MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281879395 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2015-0013

OPTIMAL DESIGN FOR A COMPOSITE WIND TURBINE BLADE WITH FATIGUE AND FAILURE CONSTRAINTS

2015· article· en· W2281879395 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Adam Chehouri, Rafic Younès, Adrian Ilinca, Jean Perron, Hassan Lakiss

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersUniversité Libanaise
KeywordsTurbine bladeBlade (archaeology)TurbineRotor (electric)Structural engineeringWind powerRenewable energyComposite numberComputer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The search for more efficient and sustainable renewable energies is rapidly growing. Throughout the years, wind turbines matured towards a lowered cost-of-energy and have grown in rotor size therefore stretched the role of composite materials that offered the solution to more flexible, lighter and stronger blades. The objective of this paper is to present an improved version of the preliminary optimization tool called Co-Blade, which will offer designers and engineers an accelerated design phase by providing the capabilities to rapidly evaluate alternative composite layups and study their effects on static failure and fatigue of wind turbine blades. In this study, the optimization formulations include non-linear failure constraints. In addition a comparison between 3 formulations is made to show the importance of choosing the blade mass as the main objective function and the inclusion of failure constraints in the wind turbine blade design.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207