International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 83 (2015) 337344

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhmt

Neural network optimization by comparing the performances of the

training functions -Prediction of heat transfer from horizontal tube
immersed in gassolid uidized bed
L.V. Kamble a,, D.R. Pangavhane b, T.P. Singh c
a
Symbiosis International University, Pune 412115, Maharashtra, India
b
K.J. Somaiya Institute of Engineering and Information Technology, Sion, Mumbai 400022, Maharashtra, India
c
SIT, Symbiosis International University, Pune 412115, Maharashtra, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper describes the selection of training function of an articial neural network (ANN) for modeling
Received 20 August 2014 the heat transfer prediction of horizontal tube immersed in gassolid uidized bed of large particles. The
Received in revised form 20 October 2014 ANN modeling was developed to study the effect of uidizing gas velocity on the average heat transfer
Accepted 27 November 2014
coefcient between uidizing bed and horizontal tube surface. The feed-forward network with back
Available online 23 December 2014
propagation structure implemented using LevenbergMarquardts learning rule in the neural network
approach. The objective of this work is to compare performances of ve training functions (TRAINSCG,
Keywords:
TRAINBFG, TRAINOSS, TRAINLM and TRAINBR) implemented in training neural network for predicting
Articial neural network
Fluidized bed
the heat transfer coefcient. The comparison is shown on the basis of percentage relative error, coef-
Heat transfer coefcient cient of determination, root mean square error and sum of the square error. The predictions by training
Training function function TRAINBR found to be in good agreement with the experiments values.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction tion accuracy. Now a day, computational intelligence is attracting

Fluidized beds nd applications in different industries, such as
the coal combustors, boilers, and furnaces; drying solid particles;
waste heat recovery heat exchangers; etc. In most applications, u-
idized bed consists of a vertically oriented column lled with par-
ticles (small or large), and uid (gas or liquid) pumped upward
through a distributor, at the bottom of the bed [1]. The main char-
acteristics of the uidized bed are its isothermal nature and the
high rate of heat transfer between the uidized bed and the
immersed surface [2]. In case of large particles, heat transfer is
caused by steady state conduction across a gas layer between the
surface and particle and by gas convection, as explained by Rav-
indranath [3]. The heat transfer between gassolid uidized bed
and surface immersed in it consists of three additive parts: particle
convective part, gas convective part and radiative part [4,5]. The
heat transfer coefcient for an immersed surface in a uidized
bed of large particles is mainly controlled by the gas convective
part than the particle convective part [6]. The analysis of perfor-
mance of such thermodynamic systems depends on the computa-
Corresponding author. Mobile: +91 9921512503.
E-mail address: klaxmanv@rediffmail.com (L.V. Kamble).
researchers for solving various engineering problems of nonlinear
nature. The traditional methods for such analysis include using
fundamental equations, employing conventional correlations, or
developing unique designs from experimental data through trial
and error. To overcome this difculty, a simple articial neural net-
work (ANN) method implemented in various heat transfer studies
based on databases available from experimentation. The empirical
models and correlations developed by conventional methods are
complex in nature, difcult to predict nonlinear relationship, less
accurate, and need long computing time. Articial neural network
can provide a platform for solving such thermal processes with
quick and reliable way of predicting their performance. The
changes in the system can continuously be updated easily.
The effect of uidizing velocity on heat transfer coefcient
studied for a horizontal tube immersed in the bed of large parti-
cles such as mustard, raagi and bajara. Experimental results for
heat transfer coefcient between the bed and single horizontal
tube surface is calculated and compared to the theoretical results
by developed correlations in authors previous work [7]. The
experimental data achieved is implemented in ANN predictions.
The other parameters like particle mean diameter, temperature
difference between the bed and tube surface are treated as input
parameters in neural network (NN) modeling. The multilayer

