Optimization of Energy Efficiency in Mechanical Engineering Systems: A Comprehensive Multi-Scale Review and Engineering Framework

Optimization of energy efficiency in mechanical engineering systems has progressed from isolated component tuning to a multi-scale engineering problem that links equipment design, operating-condition selection, and computational decision-making. This review synthesizes literature across pumps, compressors, turbines, heat exchangers, boilers, and motors, emphasizing practical interventions such as variable speed drives, advanced materials, surface modification, and improved lubrication. It further evaluates classical mathematical optimization methods, including Linear Programming, Nonlinear Programming, and Dynamic Programming, alongside metaheuristic strategies such as Genetic Algorithm, Particle Swarm Optimization, Simulated Annealing, and Ant Colony Optimization. Recent review literature shows that optimization is increasingly treated as an integrated process-systems problem, with AI-assisted and hybrid modeling approaches expanding the scope of feasible solutions. 1 Representative application studies demonstrate that nonlinear surrogate-based optimization can successfully minimize cost or emissions in industrial energy systems, that thermal–mechanical compression can outperform single-cycle alternatives in high-temperature heat upgrading, and that modified PSO variants can improve solution quality in constrained mechanical design problems. 254 Recent multiscale optimization work also shows that fast-converging PSO frameworks can improve both energy consumption and output efficiency in complex engineering systems. 6 The evidence indicates that optimization gains depend on problem structure, constraint severity, and implementation realism rather than on algorithmic novelty alone. The main lacunae are fragmentation between physical and computational interventions, limited benchmarking across domains, weak reporting of deployment feasibility, and insufficient integration of robustness and lifecycle metrics. To address these gaps, the review proposes a unified engineering framework for selecting optimization strategies according to system complexity, data availability, objective structure, and industrial applicability.

