Exergy Analysis of an Indirectly-Fired Combined Cycle Power Generation System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A natural gas fired combined cycle power plant with indirectly-fired heating for additional work output is investigated in the current work. The mass flow rate of coal for the indirect firing mode in circulating fluidized bed combustor is estimated based on fixed natural gas input to the topping combustor. The effects of pressure ratio, gas turbine inlet temperature, inlet temperature to the topping combustor on the exergetic performance of the combined cycle configuration are analysed. The use of coal in indirect-firing mode reduces with increase in turbine inlet temperature due to increase in the use of natural gas. The exergetic efficiency increases with pressure ratio up to the optimum pressure and it also increase with gas turbine inlet temperature. The exergy destruction is highest for the circulating fluidized bed combustor (CFBC) followed by the topping combustor. The analyses show that the indirectly fired mode of the combined cycle offers better performance but with higher exergy destruction and the opportunity for additional net work output by using solid fuels (coal in this case) in existing natural gas based power plant is realized.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".