers
error better than the PID controllers. They have also reported that,
the ANN based controller can be a good substitute for the PID
Control of heat exchangers plays a major role in achieving better
controllers in heat exchanger applications. In another work, a novel
system performance and energy saving. Conventional controllers
RBFN architecture characterized by activation functions with dy-
are not suitable for the systems having nonlinear behavior, which
namic synaptic units (DSU) was adopted in controlling the
includes uncertainties and time delays that may lead to the
ammonia evaporator and compared with two other neural network
reduction of heat exchanger effectiveness. Nonlinear controllers
structures such as direct mapping neural network (DMNN) and
based on AI techniques like fuzzy logic and ANN can overcome
RBFN with dynamic neural units (DNN) [166]. From the three dy-
these issues [160e162]. A summary of ANN applications for control
namic networks reported in their study, it was concluded that
of heat exchangers are consolidated and presented in Table 20.
neural networks with DSU needs less input and hidden layer nodes
Diaz et al. [163] predicted the dynamic performance of heat
than conventional DMNN with nonlinear static activation functions
exchangers using ANN. The results are compared with proportional
and RBFNN with DNN. The RBFNN with DSU results in faster
integral (PI) and proportional integral derivative (PID) controllers.
convergence in the training process to control the evaporator more
In their work, a novel methodology was proposed for predicting the
effectively.
Vasickaninova
et al. [167] controlled the thermal processes of
heat exchanger using MLFFN and compared with the PID controls.
Table 20
The input layer of the network consists of three neurons namely dt,
Control of heat exchangers.
r and cp. The output layer consists of two output neurons namely h
Authors Heat exchanger Network Parameters and volume flow rate. The MLFFN with a 3-6-2 configuration con-
[references] configuration architectures controlled
trols the thermal processes of a heat exchanger with an integrated
Diaz et al. [163] Aireliquid heat exchanger MLFFN Control of Ta square error of 279.35, whereas the PID controller has an integrated
Varshney and Fin tube heat exchanger MLFFN Control of T
error of 304.7. The reported results confirmed that the ANN pre-
Panigrahi [164]
Abbassi and Evaporative condenser MLFFN Thermal capacity dicted control strategy is a good tool for successful control of the
Bahar [165] thermal processes happening in heat exchangers with significant
Nanayakkara Evaporator RBFN Cooling capacity energy savings. Similarly, Hu et al. [168] predicted the static and
et al. [166] dynamic performance of a HVAC heat exchanger using ANN. They
Vasickaninova Tubular heat exchanger MLFFN h and volume
et al. [167] flow rate
used two MLFFN models for predicting the static and dynamic
Hu et al. [168] HVAC heat exchangers MLFFN Chilled water response of a heat exchanger used in a mechanical HVAC system. In
outlet their work, five input parameters (such as inlet chilled Tw, outlet
 
temperatures chilled Tw, inlet temperature of hot air, chilled water m andma ) were

and outlet Ta
considered for predicting the Q of a heat exchanger. The MLFFN
Li et al. [169,170] Evaporator of air MLFFN DBT and WBT
conditioning system with a 5-10-1 configuration predicts the Q within an accuracy of
Jahedi and HVAC Heat exchanger WNN-IIR Temperature ±4.87% deviations. Another ANN model with ten neurons in the
Ardehali [171] and humidity input layer and two neurons in the output layer was developed for
Gang et al. [172] Ground source MLFFN Temperature predicting the dynamic performance of a heat exchanger. The
heat exchanger
network with a 10-20-2 configuration predicts the chilled water
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
outlet temperature and outlet air temperature with maximum
relative errors of 11.42% and 6.94%, respectively. In another work, Li
et al. [169,170] developed a MLFFN to control the evaporator used in
an air conditioning system. In their work, a MLFFN was developed
to predict the DBT and WBT of the air at exit. The network consists
of twelve neurons in input layer representing indoor DBT and WBT
of air at three different time intervals, while the six other inputs are
the compressor and fan speeds at two different speeds. The two
outputs include DBT and WBT of air. It was reported that the
network with a 12-30-2 configuration predicts the DBT and WBT of
the air leaving the evaporator of the heat exchanger with an
average relative errors and MREs of 0.30% and 1.36%, respectively.
Jahedi and Ardehali [171] controlled the temperature and hu-
midity of air leaving the HVAC heat exchanger using WNN with
infinite impulse response (IIR) filer for the faster and accurate
identification of system dynamics. It was reported that, the per-
formance of a HVAC heat exchanger using WNN-IIR controller
showed improved energy efficiency when compared to the pro-
portional derivative (PD) controllers. In a recent investigation, an
ANN based control strategy was proposed by Gang et al. [172] to
compare the cooling water temperature leaving from ground heat
exchanger and cooling tower. In their work, a MLFFN with LM
learning algorithm was developed with ten neurons in the input
layer representing temperatures at different locations in a heat
pump circuit and one neuron in the output layer representing
temperature of cooling water leaving the cooling tower and ground
heat exchanger. It was reported that ANN based control is more
energy efficient when compared to schedule based control system
and temperature differential based control system.
4.5. Comparison of the ANN architectures for heat exchanger
analysis
ANN architectures used for heat exchanger analysis discussed in
this paper are summarized in Table 21. From Table 21, it can be
concluded that MLFFNs were widely used for heat exchanger
analysis due to its simplicity (compared to other network models).
The most common variants in MLFFN architectures for modeling of
thermal systems are LM, SCG and CGP [173e175]. But, the LM is the
most suitable variant for modeling and simulation of heat ex-
changers due to its higher speed and fast convergence when
compared to SCG and CGP. The MLFFNs have certain limitations in
optimizing the network parameters as mentioned in some research
reports [176e178]. AI techniques have been developed to optimize
the network configuration. Limited investigations have been re-
ported with a hybrid ANN approach for heat exchanger applica-
tions. Hence, further research is required to the hybrid approach of
heat exchanger analysis. WNN overcomes the limitations of MLFFN
for certain heat exchanger applications [67,179]. From the literature
reviewed, it can be understood that MLFFNs are the most suitable
network configuration used for modeling and simulation of heat
exchangers, estimation of heat exchanger parameters such as Rfo, h
and f values, phase change characteristics in heat exchangers and
control of heat exchangers with acceptable accuracy.
Table 21
Number of ANN used in heat exchanger analysis.
Type of ANN MLFFN GRNN RBFN ANFIS Hybrid Others
Modeling of heat exchangers 58 e 1 4 2
Estimation of h, Rfo, f 16 e e 5 1
Phase change characteristics 21 2 4 2 3
Control of heat exchangers 8 e 1 e
Total 103 2 6 11 6 4
165
RBFN is another network architecture used in heat exchanger
analysis [61,121,130,133,157,166]. RBFN has a single hidden layer,
whereas a MLFFN may have more than one hidden layer, which
needs to be optimized [180]. In certain applications, RBFN has
better prediction capability when compared to MLFFN. RBFN have
faster convergence speed and higher reliability with relatively short
learning time and less extrapolation errors when compared to
MLFFN [181]. The number of hidden neurons in RBFN depends
upon the number of inputs, which require more memory space
when there were too many input data [182]. Another drawback of
RBFN is the determination of spread number as reported by Wang
et al. [183]. The high value of spread number leads to over fitting
and its less value may lead to insufficient learning. The spread
parameter can be optimized using GA as it has done by Zhang and
Bai [184]. The optimal network parameters were predicted using
PSO in a work reported by Lee and Ko [185]. Due to these draw-
backs, limited investigations have been reported with RBFN for heat
exchanger analysis when compared to MLFFN.
WNN is a new class of networks, which have been widely used
[186]. WNN combines the advantages of discrete wavelet transform
and neural network processing to attain good non-linear relation-
ship, which has been successfully used in fault diagnosis, load
forecasting and functional approximations [186]. The WNN is a
generalized RBFN, which has faster convergence than RBFN [179].
The WNN is based on MLFFN, of which the sigmoid transfer func-
tion was replaced by wavelet bases, whereas the activation function
in output layer is sigmoid function. The prediction capability of
WNN was found to be better when compared to MLFFN [67,179]. In
a recent work, a fuzzy integrated WNN was proposed for modeling
and optimization applications [187]. The optimization techniques
such as GA, PSO, SA and ANT colony were also used to optimize the
network parameters. Limited investigations have been reported
with WNN architecture for modeling and simulation of heat ex-
changers. Hence, further research is required to explore the possi-
bility of using WNN for modeling, simulation, fault diagnosis and
control of heat exchangers.
