MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129392728 · doi:10.1142/s0218539321500248

Integrated Prognosis for Wind Turbine Gearbox Condition-Based Maintenance Considering Time-Varying Load and Crack Initiation Time Uncertainty

2021· article· en· W3129392728 on OpenAlexaff
Fangfang Ding, Zhigang Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Reliability Quality and Safety Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrognosticsTurbineWarrantyWind powerCondition monitoringReliability engineeringCondition-based maintenanceEngineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maintenance management in wind energy industry has great impact on the overall wind power cost. Maintenance services are either supported by wind turbine manufacturers within warranty period, or managed by wind farm owners. With condition-based maintenance (CBM) strategy, maintenance activities are scheduled based on the predicted health conditions of wind turbine components, and accurate prognostics methods are critical for effective CBM. The reported studies on integrated health prognostics considered the uncertainty in crack initiation time (CIT) uncertainty, but did not incorporate time-varying loading conditions, which could also have a significant impact on future health condition and remaining useful life (RUL) prediction. Constant loads were generally used to approximate the actual time-varying loading conditions. In this paper, an integrated prognostics method is proposed for wind turbine gearboxes considering both time-varying loading conditions and CIT uncertainty. As new condition monitoring observations are available, the distributions of both material model parameter and CIT are updated via Bayesian inference, and the failure time prediction is updated accordingly. An example is provided to demonstrate that the proposed time-varying load approach presents more benefits considering the uncertainty of CIT, with significant accuracy improvement comparing to the constant-load approach.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Reliability Quality and Safety EngineeringSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207