MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1507456777 · doi:10.1080/15435075.2012.675799

Wind Turbine Performance in Controlled Conditions: Experimental Results

2012· article· en· W1507456777 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Gaunt, David A. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Green Energy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbineRotational speedWind powerMarine engineeringWind speedRange (aeronautics)Power (physics)Environmental scienceTurbine bladeAutomotive engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringMeteorologyAerospace engineeringElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Experimental research has been completed using a custom designed and built 4.3 m diameter wind turbine in a large scale university operated indoor wind facility. The primary purpose of the turbine testing outlined here was to determine the power production of the turbine. These tests were completed over a wide range of wind speeds and turbine blade rotational speeds. Two other previous large scale wind turbine tests are also briefly discussed with a comparison outlining the unique aspects of these experiments. Power production tests were completed covering a range of mean wind speeds, 6.4 m/s to 11.1 m/s nominal, and turbine low speed shaft rotational rates, 40 rpm to 220 rpm. This testing allowed the total power produced by the blades to be determined as a function of input wind speed, as traditionally found in power curves for commercial turbines. The coefficient of power, CP , was determined as a function of the tip speed ratio λ which gives insight into the peak power production of the experi...

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Green EnergySame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207