A general property of endoreversible thermal engines

L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Brown

Citation: Journal of Applied Physics 81, 2973 (1997); doi: 10.1063/1.364090

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.364090
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jap/81/7?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing

Articles you may be interested in

The thermodynamics of endoreversible engines
Am. J. Phys. 75, 169 (2007); 10.1119/1.2397094

Reply to “Comment on ‘A general property of endoreversible thermal engines’” [J. Appl. Phys. 89, 1518 (2001)]
J. Appl. Phys. 89, 1520 (2001); 10.1063/1.1335619

Comment on “A general property of endoreversible thermal engines” [J. Appl. Phys. 81, 2973 (1997)]
J. Appl. Phys. 89, 1518 (2001); 10.1063/1.1335618

Performance characteristics of endoreversible chemical engines

J. Appl. Phys. 74, 5303 (1993); 10.1063/1.354253

Optimal staging of endoreversible heat engines

J. Appl. Phys. 53, 1 (1982); 10.1063/1.331592

[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
134.176.129.147 On: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:16:53
 A general property of endoreversible thermal engines
L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Browna)
Departamento de Fı́sica, Escuela Superior de Fı́sica y Matemáticas, Instituto Politécnico Nacional,
UP Zacatenco, CP 07738 México, DF México
~Received 15 July 1996; accepted for publication 10 December 1996!
In this work we propose that endoreversible Carnot–type heat engines have a general property
independent of the heat transfer law used to describe heat exchanges between the working fluid and
its thermal reservoirs. This property has to do with the so-called ecological function @F. Angulo–
Brown, J. Appl. Phys. 69, 7465 ~1991!#. According to this property, the efficiency at the maximum
of the ecological function is the semisum of the Carnot and the maximum power efficiencies for any
heat transfer law. This result is obtained by using the quasiparabolic behavior of power versus
efficiency. From this property, we obtain a corollary over a general quantitative relation between the
power ~and also the entropy production! of both maximum power and maximum ecological regimes.
We also discuss a criterion to find the best ecological function. © 1997 American Institute of
Physics. @S0021-8979~97!05906-9#

I. INTRODUCTION
Classical equilibrium thermodynamics ~CET! has been
very important in the study of thermal engines.1 The main
role of CET in thermal engine analysis has consisted in pro-
viding upper bounds for process variables such as efficiency,
work, heat and others. However, the CET bounds ~only
achievable in the reversible limit! are usually far away from
typical real values. During the last two decades a finite-time
thermodynamics ~FTT! has been developed.2–6 One of the
main achievements of FTT has been to formulate heat engine
models under more realistic conditions than those of CET.
By means of FTT models good agreement between theoret-
ical values of process variables and experimental data has
been obtained.7–13 Also by using these models, loop shaped
power versus efficiency curves that are common in almost all
real heat engines have been obtained.9,10,14–16 Practically all
FTT models are elaborated in the context of optimization
criteria, such as minimization of entropy generation,17,18
maximization of power output,7 minimization of cost19 and
maximization of a kind of ecological function.20 One of the
most successful FTT models for heat engines is the so-called
Curzon–Ahlborn ~CA! engine ~see Fig. 1!. This model con-
sists of the following parts: two heat reservoirs ~at tempera-
tures T 1 and T 2 ); two irreversible components ~thermal con-
ductances a and b ) and a reversible Carnot engine between
the intermediate heat reservoir at T 1w and the intermediate
heat reservoir at T 2w . In CA engines, the so-called endo-
reversibility hypothesis14 has played a very important role.
This hypothesis ascribes the whole engine’s entropy produc-
tion only to couplings between the working fluid and its
surroundings. Apparently, it is always possible to construct
an endoreversible model equivalent to a real thermal engine
by the ‘‘displacement’’ of all real entropy sources towards
the links between the working fluid and its environment.
That is, one can conceive of an endoreversible model as a
first approximation to the real engine with positive global
entropy production.5,8 However, in general the endorevers-
a!
Electronic mail: angulo@esfm.ipn.mx
ible models lead to efficiency calculations that are very sen-
sitive to the heat transfer law used to describe the heat ex-
changes between the working substance and its sur-
roundings. For example, when one uses the so-called New-
ton law of cooling in a CA engine at maximum power, one
obtains the CA efficiency, given by7
h CA512 A T2
T1
; ~1!
T 1 and T 2 are shown in Fig. 1. However, when in the same
CA engine, some other heat transfer law is used, different
results from Eq. ~1! are obtained ~see, for example, Refs. 8,
21 and 22!. In 1991, an ecological optimization criterion for
FTT–thermal cycles was proposed.20 This criterion consists
of the maximization of a function E that represents a good
compromise between high power output and low entropy
production. This function is given by
E5 P2T 2 s , ~2!
where P is the power output of the cycle, s the total entropy
production ~system plus surroundings! per cycle, and T 2 is
the temperature of the cold reservoir. When function E is
maximized, the CA cycle has a configuration that produces
around 80% of the maximum power and only about 30% of
the entropy produced in the maximum power regime. An-
other important property of the maximum-E regime20 is that
the CA-engine’s efficiency in this regime, h E , is given by
h E ' 21 ~ h C 1 h CA! , ~3!
where h C is the Carnot efficiency and h CA is the maximum
power efficiency given by Eq. ~1!. In Ref. 23, numerical
evidence was presented about how Eq. ~3! is also valid for
the case where in CA engines one uses the so-called
Dulong–Petit law of cooling for describing the heat ex-
change between the working fluid and its surroundings. In
this article, we show that the semisum formula given by Eq.
~3! is a general property for CA-endoreversible cycles, inde-
pendent of the heat transfer law used in Section III. This
property is demonstrated by using the result of Section II,