GRNN configuration has radial basis layer and a linear layer as
indicated by Specht [188]. Only two research investigations have
been reported with the application of GRNN for heat exchangers
[121,157]. The most significant characteristics of GRNN are its good
function approximation ability compared to MLFFN, fast training
time and exceptional stability during its prediction stage. GRNN is
proposed for function approximation and classification problems.
However, the prediction capability of GRNN is affected while the
handling of large training data [189]. GRNN does not require an
iterative training procedure as in the back propagation method. The
prediction of optimal smoothening parameter and hidden layer size
are the two major tasks in optimizing the GRNN configuration
[190]. GA integrated GRNN was recommended for predicting the
smoothening factor [191]. Moreover, GRNNs are having poor
extrapolation capability when compared to the MLFFNs. In a
comparative study, it was reported that, GRNN has poor prediction
capability of condensation characteristics when compared to
MLFFN, RBFN and ANFIS [121,157]. Due to these drawbacks, GRNNs
are not generally used in the thermal analysis of heat exchangers.
GRNN is suitable for two phase flow identifications in heat ex-
changers handling multiphase flows (such as condensers and
evaporators).
The ANFIS configuration combines the learning capabilities of a
1
neural network and reasoning capabilities of fuzzy logic [192e194].
e ANFIS predictions of heat exchanger performance were found to be
2 better when compared to MLFFN as reported by many researchers
1 [23,24,64,77,96,98,113,118,136,157]. However, in certain applica-
tions, ANFIS have poor prediction capability for heat exchanger
applications when compared to MLFFNs [77,157]. Selection of
166 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
inputs for ANFIS has the influence on prediction capability as re-
ported by Jang [195]. Hence it is necessary to select the proper input
parameters carefully. ANFIS prediction capability can be further
improved by optimizing the network parameters using GA [113]
and PSO [196]. The prediction accuracy of ANFIS is also enhanced
by integrating ANFIS with fuzzy weighted preprocessing [197].
5. Limitations of ANN modeling for heat exchanger
applications
The major limitations of ANN for heat exchanger analysis
include over training errors, extrapolation errors and optimization
of network configuration. Discussions of the limitations of ANN
modeling for heat exchanger analysis are given in the following
subsections.
5.1. Over training errors
Over training errors occur when the capacity of ANN for training
is too large or more number of iterations were allowed [198]. In
most of the engineering applications of ANN, a very high training
precision or large number of training cycles is preset to terminate
the training processes. However, in actual engineering systems, few
training samples are usually erroneous due to experimental un-
certainties. Hence, high precision may over fit the training samples
and degrade the performance prediction of an ANN model. To
overcome the problem of over training with ANN, the number of
training cycles and number of training data needs to be optimized.
To reduce the overtraining error in ANN, EBaLM-OTR was intro-
duced and this methodology was elaborated by Wijayasekara et al.
[91].
5.2. Extrapolation errors
ANN models are not effective for extrapolation beyond the
training data as identified by Yin et al. [198]. While preparing the
training data, the maximum and minimum values of the system are
to be selected from the experimental results. Some artificial
training samples can be drawn using empirical correlations which
cover the entire range (as much as possible). The range of the
training data must be representative of the entire operating range
of the system in order to reduce the extrapolation errors.
5.3. Network optimization
Selection of optimum network parameters such as, the number
of neurons in hidden layer, number of hidden layers, momentum
factor, learning rate, number of training data and variant are the
major tasks in MLFFN network modeling [199e201]. Trial and error
method is the widely used approach to optimize the network
configuration. The number of neurons in hidden layer can also be
optimized using following equation (1) [202].
1 which needs a detailed further attention.
Number of hidden neurons ¼ ðinput neurons þ output neuronsÞ
2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
þ Number of training data
(1)
However, the trial and error method is time consuming and the
resultant ANN configuration may not be optimum. To overcome
this drawback, GA based ANN approach was developed for opti-
mizing the network parameters [203,204]. PSO can also be
employed for optimizing the ANN configuration. PSO has faster
convergence speed with higher accuracy when compared to GA as
reported by researchers [205e207]. Similarly, simulated annealing
(SA) [208] and ANT colony algorithms [209] can be used to optimize
the network parameters. The hybrid optimization technique using
SA and PSO is still more effective than the conventional PSO based
hybrid ANN as reported by Da and Ge [210].
5.4. Training data requirement
ANN is quite suitable to the problems having large number of
training data [211]. The available data can be split as training data,
validation data and testing data. Improper data splitting can lead to
a poor prediction capability [212]. Hence, the selection of data for
training and testing is more important in order to attain high ac-
curacy. Experimental uncertainty and theoretical assumptions may
influence the reliability of the results in case of handling large
training data [213]. Hence, the number of training data required for
the network needs to be optimized. Novel optimization techniques
may be used to minimize the training data requirement.
6. Further research needs
The major research extensions are identified and listed below
based on the literature reviewed in the area of application of ANN
for the thermal analysis of heat exchangers.
(i) Limited investigations have been reported with the GA in-
tegrated ANN approach. Hence, it is essential to extend the
suitability of GA integrated ANN for a wide range of heat
exchanger applications.
(ii) PSO approach may be used to optimize the ANN architecture
for heat exchanger analysis.
(iii) SA approach is also used to optimize the ANN configurations
for modeling of heat exchangers.
(iv) Need for the optimization of network configuration using an
ANT colony algorithm.
(v) The hybrid network optimization technique is still more
effective than GA, PSO and SA techniques. The hybrid
network optimization approach may be tried for heat
exchanger applications.
(vi) The hybrid training algorithm may be tried elaborately for
heat exchanger applications [214].
(vii) MLFFN with statistical data weighting pre-processing re-
duces the number of training data [215]. Further research
extension of this concept is required for heat exchanger
applications.
(viii) Life cycle assessments of heat exchangers can be carried out
in order to investigate its environmental impacts using ANN
models.
(ix) The quality of water used in heat exchangers may influence
the life of heat exchangers [216]. Hence, the ANN modeling
of heat exchangers by considering the water quality can be
tried.
(x) Pinch analysis of heat exchangers using ANN is one area,
(xi) Exergy analysis of heat exchangers using ANN models hav-
ing very good future scope for optimizing the size, weight,
baffle geometry and cost of heat exchangers [217].
(xii) LMTD and ε-NTU method of heat exchangers are not valid
for zeotropic mixtures due to its non-isothermal behavior,
which requires a correction factor [20]. Hence, the devel-
opment of the ANN model for predicting such correction
factor needs further research.
(xiii) Frost formation is a major issue in cooling coils [218]. ANN
model may be developed to control the frost formation in
cooling coils.
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
(xiv) ANN modeling of heat exchangers using PCM is a current
topic, particularly suitable for renewable energy based heat
storage applications such as, solar water heaters and air
heaters [219].
(xv) The presence of non-condensable gases in the condensers of
refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump systems have
influenced its thermodynamic performance [220]. Further
research investigation is required using ANN.
(xvi) The influence of compressor lubricant during boiling and
condensation characteristics of refrigerants in evaporators
and condensers of refrigeration systems is a topic gaining
importance because of the alternative refrigerant usage
[221].
(xvii) The identification of two phase flow instabilities in con-
densers and evaporators using ANN is a topic of major in-
terest in many heat transfer applications [222].
(xviii) The composition shift and temperature glide are the two
special attributes of zeotropic mixed refrigerants [20]. The
suitability of ANN for predicting composition shift and
temperature glide of new environment friendly refrigerant
mixtures reported in the literature needs further research to
investigate its dynamic behavior [223,224].
(xix) ANFIS controls the temperature and humidity in HVAC
systems [225]. The suitability of ANFIS may be tried to
control the heat exchanger operations.
(xx) ANN models identify the faults in thermal systems with
good accuracy [226e229]. The suitability of using ANN is
having an excellent scope, particularly with respect to nu-
clear reactor applications.
(xxi) The prediction capability of least square support vector
machines is slightly higher than conventional ANN models
[230]. Hence, the suitability of least square support vector
machines for heat exchanger control needs further research
investigation.
