J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 32 (1999) 26052608.

Printed in the UK

PII: S0022-3727(99)05952-5

Entropy generation analysis of

magnetohydrodynamic induction
devices

Hugo Salas, Sergio Cuevas and Mariano Lopez

de Haro
Facultad de Ciencias, UAEMor., Av. Universidad 1001, Cuernavaca, Mor. 62210, Mexico
Centro de Investigacion en Energa, UNAM, AP 34, Temixco, Mor. 62580, Mexico
E-mail: secuevas@servidor.unam.mx and malopez@servidor.unam.mx
Received 12 June 1999
Abstract. Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) induction devices such as electromagnetic pumps

or electric generators are analysed within the approach of entropy generation. The flow of an
electrically-conducting incompressible fluid in an MHD induction machine is described
through the well known Hartmann model. Irreversibilities in the system due to ohmic
dissipation, flow friction and heat flow are included in the entropy-generation rate. This
quantity is used to define an overall efficiency for the induction machine that considers the
total loss caused by process irreversibility. For an MHD generator working at maximum
power output with walls at constant temperature, an optimum magnetic field strength
(i.e. Hartmann number) is found based on the maximum overall efficiency.

1. Introduction

The optimization and modelling of real devices based on the

entropy-generation minimization method have been widely
investigated in recent years [16]. The main idea behind
this method is to carry out the optimization process with the
physical constraints imposed by the irreversibilities produced
by the operating device. This approach, also known as
second law analysis, has been applied to different devices
such as heat exchangers, power plants and natural convection
systems in enclosures. In most of the analysed fluid-flow
situations, the entropy generation is due to irreversibilities
associated with fluid friction and heat and mass transfer
phenomena. However, to the best of our knowledge,
magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) flow devices have not been
analysed within the framework of entropy generation. In
these systems, in addition to irreversibilities produced by
viscous dissipation and heat and mass transfer, Joule or ohmic
dissipation produced by electric currents circulating in the
electrically conducting fluid have also to be considered. A
wide variety of MHD technologies have been developed in
the second half of the twentieth century. Particularly the
metallurgical industry, and, in general, the materials industry
have obtained benefits in recent years from many successful
applications of the electromagnetic processing of materials
[7, 8]. Electromagnetic pumps, flowmeters and electrical
MHD generators count among the earliest technological
applications of MHD. While MHD pumps and flowmeters are
well-established commercial technologies, MHD generators
have not yet attained the status of a mature technology
and interest in them remains latent [8]. In this paper we
0022-3727/99/202605+04$30.00

1999 IOP Publishing Ltd

apply the entropy-generation approach to the analysis of an

MHD induction device such as an electromagnetic pump or
electrical generator using the well known Hartmann model
[9]. We assume that compressibility effects on the working
fluid are negligible as it is the case in a liquid metal. The
objective of this work is twofold. First, to show with a very
simple example, a methodology for choosing optimal design
parameters, given the operation conditions, that minimize the
total energy loss produced by irreversibilities in this kind of
MHD induction machine. Second, to bring to attention the
potential benefits of applying the second law analysis to the
optimization and modelling of MHD devices.
2. Entropy balance in systems including
irreversible phenomena due to electromagnetic
forces

The general expression for the entropy balance equation in

the case of non-reacting mixtures of n (charged or uncharged)
components in an electromagnetic field in which polarization
phenomena may be neglected, can be written in the form [10]

ds
= Js + S
dt

(1)

where , s, Js and S are the mass density, entropy per

unit mass, entropy flow and the entropy generation rate,
respectively. Equation (1) along with the condition S >
0 represent the local expression for the second law of
thermodynamics. In the case of a viscous, electricallyconducting fluid immersed in an electromagnetic field Js and
2605

