2022 IEEE 2nd International Maghreb Meeting of the Conference on Sciences and Techniques of Automatic Control and

2022 IEEE 2nd International Maghreb Meeting of the Conference on Sciences and Techniques of Automatic Control and Computer Engineering (MI-STA) | 978-1-6654-7918-9/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/MI-STA54861.2022.9837616

Computer Engineering (MI-STA) Sabratha, Libya 23-25 May 2022

Modeling and Simulation of a Hybrid Gas Turbine

Power Plant-Solar Photovoltaic Plant System used in
Messla Oil Field
Abdulbaki. A. Allous Hassan. A. El-Gamal El-Arabi. M. Attia
Mechanical Engineering Department Mechanical Engineering Department Mechanical Engineering Department
College of Engineering and Technology Faculty of Engineering College of Engineering and Technology
Arab Academy for Science, Alexandria University Arab Academy for Science,
Technology and Maritime Transport Alexandria, Egypt Technology and Maritime Transport
Alexandria, Egypt ha_elgamal@yahoo.com Alexandria, Egypt
abdulbaki.allous95@gmail.com mielaraby@yahoo.com

Abstract— The present study was conducted to investigate
the adequate operation of a hybrid system in Messla Oil Field,
Libya. The proposed hybrid system includes a gas turbine
power plant existing in the field. It produces approximately 11 -
11.8 MW per hour with a predictive solar photovoltaic plant for
7 MW. The present study mainly aims to model and highlight
the capabilities of the hybrid system to produce electricity in
parallel. Additionally, the hybrid system is designed and
simulated to reduce the over-dependence of gas turbine power
plants in oil and gas fields during the day as the energy demand
is met through the hybrid system. Gas turbine power plant real
data and environment real ambient temperature and global sun
irradiance data were used at selected time intervals over a year.
Moreover, mathematical models were established using the
MATLAB and Simulink package for gas turbine power plant
and solar photovoltaic plant, respectively for each season, to
predict the electricity produced by the proposed system under
appropriate operation. The verification of the utilized system
models was done first. The theoretical results are presented and
discussed. It is concluded that the use of a hybrid gas turbine-
solar photovoltaic plant system provides the necessary electrical
power and continuity of electricity production. It also improves
the performance of the gas turbine power plant and reduces the
load thereon, thereby saving the power output and the fuel mass
flow rate to the gas turbine power plant. Some useful
recommendations for future research work in this field of study
are provided in this work.
Keywords— Modeling, Simulation, Hybrid System, Gas
Turbine Power Plant, Solar Photovoltaic plant, MATLAB, Messla
Oil Field.
I. INTRODUCTION
Many types of research have been conducted on the gas
turbine power plants (GTPP), then on solar photovoltaic (PV)
plant, and finally on the hybrid GTPP-solar PV plant system.
Rahman, et al [1] presented a thermodynamic performance
analysis of GTPP, where they investigated the variety of
operating conditions including compressor and turbine
compression ratio, inlet and outlet temperatures of the turbine,
ambient temperature, air-fuel ratio, isentropic compressor
efficiency, and isentropic turbine efficiency on the overall
performance of GT which included compressor work, specific
fuel consumption, power, thermal efficiency, and heat rate.
The MATLAB software was used in the GT performance
model. It was concluded that the power output and thermal
efficiency reduce linearly with the increased ambient
temperature and air-fuel ratio. The results also showed that the
heating rate and specific fuel consumption increase linearly
with the increased ambient temperature and air-fuel ratio.
Guo, et al [2] presented a PV system simulation model based
on the physical equivalent circuit of PV arrays and its
mathematical model using MATLAB/Simulink software. The
simulation model was used to obtain the current-voltage (I-V)
output characteristics of the PV array under various irradiation
levels and temperatures conditions. The P-V curve of the PV
array is a single peak curve, which means that the PV array
has a Maximum Power Point (MPP). The simulation results
showed that the changes in irradiation mainly affect the output
current of PV arrays, while the temperature changes mainly
affect the output voltage of PV arrays. Comodi, et al [3]
presented a hybrid system consisting of a 100 kW Micro GT
with the power output of a solar PV plant whose annual output
is available by field measurements. They defined the size of
the solar PV plant and the hybrid system management strategy
for a reliable day-hourly forecast of the electrical power output
under whatever ambient conditions. The results showed that
the strategy allowed achieving a higher annual power output
by the hybrid system because of the greater exploitation of the
Micro GT. Results also indicated that the proposed hybrid
system, in particular, solves the problem of the predictability
of solar PV power output, thereby granting a significant
reduction in the use of the primary fuel. Siddaraj and Tangi
[4] carried out an analysis and simulation of a hybrid Micro
GT-solar PV system in remote areas using
MATLAB/Simulink software. The system was designed
entirely based on the concept of a parallel hybrid
configuration. Results indicated that the topology of this
hybrid Micro GT-solar PV system gives good performance
under changes in insolation, ambient temperature, and load
variation. Finally, a layout of a hybrid solar PV-GTP system
was carried out by Modukpe and Ndubisi [5] for Beta Glass
Delta Plant. To achieve this, the load profile for the production
ground was obtained along with the gas usage by the GT, the
equivalent sunlight hours for the region, and the solar panels
with the inverters required to carry the load were calculated
and designed. The RETScreen software was used for the
simulation of data. The hybrid system design showed that 50%
of the power has been saved each day against using solely GT.
furthermore, the hybrid system increases the operational life
of the GT as its usage rate has been reduced by 12 hours daily.
Previous studies indicate that the use of the hybrid GTPP-
solar PV plant system will significantly reduce the power
output and fuel mass flow rate used and increase the working
life of the GTPP. Accordingly, the hybrid system (GTPP
existing in the field with a solar PV plant) was designed and
simulated to help GTPP produce electricity and provide the
necessary electrical power to an onshore oil and gas

