Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Strain processing example #358

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Nov 25, 2024
Merged

Conversation

akeeste
Copy link
Contributor

@akeeste akeeste commented Nov 1, 2024

This example demonstrates a workflow to process strain gauge data from tidal turbine blade testing. Functions are not being included in an MHKiT module because test set-up is too variable to make generic functions easily. For now the workflow will live in this example notebook.

Data / code from:
Budi Gunawan, Kim Haulenbeek, Mohammed Abdellatef, Richard Streit, Eli Lynn, Mike Willis, Darren Pendley, Damian Gallegos-Patterson, Vincent Neary, Martin Wosnik (2024)
Calibration Of Fiber Optic Rosette Sensors For Measuring Bending Moment On Tidal Turbine Blades
International Conference on Ocean Energy, Melbourne, Australia, September 17 – 19, 2024.

@akeeste akeeste requested a review from hivanov-nrel November 1, 2024 14:32
@hivanov-nrel
Copy link
Contributor

Hi Adam, could you upload the images that are in the notebook? I think the files are missing in the repo.

@akeeste
Copy link
Contributor Author

akeeste commented Nov 6, 2024

@hivanov-nrel I fixed the image links and pushed them to examples/data/strain

Copy link
Contributor

@hivanov-nrel hivanov-nrel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi Adam, good job on creating this example, which is a great introduction to someone who is trying to process strain gauge data.

I only have a few remarks that may potentially help improve clarity:

  • I'm not familiar with this type of setup, but one question that comes to mind is that you mentioned that the blade is attached to a thin-walled rectangular cube. In your calculations, you consider the cross section to be where the blade enters the cube. Usually, the cross section is taken at the strain gauges themselves, which would result in a simple hollow rectangle. Unless i'm misunderstanding the "thin-walled" part and the cross section is actually the same throughout?
  • It would be nice to add an image that shows a profile view of how the blade is loaded in relation to gravity. This would help add more meaning to the results. Maybe also adding some text explaining how the load is applied in the context of the strain gauge (blade transfers load to box which is "x" distance away from strain gauge measurement). This would provide more context for why we see that kind of moment.
  • One of the main challenges of working with strain gauge data is answering "does this make sense?". So beyond just processing the data, adding commentary to the results may help someone get into that kind of mindset and have a better understanding of how to go about interpreting their own data later.

@akeeste
Copy link
Contributor Author

akeeste commented Nov 11, 2024

Hi Adam, good job on creating this example, which is a great introduction to someone who is trying to process strain gauge data.

I only have a few remarks that may potentially help improve clarity:

  • I'm not familiar with this type of setup, but one question that comes to mind is that you mentioned that the blade is attached to a thin-walled rectangular cube. In your calculations, you consider the cross section to be where the blade enters the cube. Usually, the cross section is taken at the strain gauges themselves, which would result in a simple hollow rectangle. Unless i'm misunderstanding the "thin-walled" part and the cross section is actually the same throughout?
  • It would be nice to add an image that shows a profile view of how the blade is loaded in relation to gravity. This would help add more meaning to the results. Maybe also adding some text explaining how the load is applied in the context of the strain gauge (blade transfers load to box which is "x" distance away from strain gauge measurement). This would provide more context for why we see that kind of moment.
  • One of the main challenges of working with strain gauge data is answering "does this make sense?". So beyond just processing the data, adding commentary to the results may help someone get into that kind of mindset and have a better understanding of how to go about interpreting their own data later.

Thanks @hivanov-nrel. All good points. I'll pull in some higher level context from the test report to address your comments

@akeeste
Copy link
Contributor Author

akeeste commented Nov 15, 2024

@hivanov-nrel I finished a few more updates providing greater context on the test set-up and details of the blade root geometry. I'm waiting for an okay to push certain figures. I'll comment when that is done and I can push the rest of the updates

@akeeste
Copy link
Contributor Author

akeeste commented Nov 19, 2024

@hivanov-nrel The additional figures and context on experimental set-up are now pushed

@akeeste
Copy link
Contributor Author

akeeste commented Nov 25, 2024

@hivanov-nrel the review comments were addressed so I'll merge this PR. If you any other questions come up, we can refine in a future PR.

@akeeste akeeste merged commit ca9709f into MHKiT-Software:develop Nov 25, 2024
43 checks passed
@akeeste akeeste deleted the strain_measurements branch December 3, 2024 15:41
@ssolson ssolson mentioned this pull request Dec 4, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants