MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035743122 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2019-0280

Numerical analysis of the ground-mounted solar PV panel array mounting systems subjected to basic wind for optimum design

2020· article· en· W3035743122 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ashish Agarwal, Hassan Irtaza, M. Jamil Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research, India
KeywordsWorkbenchWind speedWind engineeringTilt (camera)Structural engineeringWind directionEngineeringMarine engineeringMeteorologyMechanical engineeringPhysicsVisualization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comprehensive numerical modeling and investigations have been carried out to analyze the effect of wind loads on various solar array mounting frame structures using ANSYS 18 Workbench (Mechanical). Extensive damages of solar arrays and mounting frames have been reported the world over due to high winds. In this study, six array mounting frame types have been considered, subjected to the basic wind of 55 m/s specified for coastal regions of India. India has six basic wind speed zones ranging from 33 m/s to 55 m/s. Many utility-scale solar farms installed in this region are susceptible to high winds. Solar arrays considered of dimension 6 m × 4 m consisting of 12 photo-voltaic (PV) panels each of size 1 m × 2 m, with panel tilt angle varying from 10° to 50°. Wind load subjected to the PV panels in the solar array considered as normal pressure force over the top and bottom surfaces to simulate forward and backward wind direction. Three different materials with their respective mechanical properties, i.e., structural steel channel for mounting truss members, aluminum casing to encapsulate PV panels, and plexiglass sheet for PV panels, were considered and simulated. Wind pressure forces have been determined, using respective net wind pressure coefficients, induced by respective wind speed and tilt angle. Maximum deformation and maximum stresses were determined by modeling and simulation in ANSYS Workbench and compared the results with various array mounting system arrangements for each case of panel tilt angle subjected to both forward and backward wind incidence.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207