Weather Guard Lightning Tech
The Blade Whisperer Returns with Morten Handberg
Morten Handberg, Principal Consultant at Wind Power LAB, joins the show to discuss the many variables within wind turbine blades that operators may not be aware of. From design to materials and operation, understanding your blades is crucial to making informed decisions in the field.
Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly email update on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary Barnes’ YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!
Welcome to Uptime Spotlight, shining light on wind. Energy’s brightest innovators. This is the progress Powering tomorrow.
Allen Hall: Morten, welcome back to the program.
Morten Handberg: Thank you so much, Allen. It’s fantastic to be back. It’s, uh, I really, really happy to be back on the show to discuss blades with you guys.
Allen Hall: So you’re a resident blade whisperer, and we wanted to talk about the differences between types of blades even within the same manufacturer, because I think there’s a lot of misunderstanding if I buy a specific OEM turbine that I’m getting the same design all the time, or even just the same basic materials are that are used.
That’s not the case anymore.
Morten Handberg: No, I mean, there’s always been variations. Uh, so the B 90 is a very good example because initially was, was released with, uh, with the, with the glass fiber spark cap. [00:01:00] But at later iterations it was, then they then switched it to carbon fiber for, for, for larger, for larger turbines, for higher rated power.
But it, it, but it sort of gave that you were not a hundred percent sure. When you initially looked at it, was this actually a ca a glass fiber, uh, beam or a carbon fiber was only when you started to learn the integral, you know, what, what to read in, in the naming convention that you could understand it.
But it caused a little confusion about, you know, I’m looking at glass fiber blade or, or a carbon fiber blade. So it’s been there for a while, but we’re seeing it more and more pronounced with, um. Uh, OEMs changing to signs, uh, or OEMs merging together, but keeping their integral design for, for, for various purposes.
And then for the, for the, for the people, not in, uh, not in the loop or not looking behind the curtain. They don’t, you don’t know, know, know the difference. So I think it’s really important that we, that we sort of highlight some of those things to make it easier for people to, to, to know, to know this.
Allen Hall: There was a generational change. [00:02:00] Uh, even in the 1.5 megawatt class. There were some blades that were fiberglass and then they, there was a trend to move to carbon fiber to make them lighter, but then the designers got better and started putting fiberglass in, where now you have 70 meter blades that are fiberglass worth 35 meter blades, may have had carbon.
Yeah, it’s hard to keep up with it.
Morten Handberg: You know, it’s really difficult to know. I mean, for, for, for the longer blades, it’s becoming more and more pronounced that they will be, uh, there will be carbon fiber reinforced. But a good, uh, example of where it doesn’t really apply is actually with, uh, with Siemens cesa.
Because if you look at Siemens, Cade said, you know, it’s, it’s Siemens, uh, the original OEM Siemens at the original OEM Cade that merged. Quite a few years back, but you know, we still see the very sharp, uh, difference between the two different designs because whenever you install a Siemens Esso turbine offshore, it’s the Siemens integral blade, it will.
And, and they kept that, [00:03:00] uh, and that blade is produced in one cast, it’s called the Integral Blade because that’s their inherited design. And there are no adhesive bond blinds in that. Uh, so all laminated is consolidated. It’s all cast in one go, and then whatever kings and small, uh, defects there, then repaired on factory before they ship offshore.
These are pure glass fiber plate that has not changed at all. So that’s sort of the, uh, how do you say, uh, the one that, that, uh, that is outside the norm that we see today. But the Gaza part of it, they, they’ve kept for onshore purposes, they kept their design using, uh, adhered shells or adhered bond lines.
So they would have two, uh, share webs and then two shells, uh, that are then, that are then, then, uh, glued together, uh, at the bond lines, on the share, on the trading edge, and on the leading edge. With carbon re, re reinforcement. Um, so that is a massive different design within one [00:04:00] OEM and often when people say, well, we have a problem with the Siemens commes blade, which one?
Uh, so then it’s very, very important to understand, you know, what blade type, you know, what, what, what turbine model it is because then we can pretty easily drive it, or even for just know the wind farm because. If it’s offshore, we pretty much, you know, we can, we, we know already. We just need to know the what, what, what size of turbine is, and derive what blade type it is.
Onshore becomes a bit more pro problematic because then you need to know, you know, at what, when was it erected, because then, you know, it can be both, but. If you don’t know, then it will just be presented as a Siemens cesa. So it’s really important to keep, uh, in check, uh, when, when, when, when, when looking at that.
So that’s a, so that’s a very important distinction that, that we need, need to understand when the child, when determining blade damages,
Allen Hall: right, because the type of damage, the integral blade would suffer really completely different than the sort of the ESA bonded design. I was looking at blades in Oklahoma recently that were integral from like a two megawatt machine, and it, it [00:05:00] looks completely different when you walk up to that blade.
