Aerodynamic Properties Identification for Small-Size Wind Turbine Blade Airfoil Sections Using the CFD Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, three airfoil sections at the root, middle, and tip of the blade of the Sunforce 400 W conventional wind turbine were investigated at different angles of attack using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) to identify the stall occurrence correlated with the maximum of the lift coefficient.To verify the CFD models, firstly, simulation results of the NACA 4412 airfoil were calculated using the XFOIL code and the CFD method, and compared against available experimental data when using a k-ω SST turbulence model.Then, lift coefficients for the three airfoil sections of the small-size wind turbine blade obtained from the CFD simulations and k-ω SST turbulence model, were calculated and compared with each other.The simulations were performed at three flow speeds, V = 3, 5 and 7m/s, while the angle of attack was varied between -2 and 15 degrees until stall occurred.Flow separation occurred close to the leading edge of the airfoil at the middle and tip of the blade at lower angles of attack, while the airfoil section at the root of the blade was more successful in keeping the flow attached to the surface.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".