978-1-6654-7918-9/22/$31.00 ©2022 IEEE

759

Authorized licensed use limited to: Israel Electric Corporation. Downloaded on December 19,2022 at 15:56:32 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
production station at the location that was chosen. The
systems were modeled and simulated for 2019, using the
actual data for that year.
II. MATHEMATICAL MODEL
The mathematical modeling was performed for the
proposed hybrid system. It was divided into two plants
operating in parallel. The following section shows the
mathematical models for each plant, which were established
using MATLAB/m-file and Simulink models.
A. Gas Turbine Power Plant Model
The GTPP that is used in this study is a single shaft turbine
as shown in Fig. 1, where each component of the plant is
Fig. 2. T-s diagram of the gas turbine power plant (it's to be noted that the
considered separately for modeling. From the continuity and data used in Fig. are original from [7]).
energy equations, the thermodynamic relations are obtained
The compressor work rate (MW) is obtained as,
Ẇ# = ṁ! % −
for each component [6]. Fig. 2 shows the T-S diagram of the
,!
GTPP. The actual process and ideal process are represented

where ṁ! is the air mass flow rate (kg/s), and %

( ) (5)
in dotted lines and solid lines, respectively. The compressor
efficiency ( ) and the turbine efficiency ( ) are considered ,! is the
in this modeling [1]. specific heat capacity of air (J/kg. K).

Energy equations for each component are as follows: The specific heat capacity of air (J/kg. K) which is considered
a function of air temperature can be expressed as,
% −0.13784 ! +1.9843*10 *
)
1) Air compressor
,! =1.0189*10 !
4.2399*10 + ! ) −3.7632*10 , ! *
+
The compressor compression ratio is expressed as,
(6)
= (1) where ! is the air temperature average at the compressor
-
where and are the air pressure at the compressor inlet = (K).
and outlet (bar), respectively.
1) Combustion chamber
The compressor efficiency is prescribed as,
The energy balance in the combustion chamber is given as,
ṁ! % ,! + ṁ. /01 + ṁ. %. .= ṁ2 % ,2 )
= (2)
(7)
is the combustion chamber efficiency, /01 is the
low heating value (kJ/kg), ṁ. and ṁ2 are the fuel and gas
where is the air temperature at the compressor inlet (K), where
and are the actual and isentropic air temperature at
the compressor outlet (K), respectively. mass flow rate (kg/s) respectively, . and ) are the fuel

respectively, % ,2 , and %. are the specific heat capacity of gas

The final air temperature (K) of the compressor outlet is temperature and gas temperature at turbine inlet (K)
calculated as,
and fuel (kJ/kg. K), respectively.
= (3)
The gases mass flow rate can be defined as,
ṁ2 = ṁ! + ṁ.
1+
(8)
= (4)
The specific heat capacity of fuel gas (J/kg. K) which is
where ! is the ratio of air-specific heat = 1.4
% −2.3127*10 ) +4.045*10 −
considered a function of gas temperature can be expressed as,
4
,! =1.8083
1.7363*10 5 ) (9)
The air-fuel ratio as prescribed as,

678 =
ṁ :;< - # ,9 9 # ,= >
ṁ9 # ,= > # ,
= (10)

?1 − ∆ A
The gas pressure at the turbine inlet (bar) can be defined as,
)= (11)
where ∆ is the pressure drop in the combustion chamber
The heat rate supplied (MW) to the cycle is obtained as,
B!CC =ṁ. ∗ /01 ∗ = ṁ2 % ,2 ) − ṁ! % ,! −
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the gas turbine power plant (it's to be noted ṁ. % ,. . (12)
that the data used in Fig. are original from [1]).

