MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618076678 · doi:10.11159/icmie17.122

The Stiffness Evaluation of Tracking Solar Power Generator for Wind Load

2017· article· en· W2618076678 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Youngeun Kim, Kyuwon Jeong

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStiffnessGenerator (circuit theory)Tracking (education)Wind powerPower (physics)Maximum power point trackingBase load power plantComputer scienceMarine engineeringElectrical engineeringElectricity generationAutomotive engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringStructural engineeringPhysicsVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the efficiency of the solar power system is dependent on the incident solar light, the solar modules have to be installed towards the sun.[1]Because the tracking type can adjust the angle of the solar module following the sun, the energy efficiency of this type is good.Since the tracking structure has to be installed outdoors, loads such as self weight, wind load, snow load, earthquake load have to be considered.In this paper, just two kinds of loads; the self weight and wind load, were considered for the simulation.The others were ignored because they are small relatively.The simulation was done using Ansys FEM code.[2-5]Wind load was simulated using the wind speed and the fluid properties set appropriate to the area where the structure was installed.From the simulation they were found how much stresses and deformations were caused by these loads.A series of experiments was conducted to verify the result of the simulation.Strain gages were attached to the position where the large strain value was shown in the simulation.[6,7] Comparing those results the stiffness of the tracker was verified.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Mechanical, Chemical, and Material EngineeringSame topicEngineering Applied ResearchFrench-language works237,207