the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 30 Aug 2023
Industry 4.0 Digital Twins in Offshore Wind Farms
Abstract. The use of digital twins in offshore wind farms presents a major opportunity to advance autonomous operations and optimize productivity. By creating virtual replicas of physical assets and systems, digital twins allow for real-time monitoring, predictive maintenance, and efficient decision-making. In the context of Industry 4.0, wind turbines are required not only to be remotely monitored and controlled through real-time data during operation, but also to manage the whole life cycle within the entire value chain. To accomplish this, the implementation of digital twin frameworks in accordance with Industry 4.0 standards is crucial. Motivated by the advanced technologies related to industrial digital twins in the context of Industry 4.0 implemented in the manufacturing sector, this paper presents findings from a study investigating the potential for transferring knowledge of industrial digital twins to offshore wind farm context. To gain a deeper understanding of the digital twin concept in the context of offshore wind applications, we conducted extensive literature studies. Specifically, we examined frameworks used in both the manufacturing industry and offshore wind industry. Our goal is to identify commonalities and differences between these frameworks, and to determine how they could be adapted to the unique requirements of the offshore wind sector. The Asset Administration Shell (AAS), which is a key concept of the Reference Architecture Model for Industry 4.0 (RAMI 4.0), provides a standardized and modular approach to representing and managing assets in industrial systems. By adopting AAS, offshore wind farms could improve the scalability, adaptability, and interoperability of their digital twin systems, and also enable more efficient and effective operation and maintenance of the turbines. Based on our findings, we concluded that implementing the AAS could be a promising option for enhancing the functionality of digital twins in offshore wind farms, and for achieving interoperability in line with the standards of Industry 4.0.
- Preprint
(4612 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on wes-2023-108', Anonymous Referee #1, 12 Sep 2023
General comments
The paper discusses the use of digital twin tools in Industry 4.0 and their possible application in offshore wind farms. Improvement of digital twin technologies is important for development of the wind energy industry and for sure there is potential to use tools developed in other industrial fields. Research about digital twins falls in the topic of condition monitoring, which is in the scope of WES.
After having read this article, I don’t think it is suitable for publication. The first part is a review of digital twin technologies that were used in the manufacturing industry or in the wind energy field. In this review the authors do not explain clearly how to apply the technologies they analyze to the operation of wind farms. Moreover, the article uses a lot of jargon not common in the wind energy field that makes it difficult to read for a member of the wind energy community. The second part of the article presents a case study of a digital twin of a new floating offshore wind farm. This second part of the article is not effective because the information given to the reader is not enough to construct a digital twin, but it is not even a literature review study because authors present just their work and do not give a broad perspective on condition monitoring of floating wind farms. In view of this issue, I don’t think the article is suitable for publication in its current state. I think the authors should clarify the scope of their article, improve the writing, and make the article more appealing and easier to understand for the wind energy community that reads this journal.
Apart from these general comments, I have specific comments and suggestions for technical corrections that I hope can be useful to improve the article. Specific comments are reported below, while technical corrections are in the attached document.
Specific comments
- In the abstract, you should avoid using Industry 4.0, or explain the meaning of this concept in plain words. The same applies to the introduction, where Industry 4.0 appears as the first word.
- Line 6 “advanced technologies”: can you name some of them?
- Section 1 – Introduction. I would use the first section of the article to introduce terms of the Industry 4.0 word that are not familiar to people of the wind energy community. Later you use a lot of jargon and acronyms, and many papers are related to scenarios a lot different from the wind energy field.
- Section 2. I think that before moving to the review of digital twin technologies, it would be beneficial to explain in plain simple words what is a digital twin concept and a digital twin framework.
- Figure 1 is not useful and can be removed. All information inside the figure is already described in the text.
- Section 2. This section is not very useful, and I think it can be removed. This is the description of the literature review process which is normally done in any study and revie article. I think it would be better to re-write this section, merging it with section 3, and cite the most important papers in the literature, mention their findings and how they can be used in the research of this paper.