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2014.11.085
0017-9310/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
338 L.V. Kamble et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 83 (2015) 337344
Nomenclature
a network output
At tube surface area (m2)
dp particle mean diameter (m)
gk current gradient.
h average heat transfer coefcient (W/m2 K)
I electric current (A)
k kth data point
kg thermal conductivity of air (W/mK)
N number of data points
Nu Nusselt number, hdp/kg
Q heat input (W)
R coefcient of correlation
R2 coefcient of determination
perceptron (MLP) developed by Rosenblatt is the popular network
in many heat transfer applications [810]. The MLP consists of
several articial neurons arranged in two or more layers. The
neurons are information-processing elements that are fundamen-
tal for MLP operation. The inputs of each neuron added and the
result is transformed by an activation function that serves to limit
the threshold of the neuron output. The output of each neuron is
multiplied by a weight of concern neuron, before being input to
every neuron in the following layer. The network adapts changing
the weight by an amount proportional to the difference between
the desired output and the actual output. The process of weight
updating is called learning or training. The training process is
achieved by applying a back propagation (BP) procedure. There
are several training algorithms using BP procedure [1118], with
individual advantages, such as calculation rate, requirements of
computation and storage. Boniecki et al. [19] developed neural
model to predict ammonia emission from the composted sewage
sludge. For all of the selected models, the correlation coefcient
reached the high values of 0.9720.981. The neural models devel-
oped by Boniecki et al. [20] to forecast the cows milk yield
proved to be the best predictive tool and optimized with the con-
jugate gradients algorithm. The sensitivity analysis performed for
input variables in network decides the dominant input variable in
the developed network. Krzywanski and Nowak [21] developed a
model to predict local heat transfer coefcient in the combustion
chamber of the circulating uidized bed boiler by ANN approach.
It is shown that neural networks gives quick and accurate results
to the input patterns provided as compared to the numerical
models developed previously. Neural network based heat convec-
tion algorithm was successfully implemented by Zang and
Haghighat [22] to predict local average Nusselt numbers along
the duct surfaces. This algorithm was also integrated with a
transient three-dimensional heat transfer model based on nite
element analysis of heat conduction to develop a new thermal
modeling method for heat exchanger.
It is noted that no single algorithm suits best to all the prob-
lems. The performance of each algorithm depends on the process
to model, the learning sample and training mode. The success of
modeling NN depends on selecting the training function. The aim
of this work is to study training algorithms selected in the study
that use the BP procedure to optimize an ANN modeling. At rst
the experimental setup is described, and then ANN model and
training algorithms implemented in the study are explained. In this
work, authors are comparing the performance of ve training
functions TRAINSCG, TRAINBFG, TRAINOSS, TRAINLM and TRAINBR
based on percentage relative error, root mean square error (RMSE),
coefcient of determination (R2) and sum of square because of
error (SSE).
T temperature (K)
Tb temperature of bed (K)
to target output
Tt temperature of tube surface (K)
u supercial uidization velocity (m/s)
V electric voltage (V)
Xk vector of current weights and biases
Greek symbols
ak learning rate
DP pressure drop (N/m2)
DT temperature difference between bed and immersed sur-
face (K)
2. Materials and procedure
2.1. Experimental set up
The schematic diagram of experiments set up shown in Fig. 1,
consists of a rectangular uidized column that is 0.1 m  0.15 m
in cross section and 0.4 m height, with a horizontal brass tube
installed at a height of 100 mm from the distributor plate. The
air was used as a uidizing gas at atmospheric pressure. The qual-
ity of uidization improved by providing tapered diffuser and ple-
num section, thus minimizing the acceleration effects because of
the high ow rate. The setup was instrumented for measuring
the bed temperature, surface temperature of heat transfer tube,
air ow rate and electrical energy supplied to the tube. The parti-
cles chosen were mustard, raagi and bajara of diameter, 1.8 mm,
1.4 mm and 2.0 mm respectively. Drying these food grains using
uidized bed is one of the growing areas where much investigation