H Salas et al

S are given by [10]



n
X
1
Js =
Jq
k Jk
T
k=1

(2)

n
1 X
k
1
Jk T
S = 2 Jq T
T
T k=1
T

1
1
(3)
+ i (E + u B ) : u
T
T
where T and k are the temperature and chemical potential
of component k of the fluid and u, Jk , Jq , i, E , B and
, are the velocity field, diffusion flow of component k,
heat flow, conduction current density, electric field strength,
magnetic field strength and viscous stress tensor, respectively.
Equation (3) shows that the entropy-generation rate, also
known as entropy source strength, contains four different
contributions that produce system irreversibilities. These
contributions arise due to dissipative phenomena of heat
conduction, mass diffusion, electrical conduction and viscous
flow. In our case, we assume that the working fluid
is a monocomponent fluid (i.e. a liquid metal), so that
mass diffusion phenomena are disregarded. The explicit
calculation of S requires additional information given by
the constitutive relations for the fluxes of heat, electric
current and momentum. In the absence of cross-effects,
this information is supplied by the ordinary laws of Fourier,
Ohm and NavierNewton, respectivelywhich offer linear
relations between the fluxes and the gradients or generalized
forces that give rise to the irreversible process, namely,

Jq = T

i = (E + u B )
(4)

= u
where , and , which are assumed to be constants, are
the thermal conductivity, electrical conductivity and dynamic
viscosity of the fluid, respectively.

An MHD electrical generator is a device that converts

mechanical energy into electric power through the interaction
of an electrically-conducting fluid with an applied magnetic
field. Conversely, in an electromagnetic pump the supplied
electric current density interacts with a magnetic field to
generate a force that pushes the fluid. These processes may
take place within a duct of constant rectangular cross section
immersed in an applied magnetic field. The walls transverse
to the field are electrically insulated while those parallel to
the field are conducting walls (electrodes) connected to an
external electrical circuit. In the case of an electric generator,
this geometry corresponds to a continuous electrode Faraday
generator. One of the simplest ways of modelling these MHD
induction devices is through an equivalent circuit approach,
assuming that the working fluid develops a Hartmann velocity
profile [9], which in dimensionless form is given by
cosh M cosh My
M cosh M sinh M

(5)

where u is the velocity component in the axial (x ) direction

normalized by the mean flow velocity Uo , and y is the
2606

where 2 = (T Tw )/Uo2 , C = M(K1) cosh M-K sinh M

and T is the dimensional temperature field. The explicit
dimensionless local entropy-generation rate is then calculated
from the expression

du 2
dy
(7)
where S is normalized by /a 2 and 2w = Tw /Uo2 . The
magnitude of S depends on three parameters, namely, M,
K and 2w . It is clear from (7) that an increase of 2w leads
to a decrease in S . However, in a real device 2w cannot be
set at an arbitrarily large value. One possibility is choosing
2w according to suitable operation conditions. For instance,
if the working fluid is mercury flowing at 2.5 m s1 and
the walls are set at ambient temperature Tw = 293 K, we
have 2w = 2.68 105 . These are conditions that can be
reasonably reached in an experimental device (for instance,
these values are consistent with the ones reported by Branover
et al [12] in an experimental run of the ER-4 system of the
Ben-Gurion University). Figure 1 shows the behaviour of
S as a function of y for M = 20, 2w = 2.68 105 and
K = 0, 0.5 and 1. Evidently, the largest values of S are
reached near the walls where dissipation effects are stronger,
particularly within boundary layers (Hartmann layers) of
O(M 1 ) thickness. Since the walls at y = 1 are insulated,
the electric current circulates through either the boundary
layers or the core of the flow. In contrast with the case when
Joule dissipation is absent [1], the value of S at the centre

S =

3. Entropy generation in the Hartmann model

u (y ) = M

transverse coordinate in the direction of the applied magnetic

field normalized by the distance a, this being half the distance
between
the walls transverse to the field. In addition, M =
Bo a / is the Hartmann number where Bo is the magnetic
field strength. There is only one electric current density
component perpendicular to both the flow velocity and the
applied field. In the Hartmann model the separation distance
between the electrodes (2b) is assumed to be much larger than
the distance between the walls transverse to the field (a  b),
so that the flow does not depend on the z -coordinate. From