7. Conclusion
Researchers from all over the world have reported many
research investigations on thermal analysis of heat exchangers
using ANN. The important research investigations related to ther-
mal analysis of heat exchangers using ANN were reviewed in this
paper. The literature discussed in this paper confirmed that, the
ANN can be successfully used for the modeling, simulation and
analysis of heat exchangers, estimation of heat exchanger param-
eters such as, heat transfer coefficient, fouling factor and friction
factor, estimation of phase change characteristics during boiling
and condensation processes of fluids, CHF, void fraction and two
phase flow identifications. Also, the control of heat exchangers with
acceptable accuracy is possible with ANN compared to conven-
tional controllers such as PD, PID, etc.
Multilayer feed forward networks were widely used for pre-
dicting the performance of heat exchangers due to its simplicity.
However, these are found to be having certain limitations in
optimizing the network configuration. The optimization tech-
niques such as GA, PSO, SA, ANT colony algorithm and hybrid
forms of optimization techniques were recommended for opti-
mizing the MLFFN configurations. The hybrid network optimi-
zation technique seems to be a more efficient approach to
optimize the network configuration. Limited investigations have
been reported with RBFN and GRNN due to its drawbacks in
performance prediction, forecasting and estimation. ANFIS is
another hybrid network used for modeling and simulation of
heat exchangers with acceptable accuracy, which needs further
research in heat exchanger control and fault diagnosis
167
applications. The limitations and future research needs of ANN in
the field of thermal analysis of heat exchangers were identified
and suggestions to overcome the drawbacks are also discussed.
From the detailed review, the authors recommend MLFFN with a
back propagation learning algorithm for the thermal analysis of
heat exchangers.
A vast spectrum of investigations is reviewed in this paper on
the topic of ANN application for the thermal analysis of heat ex-
changers. Based on the discussions presented here, it can be clearly
understood that, ANN offers an excellent alternative methodology
for the thermal analysis of heat exchangers. The information pro-
vided in this paper would be highly beneficial to the researchers
working in the field of heat exchangers and also those using the
ANN methodology in their studies.
References
[1] R.L. Cornelissen, G.G. Hirs, Thermodynamic optimization of a heat exchanger,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 42 (1999) 951e959.
[2] R.K. Shah, D.P. Sekulic, Fundamentals of Heat Exchanger Design, John Wiley
& Sons, New York, 2003.
[3] K.-T. Yang, Artificial neural networks (ANN): a new paradigm for thermal
science and engineering, ASME J. Heat Transfer 130 (2008) 1e18.
[4] M. Sen, K.T. Yang, Applications of artificial neural networks and genetic al-
gorithms in thermal Engineering, in: F. Kreith (Ed.), CRC Handbook of
Thermal Engineering, 2000, pp. 620e661 (Section 4.24).
[5] J. Thibault, B.P.A. Grandjean, Neural network methodology for heat transfer
data analysis, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 34 (1991) 2063e2070.
[6] M.M. Abu-Khader, Plate heat exchangers: recent advances, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 1883e1891.
[7] A. Sommers, Q. Wang, X. Han, C. T'Joen, Y. Park, A. Jacobi, Ceramics and
ceramic matrix composites for heat exchangers in advanced thermal systems
e a review, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 1277e1291.
[8] Q. Li, G. Flamant, X. Yuan, P. Neveu, L. Luo, Compact heat exchangers: a re-
view and future applications for a new generation of high temperature solar
receivers, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (2011) 4855e4875.
[9] S. Wright, G. Andrews, H. Sabir, A review of heat exchanger fouling in the
context of aircraft air-conditioning systems, and the potential for electro-
static filtering, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (2009) 2596e2609.
[10] G. Huminic, A. Humimic, Application of nanofluids in heat exchangers: a
review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 5625e5638.
[11] M.M.A. Bhutta, N. Hayat, M.H. Bashir, A.R. Khan, K.N. Ahmad, S. Khan, CFD
applications in various heat exchangers design: a review, Appl. Therm. Eng.
32 (2012) 1e12.
[12] M. Mohanraj, S. Jayaraj, C. Muraleedharan, Applications of artificial neural
networks for refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump systems e a re-
view, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 1340e1358.
[13] T. Cong, G. Su, S. Qiu, W. Tian, Applications of ANN in fluid flow and heat
transfer problems in nuclear engineering: a review work, Prog. Nucl. Energy
62 (2013) 54e71.
[14] A. Mellit, S.A. Kalogirou, Artificial intelligence techniques for photovoltaic
applications: a review, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 34 (2008) 574e632.
[15] S.A. Kalogirou, Artificial intelligence for the modeling and control of com-
bustion processes: a review, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 29 (2003) 515e566.
[16] S.A. Kalogirou, Applications of artificial neural networks for energy systems,
Appl. Energy 67 (2000) 17e35.
[17] S.A. Kalogirou, Artificial neural networks in renewable energy systems ap-
plications: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 5 (2001) 373e401.
[18] M.A. Hussain, Review of the applications of neural networks in chemical
process control e simulation and online implementation, Artif. Intell. Eng. 13
(1999) 55e68.
[19] J.P. Holman, Heat Transfer, ninth ed., Mc Graw Hill, New York, 2002.
[20] L. Rajapaksha, Influence of special attributes of zeotropic refrigerant mix-
tures on design and operation of vapour compression refrigeration and heat
pump systems, Energy Convers. Manage. 48 (2007) 539e545.
[21] G. Diaz, M. Sen, Simulation of heat exchanger performance using artificial
neural networks, HVAC&R Res. 5 (1999) 195e208.
[22] Y. Islamoglu, A new approach for the prediction of the heat transfer rate of
the wire-on-tube type heat exchangerduse of an artificial neural network
model, Appl. Therm. Eng. 23 (2003) 243e249.
[23] M. Hayati, A. Rezaei, M. Seifi, Prediction of the heat transfer rate of a single
layer wire-on-tube type heat exchanger using ANFIS, Int. J. Refrig. 32 (2009)
1914e1917.
[24] H.M. Ertunc, M. Hosoz, Comparative analysis of an evaporative condenser
using artificial neural network and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system,
Int. J. Refrig. 31 (2008) 1426e1436.
[25] M. Mohanraj, S. Jayaraj, C. Muraleedharan, Exergy analysis of direct expan-
sion solar assisted heat pumps using artificial neural networks, Int. J. Energy
Res. 33 (2009) 1005e1020.
168 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
[26] M. Mohanraj, S. Jayaraj, C. Muraleedharan, Exergy assessment of a direct
expansion solar assisted heat pump working with R22 and R407C/LPG
mixture, Int. J. Green Energy 7 (2010) 65e83.
[27] L.-X. Zhao, C.-L. Zhang, Fin-and-tube condenser performance evaluation
using neural networks, Int. J. Refrig. 33 (2010) 625e634.
[28] Z. Tian, B. Gu, L. Yang, F. Liu, Performance prediction for al parallel flow
condenser based on artificial neural network, Appl. Therm. Eng. 63 (2014)
459e467.
[29] L. Yang, Z.-Y. Li, L.-L. Shao, C.-L. Zhang, Model-based dimensionless neural
networks for fin-and-tube condenser performance evaluation, Int. J. Refrig.
48 (2014) 1e9.
[30] A.S. Sahin, Performance analysis of single-stage refrigeration system with
internal heat exchanger using neural network and neuro-fuzzy, Renew.
Energy 36 (2011) 2747e2752.
[31] Y. Islamoglu, A. Kurt, C. Parmaksizoglu, Performance prediction for non-
adiabatic capillary tube suction line heat exchanger: an artificial neural
network approach, Energy Convers. Manage. 46 (2005) 223e232.
[32] M. Heimel, W. Lang, R. Almbauer, Performance prediction using artificial
neural networks for isobutene flow in non-adiabatic capillary tubes, Int. J.
Refrig. 38 (2014) 281e289.
[33] D. Kumlutas, Z.H. Karadeniz, H. Avcı, M. Ozsen, Investigation of design pa-
rameters of a domestic refrigerator by artificial neural networks and nu-
merical simulations, Int. J. Refrig. 35 (2012) 1678e1689.
[34] K.S. Yigit, H.M. Ertunc, Prediction of the air temperature and humidity at the
outlet of a cooling coil using neural networks, Int. Commun. Heat Mass
Transfer 33 (2006) 898e907.
[35] A.R. Tahavvor, M. Yaghoubi, Prediction of frost deposition on a horizontal
circular cylinder under natural convection using artificial neural networks,
Int. J. Refrig. 34 (2001) 560e566.
[36] P.K. Nag, Heat Transfer, second ed., Tata Mc Grawhill, New Delhi, 2002.
