ExaWind: Open‐source CFD for hybrid‐RANS/LES geometry‐resolved wind turbine simulations in atmospheric flows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".