0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Controls, Diagnostics, and Instrumentation

Modeling and Simulation of the Transient Behavior of an Industrial Power Plant Gas Turbine

[+] Author and Article Information
Hamid Asgari

Mem. ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Canterbury (UC),
Christchurch 8140, New Zealand
e-mail: hamid.asgari@pg.canterbury.ac.nz

Mauro Venturini

Mem. ASME
Dipartimento di Ingegneria,
Università degli Studi di Ferrara,
Via G. Saragat,
Ferrara 1-44122, Italy
e-mail: mauro.venturini@unife.it

XiaoQi Chen

Mem. ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Canterbury (UC),
Christchurch 8140, New Zealand
e-mail: xiaoqi.chen@canterbury.ac.nz

Raazesh Sainudiin

Department of Mathematics and Statistics,
University of Canterbury (UC),
Christchurch 8140, New Zealand
e-mail: r.sainudiin@math.canterbury.ac.nz

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Controls, Diagnostics and Instrumentation Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received November 27, 2013; final manuscript received December 8, 2013; published online January 9, 2014. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 136(6), 061601 (Jan 09, 2014) (10 pages) Paper No: GTP-13-1434; doi: 10.1115/1.4026215 History: Received November 27, 2013; Revised December 08, 2013

This study deals with modeling and simulation of the transient behavior of an Industrial Power Plant Gas Turbine (IPGT). The data used for model setup and validation were taken experimentally during the start-up procedure of a single-shaft heavy duty gas turbine. Two different models are developed and compared by using both a physics-based and a black-box approach, and are implemented by using the matlab© tools including Simulink and Neural Network toolbox, respectively. The Simulink model was constructed based on the thermodynamic and energy balance equations in matlab environment. The nonlinear autoregressive with exogenous inputs NARX model was set up by using the same data sets and subsequently applied to each of the data sets separately. The results showed that both Simulink and NARX models are capable of satisfactory prediction, if it is considered that the data used for model training and validation is experimental data taken during gas turbine normal operation by using its standard instrumentation.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Variations of load for different maneuvers

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Block diagram of the Simulink model of the IPGT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Simulink model of the IPGT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Block diagram of complete NARX model of the IPGT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

NARX model of the IPGT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Performance of the trained NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Variations of rotational speed for the maneuver M1 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Variations of compressor pressure ratio for the maneuver M1 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Variations of compress outlet temperature for the maneuver M1 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Variations of turbine outlet temperature for the maneuver M1 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Variations of rotational speed for the maneuver M2 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Variations of compressor pressure ratio for the maneuver M2 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Variations of compress outlet temperature for the maneuver M2 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Variations of turbine outlet temperature for the maneuver M2 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Variations of rotational speed for the maneuver M3 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Variations of compressor pressure ratio for the maneuver M3 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Variations of compress outlet temperature for the maneuver M3 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Variations of turbine outlet temperature for the maneuver M3 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Variations of rotational speed for the maneuver M4 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Variations of compressor pressure ratio for the maneuver M4 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Variations of compress outlet temperature for the maneuver M4 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Variations of turbine outlet temperature for the maneuver M4 for the real system, Simulink model, and NARX model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

RMSE (%) of the Simulink and NARX models for four main selected outputs of the all maneuvers

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In