IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v52y2013icp44-54.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Response surface method applied to the thermoeconomic optimization of a complex cogeneration system modeled in a process simulator

Author

Listed:
  • Pires, Thiago S.
  • Cruz, Manuel E.
  • Colaço, Marcelo J.

Abstract

This work presents the application of a surrogate model – a response surface – to replace the objective function to be minimized in the thermoeconomic optimization of a complex thermal system modeled with the aid of an expert process simulator. The objective function accounts for fuel, capital, operation and maintenance costs of the thermal system, and depends on nine decision variables. The minimization task is performed through the computational integration of two professional programs, a process simulator and a mathematical platform. Five algorithms are used to perform the optimization: the pattern search and genetic algorithms, both available in the mathematical platform, plus three custom-coded algorithms, differential evolution, particle swarm and simulated annealing. A comparative analysis of the performance of all five methods is presented, together with a critical appraisal of the surrogate model effectiveness. In the course of the optimization procedure, the process simulator computes the thermodynamic properties of all flows of the thermal system and solves the mass and energy balances each time the objective function has to be evaluated. By handling a set of radial basis functions as an approximation model to the original computationally expensive objective function, it is found here that the number of function evaluations can be appreciably reduced without significant deviation of the optimal value. The present study indicates that, for a thermoeconomic system optimization problem with a large number of decision variables and/or a costly objective function, the application of the response surface surrogate may prove more efficient than the original simulation model, reducing substantially the computational time involved in the optimization.