can be carried out by using ANN modeling. The static bed height
was 150 mm and the duct supported by a perforated distributor
plate 4 mm thick at the bottom, which consisted of many small
holes. A stainless steel screen with the mesh was placed above
the distributor to gain more homogeneous distribution of the gas
ow. The heat transfer tube was 110 mm in length and its outer
diameter was 27.5 mm. The cartridge heater inserted inside the
bare single tube, and the heat input to the tube was controlled
by a variable direct current power supply. The heat input was
determined by measuring voltage (V) and current (I). The temper-
ature of the bed measured at three different heights in the bed,
while two thermocouples were mounted on tube surface at equal
distance to measure tube surface temperature. The pressure
difference across the bed was measured by using a water
tube manometer. A constant heat input of 52.2 W was main-
tained throughout the experiment. The plenum chamber was
made up of 1.5 mm thick mild steel plate and was xed to a
ange at its top end to accommodate the distributor plate. A cen-
trifugal blower of 0.75 kW capacities provided the air for
uidization.
2.2. Experimental heat transfer coefcient
The experimental heat transfer coefcient h (W/m2 K) was cal-
culated from simple relation of heat energy supplied:
Q hAt T t  T b 1
where Q was the measured tube heat input (W), At is surface area
of tube (m2), Tt is tube surface temperature (K) and Tb is bed
temperature (K).
 L.V. Kamble et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 83 (2015) 337344
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of experimental set-up.
2.3. Architecture of neural network
In this study a multilayer feed-forward ANN model [12] has
been developed. The schematic diagram of NN model selected for
the current study is shown in Fig. 2. The network consists of an
input layer with three neurons (particle diameter dp (mm), uid-
izing velocity u(m/s) and temperature difference between bed and
tube surface DT (K)), an output layer of two neurons (heat transfer
coefcient h (W/m2 K) and Nusselt number Nu), and hidden layer
of ve neurons. The activation function is, tansig, in the hidden
layer whereas, purelin, is in output layer with TRAINLM training
algorithm.
2.4. Training algorithms
There are different BP training algorithms in MATLAB ANN tool-
box [23]. In this study, training and validation steps were carried
out for each of the ve different training functions (Table 1).
The categories of fast algorithms use standard numerical
optimization techniques such as conjugate gradient (TRAINSCG)
[24,25], quasi-Newton (TRAINBFG, TRAINOSS), [26] and Leven-
bergMarquardt (TRAINLM), [27,28]. The other conjugate gradient
Fig. 2. Articial neural network structure in the study.
339
algorithms require line search at each iteration which is computa-
tionally expensive. Hence the scaled conjugate gradient algorithm
(TRAINSCG), developed by Moller was designed to avoid the
time-consuming line search. The basic calculation step of the
quasi-Newton methods, (Eq. (2)), converges faster than the conju-
gate gradient method, but it requires the calculation of the Hessian
matrix, A1
k , of the performance index at the current values of
weights and biases. This calculation is complex and expensive to
perform.
X k1 X k  A1
k :g k 2
The Broyden, Fletcher, Goldfarb, and Shano (TRAINBFG) updating
method and the LevenbergMarquardt (TRAINLM) algorithms avoid
this difculty because they update an approximate Hessian matrix
at each iteration of the algorithm. LevenbergMarquardt algorithm
was designed to approach second-order training speed without
having to compute the Hessian matrix. If the performance function
has the form of a sum of squares, then the Hessian matrix can be
approximated as
H JT J 3
and the gradient can be computed as
g JT e 4
where J is the Jacobian matrix that contains rst derivatives of the
network errors with respect to the weights and biases, and e is a
vector of network errors. The Jacobian matrix can be computed
through a standard BP technique that is much less complex
than computing the Hessian matrix. The LevenbergMarquardt
algorithm uses this approximation to the Hessian matrix in the
following Newton-like update:
h i1
X k1 X k  J T J lI J T e 5
When the scalar l is zero, this is just Newtons method, using the
approximate Hessian matrix. When l is large, this becomes gradi-
ent descent with a small step size. Newtons method is faster and
more accurate near an error minimum, so the aim is to shift
towards Newtons method as quickly as possible. Thus, l
is decreased after each successful step that is reduction in
340 L.V. Kamble et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 83 (2015) 337344

