Wind power system reliability and maintenance optimization considering turbine and wind uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Wind power is an important source of renewable energy and accounts for significant portions in supplying electricity in many countries and locations. The purpose of this paper is to develop a method for wind power system reliability assessment and condition-based maintenance (CBM) optimization considering both turbine and wind uncertainty. Existing studies on wind power system reliability mostly considered wind uncertainty only and did not account for turbine condition prediction. Design/methodology/approach Wind power system reliability can be defined as the probability that the generated power meets the demand, which is affected by both wind uncertainty and wind turbine failures. In this paper, a method is developed for wind power system reliability modeling considering wind uncertainty, as well as wind turbine condition through health condition prediction. All wind turbine components are considered. Optimization is performed for maximizing availability or minimizing cost. Optimization is also conducted for minor repair activities to find the optimal number of joint repairs. Findings The wind turbine condition uncertainty and its prediction are important for wind power system reliability assessment, as well as wind speed uncertainty. Optimal CBM policies can be achieved for optimizing turbine availability or maintenance cost. Optimal preventive maintenance policies can also be achieved for scheduling minor repair activities. Originality/value This paper considers uncertainty in both wind speed and turbine conditions and incorporates turbine condition prediction in reliability analysis and CBM optimization. Optimization for minor repair activities is studied to find the optimal number of joint repairs, which was not investigated before. All wind turbine components are considered, and data from the field as well as reported studies are used.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".