760

Authorized licensed use limited to: Israel Electric Corporation. Downloaded on December 19,2022 at 15:56:32 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1) Turbine where M J , MC , and M J are the solar cell photoelectric, diode,
The turbine compression ratio is expressed as, and shunt current (A), respectively.
>
E=
The solar cell diode current (A) is expressed as,
F
(13)
MC = MO PQR S V−1
<L
* T∗ <U
where is the gas pressure at the turbine outlet (bar). (21)

where MO is the solar cell diode reverse saturation current (A),

6 is the solar cell diode quality (ideality) factor, 1C and 1
The turbine efficiency is calculated as,
> F
> F
= (14)
are the solar cell diode and thermal voltage (V).
The gas temperature at the turbine outlet (K) can be
1C = 1N + ?MN ∗ 8 A
The diode voltage (V) can be defined as,
calculated as,
= (22)
> > =
F F
= (15)
The solar thermal voltage (V) can be defined as,
1 =
X∗
* = ) G1 − 1− I (16) Y
(23)
H
Substituting from (22) and (23) into (21) is obtained as,
where 2 is the ratio of gas-specific heat = 1.33, * and *
MC = MO PQR S V−1
Y∗?<Z -[Z∗\ A
T∗X∗
are the actual and isentropic gas tempera at turbine outlet (K), (24)

where 1N is the solar cell output voltage (V), 8 is the solar

respectively.
cell series resistance (Ω), ] is the charge of an electron
Ẇ = ṁ2 % − =1.602176634×10 5 ℃, ^ is the Boltzmann’s constant =
The work rate of the turbine (MW) is expressed as,

1.380649× 10 ) J/K, and

,2 ( ) *) (17)
is the solar cell actual
The power output (MW) is expressed as, temperature at the nominal condition (K).
= Ẇ − Ẇ# (18) The shunt resistance current (A) is given as,

MJ=
< _ <L ?<Z-?[Z ∗\ AA
\ _ \ _ \ _
The thermal efficiency of the cycle can be expressed as,
where 8
= = (25)
EJ =
K LL
(19) J is the solar cell shunt or parallel resistance (Ω).
Substituting from Eqn. (24) and eqn. (25) into the eqn. (20)
B. Solar Photovoltaic System Models
to obtain the mathematical model (I–V characteristic) for an
individual solar PV cell is expressed as,

MN =M J −MO PQR S V−1 −

1) Solar Photovoltaic Cell Model
Y∗?<Z -[Z∗\ A ?<Z-?[Z∗\ AA
T∗X∗ \ _
To predict power output in solar PV cells, the single diode (26)
equivalent circuit is used, which is derived from physical
principles, as illustrated in Fig. 3. According to this model, 2) Solar Photovoltaic Module Model
the equivalent circuit of a solar PV cell consists of a
photoelectric current source (M J ) connected in anti-parallel
To obtain high power, solar PV cells are grouped in larger
units called module (also known as panel), which are

parallel resistance (8 J or 8 ).
to a single diode ‘D’, series resistance (8 ), and shunt or combined in series and parallel to provide the required output

module is arranged in ` and `a – a number of solar cells

voltage and current. The equivalent circuit for the solar PV
Fig. 3 is shown an equivalent circuit diagram using

current MN (A) is found as, [8].

Kirchhoff’s current law equation for solar PV cell output connected in parallel and series respectively, as illustrated in
Fig.4.

MN = M J − MC − M J (20) The current-voltage equation of the module may be obtained

according to the following relation is shown as, [9].
f k ∗l
Y∗e g -j g no
Mb = ` ∗ M J −` ∗ MO cPQR d p − 1q
hi hm

T∗X∗

h
ej<g∗ m n-[g∗\ o
q
hi

\ _
−c (27)

where Mb and 1b are the solar module output current (A) and
voltage (V), respectively.
The solar cell photoelectric current (A) is expressed as,
M uM +w − x
r
J rst9 , v. v.
Fig. 3. Single diode equivalent circuit model of a generalized photovoltaic
cell (it's to be noted that the data used in the Figure are original from [9]).
= (28)

761

Authorized licensed use limited to: Israel Electric Corporation. Downloaded on December 19,2022 at 15:56:32 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 4. Single diode equivalent circuit model of a generalized photovoltaic
module (it's to be noted that the data used in Fig. are original from [9]).