Technical corrections
See attached document. There are many sentences that are a bit obscure and difficult to understand. I have highlighted them and commented with “rephrase”.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Evi Elisa Ambarita, 27 Oct 2023
We appreciate your feedback. We have revised our manuscript to address all your comments, by
* Adding 1st paragraph of introduction section to explain the urgency of implementing Industry 4.0 standard in wind energy field
* Revising 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of introduction section to address comments about the uncommon jargons (such as industry 4.0, digital twin, framework, and interoperability) and about how to to apply the technologies on the operation of wind farms.
* Rephrasing some confusing sentences.
Please find the attached file for our responses to each point of your comments.
Your inputs have helped improve our paper quality. Hopefully the revised manuscript will be clearer and more understandable for wind energy community.
-
RC2: 'Comment on wes-2023-108', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Sep 2023
This manuscript discussed the potential implementation and solution of building the digital twins for offshore wind farms under the context of industry 4.0. The study of the digital twins for offshore wind farms falls into the scope of WES.
After conducting a thorough review of the manuscript, "Industry 4.0 Digital Twins in Offshore Wind Farms," I believe that the paper has significant potential but requires substantial revisions before it can be considered for publication. Hence, I suggest that the manuscript should be reconsidered after major revisions.
In general, this manuscript tries to combine the research paper review and a case study together, which causes the consequence of limiting the depth of investigation and discussion in both areas. For instance, in session 3, the paper provides a list of research papers in the field and categorizes them based on their main purposes. However, the presentation in this section lacks clarity and depth, making it challenging for readers to grasp the main insights and the connections between these studies. On the case study part, the details of the simulation are not well presented, and the results are plainly listed, which causes a gap between the simulation result discussion and the final drawn conclusion “AAS could be a promising option for enhancing the functionality of digital twins in offshore wind farms”.
I fully acknowledge the efforts from the authors of gathering a substantial amount of research papers and performing simulations. However, I think the authors should clarify the scope of their article, deepen the investigation/discussion making the article more appealing and insightful for the wind energy community that reads this journal.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2023-108-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Evi Elisa Ambarita, 27 Oct 2023
Thank you for your positive feedback of considering our article for publication. We have revised our manuscript to address your comments as well as reviewer 1, by
* Adding 1st paragraph of introduction section to explain the urgency of implementing Industry 4.0 standard in wind energy field
* Revising 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of introduction section to address comments about the uncommon jargons (such as industry 4.0, digital twin, framework, and interoperability) and about how to to apply the technologies on the operation of wind farms.
* Rephrasing some confusing sentences.
We attached a file to response to your comments in detail.
Hopefully, our explanation can provide more understanding to readers and clarify all confusion.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Evi Elisa Ambarita, 27 Oct 2023
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on wes-2023-108', Anonymous Referee #1, 12 Sep 2023
General comments
The paper discusses the use of digital twin tools in Industry 4.0 and their possible application in offshore wind farms. Improvement of digital twin technologies is important for development of the wind energy industry and for sure there is potential to use tools developed in other industrial fields. Research about digital twins falls in the topic of condition monitoring, which is in the scope of WES.
After having read this article, I don’t think it is suitable for publication. The first part is a review of digital twin technologies that were used in the manufacturing industry or in the wind energy field. In this review the authors do not explain clearly how to apply the technologies they analyze to the operation of wind farms. Moreover, the article uses a lot of jargon not common in the wind energy field that makes it difficult to read for a member of the wind energy community. The second part of the article presents a case study of a digital twin of a new floating offshore wind farm. This second part of the article is not effective because the information given to the reader is not enough to construct a digital twin, but it is not even a literature review study because authors present just their work and do not give a broad perspective on condition monitoring of floating wind farms. In view of this issue, I don’t think the article is suitable for publication in its current state. I think the authors should clarify the scope of their article, improve the writing, and make the article more appealing and easier to understand for the wind energy community that reads this journal.