Energy efficiency; mechanical engineering systems; exergy; optimization

1. E. N. Pistikopoulos and Y. Tian, “Advanced Modeling and Optimization Strategies for Process Synthesis,” Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng., vol. 15, pp. 81–103, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Q. Chen and I. E. Grossmann, “Recent developments and challenges in optimization-based process synthesis,” Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng., vol. 8, pp. 249–283, 2017. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. E. N. Pistikopoulos et al., “Process systems engineering—the generation next?,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 147, p. 107252, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. P. Daoutidis and Q. Zhang, “From Amundson, Aris, and Sargent to the future of process systems engineering,” Chem. Eng. Res. Des., vol. 188, pp. 704–713, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. L. Mencarelli, Q. Chen, A. Pagot, and I. E. Grossmann, “A review on superstructure optimization approaches in process system engineering,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 136, p. 106808, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. J. Ryu, L. Kong, A. E. P. de Lima, and C. T. Maravelias, “A generalized superstructure-based framework for process synthesis,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 133, p. 106653, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. C. D. Demirhan, W. W. Tso, J. B. Powell, and E. N. Pistikopoulos, “A multi-scale energy systems engineering approach towards integrated multi-product network optimization,” Appl. Energy, vol. 281, p. 116020, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. A. Bhosekar and M. Ierapetritou, “Advances in surrogate based modeling, feasibility analysis, and optimization: a review,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 108, pp. 250–267, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. L. T. Biegler, “New directions for nonlinear process optimization,” Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng., vol. 21, pp. 32–40, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. J. Kronqvist, D. E. Bernal, A. Lundell, and I. E. Grossmann, “A review and comparison of solvers for convex MINLP,” Optim. Eng., vol. 20, pp. 397–455, 2019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. M. Locatelli and F. Schoen, “(Global) optimization: historical notes and recent developments,” EURO J. Comput. Optim., vol. 9, p. 100012, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. N. V. Sahinidis, “Optimization under uncertainty: state-of-the-art and opportunities,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 28, pp. 971–983, 2004. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. C. Li and I. E. Grossmann, “A review of stochastic programming methods for optimization of process systems under uncertainty,” Front. Chem. Eng., vol. 2, p. 34, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. J. J. Torres, C. Li, R. M. Apap, and I. E. Grossmann, “A review on the performance of linear and mixed integer two-stage stochastic programming software,” Algorithms, vol. 15, no. 4, p. 103, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Y. Zeng, Y. Cai, G. Huang, and J. Dai, “A review on optimization modeling of energy systems planning and GHG emission mitigation under uncertainty,” Energies, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 1624–1656, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Y. P. Cai, G. H. Huang, and Q. Tan, “Optimal planning of energy management systems under multiple uncertainties,” Appl. Energy, vol. 86, pp. 480–495, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Y. P. Cai, G. H. Huang, Q. G. Lin, X. H. Nie, and Q. Tan, “An optimization-model-based interactive decision support system for regional energy management systems planning under uncertainty,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 36, pp. 3470–3482, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Y. P. Cai, G. H. Huang, Q. Tan, and Z. F. Yang, “Planning of community-scale renewable energy management systems in mixed stochastic and fuzzy environment,” Renew. Energy, vol. 34, pp. 1833–1847, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Y. P. Cai, G. H. Huang, Q. Tan, and Z. F. Yang, “An integrated approach for climate-change impact analysis and adaptation planning under multi-level uncertainties—Part I: Methodology,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 15, pp. 2779–2790, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Y. P. Cai, G. H. Huang, Q. Tan, and L. Liu, “An integrated approach for climate-change impact analysis and adaptation planning under multi-level uncertainties—Part II: Case study,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 15, pp. 3051–3073, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. G. C. Li, G. H. Huang, Q. G. Lin, X. D. Zhang, Q. Tan, and Y. M. Chen, “Development of a GHG-mitigation oriented inexact dynamic model for regional energy system management,” Energy, vol. 36, pp. 3388–3398, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Y. P. Li and G. H. Huang, “Optimization of regional economic and environmental systems under fuzzy and random uncertainties,” J. Environ. Manag., vol. 92, pp. 2010–2020, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. J. A. Rong and R. Lahdelma, “An efficient linear programming model and optimization algorithm for trigeneration,” Appl. Energy, vol. 82, pp. 40–63, 2004. