the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
On the Uncertainty of Digital Twin Models for Load Monitoring and Fatigue Assessment in Wind Turbine Drivetrains
Abstract. This article presents a systematic assessment of the uncertainty in digital twins for load and fatigue monitoring in wind turbine drivetrains. The uncertainty in the measurement input, the reduced order drivetrain models and the model updating methods are investigated. A statistical analysis is conducted on gear and bearing load measurements from numerical studies with 5 and 10 MW drivetrain models and from field measurements of a 1.5 MW research turbine. The uncertainty is quantified using log-normal distributions and limitations of digital twin are discussed such as the measurement uncertainty in 10 min averaged SCADA data, the uncertainty in estimating the unknown rotor torque, and the modelling errors in torsional reduced order drivetrain models. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of the origin and the effects of uncertainty in digital twins and delivers a foundation for further reliability and risk assessment studies.
- Preprint
(1909 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on wes-2024-28', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Apr 2024
The manuscript entitled "On the Uncertainty of Digital Twin Models for Load Monitoring and Fatigue Assessment in Wind Turbine Drivetrains" deals with a very interesting and timely topic, which for sure fits well with the scientific objectives of the journal.
I have some doubts regarding the conceptual framework. The authors quantify the uncertainty of the employed models by comparing numerical simulations (with high fidelity models and 200 Hz of frequency) against other numerical simulations (which have lower frequency, or employ Kalman filters, or simulate a dynamic behavior through reduced models). For me, it is slightly misleading to call this "uncertainty". The uncertainty is something related to a process of measurement. Sincerely, I would rather call it information loss, or something like similar.
Furthermore, I am not convinced by the way the authors define the various uncertainties. For example, above Equation 3, the authors say that the system identification uncertainty is defined as the ratio of the true system parameter to the estimated parameter set. I do not agree. An uncertainty is a difference with respect to a true parameter. One might consider the relative uncertainty, which is the ratio of the difference with respect to a true parameter to the true parameter itself. None of these have the form of true / estimated value. I suggest elaborating on this point and presenting the problem in a more consistent way.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-28-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on wes-2024-28', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Apr 2024
The manuscript titled "On the Uncertainty of Digital Twin Models for Load Monitoring and Fatigue Assessment in Wind Turbine Drivetrains." addresses a timely and relevant topic related to understanding and quantifying uncertainties associated with digital twin technology for load and fatigue monitoring of wind turbine drivetrains.The numerical studies of this manuscript provides a comprehensive analysis of various sources of uncertainty. The use of log-normal distributions to quantify uncertainties is appropriate and well-justified.However, I do agree with the first reviewer's opinion that the "uncertainty" should be defined as the difference between simulated results and real measured data. Hence I suggest revising the conceptual framework as a study on the information loss under different simulation conditions.In conclusion, this manuscript presents valuable research on the "uncertainties" inherent in digital twin technology for wind turbine drivetrain monitoring, but certain aspects of the conceptual framework and uncertainty definitions need revision for clarity and consistency. After the authors have considered and incorporated the suggested revisions, I believe the study will contribute significantly to the existing body of knowledge. I recommend publication following these improvements.Citation: https://doi.org/
10.5194/wes-2024-28-RC2
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
179 | 34 | 9 | 222 | 3 | 3 |
- HTML: 179
- PDF: 34
- XML: 9
- Total: 222
- BibTeX: 3
- EndNote: 3
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1