where y and y v. are the actual irradiation at the nominal

Fig. 5. Single diode equivalent circuit model of a generalized photovoltaic

condition, and the reference (W/m ), M , v. is the solar cell

array (it's to be noted that the data used in Fig. are original from [11]).

where M! and 1! are the solar array output current (A) and
reference short circuit current (A), w is the temperature voltage (V), respectively.
coefficient of short circuit current, and v. is the reference
The output power of the array (W) can be calculated as,
= 1! ∗ M!
module temperature.
The solar cell diode reverses saturation current (A) which (34)
varies with temperature can be defined as,
III. CASE STUDY
)
MO = MO, j n PQR e j − no
}= ∗Y
v. T∗X
In the present work, the Messla Oil Field of the Arabian
st9 st9
(29)
Gulf Oil Company, Libya was selected and the climatic data
for this site were provided. Messla Oil Field is located in the
The solar cell reference diode reverse saturation current (A) southeast part of Libya at the latitude of 27°59' N and
is as expressed follows, longitude of 22°20' E. Most previous studies have shown

MO, =M PQR S− V−1

Y∗<~ ,st9
clearly that the hybrid GTPP-solar PV plant system is the
v. , v. T∗X∗ ∗•i
(30) most appropriate way to address the GTPP problem in high

where 1O , v., and €2 are the solar reference open-circuit

voltage (V) and the Band gap energy (eV), respectively.
3) Solar Photovoltaic Arrays Model
For obtaining higher power, solar PV modules are grouped
in larger units known as solar PV array (or often generalized
as PV system or plant), which are combined in series and in
parallel to provide the desired output voltage and current. The
temperatures, increase economic growth, and preserve the
environment from fossil fuel emissions in the future, as well
as take advantage of abundant solar energy.
A. Proposed Model
The main objective of this study is to investigate the
practicality of implementing a plant working on the principles
of the gas turbine Brayton cycle, combined with a solar PV
plant. The block diagram in Fig. 6 shows the work flow of the

` ,b , and `a,b - number of solar modules connected in

equivalent circuit for the solar PV arrays is arranged in hybrid GTPP-solar PV plant system. The solar PV plant
consists of PV arrays, which give the DC power under
parallel series respectively, as illustrated in Fig. 5. varying temperature and irradiation conditions. The DC from
the PV goes into the inverter with MPPT to convert it to
The relationship between the output current and voltage is alternating current (A.C) and get power at the MPP and then
expressed as, [10].
M! = ` ∗ ` ∗ M J− ` ∗ ` ∗ MO ∗
into the grid. The GTPP is also connected to the same grid
,b ,b
but in parallel with the PV plant.
f k ∗l h hm,g h
Y∗ƒ -j ∗ i n„ ƒj< ∗ n-j [‡ ∗\ ∗ i n„
•PQR ‚ … − 1†- • †
B. Gas Turbine Power Plant
hi,g hm,g hm hi,g hm

T∗X∗ ∗•i h
\ _ ∗j i n
The GTPP name is Messla Field GT (GT# 1), operating a
h m simple GT engine. The simple GTPP mainly consists of a
turbine coupled with a compressor and a combustor (or
(31)
combustion chamber) and is connected by one shaft. The
The solar module series and shunt resistance (Ω) are shown
combustion chamber is placed between the compressor and
8a,b = i ∗ 8 , and 8aJ,b = i ∗ 8 J
• •
as,
turbine in the fuel circuit. The GTPP produces approximately
•m •m
(32) 10.2 - 11.3 MW per hour, to meet the Messla Oil Field's needs
for electrical energy (wells, mainline pumps, gas compressor

M! = ` ∗ ` ∗ M J− ` ∗ ` ∗ MO ∗
Substituting (32) into (31) is obtained as,
lighting, and facilities). A MATLAB/m-file is designed and
,b ,b constructed to solve the governing equations of a GTPP. The
f k ∗li,g hm,g
Y∗ƒ -j n„ ƒj< ∗ n- [‡ ∗\i,g „
•PQR ‚ … − 1† − • †
data that is used in the MATLAB/m-file for the simulation
hi,g hm,g hi,g
and design is divided into two types: First, Real operating
T∗X∗ ∗•i \i_,g (available) data. Second, some assumptions are made due to
a lack of detailed information, to simplify the existing
(33) problem.