J. Appl. Phys. 81 (7), 1 April 1997 0021-8979/97/81(7)/2973/7/$10.00 © 1997 American Institute of Physics 2973
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
134.176.129.147 On: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:16:53
 ~ 12 h ! k T k1 2T k2
P~ h !5gh , ~7!
a b
~ 12 h ! 1 ~ 12 h ! k
a1b a1b
and
g @~ 12 h ! T 1 2T 2 #@~ 12 h ! k T k1 2T k2 #
s~ h !5 , ~8!
T 1T 2 a b
~ 12 h ! 1 ~ 12 h ! k
a1b a1b
with g 5 ab /( a 1 b ). On the other hand, if the heat transfer
laws at the couplings between the working fluid and heat
reservoirs have the form
FIG. 1. Schematic endoreversible Curzon–Ahlborn engine; the enclosed
region is the reversible part of the engine. Q 1 5 a ~ T 1 2T 1w ! k
and ~9!

where we found that a function g( h ), which links power Q 2 5 b ~ T 2w 2T 2 ! ,

k

output with entropy production for CA cycles, is independent with k.0 ~for example, k55/4 for the Dulong–Petit heat
of any heat transfer law. transfer law!, functions P( h ) and s ( h ) are given by,23
In Section III, we also present a corollary of Eq. ~3!,
which shows that for any heat transfer law, the power output
at the maximum-E regime is 75% of the cycle’s maximum
P ~ h ! 5 ab
h
F ~ 12 h ! T 1 2T 2
12 h a 1 b 1/k ~ 12 h ! ~ k21 ! /k
1/k G k
~10!
power and the entropy produced at the maximum-E regime
and
is only 25% of that produced at the maximum power regime.
In Section IV, we propose a criterion by which to choose the
best ecological function among a family of possible func-
tions. Finally, in the Appendix we present further numerical
s~ h !5
ab ~ 12 h ! T 1 2T 2
T 1T 2 12 h F
~ 12 h ! T 1 2T 2
a 1/k 1 b 1/k ~ 12 h ! ~ k21/ ! k D
k
.
~11!
evidence about the approximate validity of Eq. ~3!.
Now, we shall demonstrate that the function g( h ) given
by Eq. ~4!, which links power output with entropy produc-
tion, is independent of any heat transfer law used in an en-
II. THE g ( h ) FUNCTION doreversible CA cycle. Starting from Fig. 1, we have the
universe entropy production per cycle given by
For CA cycles, it was shown in Ref. 8 that the power
output P and the universe’s entropy production s are linked Q2 Q2 Q1 Q1
by @ P N (x,y)/ s N (x,y) # 5g(x,y)5 @ P D P (x,y)/ s D P (x,y) # , s5 1 2 2 . ~12!
T 2 T 2w T 1w T 1
where g(x,y)5 @ T 1 T 2 (T 1 2T 2 2x2y)/T 2 x1T 1 y # with x
5T 1 2T 1w and y5T 2w 2T 2 ~see Fig. 1!, and the subscripts By using the endoreversibility hypothesis, which is
N and D P refer to Newton’s and Dulong–Petit’s laws of Q1 Q2
cooling respectively. These expressions were derived in the 5 , ~13!
T 1w T 2w
context of a CA treatment using the variables x and y. How-
ever, when one adopts a treatment based on only one vari- Eq. ~12! reduces to
able, namely the efficiency h , 3 the expression for g(x,y) Q2 Q1
becomes20 s5 2 . ~14!
T2 T1
T 1T 2h
g~ h !5 . ~4! If we use the first law of thermodynamics, we get
T 1 2T 2 2 h T 1
Thus, for the two heat transfer laws mentioned, we have s5
Q 12 P Q 1
T2
2
T1
5Q 1
1
2
1
T2 T1
P
2 ,
T2 S D ~15!
P ~ h ! 5g ~ h ! s ~ h ! , ~5!
where P is the work per cycle period ~power output!. Mul-
where, for instance, for heat transfer laws of the form, tiplying Eq. ~15! by h we obtain