[37] S. Akbari, H.B. Hemingson, D. Beriault, C.J. Simonson, R.W. Besant, Applica-
tion of neural networks to predict the steady state performance of a run-
around membrane energy exchanger, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 55 (2012)
1628e1641.
[38] S. Akbari, C.J. Simonson, R.W. Besant, Application of neural networks to
predict the transient performance of a run-around membrane energy
exchanger for yearly non-stop operation, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 55 (2012)
5403e5416.
[39] C.K. Tan, J. Ward, S.J. Wilcox, R. Payne, Artificial neural network modelling of
the thermal performance of a compact heat exchanger, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29
(2009) 3609e3617.
[40] K. Ermis, ANN modeling of compact heat exchangers, Int. J. Energy Res. 32
(2008) 581e594.
[41] R. Selbas, A. Sencan, B. Kilic, Alternative approach in thermal analysis of plate
heat exchangers, Heat Mass Transfer 45 (2009) 323e329.
[42] H. Peng, X. Ling, Optimal design approach for the plate-fin heat exchangers
using neural networks cooperated with genetic algorithms, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 28 (2008) 642e650.
[43] H. Peng, X. Ling, Neural networks analysis of thermal characteristics on
plate-fin heat exchangers with limited experimental data, Appl. Therm. Eng.
29 (2009) 2251e2256.
[44] V. Singh, V. Aute, R. Radermacher, A heat exchanger model for air-to-
refrigerant fin-and-tube heat exchanger with arbitrary fin sheet, Int. J.
Refrig. 32 (2009) 1724e1735.
[45] A. Pacheco-Vega, G. Diaz, M. Sen, K.T. Yang, R.L. McClain, Heat rate pre-
dictions in humid airewater heat exchangers using correlations and neural
networks, ASME J. Heat Transfer 123 (2001) 348e354.
[46] A. Pacheco-Vega, M. Sen, K.T. Yang, R.L. McClain, Neural network analysis of
an-tube refrigerating heat exchanger with limited experimental data, Int. J.
Heat Mass Transfer 44 (2001) 763e770.
[47] G.-L. Ding, C.-L. Zhang, T. Zhan, An approximate integral model with an
artificial neural network for heat exchangers, Heat TransferdAsian Res. 33
(2004) 153e160.
[48] Z.G. Wu, J.Z. Zhang, Y.B. Tao, Y.L. He, W.Q. Tao, Application of artificial neural
network method for performance prediction of a gas cooler in a CO2 heat
pump, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 51 (2008) 5459e5464.
[49] Q. Wang, G. Xie, M. Zeng, L. Luo, Prediction of heat transfer rates for shell-
and-tube heat exchangers by artificial neural networks approach, J. Therm.
Sci. 15 (2006) 257e262.
[50] G.N. Xie, Q.W. Wang, M. Zeng, L.Q. Luo, Heat transfer analysis for shell-and-
tube heat exchangers with experimental data by artificial neural networks
approach, Appl. Therm. Eng. 27 (2007) 1096e1104.
[51] S.A. Mandavgane, S.L. Pandharipande, Application of optimum ANN archi-
tecture for heat exchanger modeling, Indian J. Chem. Technol. 13 (2006)
634e639.
[52] S.L. Pandharipande, M.A. Siddiqui, A. Dubey, S.A. Mandavgane, Optimising
ANN architecture for shell and tube heat exchanger modeling, Indian J.
Chem. Technol. 11 (2004) 804e810.
[53] M.N. Kashani, J. Aminian, S. Shahhosseini, M. Farrokhi, Dynamic crude oil
fouling prediction in industrial preheaters using optimized ANN based
moving window technique, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 90 (2012) 938e949.
[54] O. Duran, N. Rodriguez, L.A. Consalter, Neural networks for cost estimation
of shell and tube heat exchangers, Expert Syst. Appl. 36 (2009)
7435e7440.
[55] D.A. Fadare, A.S. Fatona, Artificial neural network modeling of heat transfer
in a staggered cross-flow tube-type heat exchanger, Pacific J. Sci. Technol. 9
(2008) 317e323.
[56] S.A. Kalogirou, Solar thermal collectors and applications, Prog. Energy
Combust. Sci. 30 (2004) 231e295.
[57] S.A. Kalogirou, S. Panteliou, A. Dentsoras, Artificial neural networks used for
the performance prediction of a thermosiphon solar water heater, Renew.
Energy 18 (1999) 87e99.
[58] S.A. Kalogirou, Long-term performance prediction of forced circulation solar
domestic water heating system using artificial neural networks, Appl. Energy
66 (2000) 63e74.
[59] S.A. Kalogirou, S. Lalot, G. Florides, B. Desmet, Development of a neural
network-based fault diagnostic system for solar thermal applications, Solar
Energy 82 (2008) 164e172.
[60] S.A. Kalogirou, E. Mathioulakis, V. Belessiotis, Artificial neural networks for
the performance prediction of large solar systems, Renew. Energy 63 (2014)
90e97.
[61] J. Facao, S. Varga, A.C. Oliveira, Evaluation of the use of artificial neural
networks for the simulation of hybrid solar collectors, Int. J. Green Energy 4
(2004) 337e352.
[62] A. Sozen, T. Menlik, S. Unvar, Determination of efficiency of flat-plate solar
collectors using neural network approach, Expert Syst. Appl. 35 (2008)
1533e1539.
[63] C. Cetiner, F. Halici, H. Cacur, I. Taymaz, Generating hot water by solar energy
and application of neural network, Appl. Therm. Eng. 25 (2005) 1337e1348.
[64] E. Dikmen, M. Ayaz, H.H. Ezen, E.U. Kucuksille, A.S. Sahin, Estimation and
optimization of thermal performance of evacuated tube solar collector sys-
tem, Heat Mass Transfer 50 (2014) 711e719.
[65] I. Farkas, P. Geczy-Vig, Neural network modelling of flat-plate solar collec-
tors, Comput. Electron. Agric. 40 (2003) 87e102.
[66] M. Caner, E. Gedik, A. Kecebas, Investigation on thermal performance
calculation of two type solar air collectors using artificial neural network,
Expert Syst. Appl. 38 (2011) 1668e1674.
[67] H. Esen, F. Ozgen, M. Esen, A. Sengur, Artificial neural network and wavelet
neural network approaches for modelling of a solar air heater, Expert Syst.
Appl. 36 (2009) 11240e11248.
[68] H. Benli, Determination of thermal performance calculation of two different
types solar air collectors with the use of artificial neural networks, Int. J. Heat
Mass Transfer 60 (2013) 1e7.
[69] S.K. Tyagi, A.K. Pandey, P.C. Pant, V.V. Tyagi, Formation, potential and
abatement of plume from wet cooling towers: a review, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 3409e3429.
[70] M. Hosoz, H.M. Ertunc, H. Bulgurcu, Performance prediction of a cooling tower
using artificial neural network, Energy Convers. Manage. 48 (2007) 1349e1359.
[71] M. Gao, F.-Z. Sun, S.-J. Zhou, Y.-T. Shi, Y.-B. Zhao, N.-H. Wang, Performance
prediction of wet cooling tower using artificial neural network under cross-
wind conditions, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48 (2009) 583e589.
[72] M. Gao, Y.-T. Shi, N.-N. Wang, Y.-B. Zhao, F.-Z. Sun, Artificial neural network
model research on effects of cross-wind to performance parameters of wet
cooling tower based on level Froude number, Appl. Therm. Eng. 51 (2013)
1226e1234.
[73] Y. Islamoglu, Modeling of thermal performance of a cooling tower using an
artificial neural network, Heat. Transfer Eng. 26 (2005) 73e76.
[74] X. Qi, Z. Liu, D. Li, Numerical simulation of shower cooling tower based on
artificial neural network, Energy Convers. Manage. 49 (2008) 724e732.
[75] J. Wu, G. Zhang, Q. Zhang, J. Zhou, Y. Wang, Artificial neural network analysis
of the performance characteristics of a reversibly used cooling tower under
cross flow conditions for heat pump heating system in winter, Energy Build.
43 (2011) 1685e1693.
[76] M. Hosoz, H.M. Ertun, A.F. Ozguc, Modelling of a direct evaporative air cooler
using artificial neural network, Int. J. Energy Res. 32 (2008) 83e89.
[77] R.T. Kiran, S.P.S. Rajput, An effectiveness model for an indirect evaporative
cooling (IEC) system: comparison of artificial neural networks (ANN),
adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and fuzzy inference system
(FIS) approach, Appl. Soft Comput. 11 (2011) 3525e3533.
