MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391151025 · doi:10.1002/we.2886

ExaWind: Open‐source CFD for hybrid‐RANS/LES geometry‐resolved wind turbine simulations in atmospheric flows

2024· article· en· W4391151025 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

VenueWind Energy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersOak Ridge National LaboratoryOffice of Energy EfficiencyWind Energy Technologies OfficeNational Nuclear Security AdministrationSandia National LaboratoriesU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyOffice of Science
KeywordsReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsComputational fluid dynamicsAerospace engineeringTurbulenceLarge eddy simulationSolverComputer scienceTurbineTurbine bladeComputational scienceGeometryMechanicsPhysicsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Predictive high‐fidelity modeling of wind turbines with computational fluid dynamics, wherein turbine geometry is resolved in an atmospheric boundary layer, is important to understanding complex flow accounting for design strategies and operational phenomena such as blade erosion, pitch‐control, stall/vortex‐induced vibrations, and aftermarket add‐ons. The biggest challenge with high‐fidelity modeling is the realization of numerical algorithms that can capture the relevant physics in detail through effective use of high‐performance computing. For modern supercomputers, that means relying on GPUs for acceleration. In this paper, we present ExaWind, a GPU‐enabled open‐source incompressible‐flow hybrid‐computational fluid dynamics framework, comprising the near‐body unstructured grid solver Nalu‐Wind, and the off‐body block‐structured‐grid solver AMR‐Wind, which are coupled using the Topology Independent Overset Grid Assembler. Turbine simulations employ either a pure Reynolds‐averaged Navier–Stokes turbulence model or hybrid turbulence modeling wherein Reynolds‐averaged Navier–Stokes is used for near‐body flow and large eddy simulation is used for off‐body flow. Being two‐way coupled through overset grids, the two solvers enable simulation of flows across a huge range of length scales, for example, 10 orders of magnitude going from O(μm) boundary layers along the blades to O(10 km) across a wind farm. In this paper, we describe the numerical algorithms for geometry‐resolved turbine simulations in atmospheric boundary layers using ExaWind. We present verification studies using canonical flow problems. Validation studies are presented using megawatt‐scale turbines established in literature. Additionally presented are demonstration simulations of a small wind farm under atmospheric inflow with different stability states.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.298
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