and
Q 1 5 a ~ T k1 2T k1w !
hs5hQ1 S 1
2
1
T2 T1
2
hP
T2 D
, ~16!

which becomes
Q 2 5 b ~ T k2w 2T k2 ! , ~6!
T 1T 2h
with a , b being thermal conductances and k51,2, . . . ,n P~ h !5 s~ h ! ~17!
T 1 2T 2 2 h T 1
~for example, k51 for the Newton heat transfer law!, the
functions P( h ) and s ( h ) are given by3,23,24 or

2974 J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 81, No. 7, 1 April 1997 L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Brown
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
134.176.129.147 On: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:16:53
 h h M P 5 12 h C . ~20!
P~ h !5 T 2s~ h !. ~18!
h C2 h On the other hand, for the maximum-E point, from Eq.
Thus, we have determined that the function g( h ) given ~2! we have
by Eq. ~4! is independent of the heat transfer law correspond-
ing to Q 1 and Q 2 . This same result was previously obtained
by De Vos.24 Equation ~18! gives us a relationship between
S dE ~ h !
dh D S
hME
5
d P~ h !
dh
2T 2
ds~ h !
dh D hME
50. ~21!

power output and power loss given by Pl 5T 2 s . 25 In Sec-

After substitution of Eq. ~5! into Eq. ~21!, we get
tion III we shall use this result for demonstrating a general
property for endoreversible CA cycles.
S d P~ h !
dh D F S DG
hME
5
d P~ h !
dh g~ h ! hME
. ~22!

