MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401941661 · doi:10.1115/gt2024-129319

Development of SGT-A35 GT61 (39 MW) for Oil and Gas Applications

2024· article· en· W4401941661 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak Thirumurthy, Vincent Perez, Didier Wong Mew Wah, Mark Scudamore

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsSiemens (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The SGT-A35 (previously known as Industrial RB211) aeroderivative gas turbine is derived from the Rolls-Royce RB211 aviation gas turbine and it has a fleet size of more than 800 units. It is a known reference in the oil and gas market for both offshore and onshore application with more than 46 million hours of operating experience. Since its entry into service in 1974, this gas turbine has gone through continuous improvement with advanced technologies for increased power output, cycle efficiency, reliability, and availability. The SGT-A35 GT61 is the current fourth-generation gas turbine which was introduced in 2001 and provides 34 MW. The new fifth generation SGT-A35 GT61 (39 MW) is the latest and most significant development in the Siemens Energy aeroderivative gas turbine product portfolio. The design changes were limited to cold section of the gas turbine. This includes addition of stage zero to the intermediate pressure compressor, newly designed variable inlet guide vane, variable stator vanes, and minor redesign to other compressor stages. These changes increased the flow capacity and greater than 10% increase in shaft power is achieved. No changes to the hot section has been implemented to maintain the industry class reliability and to keep the fleet experience relevant. This paper provides the details on how the new fifth generation SGT-A35 variant was developed and verified. An extensive engine test program was completed at Siemens Energy facilities to verify all critical-to-quality attributes and to mitigate technical risks before the entry to service. In addition to the design details, results from the development test campaign are presented. The test exceeded the expectations and provided valuable data for further optimization of the product performance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207