On the evaluation of wind loads for wind turbines' foundation design: Experimental and numerical investigations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past two decades, wind farms have been enjoying renewed interest as means for clean and renewable energy production. Larger and taller wind turbines are used for harvesting wind energy. In this paper, a boundary-layer wind tunnel experiment was carried out on a model of the 5-MW National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) wind turbine, to evaluate overall wind-induced base loadings in a parked condition. While mean and background base loadings were measured experimentally, a posttest dynamic analysis framework is developed to assess inertial loads analytically. The analytical analysis is carried out under both rigid and flexible tower-foundation assumptions. Whenever applicable, the wind tunnel measurements are compared with NREL results, which were obtained by using the Fatigue, Aerodynamics, Structures, and Turbulence (FAST) software. The comparison shows a good agreement between the proposed approach and the available FAST results. In addition, the study indicates that the flexibility of the foundation may result in a reduced overall wind loads, due to base isolation effects. However, the assumption of a rigid foundation results in a slightly conservative base loads. This said, depending on the available foundation system, the methodology followed in the current paper remains in force and the base stiffness can be updated to permit the estimation of actual foundation loadings.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 it