Experimental load measurement on a yawed wind turbine and comparison to FAST
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Current interest in unsteady aerodynamics of yawed turbines for wake redirection and cyclic load alleviation requires a clear understanding of turbine load fluctuation with azimuth position. To that end, an experimental 3.5 m diameter wind turbine rig was designed to measure rotor torque, flapwise/edgewise blade root bending moment, and normal force coefficient at r/R=0.66 and 0.82. The turbine was tested inside a large scale wind generation facility with a blockage ratio of 7%. Simultaneously and in time-resolved fashion, measurements were collected to produce phase-averaged performance parameters that are presented versus azimuth while the turbine is operating at different tip speed ratios and yaw angles. The NREL FAST code predictions were then compared to experimental data under the same conditions. It was found that in non-yawed conditions, FAST predictions were accurate but discrepancies start to emerge when the turbine is yawed and operating in dynamic stall conditions. In non-yawed cases, the discrepancy between experimental and FAST data is less than 7% when the flow is attached and increases to 22% when the flow is stalled. One of the main sources of discrepancy found is in the process of correcting the airfoil coefficients to account for 3D flow effects using AirfoilPrep.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".