MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7070301592

Operations & Maintenance Simulation for Tidal Energy Converters:

2018· report· en· W7070301592 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRepository hosted by TU Delft Library (TU Delft) · 2018
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperabilityTidal powerTurbineMarine energyRenewable energySubmarine pipelineOffshore wind powerWind powerCurrent (fluid)Tidal current
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

he Netherlands is establishing its own test and development centre for marine energy: the Dutch Marine Energy Centre (DMEC), in order to facilitate essential real sea experience. However, realistic simulations in software is also important: helping avoid expensive failures, plan costs and choose vessels and equipment for offshore renewable energy farms. ECN O&M Calculator is a time domain simulation tool used to model different Operations & Maintenance (O&M) strategies for offshore wind farms and to compute the corresponding KPIs. This has been converted to be useful for tidal current energy farms, through the following adaptations: 1. An updated user interface; 2. Use of tidal currents and weather at multiple locations for operability assessment of vessels; 3. More flexible and multiple shift patterns to use short, changing access periods at slack tide; 4. Separation between deterministic tidal currents and uncertain waves for simulation, and use of tidal currents-instead of wind-for turbine performance; 5. Inclusion of a powerful weather simulator to improve understanding of long-term variability of KPIs. This new tool is applied to case studies through working closely with Tocardo International BV, a developer of tidal current energy turbines based at Den Oever, The Netherlands. The expected performance of their planned test projects, at FORCE in Canada and EMEC in Scotland, are assessed in terms of costs and availability, based on the planned O&M strategy. Subsequently, improved O&M strategies for these projects are explored through simulations. At FORCE, waiting on spares and waiting for vessels to complete long transits have a significant impact on farm performance. The 15-year average availability using the baseline O&M strategy is 69.2%, costing 5.08 M$/year. By applying a stock control to two spare parts, the availability increases to 90.7% (yield) while the costs increase to 5.88 M$/year. Further, the planned number of three standby speedboats is unnecessary, and can be reduced to one. At EMEC, a similar result is found, where stock control and improving the speed of the tug boats can significantly improve performance. The baseline O&M strategy results in average availability of 68.7%, costing 0.25M£/year. By contrast, the best strategy found gives an availability of 84.4%, costing 0.32M£/year.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.280
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepository hosted by TU Delft Library (TU Delft)French-language works237,207