MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Novel Image Analysis Method for Blade Aerodynamic Performance on Operational Turbine

2014· article· en· W1997696793 on OpenAlexafffund
Nigel Swytink‐Binnema, David A. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of WaterlooOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsStall (fluid mechanics)AerodynamicsTurbineTurbine bladeTuftWind tunnelFlow visualizationMarine engineeringWind powerVisualizationComputer scienceEngineeringAerospace engineeringFlow (mathematics)Mechanical engineeringElectrical engineeringPhysicsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tuft flow visualisation has been used to study aerodynamic stall on wind turbine blades for several decades. In recent years, advances in the processing power of personal computers have made digital image processing vastly more accessible. In this paper, therefore, a novel method is presented to digitally analyse tuft flow visualisation on the blade of an operating wind turbine. Examination of the outboard 40% of the blade of a 10 m diameter wind turbine revealed stalled flow in wind speeds from 5m/s to 20m/s. The region of stall at those speeds increased from 5% to 40% of the coverage area of the tufts. This increase in the amount of stalled flow is expected for stall-regulated wind turbines. Overall, the results are very promising and demonstrate potential for a wide range of aerodynamics applications including real-time blade stall determination and classical wind tunnel aerodynamics studies.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207