Table 1
The description of selected training algorithms for the study.

Training Function Description

TRAINSCG scaled conjugate gradient BP [24,25] The only conjugate gradient algorithm that requires no line search. Very good general-purpose training algorithm
TRAINBFG BFGS quasi-Newton BP [26] It requires storage of approximate Hessian matrix and has more computation in each iteration than conjugate
gradient algorithms, but it usually converges in fewer iterations
TRAINOSS One-step secant BP [26] Compromise between conjugate gradient methods and quasi-Newton methods
TRAINLM LevenbergMarquardt BP [27,28] It is the fastest training algorithm for networks of moderate size. It has memory reduction feature for use when
the training set is large
TRAINBR Bayesian regularization [29] Modication of the LevenbergMarquardt training algorithm to produce networks that generalizes well. It
reduces the difculty of determining the optimum network architecture

Table 2
Experimental conditions of training and testing data.

Variable Training range Testing range

Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
Fluidizing velocity (m/s) 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.3
Particle diameter (mm) 1.4 2.0 1.4 2.0
Temperature difference (K) 75.5 121.35 73.5 106.46
Heat transfer coefcient (W/m2K) 49.79 80.02 56.75 82.2
Nusselt number 3.094 5.3845 3.604 5.5312

performance function and is increased only when a tentative step
would increase the performance function. In this way, the perfor-
mance function will always be reduced at each iteration of the algo-
rithm. The one-step secant (TRAINOSS) method is an improvement
of the TRAINBFG method because it decreases the storage and com-
putation in each iteration. The TRAINOSS method does not store the
complete Hessian matrix; it assumes that the previous Hessian
matrix was the identity matrix. This function has additional advan-
tage that the new search direction can be calculated without com-
puting a matrix inverse. The Bayesian regularization (TRAINBR),
[2931] method improves the ANN generalization. In this method
the weights and biases of the network are assumed to be random
variables with specied distributions. The regularization parame-
ters are related to the unknown variances associated with these dis-
tributions. This method involves modication of the performance
index. The performance index for the Bayesian regularization
method is given by Eq. (6);
F b  Ed a  Ew
where a and b are parameters to be optimized, Ed is the mean
sum of the squared network errors, and Ew is the sum of the
squares of the network weights. One feature of this algorithm is that
it provides a measure of how many network parameters (weights
and biases) are being effectively utilized by the network.
2.5. Methodology
The supervised training, in which a network is trained for a par-
ticular set of inputs to produce the desired outputs, was imple-
mented in this study. Initially, the weights of input vectors and
bias were chosen randomly; however, the weights, subsequently,
were adjusted to minimize the network performance function
i.e., mean square error (MSE) with performance level 1  105.
The training was considered as completed when the NN reached
user dened performance level. The network weights have been
updated using the BP algorithm as implemented by Sahoo et al.
[14]. The published literature [1315] on the implementation of
NN modeling implies that the BP learning technique is popular
and provides results with high accuracy. In this technique it uses
a gradient descent algorithm in which it updates the network
weights and biases in the direction in which the performance func-
tion decreases most rapidly (i.e. along the negative of the gradient).
X k1 X k  ak  g k
Xk is vector of current weights and biases, ak is learning rate and
gk is current gradient. The learning rate in training the network
was set at 0.5. Initially the TRAINLM algorithm was chosen for the
network training [13]. The training data sets have been fed for a
maximum of 2000 epochs until the MSE was below a performance
goal set. The weights and biases have been updated only after the
entire training set has been applied to the network. The readings
of input and output achieved during experimentation have been
utilized for the training and testing of the network. The network
was trained with 75 data sets (70% of data) and tested with 30 data
sets (30% of data) hence in all 105 data sets were taken in NN mod-
eling. The post-training analysis has been performed with a regres-
sion analysis between the network response and the corresponding
target. The resulting correlation coefcient (R-value) between the
ANN outputs and the targets decides the measure of the perfor-
mance of the network. In order to obtain the optimum number of
neurons in a hidden layer, the ANN model was trained with a vary-
ing number of neurons with the tansig transfer function and TRAIN-
6
LM algorithm. The maximum neurons checked were 15, starting
with a minimum of one neuron and then increasing the network
size in steps by adding a neuron every time. Based on the results,
the minimum error found at ve numbers of neurons hence
selected. This is an optimum topology obtained in authors previous
work [7]. The experimental and predicted values of the heat transfer
coefcient and Nusselt number match with a high level of accuracy.
X 2
MSE 1=N t o k  ak ; 1  k  N 8
where a is network output, to be target output and N is number
of data points. The experimental conditions are listed in Table 2.
3. Results and discussion
Initially the network was trained using TRAINLM training func-
tion. The optimum number of hidden neurons found to be ve
hence this topology is nalized for the study. Then the network
was trained with other training functions TRAINSCG, TRAINBFG,
TRAINOSS, and TRAINBR keeping all other network parameters
same as that of TRAINLM for comparison purpose. The training
was continued till the least value of MSE at denite value of epochs
attained, as represented in Figs. 37. These gures are the perfor-
mance plots (learning curves) of the mean square error value ver-
7 sus the number of iterations (epochs). The curves start from a large
 L.V. Kamble et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 83 (2015) 337344 341

