MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329191851 · doi:10.2514/6.2013-1062

Manufacturing Defect Effects on Bend-Twist Coupled Wind Turbine Blades

2013· article· en· W2329191851 on OpenAlex
Michael McWilliam, Curran Crawford

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

Venue51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbine bladeStructural engineeringDeflection (physics)Coupling (piping)Wind powerTwistMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringTurbineEngineeringPhysicsOpticsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New design concepts for large flexible blades are needed to continue the trend towards ever larger turbines and continued economies of scale. Load alleviation based on building bend-twist coupling into the blades is an attractive concept because it can reduce the root bending moments and the fatigue damage in the blades with a negligible affect on the annual energy production. The challenges in quality control associated with fiber laminate lay-up processes present a risk associated with this concept. This study attempts to quantify this risk by evaluating the sensitivity of the blade’s elastic properties to various manufacturing defects. This study will look at the bend-twist coupling coefficient, weight, internal stress and tip deflection. The defects that will be considered are errors in position, size and thickness of the layers along with errors in the fiber angle.

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), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · 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