III. THE SEMISUM PROPERTY

By using Eqs. ~4! and ~19! in Eq. ~22!, we obtain
In Ref. 3, De Vos analyzed the performance of the h M E 5 34 h C , ~23!
nuclear power plant ‘‘Doel 4’’ in Doel, Belgium. This power
plant has an observed thermal efficiency, h ob .0.35, operat- that is,
ing between the extreme temperatures T 1 .566 K and
T 2 .283 K. Thus, its CA efficiency @given by Eq. ~1!# is
h M E 5 12 ~ h C 1 21 h C ! , ~24!
h CA50.29 and its Carnot efficiency is h C 50.5. Under eco- and then, using Eq. ~20! we get
nomical considerations, De Vos concludes that this plant
works in an optimum regime with an efficiency h op 5 h ob , h M E 5 12 ~ h C 1 h M P ! . ~25!
such that That means, Eq. ~3! in this case is a true equality. Thus,
h CA, h op , h C . if the P vs h curves were exact parabolas, the semisum
property given by Eq. ~25! would be also exact. However, in
Nevertheless, De Vos does not propose any quantitative many cases, such as Newton’s,20 Dulong–Petit’s8 and
criterion to identify this optimum regime. This author also Stefan–Boltzmann’s ~see the Appendix! heat transfer laws,
suggests that a more realistic analysis of the thermal ex- property Eq. ~25! holds only approximately. This has to do
changes involved in that power plant would include Stefan– with the fact that the P vs h characteristics for those heat
Boltzmann radiation. In Ref. 8, a brief analysis of Doel 4, laws ~when they are used in CA cycles! have small depar-
was made by taking into account radiative contributions. In tures from parabolic behavior. We have thus demonstrated
that paper, by means of the Dulong–Petit heat transfer law, that the semisum formula is a general property for CA en-
the ecological function E @Eq. ~2!# was maximized obtaining, gines independent of any heat transfer law. As far as we
h D P 50.36, which is a value very close to h ob 50.35. This know, this is the first general property proposed for CA
result suggests that Doel’s nuclear power plant works in a cycles. Equation ~25! can be also obtained by means of the
regime very close to the maximum-E regime, hence this re- so–called method of endo-
gime may be the quantitative version of the De Vos qualita- reversible Carnot cycles,27,28 which is equivalent to using Eq.
tive economic reasoning. On the other hand, in Ref. 20 for ~7! with k51 at the limit T 2 →T 1 . 29 In fact, this equivalence
Newtons’s law and in Ref. 23 for Dulong–Petit’s law the is true for any k corresponding to any heat transfer law.
approximation given by Eq. ~3! was tested. In what follows,
we propose a proof that the property given by Eq. ~3! is A. The 75–25 corollary
independent of the heat transfer law in endoreversible CA Substituting Eq. ~20! into Eq. ~19! yields
cycles. Generally, the characteristic power versus efficiency
for endoreversible CA cycles are convex curves with an P ~ h M P ! 5 41 P 0 h 2C , ~26!
unique maximum point at h M P . The function P5 P( h ) has
and substituting Eq. ~21! into Eq. ~19! yields
zeros at the origin and at h C . The departure of the function
P( h ) from a parabolic behavior is generally very small ~see P~ h ME!5 3
16 P 0 h 2C . ~27!
Fig. 3 in Refs. 3 and 23!. Thus, we propose as a general form
for the function P( h ) a parabola given by Thus

P~ h !5 P 0h~ h C2 h !, ~19! P~ h ME! 3

5 . ~28!
P~ h M P! 4
with P 0 as a constant. Further reasons for the feasibility of
Eq. ~19! may be found in the analysis of the concepts of That is, the power output at the maximum-E point is
power output and efficiency in the context of linear irrevers- 75% of the maximum power of a CA cycle independent of
ible thermodynamics.26 For the maximum power point, we the heat transfer law used.
have If we analyze the behavior of s vs h curves like those

S D
given by Eqs. ~8! and ~11! ~see also Figs. 3.3~c! of Ref. 3 and
d P~ h !
5 P 0 ~ h C 22 h ! 50, 2~c! of Ref. 23!, we observe that they have small departures
dh hMP from parabolic behavior of the type
thus, s ~ h ! 5 s 0~ h 2 h C ! 2, ~29!

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 81, No. 7, 1 April 1997 L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Brown 2975
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
134.176.129.147 On: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:16:53
 FIG. 2. C( e ) vs e , with the maximum point at e 51. FIG. 3. ~a! Power output against efficiency for the Stefan–Boltzmann ra-
diation law. ~b! Ecological function against efficiency for the Stefan–
Boltzmann law. In both cases b / a 5100.

with s 0 as a constant. Equation ~29! is indeed a direct con-

sequence of Eqs. ~4!, ~5! and ~19!, that is, if P( h ) is a pa-
rabola, then s ( h ) is also a parabola.29 This kind of behavior we can look for the value of e when C( e ) reaches a maxi-
for s ( h ) finds further justification in the context of linear mum value. If in the procedure to obtain Eq. ~23! we use Eq.
irreversible thermodynamics.26 Following now a similar pro- ~33! instead of Eq. ~2!, we get
cedure as in the power case @Eq. ~28!#, we obtain 2 e 11
h M Ee5 h . ~35!
s ~ h M P ! 5 s 0~ h M P2 h C ! 52 1
4 s 0 h 2C ~30! 2 ~ e 11 ! C
and After substitution of this result into Eq. ~19!, we obtain
s ~ h M E ! 5 s 0~ h M E2 h C ! 25 1
16 s 0 h 2C . ~31! 2 e 11
P~ h M Ee !5 P 0 h2 , ~36!
Dividing Eq. ~31! by Eq. ~30!, we get 4 ~ e 11 ! 2 C

