Wake Dynamics and Vortex Interaction Around Tripile Foundations for Offshore Wind Turbines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The complex interaction of wake dynamics around tripile foundations for offshore wind turbines is investigated using large eddy simulations. The foundation consists of two cylinders at the front and one behind and is arranged in two different triangular configurations with spacing ratios of s/D = 3 and s/D = 5 (where s and D represent the spacing and cylinder diameter, respectively). A key objective is to examine the influence of the tripile configuration and variation of the spacing ratios on wake interference, vortex dynamics, and momentum transfer. The mean flow field depicts the submerged foundations obstruct free flow, which creates unsteadiness in velocity and pressure fields that lead to vortex generation and wake interactions between adjacent structures. The wake topology downstream of the submerged foundation is influenced by the interaction of the separated and reattaching flow near the foundation surfaces. The three-dimensional flow with large-scale and small-scale structures is investigated. Key flow features include Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities, horseshoe vortices, and the transition between quadrupole and multipole wake regimes with spacing variation. The study reveals s/D = 3 led to strong wake interactions and unified vortex dynamics, characterized by vortex loops and synchronized shedding. In contrast, s/D = 5 results in reduced interference and more independent wake structures with distinct frequencies. The outcome of this study seeks to advance the design of tripile foundations, improving operational safety, reducing wake effects, and minimizing localized scour in marine environments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".