MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309121639 · doi:10.3390/en15228553

Atmospheric Drivers of Wind Turbine Blade Leading Edge Erosion: Review and Recommendations for Future Research

2022· article· en· W4309121639 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsWind Energy Institute of Canada
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationEnergiteknologisk udviklings- og demonstrationsprogramSight Research UKNatural Environment Research CouncilU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceWind powerWind speedAerodynamicsPrecipitationTurbineMeteorologyTurbine bladeComputer scienceAerospace engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leading edge erosion (LEE) of wind turbine blades causes decreased aerodynamic performance leading to lower power production and revenue and increased operations and maintenance costs. LEE is caused primarily by materials stresses when hydrometeors (rain and hail) impact on rotating blades. The kinetic energy transferred by these impacts is a function of the precipitation intensity, droplet size distributions (DSD), hydrometeor phase and the wind turbine rotational speed which in turn depends on the wind speed at hub-height. Hence, there is a need to better understand the hydrometeor properties and the joint probability distributions of precipitation and wind speeds at prospective and operating wind farms in order to quantify the potential for LEE and the financial efficacy of LEE mitigation measures. However, there are relatively few observational datasets of hydrometeor DSD available for such locations. Here, we analyze six observational datasets from spatially dispersed locations and compare them with existing literature and assumed DSD used in laboratory experiments of material fatigue. We show that the so-called Best DSD being recommended for use in whirling arm experiments does not represent the observational data. Neither does the Marshall Palmer approximation. We also use these data to derive and compare joint probability distributions of drivers of LEE; precipitation intensity (and phase) and wind speed. We further review and summarize observational metrologies for hydrometeor DSD, provide information regarding measurement uncertainty in the parameters of critical importance to kinetic energy transfer and closure of data sets from different instruments. A series of recommendations are made about research needed to evolve towards the required fidelity for a priori estimates of LEE potential.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.265 · 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