Radiating extended surfaces are widely used to enhance heat transfer between primary surface and the environment. The present paper applies the homotopy perturbation to obtain analytic approximation of distribution of temperature in heat fin radiating, which is compared with the results obtained by Adomian decomposition method (ADM). Comparison of the results obtained by the method reveals that homotopy perturbation method (HPM) is more effective and easy to use.
1. Introduction
Most scientific
problems and phenomena such as heat transfer occur nonlinearly. Except a
limited number of these problems, it is difficult to find the exact analytical
solutions for them. Therefore, approximate analytical solutions are searched
and were introduced [1–5], among which homotopy perturbation method (HPM) [6–12] and Adomain
decomposition method (ADM) [13, 14] are the most effective and convenient ones
for both weakly and strongly nonlinear equations.
The analysis of
space radiators, frequently provided in published literature, for example, [15–22], is based
upon the
assumption that the thermal conductivity of the fin material is
constant. However, since the temperature difference of the fin base and its tip
is high in the actual situation, the variation of the conductivity of the fin material
should be taken into consideration and includes the effects of the variation of
the thermal conductivity of the fin material. The present analysis considers
the radiator configuration shown in Figure 1. In the design, parallel pipes are joined
by webs, which act as radiator fins. Heat flows by conduction from the pipes
down the fin and radiates from both surfaces.
Schematic of a heat fin radiating element.
Here, the fin
problem is solved to obtain the distribution of temperature of the fin by
homotopy perturbation method and compared with the result obtained by the
Adomian decomposition method, which is used for solving various nonlinear fin
problems [23–25].
2. The Fin Problem
A typical heat
pipe space radiator is shown in Figure 1. Both surfaces of the fin are radiating
to the vacuum of outer space at a very low temperature, which is assumed equal
to zero absolute. The fin is diffuse-grey with emissivity ε,
and has temperature-dependent thermal conductivity k,
which depends on temperature linearly. The base temperature Tb of the fin and tube surfaces temperature is
constant; the radiative exchange between the fin and heat pipe is neglected.
Since the fin is assumed to be thin, the temperature distribution within the
fin is assumed to be one-dimensional. The energy balance equation for a
differential element of the fin is
given as [26]:
2wddx[k(T)dTdx]−2εσT4=0,
where k(T) and σ are the thermal conductivity and the Stefan-Boltzmann
constant, respectively. The thermal conductivity of the fin material is assumed
to be a linear function of temperature according to
K(T)=Kb[1+λ(T−Tb)],
where kb is the thermal conductivity at the base
temperature of the fin and λ is the slope of the thermal conductivity temperature
curve.
Employing the
following dimensionless parameters:
θ=TTb,ψ=εσb2Tb3kw,ξ=xb,β=λTb,
the formulation
of the fin problem reduces to
d2θdξ2+β(dθdξ)2+βθd2θdξ2−ψθ4=0,
with boundary conditions
dθdξ=0atξ=0,θ=1atξ=1.
3. Basic Idea of Homotopy Perturbation Method
In this study,
we apply the homotopy perturbation method to the discussed problems. To
illustrate the basic ideas of the method, we consider the following nonlinear
differential equation,
A(θ)−f(r)=0,
where A(θ) is defined as follows:
A(θ)=L(θ)+N(θ),
where L stands for the linear and N for the nonlinear part. Homotopy perturbation
structure is shown as the following equation:
H(θ,P)=(1−p)[L(θ)−L(θ0)]+p[A(θ)−f(r)]=0
Obviously, using (3.3) we have
H(θ,0)=L(θ)−L(θ0)=0,H(θ,1)=A(θ)−f(r)=0,
where p∈[0,1] is an embedding parameter and θ0 is the first approximation that satisfies the
boundary condition. We Consider θ and asθ=∑i=0Mpiθi=θ0+pθ1+p2θ2+p3θ3+p4θ4+⋯.
4. The Fin Temperature Distribution
Following
homotopy-perturbation method to (2.4a), (2.4b), and (2.4c), linear and non-linear parts are
defined as
L(θ)=d2θdξ2,N(θ)=β(dθdξ)2+βθd2θdξ2−ψθ4,
with the
boundary condition given in (2.4b), θ(0) is any arbitrary constant, C.
