MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611937389 · doi:10.1115/1.4036633

Modeling of a Wind Turbine Rotor Blade System

2017· article· en· W2611937389 on OpenAlexaff
Dayuan Ju, Qiao Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of vibration and acoustics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlade element theoryRotor (electric)AerodynamicsTurbine bladeBlade element momentum theoryVibrationHelicopter rotorTurbineCoupling (piping)Structural engineeringRotation (mathematics)EngineeringBlade pitchMechanicsPhysicsMechanical engineeringComputer scienceAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In wind turbine blade modeling, the coupling between rotor rotational motion and blade vibration has not been thoroughly investigated. The inclusion of the coupling terms in the wind turbine dynamics equations helps us understand the phenomenon of rotor oscillation due to blade vibration and possibly diagnose faults. In this study, a dynamics model of a rotor-blade system for a horizontal axis wind turbine (HAWT), which describes the coupling terms between the blade elastic movement and rotor gross rotation, is developed. The model is developed by using Lagrange's approach and the finite-element method has been adopted to discretize the blade. This model captures two-way interactions between aerodynamic wind flow and structural response. On the aerodynamic side, both steady and unsteady wind flow conditions are considered. On the structural side, blades are considered to deflect in both flap and edge directions while the rotor is treated as a rigid body. The proposed model is cross-validated against a model developed in the simulation software fatigue, aerodynamics, structure, and turbulence (fast). The coupling effects are excluded during the comparison since fast does not include these terms. Once verified, we added coupling terms to our model to investigate the effects of blade vibration on rotor movement, which has direct influence on the generator behavior. It is illustrated that the inclusion of coupling effects can increase the sensitivity of blade fault detection methods. The proposed model can be used to investigate the effects of different terms as well as analyze fluid–structure interaction.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of vibration and acousticsSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207