Fig. 3. Performance graph (TRAINSCG). Fig. 5. Performance graph (TRAINOSS).

Fig. 4. Performance graph (TRAINBFG). Fig. 6. Performance graph (TRAINLM).

value of estimated error determined by initial conditions, then

decreases at some rate depending on the type of training algorithm
implemented and nally converges to a steady state value. The X-
axis explains the number of iterations in which the performance
goal (MSE) is achieved. These result plots represent different train-
ing functions for the same input and output data. Fig. 7 is the per-
formance curve for the TRAINBR function which explains the best
combination of sum of square error and sum of square weights
additionally as compared to other training function plots. The per-
formance goal is achieved in 40 epochs and optimized network is
developed with sum of square error as 9.3023  106 and sum of
square weight as 10.5848. The effective number of network param-
eters (weights and biases) found to be 24.5361 which have been
effectively utilized by the network. The percentage relative error
of heat transfer coefcient values obtained from the neural net-
work with respect to experimental values is provided in Table 3.
The percentage relative error is least for the TRAINBR function as
compared to other training functions; it is in the range of
0.0006% to 0.1267%. The output values of Nusselt number are
not included as it will represent the same nature as that of heat
transfer coefcient. Fig. 7. Performance graph (TRAINBR).
342 L.V. Kamble et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 83 (2015) 337344

Table 3
Comparative % relative error of heat transfer coefcient by ve ANN training functions with the experimental values.

h (W/m2 K) EXP. % Relative error (TRAINBFG) % Relative error (TRAINBR) % Relative error (TRAINSCG) % Relative error (TRAINLM) % Relative error (TRAINOSS)
69.44 0.0012 0.0006 0.0317 0.0168 0.0324
72.98 0.0711 0.0071 0.1000 0.0034 0.1150
74.13 0.0169 0.0134 0.0113 0.0179 0.0357
77.24 0.0676 0.0243 0.0496 0.0721 0.0548
80.02 0.0266 0.0191 0.0211 0.0017 0.0126
82.20 0.1601 0.1178 0.1432 0.1265 0.0517
80.98 0.2670 0.0293 0.0606 0.1345 0.9190
59.13 0.0957 0.0029 0.0754 0.0391 0.0472
62.82 0.1192 0.0060 0.0855 0.0178 0.0508
64.56 0.0074 0.0015 0.0127 0.0384 0.0002
66.27 0.0548 0.0047 0.0398 0.0189 0.0361
68.23 0.0186 0.0084 0.0355 0.0438 0.0214
70.98 0.0962 0.1267 0.1817 0.0183 0.4527
68.87 2.8033 0.0713 2.8128 0.1737 1.4204
49.79 0.0135 0.0112 0.0044 0.0135 0.0024
53.86 0.0106 0.0267 0.0015 0.0063 0.0212
54.67 0.0461 0.0132 0.0649 0.0739 0.1057
56.46 0.1498 0.0096 0.1196 0.0466 0.1018
57.00 0.0423 0.0139 0.0560 0.0165 0.0502
57.81 0.0751 0.0737 0.0765 0.2572 0.3261
56.75 0.1080 0.1225 0.1570 0.0818 1.2268

Fig. 8. Regression analysis of TRAINBR for training data. Fig. 10. Regression analysis of TRAINBFG for testing data.

Fig. 9. Regression analysis of TRAINBR for testing data. Fig. 11. Regression analysis of TRAINSCG for testing data.