762

Authorized licensed use limited to: Israel Electric Corporation. Downloaded on December 19,2022 at 15:56:32 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1) Assumptions Data of Messla Field Gas Turbine Power
Plant
Some of the data is not available in the Messla Oil Field
gas turbine operations management. Therefore, some
assumptions are made for analysis based on the age of GTPP
components, several operating hours, and additional load of
the GTPP, in consultation with the station engineers. The
following assumptions have been made [12-15]:
• All cycle parts are a steady-state model.
• The precept of the ideal gas mixture is carried out for the air

• The lower heating value (LHV) of the natural gas is B:;< =

and the combustion products (natural gas).

Fig. 6. Proposed Hybrid System
1) Available Data of Messla Field Gas Turbine Power
Plant.
The Messla field GT data are measured four times a day,
namely at 7:00, 10:00, 14:00, and 16:00. The data for the year
2019 will be divided into seasons, and each season has its
obtained average data as shown in Table I.
• The injected combustion chamber fuel is natural gas at 55°C
and 13.44 bar.
• The Axial air compressor consists of (17) stages to
compress the air, followed alternately by stages of stator
blades, and its efficiency is 85%.
• The turbine section includes (2) stages, each one of them
47.141 MJ/kg.
• Heat loss from the combustion chamber is assumed to be
5% of the LHV. Additionally, a 5% pressure drop is
considered in the combustion chamber (∆ ). Furthermore,
all other components are considered adiabatic.
• Heat losses in the turbine and the compressor are considered
to be negligible.
C. Solar Photovoltaic Plant
The solar PV plant is designed, modeled, and simulated on
the ground of the Messla field in 2019. The real Messla Oil
Field data is used for both average ambient temperature taken
from GTPP data (T ) and average solar irradiance (G) four
times a day, namely at 7:00, 10:00, 14:00, and 16:00, based
on the measured data from the GTPP as shown in Table II
[16]. The input parameters of the solar PV plant were
assigned to the MATLAB/Simulink model of the proposed
system.
1) Photovoltaic Module for Simulation
In the present work, the vertex TSM-DE18M (II)-Train
solar PV module is chosen for a MATLAB/Simulink
simulation model. The module is made of 150
Monocrystalline silicon solar cells, 72 in series and 2 in
parallel, and provides 490 W of nominal maximum power as

STC at irradiance 1000 W/m and cell temperature 25 Co:

consisting of one stator stage (distributor nozzle), and its per the manufacturing specifications data of the module under
efficiency is 86%.
The max power (P“”• ,) is 490 W, and the maximum power
voltage ( V—˜˜ ) and maximum power current ( I—˜˜ ) are
• The combustion chamber section consists of a system of
(10) tubular combustion chambers arranged symmetrically
and evenly in a circumference, and its efficiency is 92%. 42.4V and 11.56A respectively. The open-circuit voltage
TABLE I. Gas turbine power plant average data from all seasons. (Vš› ) and short circuit current (Iœ› ) are 51.3V and 12.14A,
ˆ‰ Š‰ Š‹ ˆŒ ŠŒ •Ž
respectively. The series and shunt resistance are 0.247 (Ω)
••/s
Seasons Timing
O'clock Co Bar Bar Co Bar and 400 (Ω) respectively, and the efficiency is 20.5%. The
7:00 7.92 0.99 7.59 313.8 1.012 0.578 nominal module operating temperature (NMOT) rating of the

∆P“”• is -0.36%/ Co. The temperature coefficient of ∆Vš›

Winter 10:00 17 0.99 7.49 325.3 1.012 0.581 module is 41 Co (±3 Co), and the temperature coefficient

and ∆Iœ› are -0.26%/Co and 0.04%/Co, respectively [17].

14:00 21.8 0.99 7.83 338.3 1.012 0.586
16:00 21.9 0.99 7.39 339.1 1.012 0.580
7:00 16.9 0.99 7.51 345 1.012 0.638
Spring 10:00 25.5 0.99 7.40 355.5 1.012 0.639 2) Modeling and Simulation of Solar Photovoltaic Plant
14:00 30 0.99 7.34 370.1 1.012 0.667
16:00 29.8 0.99 7.31 370.2 1.012 0.670 The solar PV plant is designed, modeled, and simulated at
7:00 29.0 0.99 7.19 353.0 1.012 0.603 7MW. The number of PV is 14283 panels divided into 23

34126 • . The mathematical model equations presented in

Summer 10:00 36.5 0.99 7.11 369.2 1.012 0.608 series and 621 parallels. In addition, the solar PV field area is
14:00 41.1 0.99 7.03 380.0 1.012 0.649
16:00 41.2 0.99 7 383.1 1.012 0.652
7:00 21.3 0.99 7.33 336.8 1.012 0.577 section II are used to build a model capable of extracting the
Autumn 10:00 30.2 0.99 7.24 352.1 1.012 0.600 outputs of the solar PV plant. Subsequently, some of the
14:00 34.3 0.99 7.15 363.3 1.012 0.612 parameter blocks are used to connect the circuit of the solar
16:00 33.6 0.99 7.12 363 1.012 0.612
PV plant, the most important components [namely the