Then we
have
dθdξ=0atξ=0,θ=Catξ=0.Substituting (3.5) in to (4.1) and then into (3.3) and rearranging based on power of p-terms, we have the following
By increasing
the number of the terms in the solution, higher accuracy will be obtained. Since
the remaining terms are too long to be mentioned in here, the results are shown
in tables.
Solving (4.3a), (4.4a), (4.5a), (4.6a), and (4.7a) results in θ(ξ).
When p→1,
we have
θ(ξ)=C+12ψC4ξ2+16ψ2C7ξ4−12βC5ψξ2+13180ψ3C10ξ6−1124ψ2C8βξ4+12β2C6ψξ2+23720ψ4C13ξ8−1960ψ3C11βξ6+78β2C9ψ2ξ4−12β3C7ψξ2⋯.
5. Results
The
coefficient C representing the temperature at the fin tip can be evaluated from
the boundary condition given in (2.4c) using the numerical method.
Tables 1 and 2 show the dimensionless tip temperature, that is, coefficient C, for
different thermal conductivity parameters, β.
The tables state that the convergence of the solution for the higher
thermo-geometric fin parameter, ψ,
is faster than the solution with lower fin parameter. It is clear from the tables
that the solution is convergent. In order to investigate the accuracy of the homotopy
solution, the problem is compared with decomposition solution [26], also the
corresponding results are presented in Figure 2. It should be mentioned that the
homotopy results in the tables are arranged for first 5, 7, 10, 14 terms of the
solution (M). It is seen that the results by homotopy perturbation method, and adomian
decomposition method are in good agreement. The results of the comparison show
that the difference is 3.1% in the case of the strongest nonlinearity, that is, β=1.0 and ψ=100.
The dimensionless tip temperature for ψ=1.
Number of the terms in the
solution
(M)
M=5
M=7
M=10
M=14
Method
HPM
ADM
HPM
ADM
HPM
ADM
HPM
ADM
β=0.6
0.827821
0.819185
0.826552
0.825079
0.8267319
0.825063
0.82675
0.825052
β=0.4
0.813389
0.814489
0.813351
0.813279
0.8133683
0.810866
0.813369
0.813236
β=0.2
0.797708
0.80021
0.797712
0.799025
0.7977122
0.797812
0.797712
0.797809
β=0
0.779177
0.777778
0.779147
0.777765
0.7791452
0.776554
0.779145
0.775333
β=−0.2
0.757702
0.752987
0.75698
0.752967
0.7568182
0.754144
0.756802
0.754132
β=−0.4
0.819743
0.814465
0.816013
0.813252
0.8132926
0.810831
0.812155
0.813201
β=−0.6
0.710294
0.715063
0.703219
0.700812
0.6988481
0.696134
0.696764
0.694918
The dimensionless tip temperature for ψ=1000.
Number of the terms in the
solution
(M)
M=5
M=7
M=10
M=14
Method
HPM
ADM
HPM
ADM
HPM
ADM
HPM
ADM
β=0.6
0.139382
0.144312
0.135502
0.137711
0.1330265
0.134125
0.132616
0.132718
β=0.4
0.138351
0.143412
0.134243
0.136526
0.1315594
0.132756
0.130091
0.131026
β=0.2
0.137341
0.142026
0.133009
0.134937
0.1301168
0.131213
0.129486
0.129613
β=0
0.136349
0.141055
0.131797
0.133785
0.1286995
0.129663
0.127504
0.127327
β=−0.2
0.135376
0.140165
0.13061
0.132654
0.127308
0.128143
0.125348
0.125431
β=−0.4
0.134422
0.139565
0.129445
0.131856
0.1259426
0.127342
0.124118
0.124432
β=−0.6
0.133485
0.138374
0.128303
0.130525
0.1246034
0.125336
0.122715
0.122936
Comparison of the HPM and ADM for β=1.0 and M=14.