The validation of the training function is performed by execut-
ing regression analysis (post-training analysis) between network
response and corresponding targets. All the training functions have
achieved the value of R2 as unity for training data whereas the
function TRAINBR has achieved value of R2 as unity for testing data
also (Figs. 8 and 9).
The coefcient of determination values for testing data for func-
tions TRAINBFG, TRAINSCG, TRAINLM and TRAINOSS have achieved
the values 0.995, 0.995, 0.999 and 0.998, respectively with inferior
performance than TRAINBR as shown in Figs. 1013.
The values of RMSE, SSE, and R2 are presented in Table 4.
After analyzing all the results, TRAINBR function has shown better
 L.V. Kamble et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 83 (2015) 337344 343

gassolid uidized bed of large particles. The selected feed-forward

NN with BP structure and TRAINBR training function is a good tool
for modeling uidized bed heat transfer studies.

Abbreviations

ANN articial neural network

BP back propagation
MLP multilayer perceptron
MSE mean square error
NN neural network
RMSE root mean square error
SSE sum of square error
SSW sum of square weight

Fig. 12. Regression analysis of TRAINLM for testing data. Conict of interest

None declared.

References

[1] L.S. Tsimring, R. Ramaswamy, P. Sherman, Dynamics of a shallow uidized bed,

Am. Phys. Soc. 60 (6) (1999) 71267130.
[2] M. Rhodes, Fluidization of Particles by Fluids, Monash University, Melbourne,
Australia, 2001.
[3] G. Ravindranath, Heat transfer studies of single bare tube and bare tube
bundles in a gassolid uidized bed (Ph.D. thesis), University BDT COE
Davanagere, India, 2008.
[4] K.M. Wagialla, S.S. Elnashaie, A.H. Fakeeha, Review on heat transfer in gas solid
uidized beds, J. King Saud Univ. Eng. Sci. 2 (1990) 331346.
[5] S. Deshmukh, S. Volkers, M. Annaland, H. Kuipers, Heat transfer in a membrane
assisted bubbling uidized with immersed horizontal tubes, Int. J. Chem.
Reactor Eng. 3 (A1) (2005) 116.
[6] S.C. Saxena, V.L. Ganzha, Heat transfer to immersed surfaces in gas-uidized
beds of large particles and powder characterization, Powder Technol. 39
(1984) 199208.
[7] L.V. Kamble, D.R. Pangavhane, T.P. Singh, Experimental investigation of
horizontal tube immersed in gassolid uidized bed of large particles using
articial neural network, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 70 (2014) 719724.
Fig. 13. Regression analysis of TRAINOSS for testing data.
[8] G. Diaz, M. Sen, K.T. Yang, R.L. McClain, Dynamic prediction and control of heat
exchangers using articial neural networks, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 44
(2001) 16711679.
[9] S.A. Kalogirou, Applications of articial neural-networks for energy systems,
Table 4 Appl. Energy 67 (2000) 1735.
List of various errors obtained for training and testing data of ve functions with the [10] M.Y. Raq, G. Bugmann, D.J. Easterbrook, Neural network design for
trained network. engineering applications, Comput. Struct. 79 (2001) 15411552.
[11] G.N. Xie, Q.W. Wang, M. Zeng, L.Q. Luo, Heat transfer analysis for shell and
Training R2 RMSE SSE tube heat exchangers with experimental data by ANN approach, Appl. Therm.
function Eng. 27 (2007) 10961104.
Training Testing Training Testing Training Testing
[12] C.K. Tan, J. Ward, S.J. Wilcox, R. Payne, Articial neural network modeling of
TRAINBFG 0.999979 0.99360 0.040657 0.7959882 0.02480 3.80158 the thermal performance of a compact heat exchanger, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29
TRAINBR 0.999999 0.99995 0.008776 0.0671686 0.00116 0.02707 (2009) 36093617.
TRAINSCG 0.999983 0.99361 0.037146 0.7953554 0.02070 3.79554 [13] M. Hayati, T. Youse, M. Ashjaee, A. Hamidi, Y. Shirvany, Application of
TRAINLM 0.999993 0.99989 0.023405 0.1011707 0.00822 0.06141 articial neural networks for prediction of natural convection heat transfer
TRAINOSS 0.999983 0.99640 0.036802 0.596654 0.02032 2.13598 from a conned horizontal elliptic tube, World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 28
