Field monitoring of the ground vibrations adjacent to an onshore wind turbine foundation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigations of the soil–foundation interaction behaviour of wind turbine foundations and transfer of energy from the wind to the ground have not been reported in Canada. Indeed, very few vibration monitoring studies have been conducted globally around wind farms. It has been found that turbines predominantly produce vibrations related to structural resonances and blade-passing frequencies. Energy is found to be modified with distance and is dominated by surface waves. This paper describes a study of the effect of wind–structure interaction on the behaviour of a turbine foundation and the generation of ground-based vibrations around a working commercial wind turbine in Ontario. The field monitoring system and meteorological instrumentation are described in this paper and the responses of the structure and surrounding ground due to the fluctuating wind-field are discussed. The spectral analysis shows that the higher frequency vibrations attenuate more rapidly than the lower frequency vibrations. The tilted elliptical particle motions are found to be non-Gaussian because of the non-Gaussian wind conditions. The response attenuation with distance indicates that both geometric and material attenuation may dominate the vibration attenuation in the near field and only geometric attenuation occurs in the far field.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".