s ~ h M E ! 50.25s ~ h M P ! . ~32! and using Eq. ~26!, we can write the quotient between
P( h M E e ) and P( h M P ) as
That is, the entropy produced in the ecological regime is
only 25% of that produced in the maximum power point. We P~ h M Ee! 2 e 11
call this result, the 75–25 corollary. In this case, we also find 5 . ~37!
P~ h M P! ~ e 11 ! 2
small departures between Eq. ~32! and the entropy calcula-
tions made with several heat transfer laws;23 however these From this result it is clear that lime →1 (2 e 11)/( e 11) 2
departures are small and they have to do with the fact that 53/4 as expected @Eq. ~28!#. Now we shall calculate the
Eq. ~29! is also an approximation. quotient s ( h M E e )/ s ( h M P ). First, we take Eq. ~29! evalu-
ated at h M P @Eq. ~19!#

IV. THE BEST ECOLOGICAL FUNCTION s ~ h M P ! 5 14 s 0 h 2C , ~38!

The so-called ecological function given by Eq. ~2! was and then we evaluate the same equation at h M E e given by Eq.
heuristically proposed in Ref. 20 as a good compromise be- ~35!. Thus, we have
tween high power output P and small lost power P l
1
5T 2 s . However, in the same spirit, a family of ecological s~ h M Ee!5 s h2 . ~39!
functions may be constructed, that is, 4 ~ e 11 ! 2 0 C

E e 5 P2 e T 2 s , ~33! Now, we take the quotient between Eqs. ~39! and ~38!
and get
with e being a positive real number. If we define a function
C( e ) that measures the compromise between high power s~ h M Ee! 1
output and low entropy production as 5 , ~40!
s~ h M P! ~ e 11 ! 2
P~ h ME! s~ h ME! such that lime →1 ( e 11) 2 51/4, as expected @Eq. ~32!#. Now
C~ e !5 2 , ~34!
P~ h M P! s~ h M P! we construct the function C( e ) given by Eq. ~34! and obtain

2976 J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 81, No. 7, 1 April 1997 L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Brown
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
134.176.129.147 On: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:16:53
 TABLE I. Comparison between % h E1SB numerically calculated and % h E SB obtained with the semisum property
for the Stefan–Boltzmann law, where D% h E SB 5 u % h E1SB 2% h E SB u . The power plant data were taken from
Refs. 3 and 5. ~We have taken b / a 5100.)

Power plant T 1 ~K! T 2 ~K! % h C % h M P SB % h E1 % h E SB D% h E SB

SB

Central steampower stations

~UK 1936–1940! 698 298 57.3 39.9 46.6 48.6 2.0
Combined–cycle ~steam and mercury! plant
~US 1949! 783 298 61.9 44.1 50.8 53.0 2.2
Steam–power plant
~US 1956! 923 298 67.7 49.5 56.1 58.6 2.5
West Thurrock conventional coal-fired
steam plant
~UK 1962! 838 298 64.4 46.4 53.1 55.4 2.3
Lardarello geothermal steam plant
~Italy 1964! 523 353 32.5 19.7 25.3 26.1 0.8
Doel 4 nuclear power plant
~Belgium 1985! 566 283 50.0 33.5 40.1 41.7 1.6

2e by the linear Newton law. The maximum power efficiency is

C~ e !5 . ~41!
~ e 11 ! 2
By means of the extremum condition dC( e )/d e 50, we
obtain
e 51 ~42!
~see Fig. 2!. That is, if we assume that function C( e ) given
by Eq. ~34! is a good means of measuring the compromise
between high power output and low entropy production, then
the function E e @Eq. ~33!# with e 51 ~the ecological func-
tion! represents the best compromise.
V. CONCLUDING REMARKS
The CA formula for the maximum power efficiency of
an endoreversible thermal cycle such as that of Fig. 1 does
not have the universality class of the Carnot efficiency. In
fact, the CA efficiency is only valid for heat exchanges given
highly sensitive to the heat transfer law used to describe the
heat exchange between the working fluid and its surround-
ings. In some previous papers8,20,23 we suggested that a func-
tion exists ~the so-called ecological function E) such that it
has a maximum value at the efficiency h E with the property
of being the semisum of the Carnot and the maximum power
efficiencies. In those papers the property was numerically
tested for the heat transfer laws of Newton and Dulong–
Petit. In FTT it has been very common to use the P vs h
curves to study endoreversible thermal cycles. In general,
these curves have quasiparabolic behavior. From this fact, in
this paper we propose that the semisum property ~numeri-
cally suggested in some of our previous articles!, is a general
property for endoreversible CA engines. This property does
not depend on the heat transfer law used to describe the heat
exchanges between the working fluid and its heat reservoirs.
As far as we know, this is the first general property that is
independent of heat transfer law that has been proposed for
endoreversible CA engines. As a consequence of the semi-
sum property, we demonstrated the 75–25 corollary, which
has been suggested in an approximated manner in some pre-
vious papers.20,23 In this work we also suggested a criterion
for choosing the best ecological function among a family of
functions that represents a compromise between power out-
put and entropy production. We found that the ecological
function with e 51 establishes the best of such compromise.
In summary, we think that our results give new insights into
the properties of endoreversible thermal cycles.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was partially supported by COFFA–IPN
~FAB!, CONACYT ~LAAH! and Instituto Mexicano del Pe-
tróleo.