(2007) 269274.
[14] A. Sahoo, G.K. Roy, Articial neural network approach to segregation
characteristic of binary homogeneous mixtures in promoted gas solid
uidized beds, J. Powder Technol. 171 (1) (2007) 5462.
performance as compared to other four training functions which [15] L. Momenzadeh, A. Zomorodian, D. Mowla, Applying articial neural network
have been included in this modeling. for drying time prediction of green pea in microwave-assisted uidized bed
dryer, J. Agric. Sci. Tech. 14 (2012) 513522.
[16] M. Rajasimman, L. Govindarajan, C. Karthikeyan, Articial neural network
modeling of an inverse uidized bed bioreactor, J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manage.
4. Conclusion 11 (2) (2007) 6569.
[17] A. Kumar, G.K. Roy, Articial neural network based prediction of bed
The results obtained show that the training algorithm chosen expansion ratio in gassolid uidized beds with disk and blade promoters,
IE (I) J. 85 (2004) 1216.
during ANN training has a signicant inuence on the ANN predic- [18] M. Kharaajoo, B.N. Araabi, Neural network based predictive control of a heat
tions. The training function TRAINBR is the most suitable function exchanger nonlinear process, J. Electr. Electron. Eng. 4 (2) (2004) 12191226.
with the experimental data of heat transfer coefcient among the [19] P. Boniecki, J. Dach, K. Pilarski, H. Piekarska-Boniecka, Articial neural
networks for modeling ammonia emissions released from sewage sludge
ve functions which has been selected for the analysis. Next to
composting, Atmos. Environ. 57 (2012) 4954.
TRAINBR, the training function TRAINLM found to be good in per- [20] P. Boniecki, M. Lipinski, K. Koszela, J. Przybyl, Neural prediction of cows milk
formance whereas TRAINBFG found to be least in performance yield according to environment temperature, Afr. J. Biotechnol. 12 (29) (2013)
among all the ve training functions. This work will help research- 47074712.
[21] J. Krzywanski, W. Nowak, Modeling of heat transfer coefcient in the furnace
ers in the selection of training function during the modeling of the of CFB boilers by articial neural network approach, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer
NN for heat transfer prediction of horizontal tube immersed in 55 (2012) 42464253.
344 L.V. Kamble et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 83 (2015) 337344
[22] J. Zhang, F. Haghighat, Development of articial neural network based heat
convection for thermal simulation of large rectangular cross-sectional area
earth-to-earth heat exchanges, Energy Build. 42 (4) (2010) 435440.
[23] H. Demuth, M. Beale, M.T. Hagan, Neural Network Toolbox for Use with
MATLAB, Neural Network Toolbox Users Guide, The Math Works Inc., Natick,
MA, 2005.
[24] M.T. Hagan, H.B. Demuth, M.H. Beale, Neural Network Design, PWS Publishing,
Boston, MA, 1996.
[25] M.F. Moller, A scaled conjugate gradient algorithm for fast supervised learning,
Neural Networks 6 (1983) 525533.
[26] J.E. Dennis, R.B. Schanabel, Numerical Methods for Unconstrained
Optimization and Nonlinear Equations, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
1983.
[27] F.D. Foresee, M.T. Hagan, GaussNewton approximation to Bayesian
regularization, in: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on
Neural Networks, IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, 1997, pp. 19301935.
[28] M.T. Hagan, M. Menhaj, Training feed forward networks with the Marquardt
algorithm, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 5 (1994) 989993.
[29] D.J.C. Markay, Bayesian interpolation, Neural Comput. 4 (1992) 415447.
[30] J.S. Torrecilla, J.M. Aragon, M.C. Palancar, Optimization of an articial neural
network by selecting the training function application to olive oil mills
waste, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47 (2008) 70727080.
[31] D.V. Singh, G. Maheshwari, R. Shrivastav, D.K. Mishra, Neural network
comparing the performances of the training functions for predicting the value
of specic heat of refrigerant in vapor absorption refrigeration system, Int. J.
Comput. Appl. 18 (4) (2011) 15.