Home

Search

Collections

Journals

About

Contact us

My IOPscience

A non-endoreversible Otto cycle model: improving power output and efficiency

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.
1996 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 29 80
(http://iopscience.iop.org/0022-3727/29/1/014)
View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:
IP Address: 148.204.18.220
This content was downloaded on 23/05/2016 at 23:07

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 29 (1996) 8083. Printed in the UK

A non-endoreversible Otto cycle

model: improving power output and
efficiency
F Angulo-Brown, J A Rocha-Martnez and

T D Navarrete-Gonzalez

Departamento de Fsica, Escuela Superior de Fsica y Matematicas,

Instituto

Politecnico
Nacional, Edif 9, UP Zacatenco, 07738 Mexico
DF, Mexico

Departamento de Ciencias Basicas,

Universidad Autonoma

Metropolitana-Azcapotzalco, Av San Pablo 180, 02200 Mexico

DF, Mexico
Received 12 June 1995
Abstract. We propose a finite-time thermodynamics model for an Otto thermal
cycle. Our model considers global losses in a simplified way lumped into a
friction-like term, and takes into account the departure from an endoreversible
regime through a parameter (R ) arising from the Clausius inequality. Our numerical
results suggest that the cycles power output and efficiency are very sensitive to
that parameter. We find that R is the ratio of the constant-volume heat capacities
of the reactants and products in the combustion reaction occurring inside the
working fluid. Our results have implications in the search for new fuels for internal
combustion engines.

1. Introduction
In the last two decades there have been many efforts
in developing a finite-time thermodynamics (FTT) [1
3]. This discipline arose as an extension of classical
equilibrium thermodynamics (CET) towards the domain of
endoreversible processes. A key concept in FTT has been
the so-called endoreversibility hypothesis [4, 5]. This idea
allows one to conceive an irreversible thermal engine as
being separated into two parts: an internally reversible
cycle which does not produce entropy; and an external
irreversible part that includes the surroundings and their
couplings with the working fluid. All the entropy produced
by the thermal engine is ascribed to the irreversible part
only. This hypothesis has proved to be very successful.
Several authors have proposed FTT models for thermal
engines, including internal combustion engines such as the
Otto and Diesel cycles [611, 17]. By means of models of
this kind it has been possible to obtain realistic values for
typical process variables such as efficiency and compression
ratio. The endoreversibility hypothesis has been mainly
based on the idea that, for many processes, it is possible
to conceive the internal relaxation times as negligibly
short compared with the duration of the full process.
Nevertheless, it would be convenient to have a manner to
include the sometimes very important internal contributions

to the global entropy production. Ozkaynak

et al [12] and
Chen [13] have recently proposed equivalent approaches
for a non-endoreversible finite-time Carnot cycle. These
authors go beyond the endoreversibility hypothesis by
c 1996 IOP Publishing Ltd
0022-3727/96/010080+04$19.50

means of a parameter defined as [12]

R=

1SW 1
|1SW 2 |

(1)

which has values in the interval 0 < R 1; 1SW 1 is

the change in the internal entropy along the hot isothermal
branch and 1SW 2 is the entropy change corresponding
to the cold isothermal compression. Obviously in the
endoreversible limit, R = 1, and all the results of Curzon
and Ahlborn [14] are recovered. The pertinence of the
R parameter must be more deeply discussed. We think that
one way to see its relevance is through its implications
in some FTT thermal engine models. In [11] an air
standard Otto-cycle model was presented. This irreversible
model takes into account the finite-time evolution of the
cycles compression and power strokes and it considers
global losses lumped into a friction-like term. The model
permits the maximization of quantities such as the power
output and the efficiency in terms of the compression
ratio r (maximum volume divided by minimum volume).
The optimum r values obtained with this model compare
well with standard r values for real Otto engines. In
the present paper we follow step by step the model of
[11], but introducing the non-endoreversibility parameter
given by equation (1). Our results suggest that the ratio
CV 1 /CV 2 (with CV 1,2 the constant-volume heat capacities
of reactive species and products in the combustion reaction
respectively) has strong implications for the efficiency and
the power output of the Otto cycle yet without large changes
in geometric parameters such as the compression ratio.

A non-endoreversible Otto cycle model

Figure 2. Efficiency against compression ratio curves for

seven values of R (see table 1).

working fluid is a mixture (air with a certain combustible)

with constant-volume heat capacity CV 1 and during the
power stroke (3 4 1) the working fluid is constituted
as a mixture (the reaction products) with constant-volume
heat capacity CV 2 .
From the first law of thermodynamics, we obtain the
reversible total work, which is

Figure 1. The pressurevolume diagram of a reversible

Otto cycle.