6. Conclusions
In this
work, homotopy perturbation method has been successfully applied to a typical
heat pipe space radiator. The solution shows that the results of the present
method are in excellent agreement with those of ADM and the obtained solutions
are shown in the figure and tables. Some of the advantage of HPM are that reduces
the volume of calculations with the fewest number of iterations, it can
converge to correct results. The proposed method is very simple and
straightforward. In our work, we use the Maple Package to calculate the
functions obtained from the homotopy perturbation method.
AbulwafaE. M.AbdouM. A.MahmoudA. A.The solution of nonlinear coagulation problem with mass loss2006292313330MR221146810.1016/j.chaos.2005.08.044ZBL1101.82018AzizA.NaT. Y.1984Washington, DC, USAHemispherexii+199Series in Computational Methods in Mechanics and Thermal SciencesMR761354HeJ.-H.Some asymptotic methods for strongly nonlinear equations2006201011411199MR222056510.1142/S0217979206033796ZBL1102.34039RahmanM. M.mizanur.rahman@hut.fiSiikonenT.An improved simple method on a collocated grid200038217720110.1080/104077900750034661KuznetsovA. V.VafaiK.Comparison between the two- and three-phase models for analysis of porosity formation in aluminum-rich castings199629885986710.1080/10407789608913824HeJ.-H.jhhe@dhu.edu.cnApplication of homotopy perturbation method to nonlinear wave equations200526369570010.1016/j.chaos.2005.03.006ZBL1072.35502HeJ.-H.jhhe@dhu.edu.cnHomotopy perturbation method for bifurcation of nonlinear problems200562207208HeJ.-H.Homotopy perturbation technique19991783-4257262MR171104110.1016/S0045-7825(99)00018-3ZBL0956.70017HeJ.-H.Variational iteration method for autonomous ordinary differential systems20001142-3115123MR177865810.1016/S0096-3003(99)00104-6ZBL1027.34009HeJ.-H.A coupling method of a homotopy technique and a perturbation technique for non-linear problems20003513743MR172376110.1016/S0020-7462(98)00085-7ZBL1068.74618HeJ.-H.Homotopy perturbation method: a new nonlinear analytical technique200313517379MR193431610.1016/S0096-3003(01)00312-5ZBL1030.34013HeJ.-H.The homotopy perturbation method for nonlinear oscillators with discontinuities20041511287292MR203796710.1016/S0096-3003(03)00341-2ZBL1039.65052AdomianG.A review of the decomposition method in applied mathematics19881352501544MR96722510.1016/0022-247X(88)90170-9ZBL0671.34053AdomianG.199460Dordrecht, The NetherlandsKluwer Academic Publishersxiv+352Fundamental Theories of PhysicsMR1282283BartasJ. G.SellersW. H.Radiation fin effectiveness196082C7375WilkinsJ. E.Jr.Minimizing the mass of thin radiating fins196027145146KarlekarB. V.ChaoB. T.Mass minimization of radiating trapezoidal fins with negligible base cylinder interaction196361334810.1016/0017-9310(63)90027-9CockfieldR. D.Structural optimization of a space radiator19685101240124110.2514/3.29463KeilH.Optimization of a central-fin space radiator19685446346510.2514/3.29279ChungB. T. F.ZhangB. X.Optimization of radiating fin array including mutual irradiations between radiator elements1991113481482210.1115/1.2911208KrishnaprakasC. K.NarayanaK. B.Heat transfer analysis of mutually irradiating fins200346576176910.1016/S0017-9310(02)00356-3ZBL1024.80501NaumannR. J.Optimizing the design of space radiators20042561929194110.1007/s10765-004-7747-0ChiuC. H.ChenC. K.A decomposition method for solving the convective longitudinal fins with variable thermal conductivity200245102067207510.1016/S0017-9310(01)00286-1ZBL1011.80011ChiuC. H.ChenC. K.Application of Adomian's decomposition procedure to the analysis of convective-radiative fins2003125231231610.1115/1.1532012LesnicD.HeggsP. J.A decomposition method for power-law fin-type problems200431567368210.1016/S0735-1933(04)00054-5ArslanturkC.Optimum design of space radiators with temperature-dependent thermal conductivity20062611-121149115710.1016/j.applthermaleng.2005.10.038