763

Authorized licensed use limited to: Israel Electric Corporation. Downloaded on December 19,2022 at 15:56:32 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE II. Solar photovoltaic plant average data from all seasons. TABLE III. Predicted and actual results from the gas turbine power plant

ŠŸ ¡¢ Š£¤¥
for all seasons.
Timing Average Average Solar
Seasons Timing Error
G (ž/•‹)
Seasons (O'clock) Ambient Irradiance
O'clock MW MW %
ˆ‰ (Co)
Temperature
7:00 11.517 10.254 12.3
Winter 10:00 11.450 10.281 11.3
7:00 7.92 340
14:00 11.218 10.309 8.8
Winter 10:00 17.016 678.33
16:00 11.075 10.200 8.5
14:00 21.86 510.33
7:00 11.758 11.114 5.8
16:00 21.91 69.33
Spring 10:00 11.665 11.142 4.7
7:00 16.98 425
14:00 11.727 11.257 4.1
Spring 10:00 25.5 688.66
16:00 11.766 11.314 4
14:00 30 546.33
7:00 11.229 10.526 6.7
16:00 29.83 268.33
Summer 10:00 11.667 10.831 7.7
7:00 29.08 537
14:00 11.435 10.836 5.5
Summer 10:00 36.57 765.66
16:00 11.352 10.831 4.8
14:00 41.19 656
7:00 11.096 10.334 7.3
16:00 41.22 402.66
Autumn 10:00 11.252 10.527 6.9
7:00 21.3 470.33
14:00 11.192 10.638 5.2
Autumn 10:00 30.24 706.66
16:00 11.186 10.644 5
14:00 34.37 515
16:00 33.67 95 combustion chamber may not have been completed due to the
Controlled Current Source, Diode, Series RLC Branch lifetime of the gas turbine power plant and periodic
(Capacitor), Voltage and Current measurements, PWM maintenance. Moreover, a large temperature difference
Generator (DC-DC converter), MATLAB function, Signal between ambient air and the combustion chamber of GTPP in
Builder, Resistance, Series RLC Branch (Inductor), metal– the winter season. Additionally, high ambient air temperature
oxide–semiconductor field-effect transistor (MOSFET), V/I- in the summer season. As the ambient air temperature
T and P-T scopes], are illustrated in Fig. 7. increases, its density decreases, and thus the compressor
needs a higher power to draw the required amount of ambient
D. Models Validation air.
1) Solar Photovoltaic Plant Validation
1) Gas Turbine Power Plant Model Validation
The model results for the solar PV plant were validated
To have good validation results from our simulation code, with the actual results obtained from the actual solar PV plant
the calculated model results of this study of GTPP (Messla in the Arab Academy for Science, Technology, and Maritime
field GT#1) were validated with the actual operating data Transport, Abu Qir, Alexandria-Egypt. The power output for
obtained from the same GTPP. The power outputs for the the predicted and actual results was gathered in 2019, and
predicted and actual results were gathered in 2019, and errors errors were obtained as shown in Table IV.
were obtained as shown in Table III.
The error represents the percentage difference of power
stL H
The error represents the percentage difference of power
stL H
H H
output between the predicted and actual results output between the predicted and actual results
for each season. These errors are caused by some auxiliary for each season. These errors are due to the power loss caused
components in the power plant which were not considered in by cables and connections, the clouds that cover the sun's
the modeling and simulation, in addition to some assumptions rays, and the dust that forms on the panels. Therefore,
that were imposed. Also, most chemical reactions in the maintenance is usually done every three months. The error is
also due to the shadow of the buildings near the panels, as
well as the shadow of the panels on each other, in addition to
the difference in the angle of the installation structures of
solar photovoltaic panels between actual and theoretical
panels.