FIG. 4. Ecological function vs efficiency for a heat transfer law that varies
with the inverse of temperature. ~We have taken b / a 53 arbitrarily.!
APPENDIX
In Refs. 8, 20 and 23 numerical evidence of Eq. ~3! was
presented. Those results were obtained by means of heat
transfer laws such as Newton’s and Dulong–Petit’s laws.
Here we show some further numerical results of the semisum
property but using the Stefan–Boltzmann radiation law and

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 81, No. 7, 1 April 1997 L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Brown 2977
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
134.176.129.147 On: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:16:53
 TABLE II. Comparison between % h E121 calculated by Eq. ~A5! and % h E 21 obtained with the semisum
property for a T 21 heat transfer law, where D% h E 21 5 u % h E121 2% h E 21 u . The power plant data were taken
from Refs. 3 and 5. ~We have taken b / a 53.)

Power plant T 1 ~K! T 2 ~K! % h C % h M P 21 % h E1 % h E 21 D h E 21

21

Central steam–power stations

~UK 1936–1940! 698 298 57.3 30.3 43.3 43.8 0.5
Combined-cycle ~steam and mercury! plant
~US 1949! 783 298 61.9 32.8 46.8 47.3 0.5
Steam-power plant
~US 1956! 923 298 67.7 36.0 51.2 51.8 0.6
West Thurrock conventional coal-fired steam plant
~UK 1962! 838 298 64.4 34.2 48.7 49.3 0.6
Lardarello geothermal steam plant
~Italy 1964! 523 353 32.5 16.8 24.5 24.6 0.1
Doel 4 nuclear power plant
~Belgium 1985! 566 283 50.0 26.3 37.8 38.1 0.3

variation of Eq. ~6! with k521.21,22 For Stefan–Boltzmann and

law, functions P( h ) and s ( h ) are given by Eqs. ~7! and ~8!
with k54. Then we have g @~ 12 h ! T 1 2T 2 #@~ 12 h ! 4 T 41 2T 42 #
s~ h !5 . ~A2!
T 1T 2 a b
~ 12 h ! 4 T 41 2T 42 ~ 12 h ! 1 ~ 12 h ! 4
a1b a1b
P~ h !5gh ~A1!
a b With these equations, we can construct the ecological
~ 12 h ! 1 ~ 12 h ! 4
a1b a1b function E SB as

ab @~ 12 h ! 4 ~ 2 h 21 ! T 51 1 ~ 122 h ! T 1 T 42 1 ~ 12 h ! 4 T 41 T 2 2T 52 #
E SB ~ h ! 5 . ~A3!
T 1 ~ 12 h !@ a 1 b ~ 12 h ! 3 #

Figure 3 shows functions P SB ( h ) and E SB ( h ) with quasiparabolic behavior as we mentioned earlier. If we solve
dE SB ( h )/d h 50 numerically for given temperatures of the power plants of Table I, we obtain the results shown in the sixth
column of Table I. As it can be seen, the agreement between h E1 calculated numerically and h E SB calculated with the
SB
semisum formula @Eq. ~25!# is good.
If we now use the heat transfer law given by Eqs. ~6! with k521, we obtain

ab @~ 12 h ! 2 ~ 122 h ! T 21 1 @~ 2 h 21 !~ 12 h ! 21 # T 1 T 2 2 ~ 12 h ! T 22 #
E 21 ~ h ! 5 . ~A4!
T 21 T 2 ~ 12 h !@ a ~ 12 h ! 2 1 b #

This function is depicted in Fig. 4. Solving the extremum condition dE 21 ( h )/d h 50, we get

112g1 ~ 22t ! t2 A~ 114g ! g12gt1 ~ 115g ! t 2 12t 3 1t 4

h E 21 5 , ~A5!
113t

where g5 b / a and t5T 2 /T 1 . Taking the same power plant’s values as in Table I, we obtain h E1 values that are in good
21
agreement with h E 21 calculated with the semisum formula ~see Table II!.