2. The non-endoreversible Otto cycle model

As we have stated, we shall follow the Otto cycle model
taken from [11]. In figure 1 a pressurevolume diagram
of an idealized Otto cycle is depicted. In our approach we
do not consider any detailed distinction between the major
sources of irreversibility in a real Otto cycle. Instead, we
take into account only a dissipation term due to a kind
of generalized friction which embraces in a global way
thermal and friction losses. As it is usual in FTT models for
thermal engines, we consider instantaneous adiabats [15],
thus, in our model the only contribution to the full cycles
period is due to the isochoric cycles time evolution. For
the isochoric branches (2 3 and 4 1 in figure 1),
we consider [11] that heating from state 2 to state 3 and
cooling from state 4 to state 1 proceed according to constant
temperature rates, that is
dT
= k1
dt

(2)

(for 2 3) and

dT
= k2
dt
(for 4 1) where T is the absolute temperature and t is
the time. Expressions (2) may be considered as average
temperature rates. From equation (2), we obtain
t1V =

WT OT = CV 1 (T3 T2 ) CV 2 (T4 T1 )
Thus, the reversible power is
PR =

PR =

CV 1 CV 2 r 1
K1 + K2 r 1

P = 2

(7)

(8)

where is a coefficient of friction which takes into account

the global losses and is the piston velocity. Thus, the
resulting power output is
CV 1 CV 2 r 1
2 .
K1 + K2 r 1

(9)

Taking as the piston mean velocity [11], equation (9)

can be written as
P (r) =

(4)

with K1 = 1/k1 and K2 = 1/k2 . We consider that during

the compression stroke (1 2 3 in figure 1) the

(6)

with r the compression ratio given by r = V1 /V2 (see

figure 1).
Equation (7) is a monotonically increasing function of
r. It is well known that the actual power curves for internal
combustion engines are of the convex type. In [11] a
convex power curve was obtained from equation (7) by
considering a loss power given by

P =

1
(T4 T1 )
(3)
k2
where t1V and t2V are the heating and cooling times,
respectively. Thus, the cycles period is
= t1V + t2V = K1 (T3 T2 ) + K2 (T4 T1 )

CV 1 (T3 T2 ) CV 2 (T4 T1 )
.
K1 (T3 T2 ) + K2 (T4 T1 )

If we take the reversible cycle with adiabats given by

T V 1 = constant, with = CP /CV = 1.4 for the air
taken as a buffer gas, then equation (6) becomes

1
(T3 T2 )
k1

t2V =

(5)

CV 1 CV 2 r 1
b(r 1)2
K1 + K2 r 1

with
b=

X22
(1t12 )2

(10)

(11)
81

F Angulo-Brown et al
Table 1. Calculated values of Pmax r , max and rm for
seven values of R . For these calculations we use engine
data from [7, 11].

where X2 is the piston position at minimum volume and

1t12 is the time spent in the power stroke. Equation (10)
gives us a convex curve with a single maximum. Taking
the thermal efficiency as
P (r)
Qabs /

(12)

with Qabs = CV 1 (T3 T1 ), it was shown in [11] that

(r) = 1

b(r 1)2
CV 2 1
r

(K1 + K2 r 1 )
CV 1
CV 1

(13)

which is also a convex curve with a single maximum, and

it reduces to reversible Otto efficiency when CV 1 = CV 2
and = b = 0.
For engine data taken from table 1 of Mozurkewich
and Berry [6] and with K1 and K2 as estimated in [11],
equations (10) and (13) give excellent values for the
compression ratio at which power and efficiency reach their
maximum values. For maximum power, r = 10.1, and
for maximum efficiency, rm = 9.3 were obtained [11].
Moreover, (9.3) 0.28, in good agreement with typical
values of real Otto engine efficiencies. A more realistic
Otto cycle model was proposed recently [17]. This model is
similar to ours, but it considers non-instantaneous adiabats.
Nevertheless, its results are very close to those obtained by
us for practically the same engines data.
The non-endoreversibility factor given by equation (1)

was introduced Ozkaynak

et al [12] for a Curzon and
Ahlborn engine, namely a FTT Carnot-type cycle. In the
endoreversible situation, the entropy change of the working
fluid is zero. That is,
1SW 1 + 1SW 2 = 0.

(14)

However, if any internal irreversibility is considered, then

the Clausius inequality gives
1SW 1 + 1SW 2 < 0

(15)

and this inequality becomes an equality by means of

1SW 1 + R1SW 2 = 0

(16)

where R is given by equation (1). Since the Otto cycle (see

figure 1) is formed by two adiabats and two non-adiabats (as
82

Pmax (W)

max

rm

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

0.5
0.6
0.684
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.99

259.311
3 043.46
5 385.32
5 852.0
8 682.78
11 534.0
14 375.3

9.308
9.762
10.124
10.194
10.607
11.002
11.379

0.0187
0.1822
0.2821
0.2990
0.3867
0.4548
0.5044

9.264
9.264
9.264
9.264
9.264
9.264
9.264

is the Carnot cycle), we can define as in the previous way

a non-endoreversibility factor given also by equation (1).
Thus,

Figure 3. Power against compression ratio curves for

seven values of R (see table 1).