ŠŸ ¡¢ Š£¤¥
TABLE IV. Predicted and actual results from the solar photovoltaic plant
for all seasons.
Seasons Month Error
%
MW MW
December 5.5530 5.1300 8.2
Winter January 5.7793 6.2626 7.7
February 6.7242 6.2072 8.3
March 6.8540 7.7737 11.8
Spring April 7.5261 7.7353 2.7
May 8.7900 7.9237 10.9
June 7.5401 7.2905 3.4
Summer July 7.6845 7.1634 7.2
August 7.4175 7.2961 1.7
September 7.1028 7.0610 0.6
Autumn October 6.6175 6.7972 2.6
Fig 7. Simulink model of a solar photovoltaic plant. November 5.8789 6.4150 8.3

764

Authorized licensed use limited to: Israel Electric Corporation. Downloaded on December 19,2022 at 15:56:32 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 I. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The results given in Table V represent the hybrid GTPP-
solar PV plant system that is the power output and the fuel
mass flow rate of the GTPP, and the solar PV plant for the
7MW covering a portion of the power output in GTPP at four
times a day, namely 7:00, 10:00, 14:00 and 16:00 in all
seasons.
The results are shown below in Fig. 8 to Fig. 11. They are
plotted based on the data from Table V and represent the
percentage of the saved power output and fuel mass flow rate
with time (hours) in the GTPP as a result of the combination
thereof with the solar PV plant over all seasons. The
(a)
percentage values of the saved power output are the same
percentage values of the saved gas fuel mass flow rate at the
same load in each season. This is because the relationship
between the power output and gas fuel mass flow rate is linear
as shown in Eqn. 18.
A. Winter Season
The percentages of the saved power output and fuel mass
flow rate are 11.1%, 38%, 25.7%, and 0.5% in GTPP due to
the incorporation of the solar PV plant as shown in Fig. 8.
B. Spring Season
The percentages of the saved power output and fuel mass
(b)
flow rate are 17%, 40%, 28.1%, and 6.8% in GTPP due to the Fig. 8. Percentage saving in gas turbine power plant due to the incorporation
incorporation of the solar PV plant as shown in Fig. 9. of the 7 MW solar photovoltaic plant in the winter season. (a) Power output.
(b) Fuel mass flow rate.
C. Summer Season
The percentages of the saved power output and fuel mass
flow rate are 28.4%, 46.9%, 40.8%, and 15.9% in GTPP due
to the incorporation of the solar PV plant as shown in Fig. 10.
D. Autumn Season
The percentages of the saved power output and fuel mass
flow rate are 22.1%, 43.7%, 26.3%, and 0.9% in GTPP due
to the incorporation of the solar PV plant as shown in Fig. 11.
Table V. Data results of hybrid gas turbine power plant-solar photovoltaic
plant system for all seasons.

Seasons Timing ŠŸ ¡¢ ¦§ Solar PV ¨©¡¥ ¦§,©¡ª (a)

O'clock MW kg/s Plant MW kg/s
7 MW
7:00 11.51 0.578 1.283 10.23 0.514
Winter 10:00 11.45 0.58 4.36 7.09 0.36
14:00 11.21 0.58 2.88 8.33 0.43
16:00 11.07 0.58 0.05 11.0 0.58
7:00 11.75 0.64 2.0 9.75 0.53
Spring 10:00 11.66 0.64 4.66 7.0 0.38
14:00 11.72 0.66 3.30 8.42 0.48
16:00 11.76 0.67 0.80 10.9 0.62
7:00 11.22 0.603 3.19 8.03 0.43
Summer 10:00 11.66 0.61 5.47 6.19 0.32
14:00 11.43 0.65 4.66 6.77 0.38
16:00 11.35 0.65 1.81 9.54 0.54
7:00 11.09 0.58 2.45 8.64 0.45 (b)
Autumn 10:00 11.25 0.6 4.91 6.34 0.34 Fig. 9. Percentage saving in gas turbine power plant due to the incorporation
14:00 11.19 0.61 2.95 8.24 0.54 of the 7 MW solar photovoltaic plant in the spring season. (a) Power output.
16:00 11.18 0.61 0.1 11.1 0.61 (b) Fuel mass flow rate.

I. CONCLUSIONS
1- The available power from the solar PV plant is highly
dependent on environmental conditions such as ambient
temperature, and solar irradiance.

765

Authorized licensed use limited to: Israel Electric Corporation. Downloaded on December 19,2022 at 15:56:32 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

