Modeling of Gas Turbine-Based Cogeneration System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gas turbine-based power plants generate a significant portion of world’s electricity. This paper presents the modeling of a gas turbine-based cogeneration cycle. One of the reasons for the relatively low efficiency of a single gas turbine cycle is the waste of high-grade energy at its exhaust stream. In order to recover this wasted energy, steam and/or hot water can be cogenerated to improve the cycle efficiency. In this work, a cogeneration power plant is introduced to use this wasted energy to produce superheated steam for industrial processes. The cogeneration system model was developed based on the data from the Whitby cogeneration power plant in ASPEN PLUS®. The model was validated against the operational data of the existing power plant. The electrical and total (both electrical and thermal) efficiencies were around 40% and 70% (LHV), respectively. It is shown that cogenerating electricity and steam not only significantly improve the general efficiency of the cycle but it can also recover the output and efficiency losses of the gas turbine as a result of high ambient temperature by generating more superheated steam. Furthermore, this work shows that the model could capture the operation of the systems with an acceptable accuracy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".