Suggested Citation

  • Pires, Thiago S. & Cruz, Manuel E. & Colaço, Marcelo J., 2013. "Response surface method applied to the thermoeconomic optimization of a complex cogeneration system modeled in a process simulator," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 44-54.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:52:y:2013:i:c:p:44-54
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2012.12.049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544213000273
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2012.12.049?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lazzaretto, Andrea & Tsatsaronis, George, 2006. "SPECO: A systematic and general methodology for calculating efficiencies and costs in thermal systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 1257-1289.
    2. Tsatsaronis, Georgios & Winhold, Michael, 1985. "Exergoeconomic analysis and evaluation of energy-conversion plants—I. A new general methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 69-80.
    3. Calise, F. & Dentice d’ Accadia, M. & Vanoli, L. & von Spakovsky, Michael R., 2007. "Full load synthesis/design optimization of a hybrid SOFC–GT power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 446-458.
    4. Abusoglu, Aysegul & Kanoglu, Mehmet, 2009. "Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of combined heat and power production: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2295-2308, December.
    5. Sayyaadi, Hoseyn & Babaie, Meisam & Farmani, Mohammad Reza, 2011. "Implementing of the multi-objective particle swarm optimizer and fuzzy decision-maker in exergetic, exergoeconomic and environmental optimization of a benchmark cogeneration system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 4777-4789.
    6. Valero, A., 2006. "Exergy accounting: Capabilities and drawbacks," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 164-180.
    7. Valero, Antonio & Lozano, Miguel A. & Serra, Luis & Tsatsaronis, George & Pisa, Javier & Frangopoulos, Christos & von Spakovsky, Michael R., 1994. "CGAM problem: Definition and conventional solution," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 279-286.
    8. Frangopoulos, Christos A., 1987. "Thermo-economic functional analysis and optimization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 12(7), pages 563-571.
    9. Tsatsaronis, Georgios & Winhold, Michael, 1985. "Exergoeconomic analysis and evaluation of energy-conversion plants—II. Analysis of a coal-fired steam power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 81-94.
    10. Toffolo, A. & Lazzaretto, A., 2002. "Evolutionary algorithms for multi-objective energetic and economic optimization in thermal system design," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 549-567.
    11. Goffe, William L. & Ferrier, Gary D. & Rogers, John, 1994. "Global optimization of statistical functions with simulated annealing," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1-2), pages 65-99.
    12. Mardan, Nawzad & Klahr, Roger, 2012. "Combining optimisation and simulation in an energy systems analysis of a Swedish iron foundry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 410-419.
    13. Fong, K.F. & Lee, C.K. & Chow, C.K. & Yuen, S.Y., 2011. "Simulation–optimization of solar–thermal refrigeration systems for office use in subtropical Hong Kong," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 6298-6307.
    14. Dimopoulos, George G. & Frangopoulos, Christos A., 2008. "Optimization of energy systems based on Evolutionary and Social metaphors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 171-179.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bornatico, Raffaele & Hüssy, Jonathan & Witzig, Andreas & Guzzella, Lino, 2013. "Surrogate modeling for the fast optimization of energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 653-662.
    2. Gai, Chao & Dong, Yuping & Zhang, Tonghui, 2014. "Distribution of sulfur species in gaseous and condensed phase during downdraft gasification of corn straw," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 248-258.
    3. Icaro Figueiredo Vilasboas & Victor Gabriel Sousa Fagundes dos Santos & Armando Sá Ribeiro & Julio Augusto Mendes da Silva, 2021. "Surrogate Models Applied to Optimized Organic Rankine Cycles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Pires, Thiago S. & Cruz, Manuel E. & Colaço, Marcelo J. & Alves, Marco A.C., 2018. "Application of nonlinear multivariable model predictive control to transient operation of a gas turbine and NOX emissions reduction," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 341-353.
    5. Jahromi, Farid Sadeghian & Beheshti, Masoud & Rajabi, Razieh Fereydon, 2018. "Comparison between differential evolution algorithms and response surface methodology in ethylene plant optimization based on an extended combined energy - exergy analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1114-1134.
    6. Elsner, Witold & Wysocki, Marian & Niegodajew, Paweł & Borecki, Roman, 2017. "Experimental and economic study of small-scale CHP installation equipped with downdraft gasifier and internal combustion engine," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 213-227.
    7. Najafi, Gholamhassan & Ghobadian, Barat & Yusaf, Talal & Safieddin Ardebili, Seyed Mohammad & Mamat, Rizalman, 2015. "Optimization of performance and exhaust emission parameters of a SI (spark ignition) engine with gasoline–ethanol blended fuels using response surface methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 90(P2), pages 1815-1829.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abusoglu, Aysegul & Kanoglu, Mehmet, 2009. "Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of combined heat and power production: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2295-2308, December.
    2. Piacentino, Antonio & Cardona, Fabio, 2010. "Scope-Oriented Thermoeconomic analysis of energy systems. Part I: Looking for a non-postulated cost accounting for the dissipative devices of a vapour compression chiller. Is it feasible?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 943-956, March.
    3. Lamas, Wendell de Queiroz, 2013. "Fuzzy thermoeconomic optimisation applied to a small waste water treatment plant," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 214-219.
    4. Lazzaretto, A. & Toffolo, A., 2004. "Energy, economy and environment as objectives in multi-criterion optimization of thermal systems design," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 1139-1157.
    5. César Torres & Antonio Valero, 2021. "The Exergy Cost Theory Revisited," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-42, March.
    6. Kim, D.J., 2010. "A new thermoeconomic methodology for energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 410-422.
    7. Picallo-Perez, Ana & Catrini, Pietro & Piacentino, Antonio & Sala, José-Mª, 2019. "A novel thermoeconomic analysis under dynamic operating conditions for space heating and cooling systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 819-837.
    8. Usón, Sergio & Kostowski, Wojciech J. & Stanek, Wojciech & Gazda, Wiesław, 2015. "Thermoecological cost of electricity, heat and cold generated in a trigeneration module fuelled with selected fossil and renewable fuels," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(P3), pages 308-319.
    9. Manassaldi, Juan I. & Mussati, Sergio F. & Scenna, Nicolás J., 2011. "Optimal synthesis and design of Heat Recovery Steam Generation (HRSG) via mathematical programming," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 475-485.
    10. Agudelo, Andrés & Valero, Antonio & Torres, César, 2012. "Allocation of waste cost in thermoeconomic analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 634-643.
    11. Ligang Wang & Yongping Yang & Changqing Dong & Zhiping Yang & Gang Xu & Lingnan Wu, 2012. "Exergoeconomic Evaluation of a Modern Ultra-Supercritical Power Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 5(9), pages 1-17, September.
    12. Toffolo, A. & Lazzaretto, A., 2002. "Evolutionary algorithms for multi-objective energetic and economic optimization in thermal system design," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 549-567.
    13. Coban, Kahraman & Şöhret, Yasin & Colpan, C. Ozgur & Karakoç, T. Hikmet, 2017. "Exergetic and exergoeconomic assessment of a small-scale turbojet fuelled with biodiesel," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P2), pages 1358-1367.
    14. Stanek, Wojciech & Gazda, Wiesław & Kostowski, Wojciech, 2015. "Thermo-ecological assessment of CCHP (combined cold-heat-and-power) plant supported with renewable energy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(P3), pages 279-289.
    15. Oh, Si-Doek & Lee, Yeji & Yoo, Yungpil & Kim, Jinoh & Kim, Suyong & Song, Seung Jin & Kwak, Ho-Young, 2013. "A support strategy for the promotion of photovoltaic uses for residential houses in Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 248-256.
    16. Lozano, M.A. & Carvalho, M. & Serra, L.M., 2009. "Operational strategy and marginal costs in simple trigeneration systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 2001-2008.
    17. Bagdanavicius, Audrius & Jenkins, Nick & Hammond, Geoffrey P., 2012. "Assessment of community energy supply systems using energy, exergy and exergoeconomic analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 247-255.
    18. Wang, Jiangjiang & Li, Meng & Ren, Fukang & Li, Xiaojing & Liu, Boxiang, 2018. "Modified exergoeconomic analysis method based on energy level with reliability consideration: Cost allocations in a biomass trigeneration system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 104-116.
    19. Valero, Antonio & Usón, Sergio & Torres, César & Valero, Alicia & Agudelo, Andrés & Costa, Jorge, 2013. "Thermoeconomic tools for the analysis of eco-industrial parks," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 62-72.
    20. Hofmann, Mathias & Tsatsaronis, George, 2018. "Comparative exergoeconomic assessment of coal-fired power plants – Binary Rankine cycle versus conventional steam cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 168-179.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:52:y:2013:i:c:p:44-54. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.