[78] T.S. Bisoniya, A. Kumar, P. Baredar, Experimental and analytical studies of
eartheair heat exchanger (EAHE) systems in India: a review, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 19 (2013) 238e246.
[79] R. Kumar, S.C. Kaushik, S.N. Garg, Heating and cooling potential of an earth-
to-air heat exchanger using artificial neural network, Renew. Energy 31
(2006) 1139e1155.
[80] J. Zhang, F. Haghighat, Convective heat transfer prediction in large rectan-
gular cross-sectional area earth-to-air heat exchangers, Build. Environ. 44
(2009) 1892e1898.
[81] J. Zhang, F. Haghighat, Development of artificial neural network based heat
convection algorithm for thermal simulation of large rectangular cross-
sectional area earth-to-air heat exchangers, Energy Build. 42 (2010)
435e440.
[82] J.W. Gang, J. Wang, Predictive ANN models of ground heat exchanger for the
control of hybrid ground source heat pump systems, Appl. Energy 112 (2013)
1146e1153.
[83] J. Krzywanski, W. Nowak, Modeling of heat transfer coefficient in the furnace
of CFB boilers by artificial neural network approach, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer
55 (2012) 4246e4253.
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
[84] M.A. Hakeem, M. Kamil, I. Arman, Prediction of temperature profiles using
artificial neural networks in a vertical thermosiphon reboiler, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 28 (2008) 1572e1579.
[85] M.M. Prieto, E. Montanes, O. Menendez, Power plant condenser performance
forecasting using a nonfully connected artificial neural network, Energy 26
(2001) 65e79.
[86] O. Aydin, M. Baki, An experimental study on the design parameters of a
counter-flow vortex tube, Energy 31 (2006) 2763e2772.
[87] F. Kocabas, M. Korkmaz, U. Sorgucu, S. Donmez, Modeling of heating and
cooling performance of counter flow type vortex tube by using artificial
neural network, Int. J. Refrig. 33 (2010) 963e972.
[88] O. Uluer, V. Kirmaci, S. Atas, Using the artificial neural network model for
modeling the performance of the counter flow vortex tube, Expert Syst. Appl.
36 (2009) 12256e12263.
[89] K. Dincer, S. Tasdemir, S. Baskaya, B.Z. Uysal, Modeling of the effects of length
to diameter ratio and nozzle number on the performance of counterflow
RanqueeHilsch vortex tubes using artificial neural networks, Appl. Therm.
Eng. 28 (2008) 2380e2390.
[90] N. Amanifard, N.-Z. Narima, M. Borji, A. Khalkhali, A. Habidoust, Modeling
and pareto optimization of heat transfer and flow coefficients in micro-
channel using GMDH types of neural networks and genetic algorithm, En-
ergy Convers. Manage. 49 (2008) 311e325.
[91] D. Wijayasekara, M. Manic, P. Sabharwall, V. Utgikar, Optimal artificial neural
network architecture selection for performance prediction of compact heat
exchanger with the EBaLM-OTR technique, Nucl. Eng. Des. 241 (2011)
2549e2557.
[92] K. Jambunathan, S.L. Hartle, S.F. Ashforth, V.N. Fontama, Evaluating convec-
tive heat transfer coefficients using artificial neural networks, Int. J. Heat
Mass Transfer 39 (1996) 2329e2332.
[93] A.J. Ghajar, L.M. Tam, S.C. Tam, Improved heat transfer correlation in the
transition region for a circular tube with three inlet configurations using
artificial neural networks, Heat. Transfer Eng. 25 (2004) 30e40.
[94] Y. Islamoglu, A. Kurt, Heat transfer analysis using ANN with experimental
data for air flowing in corrugated channels, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 47
(2004) 1361e1365.
[95] D. Colorado, M.E. Ali, O. García-Valladares, J.A. Hern
andez, Heat transfer
using a correlation by neural network for natural convection from vertical
helical coil in oil and glycerol/water solution, Energy 36 (2011) 854e863.
[96] M. Mehrabi, S.M. Pesteei, T. Pashaee, Modeling of heat transfer and fluid flow
characteristics of helicoidal double-pipe heat exchangers using adaptive
neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS), Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 38
(2011) 525e532.
[97] L.V. Kamble, D.R. Pangavhane, T.P. Singh, Experimental investigation of
horizontal tube immersed in gasesolid fluidized bed of large particles using
artificial neural network, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 70 (2014) 719e724.
[98] T.A. Tahseen, M. Ishak, M.M. Rahman, Performance predictions of laminar
heat transfer and pressure drop in an in-line flat tube bundle using an
adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) model, Int. Commun. Heat
Mass Transfer 50 (2014) 85e97.
[99] A. Karami, E. Rezaei, M. Rahimi, S. Khani, Modeling of heat transfer in an air
cooler equipped with classic twisted tape insert using ANFIS, Chem. Eng.
Commun. 200 (2013) 532e542.
[100] U. Akdag, A.F. Ozguc, Experimental investigation of heat transfer in oscil-
lating annular flow, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 2667e2672.
[101] A. Nuntaphan, S. Vithayasai, N. Vorayos, N. Vorayos, T. Kiatsiriroat, Use of
oscillating heat pipe technique as extended surface in wire-on-tube heat
exchanger for heat transfer enhancement, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer
37 (2010) 287e292.
[102] U. Akdag, M.A. Komur, A.F. Ozguc, Estimation of heat transfer in oscillating
annular flow using artificial neural networks, Adv. Eng. Softw. 40 (2009)
864e870.
[103] H. Muller-Steinhagen, Cooling-water fouling in heat exchangers, Adv. Heat
Transfer 33 (1999) 415e496.
[104] C. Riverol, V. Napolitano, Estimation of fouling in a plate heat exchanger
through the application of neural networks, J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 80
(2005) 594e600.
[105] S. Lalot, S. Lecoeuche, Online fouling detection in electrical circulation heaters
using neural networks, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 46 (2003) 2445e2457.
[106] M.A.S. Jeronimo, L.F. Melo, S.A. Braga, P.J.B.F. Ferreira, C. Martins, Monitoring
the thermal efficiency of fouled heat exchangers: a simplified method, Exp.
Therm. Fluid Sci. 14 (1997) 455e463.
[107] J. Aminian, S. Shahhosseini, Evaluation of ANN modeling for prediction of
crude oil fouling behavior, Appl. Therm. Eng. 28 (2008) 668e674.
[108] J. Aminian, S. Shahhosseini, Neuro-based formulation to predict fouling
threshold in crude pre heaters, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 36 (2009)
525e531.
[109] S. Lalot, H. Pa
lsson, Detection of fouling in a cross-flow heat exchanger using
a neural network based technique, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 49 (2010) 675e679.
[110] R.F. Garcia, Improving heat exchanger supervision using neural networks
and rule based techniques, Expert Syst. Appl. 39 (2012) 3012e3021.
[111] L.M. Romeo, R. Gareta, Hybrid system for fouling control in biomass boilers,
Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 19 (2006) 915e925.
[112] R. Beigzadeh, M. Rahimi, Prediction of heat transfer and flow characteristics
in helically coiled tubes using artificial neural networks, Int. Commun. Heat
Mass Transfer 39 (2012) 1279e1285.
169
[113] R. Beigzadeh, M. Rahimi, Prediction of thermal and fluid flow characteristics
in helically coiled tubes using ANFIS and GA based correlations, Int. Com-
mun. Heat Mass Transfer 39 (2012) 1647e1653.
[114] G.J. Zdaniuk, L.M. Chamra, D.K. Walters, Correlating heat transfer and friction
in helically-finned tubes using artificial neural networks, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 50 (2007) 4713e4723.
[115] G. Xie, B. Sunden, Q. Wang, L. Tang, Performance predictions of laminar and
turbulent heat transfer and fluid flow of heat exchangers having large tube-
diameter and large tube-row by artificial neural networks, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 52 (2009) 2484e2497.
[116] M.R.J. Nasr, A.H. Khalaj, S.H. Mozaffari, Modeling of heat transfer enhance-
ment by wire coil inserts using artificial neural network analysis, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 143e151.
[117] M.R.J. Nasr, A.H. Khalaj, Heat transfer coefficient and friction factor predic-
tion of corrugated tubes combined with twisted tape inserts using artificial
neural network, Heat. Transfer Eng. 31 (2010) 59e69.
