4.7 Article

Insights on the impact of structural health monitoring systems on the operation and maintenance of offshore wind support structures

期刊

STRUCTURAL SAFETY
卷 94, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.strusafe.2021.102154

关键词

Offshore wind; Maintenance; Structural health monitoring systems

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Offshore wind technologies have shown potential for decarbonization, but cost reduction is needed; Structural health monitoring systems may reduce operation and maintenance costs for offshore wind, but their benefits are still unclear; A stochastic model and Monte Carlo simulation provide insights into the impact of these systems.
Offshore wind technologies have demonstrated their potential to contribute to the decarbonization of the economy throughout the last few years. Nonetheless, their costs are yet higher than those of other renewable solutions, thus cost reduction strategies are required to bring these costs to non-subsidized levels. The use of structural health monitoring systems on offshore structures may prove advantageous for operation and maintenance costs, but these benefits are not yet clear. Here, a stochastic approach is used to evaluate the benefits which may arise from the use of these systems on the support structures of offshore wind. The relevant failure modes acknowledged for the common monopile-type turbine were selected based on real events, and the evaluation of the critical regions of these structures was performed making use of results from the literature. The stochastic model was built based on a Monte Carlo simulation, providing both a tool to produce a sensitivity analysis on the system performance, as well as insights on the impact of structural health monitoring systems on the total energy output of a certain farm. Results from the model indicate that structural health monitoring systems may indeed be an asset for offshore wind operation, however other parameters influence their potential and attractiveness to farm owners.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据