MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365503845 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2022-0149

CFD modeling of vertical-axis wind turbine wake interaction

2023· article· en· W4365503845 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Belkacem Belabes, Marius Paraschivoiu

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCompute Canada
KeywordsMarine engineeringWind powerTurbineWakeComputational fluid dynamicsRotor (electric)Vertical axis wind turbineEnvironmental scienceAerospace engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since wind turbines placed in wind farms need to minimize their footprint on the ground, the effects of the wake must be considered. Placement optimization, turbine spacing, and direction of rotation are known to affect the performance of vertical-axis wind turbines (VAWTs). However, rigorous numerical modeling methodologies that investigate the influence of these characteristics are lacking, especially in the case of large wind turbines. The goal of this study is to analyze turbine configurations that might enhance the power production of VAWT farms using two-dimensional CFD models based on the Star CCM+ package. The novelty of this work is to analyze wind farm configurations for very large turbines. This is important because large turbines are much more performant than small turbines and have a high power coefficient. Results show that CFD simulations adequately capture the performance of wind turbines in farms with multiple VAWTs. In general, if a second rotor is spaced more than 10 turbine diameters downstream of the first rotor, the effect of the wake is less significant. Furthermore, a specific farm configuration with five VAWTs is investigated and shows a 20% increase in power output compared with the same number of turbines operating in isolation.

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 score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207