The ultimate proof of the soundness and viability of a novel technology is a full-scale demonstration test in which actual components are run successfully over the entire operating envelope. Consequently, the collection of accurate and meaningful test data is of utmost importance to the success of the test. An analysis of such data will validate the original design concepts and will lead to paths of further improvement for the next generations thereof. Statistical fundamentals to determine the accuracy and precision of measured data are amply documented and readily available in well-established standards. The yardstick that should be used for the “meaningfulness” of the measured test data is the satisfaction of the fundamental laws of conservation. While it is known that the “true” values of the sensor data when inserted into the governing equations for the tested component will result in perfect balances, “actual” measured values will always result in “imbalances.” Therefore, reconciliation of the individual measurements with the governing conservation equations is a must prior to the actual analysis of the data. Reconciliation in this context is an estimation of the true values of the sensor data from the actual sensor data by using statistical concepts. This paper describes the development of a data reconciliation concept that is universally applicable to any process or power plant system where sensor data are used. The usefulness and power of the technique are demonstrated by its application to a single-shaft combined cycle with both gas turbine and steam turbine driving a common generator. In the absence of a reliable and accurate measuring system to individually determine gas and steam turbine shaft outputs, data reconciliation is vital to an accurate analysis of the data.

1.
Romagnoli
,
J. A.
, and
Sanchez
,
M. C.
, 2000,
Data Processing and Reconciliation for Chemical Process Operations
,
Process System Engineering
Vol.
II
, 1st ed.,
Academic
,
New York
.
2.
Urban
,
L. A.
, 1972, “
Gas Path Analysis Applied to Turbine Engine Condition Monitoring
,”
AIAA/SAE Eighth Joint Propulsion Specialist Conference
, New Orleans, LA, Nov. 29–Dec. 11, Paper No. 72-1082.
3.
Volponi
,
A. J.
, 1982, “
Gas Path Analysis: An Approach to Engine Diagnostics
,”
35th Symposium of the Mechanical Failures Prevention Group
,
Gaithersburg, MD
, Apr. 20–22.
4.
Escher
,
P. C.
, 2002, “
Gas Turbine Data Validation Using Gas Path Analysis
,” ASME Paper No. GT-2002-30024.
5.
Doel
,
D. L.
, 1994, “
TEMPER: A Gas Path Analysis Tool for Commercial Jet Engines
,”
ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
0742-4795,
116
, pp.
82
89
.
6.
Hartner
,
P.
,
Petek
,
J.
,
Pechtl
,
P.
, and
Hamilton
,
P.
, 2005, “
Model-Based Data Reconciliation to Improve Accuracy and Reliability of Performance Evaluation of Thermal Power Plants
,” ASME Paper No. GT-2005-68937.
7.
Cheng
,
P.-C.
, and
Andersen
,
H.
, 2005, “
The Implementation of the Data Validation Process in a Gas Turbine Performance Monitoring System
,” ASME Paper No. GT-2005-68429.
8.
Kalman
,
R. E.
, 1960, “
A New Approach to Linear Filtering and Prediction Problems
,”
ASME J. Basic Eng.
,
82
, pp.
35
45
. 0742-4795
9.
Maybeck
,
P. S.
, 1979,
Stochastic Models, Estimation and Control
, Vol.
1
,
Academic
,
New York
, pp.
1
16
.
10.
ASME PTC 19.1
, 1998,
Measurement Uncertainty
,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
,
New York
.
11.
Stull
,
D. R.
, and
Prophet
,
H.
, 1971,
JANAF Thermodynamic Tables
, 2nd ed., National Bureau of Standards No. NSRDS-NBS 37.
12.
ASME PTC 46
, 1996,
Performance Test Code on Overall Plant Performance
,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
,
New York
.
13.
ASME PTC 6
, 1985,
Guidance for Evaluation of Uncertainty in Performance Tests of Steam Turbines
,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
,
New York
.
14.
Umezawa
,
S.
, 2005, “
Diagnosis of Thermal Efficiency of Combined Cycle Power Plants Using Optical Torque Sensors
,”
JSME Int. J., Ser. B
1340-8054,
48
(
1
), pp.
129
135
.
15.
Cotton
,
K. C.
, 1998,
Evaluating and Improving Steam Turbine Performance
, 2nd ed.,
Cotton Fact Inc.
,
Rexford, NY
.
16.
Shapiro
,
H.
, 1958,
The Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Compressible Fluid Flow
,
Ronald
,
New York
, Vol.
1
, Pts. I and II, p.
104
.
17.
GT PRO Version 14.0.0, ©1987–2004, Thermoflow, Inc., 29 Hudson Road, Sudbury, MA 01776.
18.
ASME PTC 4.4
, 1981,
Gas Turbine Heat Recovery Steam Generators
,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers
,
New York
.
You do not currently have access to this content.