(a)
(b)
Fig. 10. Percentage saving in gas turbine power plant due to the incorporation
of the 7 MW solar photovoltaic plant in the summer season. (a) Power
output. (b) Fuel mass flow rate.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 11. Percentage saving in gas turbine power plant due to the incorporation
of the 7 MW solar photovoltaic plant in the autumn season. (a) Power output.
(b) Fuel mass flow rate.
2- The solar PV field in the summer season has the largest
power output, thus it has the largest percentage of the saved
power output and fuel mass flow rate in GTPP working in the
hybrid model. This is because both of the higher ambient
temperature and irradiance values in the autumn, spring, and
winter seasons.
766
Authorized licensed use limited to: Israel Electric Corporation. Downloaded on December 19,2022 at 15:56:32 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3- The maximum percentages of the saved power output and
fuel mass flow rate in GTPP are due to the incorporation of
the 7MW solar PV plant for all seasons. The results are as
follows: In the winter season 38%. In the spring season 40%.
In the summer season 46.9%. In the autumn season 43.7%.
4- As a consequence, the recommended solar PV plants
development in Libya has the potential for providing a
renewable source of energy aiding the rapid expansion,
especially in the Oil and Gas industries.
REFERENCES
[1] Rahman, M. M., Ibrahim, T. K., and Abdalla, A. N.,
“Thermodynamic performance analysis of gas-turbine power-
plant,” Int. J. Phys. Sci., 6(14), pp. 3539–3550, July 2011.
[2] Guo, G., Wu, X., Zhou, S., and Cao, B., “Modeling of Solar
Photovoltaic Cells and Output Characteristic Simulation Based on
Simulink,” J. Chem. Pharm. Res., 6(7), pp. 1791–1795, 2014.
[3] Comodi, G., Renzi, M., Cioccolanti, L., Caresana, F., and
Pelagalli, L., “Hybrid system with micro gas turbine and PV
(photovoltaic) plant: Guidelines for sizing and management
strategies,” Energy, 89, pp. 226–235, August 2015.
[4] Siddaraj, U., and Tangi, S., “Integration of DG systems composed
of photovoltaic and a micro-turbine in remote areas,” Int. Conf.
Comp. Power, Energy Info. Comm., Melmaruvathur, India, 76, pp.
1–4, April 2016.
[5] Modukpe, G., and Ndubisi, S, N., “Design of a hybrid solar/gas
turbine power system for Beta Glass Plc, Delta Plant,” Int. J.
Automa. Autono. Sys., 11(1), pp. 1–8, January 2019.
[6] Kaviri, A. G., and Jaafar, M. N. M., “Thermodynamic Modeling
and Exergy Optimization of a Gas Turbine Power Plant,” IEEE 3rd
Inter. Conf. Comm. Softw Netw, Xi'an, China, pp.366-370, May
2011.
[7] Saif, M., and Tariq, M., “Performance analysis of gas turbine at
varying ambient temperature,” Int. J. Mech. Eng. Technol., 8(1),
pp. 270–280, January 2017.
[8] Neupane, S., and Kumar, A., “Modeling and Simulation of PV
Array in Matlab / Simulink for Comparison of Perturb and Observe
& Incremental Conductance Algorithms Using Buck Converter,”
Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol., 4(7), pp. 2479–2486, July 2017.
[9] Molina, M. G., “Modelling and Control of Grid-Connected Solar
Photovoltaic Systems,” Rene. Energy - Utilis. Syst. Integra, pp. 1-
32, May 2016.
[10] Haque, A. M., Sharma, S., and Nagal, D., “Simulation of
Photovoltaic Array Using Matlab / Simulink : Analysis,
Comparison & Results,” Inter. J. Advan. Compu. Elec. Thecn ,
3(2), pp. 12–21, 2016.
[11] Nour, A. M. M., El-Mohr, I., and El-Wogoud, A. A.,
“Multifunctional Single Phase Single Stage Grid-Connected
Photovoltaic System”, MSc Thesis, p. 33, 2011.
[12] Avval, H, B., Ahmadi, P., Ghaffarizadeh, A, R., and Saidi, M, H.,
“Thermo-economic-environmental multiobjective optimization of
a gas turbine power plant with preheater using evolutionary
algorithm,” Int. J. Energy Res., 35(5), pp. 389–403, March 2011.
[13] Olivenza-León, D., Medina, A., and Hernández, A. C.,
“Thermodynamic modeling of a hybrid solar gas-turbine power
plant,” Energy Conv. Manag., 93, pp. 435–447, March 2015.
[14] Yazdi, B. A., Yazdi, B. A., Ehyaei, M. A., and Ahmadi, A.,
“Optimization of micro combined heat and power gas turbine by
genetic algorithm,” Therm. Sci., 19(1), pp. 207–218, July 2015.
[15] Zareh, A, D., Saray, R, K., Mirmasoumi, S., and Bahlouli, K.,
“Extensive thermodynamic and economic analysis of the
cogeneration of heat and power system fueled by the blend of
natural gas and biogas,” Energy Conv. Mana., 164, pp. 329–443,
March 2018.
[16] https://globalsolaratlas.info/gam, (n.d.).
[17] Vertex 490W, “Train solar PV module datasheet,” (n.d).
www.trinasolar.com (accessed February 3, 2021).