Curve

R=

1SW 1
CV 1 ln(T3 /T2 )
CV 1
=
=
|1SW 2 |
CV 2 ln(T4 /T1 )
CV 2

(17)

where we have calculated the isochoric entropy changes

in the usual CET way. Then, in the Otto cycle case the
parameter R has a precise physical meaning.
Now, we can re-write the expressions for power output,
P (r) (equation (10)) and efficiency, (r) (equation (13)) by
means of the parameter R given by equation (17). The new
equations become
CV 2 (R r 1 )
b(r 1)2
(18)
K1 + K2 r 1


1
b(r 1)2
(r, R) = 1
r 1 +
(K1 + K2 r 1 ) .
R
CV 2
(19)
For the case of the engine data given by Mozurkewich
and Berry [6, 7], CV 1 = 0.2988 J K1 and CV 2 =
0.4372 J K1 , then R = 0.6834. With this same procedure
the equations (11) and (12) of [17] for (r) and P (r),
respectively, can be modified in order to include the
parameter R.
P (r, R) =

3. Numerical calculations
If we use as typical values for an Otto engine those of
table 1 in [7] we find R = 0.6834, r = 10.1, rm = 9.3 and
(9.3) = 0.28. In table 1, we show efficiencies and power
output calculated for several values of parameter R using
equations (19) and (18) respectively. For R < 0.5, the
power output and the efficiency have negative values, thus
the true physical interval for R is 0.5 R 1. As may be
seen in table 1, the maximum efficiency and the maximum
power are very sensitive to the parameter R. However,
the compression ratios r and rm have small changes for R
variations (see figures 2 and 3).
As we can observe in table 1 and figures 2 and 3, the
ratio R = CV 1 /CV 2 seems to be very important if one wants
to improve the power output and the efficiency of an Otto
cycle without great modifications in the compression ratio.
Our results suggest that, if chemical researchers can achieve
combustion reactions with R > 0.6834, then and P
may be noticeably improved without important geometrical

A non-endoreversible Otto cycle model

changes in the pistons. We are assuming that R = 0.6834

corresponds to usual combustibles like octane, for example.
It is immediate (as in [11]) that, if we couple equations (18)
and (19) through the variable r, we obtain a family of loopshaped curves P versus which are common in almost all
real heat engines. All the previous results are also valid
for the behaviour of (r) and P (r) in the model with noninstantaneous adiabats reported by Calvo-Hernandez et al
[17].

0.6834. This result would have implications for finding

new combustibles for internal combustion engines. These
fuels would improve power output and efficiency of the
engines yet for usual values of compression ratio.

4. Conclusions

References

The development of finite-time thermodynamics must be

considered as an important advance in the treatment
of irreversible processes in thermal engines and other
macroscopic systems. The endoreversibility hypothesis
has played a key role in FTT models. Apparently, it
is always possible to construct an endoreversible model
equivalent to a real thermal engine by means of the
displacement of all real entropy sources towards the
couplings between the working fluid and its surroundings
[3, 16]. In this way one can conceive an endoreversible
model as a first approximation to the real engine with
positive global entropy production. Nevertheless, it is
desirable to achieve a procedure for incorporating internal
entropy sources into the global entropy production. This
is roughly achieved by means of the non-endoreversibility
parameter, R. In fact, the Otto cycle model discussed
by Mozurkewich and Berry with R = 0.6834 is an
intrinsically non-endoreversible model. In the present
paper, we propose that the parameter R has a physical
meaning for an Otto cycle, which is the ratio CV 1 /CV 2 .
Our numerical calculations suggest that the power output
and efficiency can be remarkably improved if the reactants
and products in the combustion reaction have a ratio R >

[1] Sieniutycz S and Salamon P (eds) 1990 Finite Time

Thermodynamics and Thermoeconomics (New York:
Taylor and Francis)
[2] De Vos A 1992 Endoreversible Thermodynamics of Solar
Energy Conversion (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
[3] Bejan A 1988 Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics
(New York: Wiley)
[4] Rubin M H 1979 Phys. Rev. A 19 1272
[5] Ondrechen M J, Rubin M H and Band Y B 1983 J. Chem.
Phys. 78 4721
[6] Mozurkewich M and Berry R S 1981 Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.
USA 78 1986
[7] Mozurkewich M and Berry R S 1982 J. Appl. Phys. 53 34
[8] Ahlborn B and Barnard A J 1990 Am. J. Phys. 58 489
[9] Hoffman K H, Watowich S J and Berry R S 1985 J. Appl.
Phys. 58 2125
[10] Leff H S 1987 Am. J. Phys. 55 602
[11] Angulo-Brown F, Fernandez-Betanzos J and Daz-Pico
C A 1994 Eur. J. Phys. 15 38

[12] Ozkaynak
S, Goktun S and Yavuz H 1994 J. Phys. D:
Appl. Phys. 27 1139
[13] Chen J 1994 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 27 1144
[14] Curzon F L and Ahlborn B 1975 Am. J. Phys. 43 22
[15] Chen J and Yan Z 1988 J. Appl. Phys. 63 4795
[16] Angulo-Brown F and Paez Hernandez R 1993 J. Appl.
Phys. 74 2216
[17] Calvo Hernandez A, Medina A, Roco J M M and Velasco
S 1995 Eur. J. Phys. 16 73

Acknowledgment
This work was partially supported by the COFAA-IPN,
Mexico.

83