[118] A.H. Khalaj, A. Chaibakhsh, H. Sayyaadi, M.R.J. Nasr, Thermo-hydraulic
behavior modeling of passive heat transfer enhancement techniques using a
soft computation approach, Chem. Eng. Commun. 201 (2014) 53e71.
[119] D. Gorenflo, E. Baumho €gger, G. Herres, S. Kotthoff, Prediction methods for
pool boiling heat transfer: a state-of-the art review, Int. J. Refrig. 43 (2014)
203e226.
[120] B.M. Fronk, S. Garimella, In-tube condensation of zeotropic fluid mixtures: a
review, Int. J. Refrig. 36 (2013) 534e561.
[121] M. Balcilar, A.S. Dalkilic, A. Suriyawong, T. Yiamsawas, S. Wongwises,
Investigation of pool boiling of nanofluids using artificial neural networks
and correlation development techniques, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer
39 (2012) 424e431.
[122] W.-J. Wang, L.-X. Zhao, C.-L. Zhang, Generalized neural network correla-
tion for flow boiling heat transfer of R22 and its alternative refrigerants
inside horizontal smooth tubes, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 49 (2006)
2458e2465.
[123] G. Scalabrin, M. Condosta, P. Marchi, Modeling flow boiling heat transfer of
pure fluids through artificial neural networks, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 45 (2006)
643e663.
[124] G. Scalabrin, M. Condosta, P. Marchi, Mixtures flow boiling: modeling heat
transfer through artificial neural networks, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 45 (2006)
664e680.
[125] G. Scalabrin, M. Condosta, P. Marchi, Flow boiling of pure fluids: local heat
transfer and flow pattern modeling through artificial neural networks, Int. J.
Therm. Sci. 45 (2006) 739e751.
[126] T. Liu, X. Sun, X. Li, H. Wang, Neural network analysis of boiling heat transfer
enhancement using additives, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 45 (2002)
5083e5089.
[127] A. Alizadehdakhel, M. Rahimi, J. Sanjari, A.A. Alsairafi, CFD and artificial
neural network modeling of two-phase flow pressure drop, Int. Commun.
Heat Mass Transfer 36 (2009) 850e856.
[128] M.P. Porto, H. Pedro, L. Machado, R.N.N. Koury, C.U.S. Lima, C.F.M. Coimbra,
Genetic optimization of heat transfer correlations for evaporator tube flows,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 70 (2014) 330e339.
[129] H. Wei, G.H. Su, W.X. Tian, S.Z. Qiu, X.B. Yang, Study on the onset of nucleate
boiling in narrow annular channel by genetic neural network, Int. Commun.
Heat Mass Transfer 37 (2010) 596e599.
[130] X.-L. Wen, H.-T. Wang, H. Wang, Prediction model of flow boiling heat
transfer for R407C inside horizontal smooth tubes based on RBF neural
network, Procedia Eng. 31 (2012) 233e239.
[131] D. David, I. Mudawar, Critical heat flux (CHF) for water flow in tubes I.
Comparison and assessment of world CHF data, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 43
(2000) 2573e2604.
[132] A. Mazzola, Integrating artificial neural networks and empirical correlations
for the prediction of water-subcooled critical heat flux, Rev. Gen. Therm. 36
(1997) 799e806.
[133] N. Vaziri, A. Hojabri, A. Erfani, M. Monsefi, B. Nilforooshan, Critical heat flux
prediction by using radial basis function and multilayer perceptron neural
networks: a comparison study, Nucl. Eng. Des. 237 (2007) 377e385.
[134] A.S. Nafey, Neural network based correlation for critical heat flux in steam-
water flows in pipes, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 48 (2009) 2264e2270.
[135] T. Cong, R. Chen, G. Su, S. Qiu, W. Tian, Analysis of CHF in saturated forced
convective boiling on a heated surface with impinging jets using artificial
neural network and genetic algorithm, Nucl. Eng. Des. 241 (2011)
3945e3951.
[136] S. Zaferanlouei, D. Rostamifard, S. Setayeshi, Prediction of critical heat flux
using ANFIS, Ann. Nucl. Energy 37 (2010) 813e821.
[137] R.H. Chen, G.H. Su, S.Z. Qiu, K. Fukuda, Prediction of CHF in concentric-tube
open thermosiphon using artificial neural network and genetic algorithm,
Heat Mass Transfer 46 (2010) 345e353.
[138] H. Wei, G.H. Su, S.Z. Qiu, W. Ni, X. Yang, Applications of genetic neural
network for prediction of critical heat flux, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 49 (2010)
143e152.
[139] H.M. Wei, G.H. Su, W.X. Tian, S.Z. Qiu, W.F. Ni, X.B. Yang, Study on dryout
point by wavelet and GNN, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 664e672.
[140] S.K. Moon, S.H. Chang, Classification and prediction of the critical heat flux
using fuzzy theory and artificial neural networks, Nucl. Eng. Des. 150 (1994)
151e161.
170 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172
[141] S.K. Moon, W.-P. Back, S.H. Chang, Parametric trends analysis of the critical
heat flux based on artificial neural networks, Nucl. Eng. Des. 163 (1996)
29e49.
[142] S. Guanghui, K. Morita, K. Fukuda, M. Pidduck, J. Dounan, J. Miettinen,
Analysis of the critical heat flux in round vertical tubes under low pressure
and flow oscillation conditions: applications of artificial neural network,
Nucl. Eng. Des. 220 (2003) 17e35.
[143] A. Castillo, E. Santoyo, O. Garcia-Valladares, A new void fraction correlation
inferred from artificial neural networks for modeling two phase flows in
geothermal well, Comput. Geosciences 41 (2012) 25e39.
[144] W. Zhang, T. Hibiki, K. Mishima, Correlations of two-phase frictional pressure
drop and void fraction in mini-channel, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 53 (2010)
453e465.
[145] M.P. Malayeri, H. Muller-Steinhagen, J.M. Smith, Neural network analysis of
void fraction in air/water two-phase flows at elevated temperatures, Chem.
Eng. Process. 42 (2003) 589e597.
[146] H. Shaban, S. Tavoularis, Indentification of flow regime in vertical upward
air-water pipe flow using differential pressure signals and elastic map, Int. J.
Multiph. Flow 61 (2004) 62e72.
[147] C. Inan, T. Gonul, M.Y. Tanes, X-ray investigate of a domestic refrigerator:
observations at 25  C ambient temperature, Int. J. Refrig. 26 (2003) 205e213.
[148] S.A. Tjugum, G.A. Johansen, M.B. Holstad, The use of gamma radiation in fluid
flow measurements, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 61 (2001) 797e798.
[149] J. Chaouki, F. Larachi, M.P. Dudukovic, Non-invasive Monitoring of Multi-
phase Flows, Elesevier, Amsterdam, 1997.
[150] Y. Mi, M. Ishii, L.H. Tsoukalas, Vertical two-phase flow identification using
advanced instrumentation and neural networks, Nucl. Eng. Des. 184 (1998)
409e420.
[151] Y. Mi, M. Ishii, L.H. Tsoukalas, Flow regime identification methodology with
neural networks and two-phase flow models, Nucl. Eng. Des. 204 (2001)
87e100.
[152] T. Tambouratzis, I. Pazsit, Non-invasive on-line two phase flow regime
identification employing artificial neural networks, Ann. Nucl. Energy 36
(2009) 464e469.
[153] T. Tambouratzis, I. Pazsit, A general regression artificial neural network
for two phase flow regime identification, Ann. Nucl. Energy 37 (2010)
672e680.
[154] S. Timung, T. Mandal, Prediction of flow pattern of gaseliquid flow through
circular microchannel using probabilistic neural network, Appl. Soft Comput.
13 (2013) 1674e1683.
[155] G.H. Roshani, S.A.H. Feghhi, A. Mahmoudi-Aznaveh, E. Nazemi, A. Adineh-
Vand, Precise volume fraction prediction in oilewateregas multiphase flows
by means of gamma-ray attenuation and artificial neural networks using one
detector, Measurement 51 (2014) 34e41.
[156] H. Demir, O. Ag ra, O. Atayılmaz, Generalized neural network model of
alternative refrigerant (R600a) inside a smooth tube, Int. Commun. Heat
Mass Transfer 36 (2009) 744e749.
