Numerical Simulations of Wind Effects on an Array of Ground Mounted Solar Panels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, numerical simulations using unsteady Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) approach with Shear Stress Transport (SST) k-ω turbulence closure are employed to investigate the wind loads and wind flow field of a ground mounted solar panel array. Atmospheric boundary layer wind profiles for open terrain roughness with Reynolds number of 2.2×106, based on the wind speed at the lower edge and the chord length of a stand-alone system, are employed. Four different wind directions (0°, 45°, 135° and 180°) are considered. The numerical modeling approach employed in this study is validated for a stand-alone solar panel system by comparing the surface pressures with the study by [1] and the velocity field with a Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) measurement carried out in the Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel I at the Western University, Canada. Analyzing the wind flow field for the array configuration shows that for 0° and 180° wind directions, all trailing rows are in the complete wake of the first windward row. It is also shown that in terms of maximum drag and lift, 0° and 180° wind directions are the critical wind directions with the first windward row being the critical row. On the other hand, in terms of overturning moment, 45° and 135° are the critical wind directions, with similar overturning moment coefficients for each row.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".