MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989677737 · doi:10.1115/omae2019-95837

Characterizing Impacts of Atmospheric Turbulence on Wind Farms Through Large Eddy Simulation (LES)

2019· article· en· W2989677737 on OpenAlexaff
Jahrul Alam, Anton Afanassiev, Jagdeep Singh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanetary boundary layerTurbulenceWind powerEnvironmental scienceTurbulence kinetic energyMeteorologyAtmospheric turbulenceTowerAtmospheric sciencesWind profile power lawWind gradientWind speedAtmosphere (unit)Large eddy simulationWind shearPhysicsEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wind farms extract energy from the lowest part of the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL). Thus, characterizing the impacts of atmospheric turbulence — precisely, which aspect of it enhances or hinders the capacity factor of wind farms — is currently the least understood and the most demanding topic of wind energy research. This article demonstrates a Large Eddy Simulation (LES) of atmospheric turbulence around an array of 41 full-scale wind turbines with a rotor diameter of 126 m. A wall-adaptive subgrid-scale (SGS) model for atmospheric turbulence around wind farms has been examined. For a moist-free atmosphere in the afternoon, the spectra of kinetic energy are compared with Kolmogorov’s energy spectrum. The power production is discussed with respect to staggered arrangements of turbines. Results show that the LES model has the potential to account for atmospheric turbulence for optimizing tower placements in wind farms.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207