Apart from these general comments, I have specific comments and suggestions for technical corrections that I hope can be useful to improve the article. Specific comments are reported below, while technical corrections are in the attached document.
Specific comments
- In the abstract, you should avoid using Industry 4.0, or explain the meaning of this concept in plain words. The same applies to the introduction, where Industry 4.0 appears as the first word.
- Line 6 “advanced technologies”: can you name some of them?
- Section 1 – Introduction. I would use the first section of the article to introduce terms of the Industry 4.0 word that are not familiar to people of the wind energy community. Later you use a lot of jargon and acronyms, and many papers are related to scenarios a lot different from the wind energy field.
- Section 2. I think that before moving to the review of digital twin technologies, it would be beneficial to explain in plain simple words what is a digital twin concept and a digital twin framework.
- Figure 1 is not useful and can be removed. All information inside the figure is already described in the text.
- Section 2. This section is not very useful, and I think it can be removed. This is the description of the literature review process which is normally done in any study and revie article. I think it would be better to re-write this section, merging it with section 3, and cite the most important papers in the literature, mention their findings and how they can be used in the research of this paper.
Technical corrections
See attached document. There are many sentences that are a bit obscure and difficult to understand. I have highlighted them and commented with “rephrase”.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Evi Elisa Ambarita, 27 Oct 2023
We appreciate your feedback. We have revised our manuscript to address all your comments, by
* Adding 1st paragraph of introduction section to explain the urgency of implementing Industry 4.0 standard in wind energy field
* Revising 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of introduction section to address comments about the uncommon jargons (such as industry 4.0, digital twin, framework, and interoperability) and about how to to apply the technologies on the operation of wind farms.
* Rephrasing some confusing sentences.
Please find the attached file for our responses to each point of your comments.
Your inputs have helped improve our paper quality. Hopefully the revised manuscript will be clearer and more understandable for wind energy community.
-
RC2: 'Comment on wes-2023-108', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Sep 2023
This manuscript discussed the potential implementation and solution of building the digital twins for offshore wind farms under the context of industry 4.0. The study of the digital twins for offshore wind farms falls into the scope of WES.
After conducting a thorough review of the manuscript, "Industry 4.0 Digital Twins in Offshore Wind Farms," I believe that the paper has significant potential but requires substantial revisions before it can be considered for publication. Hence, I suggest that the manuscript should be reconsidered after major revisions.
In general, this manuscript tries to combine the research paper review and a case study together, which causes the consequence of limiting the depth of investigation and discussion in both areas. For instance, in session 3, the paper provides a list of research papers in the field and categorizes them based on their main purposes. However, the presentation in this section lacks clarity and depth, making it challenging for readers to grasp the main insights and the connections between these studies. On the case study part, the details of the simulation are not well presented, and the results are plainly listed, which causes a gap between the simulation result discussion and the final drawn conclusion “AAS could be a promising option for enhancing the functionality of digital twins in offshore wind farms”.
I fully acknowledge the efforts from the authors of gathering a substantial amount of research papers and performing simulations. However, I think the authors should clarify the scope of their article, deepen the investigation/discussion making the article more appealing and insightful for the wind energy community that reads this journal.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2023-108-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Evi Elisa Ambarita, 27 Oct 2023
Thank you for your positive feedback of considering our article for publication. We have revised our manuscript to address your comments as well as reviewer 1, by
* Adding 1st paragraph of introduction section to explain the urgency of implementing Industry 4.0 standard in wind energy field
* Revising 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of introduction section to address comments about the uncommon jargons (such as industry 4.0, digital twin, framework, and interoperability) and about how to to apply the technologies on the operation of wind farms.
* Rephrasing some confusing sentences.
We attached a file to response to your comments in detail.
Hopefully, our explanation can provide more understanding to readers and clarify all confusion.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Evi Elisa Ambarita, 27 Oct 2023
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 766 | 342 | 36 | 1,144 | 30 | 22 |
- HTML: 766
- PDF: 342
- XML: 36
- Total: 1,144
- BibTeX: 30
- EndNote: 22
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