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. J. A. Rong and R. Lahdelma, “An effective heuristic for combined heat-and-power production planning with power ramp constraints,” Appl. Energy, vol. 84, pp. 317–325, 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. J. Bujak, “Optimal control of energy losses in multi-boiler steam systems,” Energy, vol. 34, pp. 1260–1270, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. K. F. Fong, V. I. Hanby, and T. T. Chow, “System optimization for HVAC energy management using the robust evolutionary algorithm,” Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 29, pp. 2327–2334, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. K. T. Chaturvedi, M. Pandit, and L. Srivastava, “Particle swarm optimization with time varying acceleration coefficients for non-convex economic power dispatch,” Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 31, pp. 249–257, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. R. Dufo-López, J. L. Bernal-Agustín, and J. Contreras, “Optimization of control strategies for stand-alone renewable energy systems with hydrogen storage,” Renew. Energy, vol. 32, pp. 1102–1126, 2007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. J. L. Bernal-Agustín and R. Dufo-López, “Simulation and optimization of stand-alone hybrid renewable energy systems,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 13, pp. 2111–2118, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. H. Morais, P. Kádár, P. Faria, Z. A. Vale, and H. M. Khodr, “Optimal scheduling of a renewable micro-grid in an isolated load area using mixed-integer linear programming,” Renew. Energy, vol. 35, pp. 151–156, 2010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. N. Ben Guedria, “Improved accelerated PSO algorithm for mechanical engineering optimization problems,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 40, pp. 455–467, 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. C. Armatis, P. Sabharwall, and B. M. Fronk, “Evaluation of Mechanical and Thermomechanical Water Vapor Compression Techniques for Enabling High Temperature Lift Hydration-Based Chemical Heat Pumps,” J. Energy Res. Technol. Part A, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 011703, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. M. Kılıç, “Evaluation of Combined Thermal–Mechanical Compression Systems: A Review for Energy Efficient Sustainable Cooling,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 21, p. 13724, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. J. V. M. Walden et al., “Nonlinear operational optimization of an industrial power-to-heat system with a high temperature heat pump, a thermal energy storage and wind energy,” Appl. Energy, vol. 344, p. 121247, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. “A Novel Swarm Exploring Varying Parameter Recurrent Neural Network for Solving Non-Convex Nonlinear Programming,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst., 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. A. Lee et al., “The IDAES process modeling framework and model library—flexibility for process simulation and optimization,” J. Adv. Manuf. Proc., vol. 3, no. 3, p. e10095, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. F. Ceccon et al., “OMLT: optimization & machine learning toolkit,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 23, pp. 15829–15836, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. W. Bradley et al., “Perspectives on the integration between first-principles and data-driven modeling,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 166, p. 107898, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Y. Chen and M. Ierapetritou, “A framework of hybrid model development with identification of plant-model mismatch,” AIChE J., vol. 66, no. 10, p. e16996, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. S. Mohammadi and S. Cremaschi, “A new approach to building surrogate models of high-fidelity stochastic simulations: PARIN (PARameter as INput-variable),” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 176, p. 108315, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Z. T. Wilson and N. V. Sahinidis, “The ALAMO approach to machine learning,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 106, pp. 785–795, 2017. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. S. H. Kim and F. Boukouvala, “Machine learning-based surrogate modeling for data-driven optimization: a comparison of subset selection for regression techniques,” Optim. Lett., vol. 14, pp. 989–1010, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. M. Raissi, P. Perdikaris, and G. E. Karniadakis, “Physics-informed neural networks: a deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations,” J. Comput. Phys., vol. 378, pp. 686–707, 2019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. A. M. Biegler and V. M. Zavala, “Large-scale nonlinear programming using IPOPT: an integrating framework for enterprise-wide dynamic optimization,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 33, pp. 575–582, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. M. A. Drud, “CONOPT: a GRG code for large sparse dynamic nonlinear optimization problems,” Math. Program., vol. 31, pp. 153–191, 1985. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. P. E. Gill, W. Murray, and M. A. Saunders, “SNOPT: an SQP algorithm for large-scale constrained optimization,” SIAM Rev., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 99–131, 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. C. N. Li and I. E. Grossmann, “A review of stochastic programming methods for optimization of process systems under uncertainty,” Front. Chem. Eng., vol. 2, p. 34, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. P. Pistikopoulos, M. Diangelakis, R. Oberdieck, M. Papathanasiou, I. Nascu, and M. Sun, “PAROC—an integrated framework and software platform for the optimisation and advanced model-based control of process systems,” Chem. Eng. Sci., vol. 136, pp. 115–138, 2015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. I. E. Grossmann, “Review of nonlinear mixed-integer and disjunctive programming techniques,” Optim. Eng., vol. 3, pp. 227–252, 2002. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. C. M. Bazaraa, H. D. Sherali, and C. M. Shetty, Nonlinear Programming: Theory and Algorithms, 3rd ed. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. M. B. Rien et al., Linear Programming and Network Flows, 4th ed. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. R. E. Bellman and L. A. Zadeh, “Decision making in a fuzzy environment,” Manage. Sci., vol. 17, pp. 141–164, 1970. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. H. J. Zimmermann, “Applications of fuzzy sets theory to mathematical programming,” Inf. Sci., vol. 36, pp. 29–58, 1985. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. H. Tanaka, T. Okuda, and K. Asai, “On fuzzy mathematical programming,” J. Cybern., vol. 3, pp. 37–46, 1974. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. D. Dubois and H. Prade, “Systems of linear fuzzy constraints,” Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 3, pp. 37–48, 1980. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. A. Charnes, W. W. Cooper, and G. H. Symonds, “Cost horizons and certainty equivalents: an approach to stochastic programming of heating oil,” Manage. Sci., vol. 4, pp. 235–263, 1958. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. R. K. Ahuja, T. L. Magnanti, and J. B. Orlin, Network Flows: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall, 1993. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. R. Eberhart and J. Kennedy, “A new optimizer using particle swarm theory,” in Proc. 6th Int. Symp. Micro Machine Hum. Sci., 1995, pp. 39–43. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. J. H. Holland, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. Ann Arbor, MI, USA: Univ. of Michigan Press, 1975. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. D. E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Reading, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley, 1989. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gelatt, and M. P. Vecchi, “Optimization by simulated annealing,” Science, vol. 220, no. 4598, pp. 671–680, 1983. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. M. Dorigo and T. Stützle, Ant Colony Optimization. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 2004. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. C. A. Coello Coello, “Use of a self-adaptive penalty approach for engineering optimization problems,” Comput. Ind., vol. 41, pp. 113–127, 2000. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Q. He and L. Wang, “A hybrid particle swarm optimization with a feasibility-based rule for constrained optimization,” Appl. Math. Comput., vol. 178, pp. 231–242, 2006. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. E. Zahara and Y.-T. Kao, “Hybrid Nelder–Mead simplex search and particle swarm optimization for constrained engineering design problems,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 36, pp. 3880–3886, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. H. Liu, Y. Cai, and D. Li, “Hybridizing particle swarm optimization with differential evolution for constrained numerical and engineering optimization,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 10, pp. 784–793, 2010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. L. D. S. Coelho, “Gaussian quantum-behaved particle swarm optimization approaches for constrained engineering design problems,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 37, pp. 1676–1683, 2010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. A. E. Zambrano et al., “Particle evolutionary swarm optimization algorithm,” Proc. Mex. Int. Conf. Comput. Sci., 2005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. R. M. B. L. Ridao et al., “Decision support tools for energy management,” Energy, vol. 33, pp. 858–873, 2008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. A. G. Martins, D. Coelho, C. H. Antunes, and J. Clímaco, “A multiple objective linear programming approach to power generation planning with demand-side management,” Int. Trans. Oper. Res., vol. 3, pp. 305–317, 1996. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. C. O. Wene and B. Rydén, “A comprehensive energy model in the municipal energy planning process,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 33, pp. 212–222, 1988. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. H. M. Groscurth and R. Kümmel, “The cost of energy optimization: A thermoeconomic analysis of national energy system,” Energy, vol. 14, pp. 685–696, 1989. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. T. F. Schulz and H. Stehfest, “Regional energy supply optimization with multiple objectives,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 17, pp. 302–312, 1984. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. J. E. Samouilidis, J. Psarras, and D. V. Papaconstantinou, “Electricity planning vs. energy planning: A modelling approach,” Omega, vol. 12, pp. 341–346, 1984. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. M. H. Henning, “MODEST—An energy-system optimization model applicable to local utilities and countries,” Energy, vol. 22, pp. 1135–1150, 1997. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. G. H. Huang, B. W. Baetz, and G. G. Patry, “Grey dynamic programming for waste-management planning under uncertainty,” J. Urban Plann. Dev., vol. 120, pp. 132–156, 1994. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

77. R. E. Moore, Method and Application of Interval Analysis. Philadelphia, PA, USA: SIAM, 1979. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

78. B. K. Wang, G. H. Huang, and H. W. Lu, “An interval-valued fuzzy linear programming with infinite α-cuts method for environmental management under uncertainty,” Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess., vol. 25, pp. 211–222, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

79. C. D. Dong, G. H. Huang, Y. P. Cai, and Y. Xu, “An interval-parameter minimax regret programming approach for power management systems planning under uncertainty,” Appl. Energy, vol. 88, pp. 2835–2845, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

80. C. P. Mitchell, “Development of decision support systems for bioenergy applications,” Biomass Bioenergy, vol. 18, pp. 265–278, 2000. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• An Adaptive Joint Filtering Approach to Wireless Relay Network for Transmission Rate Maximization
• IoT-Integrated Mercury Substance Detection System for Cosmetic Product Safety
• Design and Implementation of Solar PV-Based Railway Microgrid for Linke Hofmann Busch Coaches
• Cost Control Techniques on Civil Engineering Projects in Oyo State, Nigeria
• Strength and Predictive Modeling of Corn Cob Ash Blended Concrete Using Multi-Output Artificial Neural Network Approach