Ohms law the current density, normalized by Uo /a, is

given by iz = M(K u ), where the value of the load

factor, K, depends on the external electric circuit conditions.
For an electric generator with a given load resistance, K
values range from zero (short-circuit condition) to one (opencircuit condition). For an electromagnetic pump, the external
circuit includes an external generator and K may take values
greater than one. In this work, we analyse the electric
generator mode of operation, although the analysis of an
electromagnetic pump can be performed in a similar way.
Assuming that the walls transverse to the field are kept at a
constant temperature Tw , the dimensionless temperature field
that results from considering viscous and ohmic dissipation
in a Hartmann flow is [11]
 2
M2
C

2(y ) =
(1 y 2 )
(M cosh M sinh M)2 2
2C
+ (cosh M cosh My )
M

1
(6)
+ (cosh 2M cosh 2My )
4

1
(2 + 2w )2

d2
dy

2

1
1
+
i 2 +
2 + 2w z
2 + 2w

Entropy generation analysis of MHD induction devices

.

s.

0.8

0.003

K=1
K=0.5
K=0

0.6

K=0.25
K=0.5
K=0.75

0.002

0.4
0.001

0.2

0.000
-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

0.0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Figure 1. Dimensionless local entropy-generation rate in the

Hartmann flow as a function of y for short-circuit (K = 0),
open-circuit (K = 1) and maximum power output (K = 0.5)
conditions. M = 20 and 2w = 2.68 105 .

s.

3000

Figure 3. S -based overall efficiency of a Hartmann model MHD

generator as a function of M for different load factor values.

2w = 2.68 105 .

4. S -based overall efficiency

0.9

Assuming an adiabatic process, the overall efficiency of a

compressible MHD generator can be defined as g = actual
work/isentropic work [13]. Therefore, g measures the
departure of the real process from a reversible or constantentropy process. Irreversibilities due to friction, heat transfer
to the walls and Joule dissipation are the main cause of
reduction of g in an MHD generator.
The local static or electrical isotropic efficiency of an
MHD generator is usually defined as [13]

M=50
M=125
M=250

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

e =
0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Figure 2. S -based overall efficiency of a Hartmann model MHD

generator as a function of K for different Hartmann numbers.

2w = 2.68 105 .

of the duct (y = 0) is not zero since Joule dissipation does

not vanish at that point. The limit for non-MHD flow is
obtained when M 0. The lowest and highest values
of S correspond to K = 1 and K = 0, that is to openand short-circuit conditions, respectively. In turn, K = 0.5,
corresponding to the maximum power output condition [9],
leads to intermediate values of the entropy-generation rate.
We note that the presence of symmetric minima in the region
close to the walls is due to the difference between the
(constant) temperature of the walls and the temperature in
the bulk of the fluid. Clearly such minima eventually become
negligible (in the scale of the figure) as the Joule dissipation
is decreased.
The global entropy-generation rate, hS i hS i(M, K,
2w ), is obtained by integrating (7) over the whole volume of
the MHD channel. For a given 2w , the function hS i presents
a monotonic increase (with a minimum at M = K = 0) as
M and K 0, which reflects the simple linear nature
of the Hartmann model.

|i E |
power output
=
.
push power
|(i B ) u |

(8)

In the laboratory system of reference, the term i E is

equal to the rate of Joule dissipation plus the rate of work
done against the retarding force i B . Therefore, (8)
gives the fraction of the mechanical work done by the fluid in
overcoming the magnetic force that is converted into useful
electric power. In order to define an overall efficiency, we
also need to consider, on the one hand, the rate of mechanical
energy required to overcome the friction force as well as the
rate of thermal energy introduced into the system through
the boundary conditions and, on the other, the energy loss
caused by viscous dissipation and heat flow. Therefore, an
alternative definition of an overall or global efficiency of an
MHD generator that takes into account the whole dissipation
produced by irreversibilities in the system, can be established
in terms of the entropy-generation rate, namely,
S = 1

h(2 + 2w )S i
hW i

(9)

where again h i denotes integration over the whole volume

of the MHD duct and W is the net work-transfer rate to the
system that comprises the mechanical work done to overcome
the Lorentz and friction forces, as well as the heat flow due
to the difference between the constant temperature of the
walls and the temperature of the fluid. Definition (9) is
valid for both compressible or incompressible working fluids.
Therefore, it is possible to optimize the operation of the MHD
2607