[157] M. Balcilar, A.S. Dalkilic, S. Wongwises, Artificial neural network techniques
for the determination of condensation heat transfer characteristics during
downward annular flow of R134a inside a vertical smooth tube, Int. Com-
mun. Heat Mass Transfer 38 (2011) 75e84.
[158] M. Balcilar, A.S. Dalkilic, O. Agra, S.O. Atayilmaz, S. Wongwises, A correlation
development for predicting the pressure drop of various refrigerants during
condensation and evaporation in horizontal smooth and micro-fin tubes, Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 39 (2012) 937e944.
[159] K. Ermis, A. Erek, I. Dincer, Heat transfer analysis of phase change process in
a finned-tube thermal energy storage system using artificial neural network,
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 50 (2007) 3163e3175.
[160] S. Bittanti, L. Piroddi, Nonlinear identification and control of a heat
exchanger: a neural network approach, J. Frankl. Inst. 334 (1997)
135e153.
[161] C. Riverol, V. Napolitano, Use of neural networks as a tuning method for an
adaptive PID: application in a heat exchanger, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 78 (2000)
1115e1119.
[162] G. Diaz, M. Sen, K.T. Yang, R.L. McClain, Adaptive neurocontrol of heat ex-
changers, ASME J. Heat Transfer 123 (2001) 556e562.
[163] G. Diaz, M. Sen, K.T. Yang, R.L. McClain, Dynamic prediction and control of
heat exchangers using artificial neural networks, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 44
(2001) 1671e1679.
[164] K. Varshney, P.K. Panigrahi, Artificial neural network control of a heat
exchanger in a closed flow air circuit, Appl. Soft Comput. 5 (2005) 441e465.
[165] A. Abbassi, L. Bahar, Application of neural network for the modeling and
control of evaporative condenser cooling load, Appl. Therm. Eng. 25 (2005)
3176e3186.
[166] V.K. Nanayakkara, Y. Ikegami, H. Uehara, Evolutionary design of dynamic
neural networks for evaporator control, Int. J. Refrig. 25 (2002) 813e826.
[167] A. Vasickaninova
, M. Bakosov
a, A. Me
sz

aros, J.J. Klemes, Neural network
predictive control of a heat exchanger, Appl. Therm. Eng. 31 (2011)
2094e2100.
[168] Q. Hu, A.T.P. So, W.L. Tse, Q. Ren, Development of ANN based models to
predict the static and dynamic response of a heat exchanger in a real MVAC
system, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 23 (2005) 110e121.
[169] N. Li, L. Xia, D. Shiming, X. Xu, M.-Y. Chan, Dynamic modeling and control of
a direct expansion air conditioning system using artificial neural network,
Appl. Energy 91 (2012) 290e300.
[170] N. Li, L. Xia, D. Shiming, X. Xu, M.-Y. Chan, On-line adaptive control of a direct
expansion air conditioning system using artificial neural network, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 53 (2013) 96e107.
[171] G. Jahedi, M.M. Ardehali, Wavelet based artificial neural networks applied for
energy efficiency enhancement of decoupled HVAC system, Energy Convers.
Manage. 54 (2012) 47e56.
[172] W. Gang, J. Wang, S. Wang, Performance analysis of hybrid ground source
heat pump systems based on ANN predictive control, Appl. Energy 136
(2014) 1138e1144.
[173] H. Esen, M. Inalli, A. Sengur, M. Esen, Performance prediction of a ground-
coupled heat pump using neural networks, Expert Syst. Appl. 35 (2008)
1940e1948.
[174] M. Mohanraj, S. Jayaraj, C. Muraleedharan, Performance prediction of direct
expansion solar assisted heat pump using artificial neural networks, Appl.
Energy 86 (2009) 1442e1449.
[175] W. Yaici, E. Entchev, Performance prediction of solar thermal energy system
using artificial neural networks, Appl. Therm. Eng. 73 (2014) 1348e1359.
[176] D. Svozil, V. Kvasnicka, J. Pospichal, Introduction to multi-layer feed-forward
neural networks, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 39 (1997) 43e62.
[177] M.W. Garder, S.R. Dorling, Artificial neural networks: the multilayer per-
ceptron e a review of application in atmospheric sciences, Atmos. Environ.
32 (1998) 2627e2636.
[178] N. Sharma, K.K. Chaudhry, C.V. Chalapati Rao, Vehicular pollution modeling
using artificial neural network technique: a review, J. Sci. Ind. Res. 64 (2005)
637e647.
[179] D.K. Mohanthy, P.M. Singru, Fouling analysis of a shell and tube heat
exchanger using local linear wavelet neural network, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transfer 77 (2014) 946e955.
[180] F. Schwenker, H.A. Kestler, G. Palm, Three learning phases for radial-basis-
function networks, Neural Netw. 14 (2001) 439e458.
[181] J.A. Leonard, M.A. Kramer, L.G. Ungar, Using radial basis functions to
approximate a function and its error bounds, IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 3
(1992) 624e627.
[182] M.T. Musavi, W. Ahmed, K.H. Chan, K.B. Faris, D.M. Hummels, On the training
of radial basis function classifiers, Neural Netw. 5 (1992) 595e603.
[183] W. Wanga, Z. Xua, W. Luc, X. Zhang, Determination of the spread parameter
in the Gaussian kernel for classification and regression, Neurocomputing 55
(2003) 643e663.
[184] L. Zhang, Y.F. Bai, Genetic algorithm-trained radial basis function neural
networks for modelling photovoltaic panels, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 18 (2005)
833e844.
[185] C.-M. Lee, C.-N. Ko, Time series prediction using RBF neural networks with a
nonlinear time-varying evolution PSO algorithm, Neurocomputing 73 (2009)
449e460.
[186] A.K. Alexandridis, A.D. Zapranis, Wavelet neural networks: a practical guide,
Neural Netw. 42 (2013) 1e27.
[187] R. Cheng, Y. Bai, A novel approach to fuzzy wavelet neural network modeling
and optimization, Electr. Power Energy Syst. 64 (2015) 671e678.
[188] D.F. Specht, General regression neural network, IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 2
(1991) 568e576.
[189] L. Rutkowski, Adaptive probabilistic neural networks for pattern classifica-
tion in time-varying environment, IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 15 (2004)
811e827.
[190] B.M. Ozyildirim, M. Avci, Generalized classifier neural network, Neural Netw.
39 (2013) 18e26.
[191] J.V. Hansen, R.D. Meservy, Learning experiments with genetic optimization
of a generalized regression neural network, Decision Support Syst. 18 (1996)
317e325.
[192] J.-S.R. Jang, ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy interface system, IEEE
Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 23 (1993) 665e685.
[193] H. Esen, M. Inalli, ANN and ANFIS models for performance evaluation of a
vertical ground source heat pump system, Expert Syst. Appl. 37 (2010)
8134e8147.
[194] H. Esen, M. Inalli, A. Sengur, M. Esen, Modeling ground source heat pump
system using adaptive neuro-fuzzy interface systems, Int. J. Refrig. 31 (2008)
65e74.
[195] J.-S.R. Jang, Input selection for ANFIS learning, in: Proceedings of the Fifth
IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 2, 1996, pp.
317e325.
[196] H.M.I. Pousinho, V.M.F. Mendes, J.P.S. Catalao, A hybrid PSO-ANFIS approach
for short-term wind power prediction in Portugal, Energy Convers. Manage.
52 (2011) 397e402.
[197] H. Esen, M. Inalli, A. Sengur, M. Esen, Predicting performance of a ground
source heat pump system using fuzzy weighted pre-processing based ANFIS,
Build. Environ. 43 (2008) 2178e2187.
[198] C. Yin, L. Rosendahl, Z. Luo, Methods to improve prediction performance of
ANN models, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 11 (2003) 211e222.
[199] J.R.M. Smits, W.J. Melssen, L.M.C. Buydens, G. Kateman, Using artificial neural
networks for solving chemical problems: part I. Multi-layer feed-forward
networks, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 22 (1994) 165e189.
[200] G. Zhang, B.E. Patuwo, M.Y. Hu, Forecasting with artificial neural networks:
the state of the art, Int. J. Forecast. 14 (1998) 35e62.
[201] Z. Wang, C.D. Massimo, M.T. Tham, A.J. Morris, A procedure for determining
the topology of multilayer feed forward neural networks, Neural Netw. 7
(1994) 291e300.
