MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120499467 · doi:10.1109/pes.2007.385462

Voltage Sag Impact on Wind Turbine Tower Vibration

2007· article· en· W2120499467 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbineWind powerAerodynamicsVoltage sagTowerVibrationWind speedVoltageEngineeringMarine engineeringElectric power systemAutomotive engineeringPower (physics)Mechanical engineeringStructural engineeringElectrical engineeringAerospace engineeringPhysicsAcousticsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to study the voltage sag impact on mechanical vibration of wind turbine structure a detailed model that considers all three electrical, mechanical and aerodynamic aspects of the wind turbine must be considered. A drawback of many works in the area of wind turbine simulation is that either a very simple mechanical model is used with a detailed electrical model or vice versa. Hence the effects of interactions between electrical and mechanical components are not accurately taken into account. In this paper, three simulation programs - TurbSim, FAST, and Simulink - are used to model the wind, mechanical and electrical parts of a wind turbine, and its controllers in detail. Simulation results obtained from the model are used to observe the interaction of all three factors affecting the operation of a wind turbine system. Especially, the voltage sag impact on tower vibration is investigated, considering different power system characteristics (i.e. short circuit level (SCL) and X/R ratio), and wind turbine operating conditions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.225 · 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