2978 J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 81, No. 7, 1 April 1997 L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Brown
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
134.176.129.147 On: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:16:53
 1
M. W. Zemansky and R. H. Dittman, Heat and Thermodynamics 14
M. Rubin, Phys. Rev. A 53, 570 ~1979!; J. M. Gordon, Am. J. Phys. 59,
~McGraw-Hill, New York, 1987!. 551 ~1991!.
2
Finite Time Thermodynamics and Thermoeconomics, edited by S. Sieniu- 15
J. M. Gordon and M. Huleihil, J. Appl. Phys. 72, 829 ~1992!.
tycz and P. Salamon ~Taylor and Francis, New York, 1990!. 16
M. A. Ait-Ali, J. Appl. Phys. 78, 4313 ~1995!.
3
A. de Vos, Endoreversible Thermodynamics of Solar Energy Conversion 17
A. Bejan, Entropy Generation Through Heat and Fluid Flow ~Wiley, New
~Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1992!. York, 1994!.
4
B. Andresen, P. Salamon, and R. S. Berry, Phys. Today 37, 62 ~1984!. 18
P. Salamon, A. Nitzan, B. Andresen, and R. S. Berry, Phys. Rev. A 21,
5
A. Bejan, Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics ~Wiley, New York, 2115 ~1980!.
1988!. 19
A. Bejan, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 31, 1211 ~1988!.
6
A. Bejan, J. Appl. Phys. 79, 1191 ~1996!. 20
F. Angulo-Brown, J. Appl. Phys. 69, 7465 ~1991!.
7
F. L. Curzon and B. Ahlborn, Am. J. Phys. 43, 22 ~1975!. Equation ~1! 21
A. de Vos, Am. J. Phys. 53, 570 ~1985!.
was previously obtained by Chambadal and Novikov ~as it is asserted in 22
L. Chen and Z. Yan, J. Chem. Phys. 90, 3740 ~1989!.
23
Ref. 6!. L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Brown, Rev. Mex. Fis. 40, 886
8
F. Angulo-Brown and R. Páez-Hernández, J. Appl. Phys. 74, 2216 ~1993!. ~1994!.
9
F. Angulo-Brown, J. Fernández-Betanzos, and C. A. Diáz-Pico, Eur. J. 24
A. de Vos, J. Phys. D 20, 232 ~1987!.
Phys. 15, 38 ~1994!. 25
T. V. Marcella, Am. J. Phys. 60, 888 ~1992!.
10
A. Calvo-Hernández, A. Medina, J. M. M. Roco, and S. Velasco, Eur. J. 26
M. Santillán and F. Angulo-Brown ~unpublished!; F. Angulo-Brown, M.
Phys. 16, 73 ~1995!; A. Calvo-Hernández, A. Medina, and J. M. M. Roco, Santillán, and E. Calleja-Quevedo, Nuovo Cimento D 17, 87 ~1995!.
J. Phys. D 28, 2020 ~1995!. 27
F. Angulo-Brown, E. Yépez, and R. Zamorano-Ulloa, Phys. Lett. A 183,
11
M. Mozurkewich and R. S. Berry, J. Appl. Phys. 53, 34 ~1982!. 431 ~1993!.
12 28
S. J. Watowich, K. H. Hoffmann, and R. S. Berry, J. Appl. Phys. 58, 2893 F. Angulo-Brown and L. A. Arias-Hernández, J. Chem. Phys. 100, 9193
~1985!. ~1996!.
13
D. C. Agrawal and V. J. Menon, J. Phys. A D3, 5319 ~1990!. 29
These remarks were suggested to us by the referee of this article.

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 81, No. 7, 1 April 1997 L. A. Arias-Hernández and F. Angulo-Brown 2979
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
134.176.129.147 On: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 10:16:53