MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367181064 · doi:10.18280/mmep.100230

Evaluation of Gas Turbine Performance in Power Plant with High-Pressure Fogging System

2023· article· en· W4367181064 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hayder Jawad Kadhim, Abdalrazzaq K. Abbas, Thualfaqir J. Kadhim, Farhan Lafta Rashid

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoggingGas turbinesHigh pressurePower stationEnvironmental scienceNuclear engineeringPower (physics)Automotive engineeringTurbineProcess engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceElectrical engineeringEngineering physicsThermodynamicsPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gas turbine power output is hypersensitive by environmental conditions, mainly in arid and hot climates.This research focuses on using a fogging air intake cooling system to improve the performance of the gas turbine in the weather conditions of Karbala city.The Aspen HYSYS software was used to simulate real data collected from the Karbala power plant (gas turbine).The simulation results were found for a gas turbine power plant with and without using the unit of air cooling.The results show there was a drop in inlet air temperature in the case of existence the cooling system when the ambient temperature in the range of (25 to 60)℃.The utilizing of air cooling technique with the gas turbine causes a gain in net power and thermal efficiency and reduction in the consumption of fuel.In addition, the heat rate reduces by 7% compared to not adding the system.However, the gas turbine plant shows better performance by employing the fogging system in the selected power plant when relative humidity below 40% and temperature exceed 30℃ during the summer months.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207