H Salas et al

generator by maximizing the function S with respect to the

parameters M, K and 2w . As it was previously mentioned,
the value of 2w can be fixed according to suitable operating
conditions. In that case, one possibility is to find the optimum
value of K that minimizes the energy loss (i.e. maximizes
S ) for a given M. The typical behaviour of S as a function
of K for three Hartmann numbers is displayed in figure 2.
However, it appears more interesting to fix the load factor in
the maximum power output value, K = 0.5, and find the M
that maximizes S . Figure 3 shows the overall S -efficiency
as a function of M for 2w = 2.68 105 and three different
values of K, namely, 0.25, 0.5 and 0.75. In this range of load
factors, the maximum efficiency value grows as K increases.
The maximum value of S for the maximum power output
condition (K = 0.5) is obtained for M = 125.
5. Concluding remarks

In this paper we have shown, with a simple example, a way of

applying the entropy-generation analysis for the modelling
and optimization of MHD induction devices. Extending
the approach used for flow problems where electromagnetic
fields and, particularly, electric conduction phenomena are
absent [2], the present analysis relies on a combination of
thermodynamics, heat transfer and magnetohydrodynamics.
Although for this simple case the minimization of S leads to
a trivial condition, it is possible to determine the conditions
that maximize an overall efficiency based on the entropygeneration rate. This is equivalent to finding the conditions of
minimum energy loss. The optimization can then be achieved
by choosing the maximum power output condition and the
Hartmann number that maximizes the overall efficiency.
Evidently, in a real MHD induction device some other
sources of dissipation additional to those considered here may
occur. In order to get a complete device optimization, these
should be taken into account in the entropy-generation rate.
That is the case of end effects in MHD duct flows [13]. These

2608

are related with the tendency of forming eddy-current loops in

the fluid in the region of either entrance or exit of the magnetic
field, which leads to pressure losses and, consequently, to
efficiency reduction.
Acknowledgments

This research was supported by DGAPA-UNAM under

project IN103797 and by CONACYT projects G0044E and
3754P, respectively.
References
[1] Bejan A 1994 Entropy Generation through Heat and Fluid
Flow (New York: Wiley)
[2] Bejan A 1996 J. Appl. Phys. 79 1191
[3] Sahin B, Koda A and Yavuz H 1996 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.
29 1162
[4] Sekulic D P, Campo A and Morales J C 1997 Int. J. Heat
Mass Transfer 40 905
[5] Sahin

A Z 1998 Trans. ASME 120 76

[6] Cheng C Y and Chen C K 1999 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 32
350
[7] Szekely J, Evans J W, Blazek K and El-Kaddah N (eds) 1991
Magnetohydrodynamics in Process Metallurgy
(Warrendale, PA: The Minerals, Metals and Materials
Society)
[8] Branover H and Unger Y (eds) 1993 Metallurgical
Technologies, Energy Conversion, and MHD Flows
(Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics vol 148)
(Washington, DC: AIAA)
[9] Hughes W F and Young F J 1989 Electromagnetodynamics
of Fluids (Florida: Krieger)
[10] De Groot S R and Mazur P 1984 Non-Equilibrium
Thermodynamics (New York: Dover)
[11] Blums E, Mikhailov Yu A and Ozols R 1987 Heat and Mass
Transfer in MHD Flows (Singapore: World Scientific)
[12] Branover H, El-Boher S, Sukoriansky S and Petrick M 1986
Test of liquid metal MHD system Technical Report
Ben-Gurion University, Israel
[13] Rosa R J 1987 Magnetohydrodynamic Energy Conversion
(New York: Hemisphere)