search

IEA-Task-43 / digital_wra_data_standard

IEA Task 43: pre-construction energy estimate data standard repository
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
58 stars 16 forks source link

Mounting arrangements properties issues #5

Closed kersting closed 4 years ago

kersting commented 4 years ago
stephenholleran commented 4 years ago

Hi G,

  • [mounting_type_id] I wonder if we should include the case for the booms that are side mounted but incorrectly mounted above the mast. This does not represent good practices and it has a direct effect on the data.

Do you mean like this?

 >-<                         >-<             
  |                           |
  |                           |
  |___________________________|
             |\  |
             | \ |
             |__\|
             |\  |
             | \ |
             |__\|

I suppose that isn't a goal post layout but how would it be treated differently than a goal post layout?

  • [boom_orientation_deg] Some folks use theodolites to get their boom orientation and therefore, I think we should not restrict ourselves to integers.

Done. And a load of others.

  • [ new field] What about the use of magnetic declination? We could create a calculated field given that we have the dates, and mast location. We could use https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/calculators/magcalc.shtml to generate that information. Users very often make mistakes on that and we can easily automate that. I could take this task. This could even eliminate the need of orientation_reference_id and reference angles always in magnetic which is what is measured on the field.

I think this is a good idea but not sure if we should restrict just yet. As discussed on the call today not all orientation measurements might be referencing magnetic north as some could be done by getting the bearing of two gps points which then reference grid/true north. Also, if we want to set a standard true north might be more appropriate as it would be inline with WGS84 lat longs that we have and it doesn't change like magnetic does. As agreed on the call we should leave it as is for this version 0 and come back to it after some learning from adoption.

kersting commented 4 years ago

Hey Stephen,

For the mounting. The configuration that you showed could be one but there is also this one that is even worse. The anemometers are barely on the top of the tower or just below of it. I think this needs to be communicated somehow. Perhaps if one has the anemometer height, tower height, and upstand height, then you can do a check to see if you’re on that situation. The analyst needs a hint that their top instruments are partially obstructed. I guess I’m making things hard to myself now that I realize that this can be actually calculated from the other database properties. Now I’m in brainstorm session. We could create a python code that checks if a mast is following the IEC recommendations for each instrument. This would save the analyst some time and it would tell where are potential problems in the mast. If it makes sense I think I could take that task.

-< >-<

| |\ | |

|| \ ||

         |__\|

         |\  |

         | \ |

         |__\|

Regarding the magnetic declination, I’m fine leaving as it is and put in a future version.

Thanks for looking at my comments.

Best regards,

Gibson Kersting RWE Renewables Americas, LLC M +1-512-574-6025

From: stephenholleran notifications@github.com Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 12:59 PM To: IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard digital_wra_data_standard@noreply.github.com Cc: Kersting, Gibson gibson.kersting@rwe.com; Author author@noreply.github.com Subject: Re: [IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard] Mounting arrangements properties issues (#5)

Hi G,

Do you mean like this?

-< >-<

| |

| |

|___|

         |\  |

         | \ |

         |__\|

         |\  |

         | \ |

         |__\|

I suppose that isn't a goal post layout but how would it be treated differently than a goal post layout?

Done. And a load of others.

I think this is a good idea but not sure if we should restrict just yet. As discussed on the call today not all orientation measurements might be referencing magnetic north as some could be done by getting the bearing of two gps points which then reference grid/true north. Also, if we want to set a standard true north might be more appropriate as it would be inline with WGS84 lat longs that we have and it doesn't change like magnetic does. As agreed on the call we should leave it as is for this version 0 and come back to it after some learning from adoption.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard/issues/5#issuecomment-670086197, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AESEJN4BLLKZ6TR4YFZHMTTR7LVOPANCNFSM4PQFGZ6Q.

stephenholleran commented 4 years ago

We could create a python code that checks if a mast is following the IEC recommendations for each instrument. This would save the analyst some time and it would tell where are potential problems in the mast. If it makes sense I think I could take that task.

I think that is a great idea. It could be one of the wow factors that could be shown to analysts highlighting the benefits of adopting this. It could be a quick win. If you are happy to take it on then great. A location to place the code might be in this repo's 'tools' folder. If you need some permission for this repo to create a branch to work in just let me know.

kersting commented 4 years ago

Hey Stephen,

Just give me one week to confirm that I can take the task. My supervisor is on vacation and I don’t want to give any surprises to him but I think I can take that.

Best regards,

Gibson Kersting RWE Renewables Americas, LLC M +1-512-574-6025

From: stephenholleran notifications@github.com Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 3:37 PM To: IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard digital_wra_data_standard@noreply.github.com Cc: Kersting, Gibson gibson.kersting@rwe.com; Author author@noreply.github.com Subject: Re: [IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard] Mounting arrangements properties issues (#5)

We could create a python code that checks if a mast is following the IEC recommendations for each instrument. This would save the analyst some time and it would tell where are potential problems in the mast. If it makes sense I think I could take that task.

I think that is a great idea. It could be one of the wow factors that could be shown to analysts highlighting the benefits of adopting this. It could be a quick win. If you are happy to take it on then great. A location to place the code might be in this repo's 'tools' folder. If you need some permission for this repo to create a branch to work in just let me know.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard/issues/5#issuecomment-670179680, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AESEJN66K34WJQQUJYBSKRLR7MIAJANCNFSM4PQFGZ6Q.

stephenholleran commented 4 years ago

HI @kersting,

Are you happy for this issue to be closed off?

kersting commented 4 years ago

Yes, thanks

Best regards,

Gibson Kersting RWE Renewables Americas, LLC M +1-512-574-6025

From: stephenholleran notifications@github.com Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 8:56 AM To: IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard digital_wra_data_standard@noreply.github.com Cc: Kersting, Gibson gibson.kersting@rwe.com; Mention mention@noreply.github.com Subject: Re: [IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard] Mounting arrangements properties issues (#5)

HI @kerstinghttps://github.com/kersting,

Are you happy for this issue to be closed off?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard/issues/5#issuecomment-677678823, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AESEJN2CETZCLCNAALPDTVLSBUTLXANCNFSM4PQFGZ6Q.