Jump to content

Update on #40 Vibratory Mode

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Discussion about #40 vibratory mode and identifying suspect anemometers

62 topics in this forum

  1. I have question about temperature

    By violet94,
    • 0 replies
    • 155 views

  2. Updates to identification of dry friction whip

    By tsmoker,
    • 1 reply
    • 15,778 views

  3. Vibratory Mode Anemometer Replacement

    By fabianb,
    • 6 replies
    • 15,786 views

  4. Link to slides from last webinar presentation

    By ColinMurray,
    • 2 replies
    • 11,040 views

  5. Replacement of unused sensors

    By Michael,
    • 2 replies
    • 10,688 views

  6. AWEA Windpower 2009 Presentation "Investigation of the NRG #40 Anemometer Slowdown"

    By Julia Austin,
    • 5 replies
    • 17,273 views

  7. NRG #40 anemometers

    By Steve_Heidra,
    • 2 replies
    • 10,670 views

  8. Could you elaborate on recommendations for how to use data from masts with corrupted sensors?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 2 replies
    • 10,771 views

  9. Can NRG specify by serial number which sensors can enter the vibratory mode? How do we determine if sensors delivered are within the problem batch(es)?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 3 replies
    • 16,826 views

  10. vibration problem in #40 anemometer

    By techfe,
    • 1 reply
    • 9,406 views

  11. White Paper: "Investigation of the NRG #40 Anemometer Slowdown" by Steven H. Clark

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 10,490 views

  12. what is vibratory mode?

    By ROHAN JADHAV,
    • 1 reply
    • 10,791 views

  13. Update on #40C Sensor Shipments

    By ltj,
    • 10 replies
    • 29,093 views

  14. Icefree3 sensors

    By GemmaAllen,
    • 1 reply
    • 9,183 views

  15. Does NRG plan to develop any tools that will aid in identifying and cleaning these areas of bad data?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 7,861 views

  16. What is the expected timing for recommendations/conclusions on how to fully identify/correct problems with sensor drag?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 7,423 views

  17. What is the magnitude of additional uncertainty that a dragging sensor is estimated to cause (%)?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 8,636 views

  18. Is there a standard uncertainty value that will be added, and has this been quantified by GH, AWS, or DNV-GEC?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 8,141 views

  19. Can we get a transcript and copy of this presentation?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 7,023 views

  20. What are the criteria for replacing an instrument? Will NRG liberally replace any sensor showing signs of this problem in 10-minute data, even if your post-calibration tests do not excite the vibration mode in the sensor?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 7,629 views

  21. What is the magnitude of any planned cost increase per sensor for a 'revised' sensor?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 7,139 views

  22. What is your recommendation on parallel installs other manufacturers' sensors alongside the 40C to compare the data (i.e. at what height and direction to install new, third party sensors)?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 6,061 views

  23. Do you have an estimated timeline for when field testing and reengineering [sic] will be complete?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 6,434 views

  24. Has this problem been seen on both tubular and lattice towers? Also, has this problem been seen on varying boom lengths/types?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 3,722 views

  25. Could this problem be found in the non-calibrated #40 anemometers?

    By Julia Austin,
    • 0 replies
    • 3,959 views
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...