 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172 171

[202] S.A. Kalogirou, M. Bojic, Artificial neural networks for the prediction of the e: wire coil diameter
energy consumption of a passive solar building, Energy 25 (2000) f: friction factor
479e491. Fr: Froude number
[203] A. Mohebbi, M. Taheri, A. Soltani, A neural network for predicting saturated G: mass flux
liquid density using genetic algorithm for pure and mixed refrigerants, Int. J. Gr: Grashof number
Refrig. 31 (2008) 1317e1327. h: heat transfer coefficient
[204] P.A. Castillo, J. Carpio, J.J. Merelo, A. Prieto, V. Rivas, G. Romero, G-Prop: j: Colburn factor
global optimization of multilayer perceptrons using GAs, Neurocomputing jf,: liquid superficial velocity
35 (2000) 149e163. jg: gas superficial velocity
[205] F. Han, T.-Y. Gu, S.-G. Ju, An improved hybrid algorithm based on PSO and BP L: length
for feed forward neural networks, Int. J. Digital Content Technol. Appl. 5 ε-NTU: effectiveness number of transfer units

(2011) 106e115. m: mass flow rate
[206] S.H. Nabavi-Kerizi, M. Abadi, E. Kabir, A PSO based weighting method for N: number of tube rows
linear combination of neural networks, Comput. Electr. Eng. 36 (2010) Nu: Nusselt number
886e894. Dp: pressure drop
[207] S.Y.S. Leung, Y. Tang, W.K. Wong, A hybrid particle swarm optimization and p: pressure
its application in neural networks, Expert Syst. Appl. 39 (2012) 395e405. ph: helical pitch
[208] R.S. Sexton, R.E. Dorsey, J.D. Johnson, Optimization of neural networks: a Pr:
 Prandtl number
comparative analysis of the genetic algorithm and simulated annealing, Eur. Q : heat transfer rate
J. Oper. Res. 114 (1999) 589e601. q: heat flux
[209] R.K. Sivagaminathan, S. Ramakrishnan, A hybrid approach for feature subset R: correlation coefficient
selection using neural networks and ant colony optimization, Expert Syst. Rfo: fouling resistance
Appl. 33 (2007) 49e60. R2: fraction of absolute variance
[210] Y. Da, X.R. Ge, An improved PSO-based ANN with simulated annealing Ra: Rayleigh number
technique, Neurocomput. Lett. 63 (2005) 527e533. Re: Reynolds number
[211] K.L. Priddy, P.E. Keller, Artificial Neural Networks: An Introduction, Prientice T: temperature
Hall of India, New Delhi, 2007. DT: temperature difference
[212] R.J. May, H.R. Maier, G.C. Dandy, Data splitting for artificial neural networks U: over all heat transfer coefficient
using SOM-based stratified sampling, Neural Netw. 23 (2010) 283e294. v: velocity
[213] A. Askarzadeh, A. Rezazadeh, Artificial neural network training using a new We: Webber number
efficient optimization algorithm, Appl. Soft Comput. 13 (2013) 1206e1213. x: vapor quality
[214] M. Yaghini, M.M. Khoshraftar, M. Fallahi, A hybrid algorithm for artificial
neural network training, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 26 (2013) 293e301. Greek symbols
[215] H. Esen, M. Inalli, A. Sengur, M. Esen, Forecasting of a ground-coupled heat
pump performance using neural networks with statistical data weighting
pre-processing, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 47 (2008) 431e441. a: thermal diffusivity
[216] B.A. Quresh, S.M. Zubair, The impact of fouling on the condenser of a vapour b: spiral angle/90
compression refrigeration system: an experimental observation, Int. J. Refrig. m: dynamic viscosity
38 (2014) 260e266. r: density
[217] T. Ayhan, B. Karlik, A. Tandiroglu, Flow geometry optimization of channels h: efficiency
3 : effectiveness
with baffles using neural networks and second law of thermodynamics,
Comput. Mech. 33 (2004) 139e143.
[218] M.R. Nasr, M. Fauchoux, R.W. Besant, C.J. Simonson, A review of frosting in Subscripts
air-to-air energy exchangers, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 30 (2014)
538e554. a: air
[219] M. Rahimi, A.A. Ranjbar, D.D. Ganji, K. Sedighi, M.J. Hosseini, R. Bahrampoury,
ab: ambient
Analysis of geometrical and operational parameters of PCM in a fin and tube b: boiling
heat exchanger, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 53 (2014) 109e115. bu: bulk
[220] R. Benelmir, S. Mokraoui, A. Souayed, Numerical analysis of film wise c: critical
condensation in a plate fin-and-tube heat exchanger in presence of non- cond: condensation
condensable gas, Heat Mass Transfer 45 (2009) 1561e1573.
con: convective
[221] L.C.Y. Hwang, R. Radermacher, Experimental investigation of oil retention in co: condenser
air conditioning systems, Int. J. Refrig. 28 (2005) 1018e1028.
CT: cooling tower
[222] L.C. Ruspini, C.P. Marcel, A. Clausse, Two phase flow instabilities: a review, e: evaporator
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 17 (2014) 521e548. fl: flue gas
[223] M. Mohanraj, C. Muraleedharan, S. Jayaraj, A review on recent developments ref: refrigerant
in new refrigerant mixtures for vapour compression based refrigeration, air g: gas
conditioning and heat pump units, Int. J. Energy Res. 35 (2011) 647e669.
i: inlet
[224] M. Mohanraj, S. Jayaraj, C. Muraleedharan, Environment friendly alternatives f: fluid
to halogenated refrigerants e a review, Int. J. Green House Gas Emission fo: fouling
Control 3 (2009) 108e119. h: hydraulic
[225] S. Soyguder, H. Alli, An expert system for the humidity and temperature l: liquid
control in HVAC systems using ANFIS and optimization with fuzzy modeling
o: outlet
approach, Energy Build. 41 (2009) 814e822. r: reduced properties
[226] A.E. Farell, S.D. Roat, Framework for enhancing fault diagnosis capabilities of
sat: saturation
artificial neural networks, Comput. Chem. Eng. 18 (1994) 613e635. s: shell
[227] H.N. Kolvo, Artificial neural networks in fault diagnosis and control, Control sur: surface
Eng. Pract. 2 (1994) 89e101. th: thermal
[228] J.C. Tudon-Martinez, R. Morales-Menendez, L.E. Garza-Castanon, Fault diag- t: tube
nosis in a heat exchanger using process history based-methods, Comput.
w: water
Aided Chem. Eng. 28 (2010) 169e174. wa: wall
[229] H. He, T.P. Caudell, D.F. Menicucci, A.A. Mammoli, Application of adaptive wi: water inlet
resonance theory neural networks to monitor solar hot water systems and wo: water outlet
detect existing or developing faults, Solar Energy 86 (2012) 2318e2333.
[230] H. Esen, F. Ozen, M. Esen, A. Sengur, Modeling of a new solar air heater
Abbreviations
through least square support vector machines, Expert Syst. Appl. 36 (2009)
10673e10682.
AI: artificial intelligence
ANFIS: adoptive neuro fuzzy interface systems
Glossary
ANN: artificial neural networks
CFD: computational fluid dynamics
A: area CGP: PolaeRibiere conjugate gradient
cp: specific heat CHF: critical heat flux
d: diameter COP: coefficient of performance
COV: coefficient of variance
172 M. Mohanraj et al. / International Journal of Thermal Sciences 90 (2015) 150e172

CO2: carbon-dioxide MRE: mean relative error

DBT: dry bulb temperature MSE: mean square error
DMNN: direct mapping neural networks NTU: number of transfer units
DMNN: dynamic neural networks PCM: phase change materials
DSU: dynamic synaptic units PI: proportional integral
FIS: fuzzy interface system PID: proportional integral derivative
GA: genetic algorithm PNN: probabilistic neural network
GMDH: group method of data handling PSO: particle swarm optimization
GNN: genetic neural networks RBFN: radial basis function network
GRNN: generalized regression neural networks RH: relative humidity
HVAC: heat ventilation and air conditioning RMS: root mean square
KURRI: Kyoto University Research Institute RMSE: root mean square error
LM: LevenbergeMarquardt RMSRE: root mean square relative error
LMTD: logarithmic mean temperature difference SAH: solar air heater
MaRE: maximum relative error SA: simulated annealing
MAE: mean absolute error SCG: scaled conjugate gradient
MARE: mean absolute relative error SWH: solar water heater
MIMO: multi input-multi output WBT: wet bulb temperature
MISO: multi input-single output WNN: wavelet neural network
MLFFN: multi layer feed forward network