MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982500216 · doi:10.1260/0309-524x.34.4.375

Vibration Analysis of 2.3 MW Wind Turbine Operation Using the Discrete Wavelet Transform

2010· article· en· W1982500216 on OpenAlexaff
Kyle Bassett, Rupp Carriveau, David S.‐K. Ting

Bibliographic record

VenueWind Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbineVibrationWind powerWaveletDiscrete wavelet transformDowntimeTowerRotor (electric)Daubechies waveletEnergy (signal processing)EngineeringContinuous wavelet transformWavelet transformComputer scienceAcousticsStructural engineeringMathematicsReliability engineeringMechanical engineeringElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligenceStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vibration analysis of operational response data from a 2.3 MW wind turbine is presented. Vibration signals were acquired for two unique environmental conditions with an accelerometer mounted in the turbine tower. A Daubechies 6th order (db6) wavelet was used to perform a 12-level discrete wavelet transform (DWT) revealing trends and similarities within the signals. Full operation signals were segmented into start up and steady state periods. Analysis of turbine start up revealed a common ramping of low frequency energy on the order of rotor rotational frequency. DWT plots were also utilized to reveal high-energy response features related to the mechanical start up of the turbine. Analysis of steady state signals revealed distinct low frequency periodicity evident in the 11th (0.1776Hz) and 12th (0.0888 Hz) decomposition levels. The analysis technique performed shows promise for potential integration into comprehensive structural health monitoring schemes designed to reduce downtime and improve the reliability of commercial wind turbines.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWind EngineeringSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207