You can tell that it’s cast in one piece. It’s very interesting to see, but that makes it, I think the, the thing about those blades is that it’s a little more manufacturing cost to, to make ’em that way, but. They are, uh, tend to be a little more rugged out in service, right?
Morten Handberg: Well, they’re, they’re definitely heavier because of the, the manufacturing process that they go through.
Um, they’re more robust. We, I think we can, we can, we can see that from a track record, uh, in general. Um, but they’re, but the trade off is that they are a lot, they’re heavier. So that means that the, that the components that are used in the Drivetrain Tower Foundation, they’re equally heavier. So you pay the price in the, uh, in the cost of the turbine.
But, uh, overall on the, on the mainland side, we do see less, at least some structural damages and if something really bad happens, so, uh, the trailing edge more often, not it’s kept to the, to the tip or on that part of the trailing edge. So, so, uh, so [00:06:00] the, the, the blade structure keeps together better, um, because of this consolidation of the laminates.
Allen Hall: Right, and the, the traditional ESA design, I’ll call it, has been a bonded design for a long time. The issue with bond lines is there is no peel ply stoppage, so there’s no fasteners in it, in case it starts to come apart, it’ll continue to peel, and that’s what we typically call a banana peel when it really goes bad.
The blade splits in two. Once it starts, it really doesn’t have a way to stop. And I think that’s why inspection is so important on those bonded blades. Right?
Morten Handberg: Yeah. Actually, 1, 1, 1 1, 1, 1 small thing. Uh, peel ply is actually something that’s used in laminate production to, uh, to you apply it when you’re casting, you laminate typically for repair.
Then when you peel it off. The surface is fresh and clean, and then you can, you can continue working it, adding more, more mobilely or, or new coating. So it removes some, uh, lamination or some grinding process that will otherwise be needed, has no structural purpose in it, [00:07:00] uh, just to kill that myth of, but you’re right.
Uh, when you have an adhere blade for any, for any manufacturer, for any purpose. If you have a, uh, if you have a deep bonding that starts, then it can, it can, depending on the location, it can grow really fast because you don’t have the same consolidation. You do have some bike layers that would add over, but it doesn’t have the same integral strength that you would see with the, uh, with the consolidated laminate.
Allen Hall: So that’s a big difference. And if you’re looking at blades, and if you haven’t. Looked inside of a hub and looked inside the blade. You, you may not even know. And I think that does happen to a lot of engineers that they, because they, they’re dealing with a thousand blades a lot of times the blade engineers, it’s crazy what they’re asked to go do.
You just can’t know all the details all the time. But just knowing these top level things can really help you suss out like where to start. And, and, and even on the inspection res regimes would on an integral blade type design, are you doing different kinds of inspections than you would do on a standard kind of.
Mesa bonded up design?
Morten Handberg: I would [00:08:00] say not actually. I mean, you would still, you would still do, uh, you, you’ll still do internal inspections because, um, you can still have defect developing. They would be, uh, slower, uh, growing in general, um, compared to a, uh, to a more thin skin laminate, uh, type blade. But, but the inspection methodology is, is more, less the same.
You would do an external inspection to check for lighting damages wearing of, uh, coating. So erosion. Any kind of structural damage in developing over the shell, uh, surfaces. And internally, you would check the bond lines, uh, because even though they’re consolidated, there is still, uh, they, they, they still have a, have a bonding, uh, an in laminate bonding.
So you want to check if that is okay. Um, and you wanna see if there’s any, uh, any defects developing in the shoulder area from breathing or from, or any kind of manufacturing defect. So it’s not that. Not that you will. Yeah. That you will then, you know, set it up and then you can let it run forever without looking at it.
You d do need to do maintenance, [00:09:00] um, but if you do proactive maintenance, you can then, then you, you will detect it in time and you can do more, uh, reactive repairs.
Allen Hall: Yeah. And what’s the difference in repair costs between a integral blade where it’s all cast at one time versus a, a bonded design? Does it tend to be a little less expensive because it’s maybe a little localized than a.
Uh, a bonded type shear web design.
Morten Handberg: Well, if the damage affect multiple parts of shear web and, uh, and beam and shell, it will always be a very extreme, very costly repair, regardless of what, whatever blade type it is. Integral blades, I would say typically will likely be more expensive if you have a structural damage, but that’s just because of the sheer number of flies that will be affected because for a, for a thin skin laminate blade.
While the damage can be, can be much larger, the amount of layers that you need to remove will be less. So I would, I would always, I, I would, I would consider it more likely that the repair costs for, for a, [00:10:00] uh, for adhesive bond line blade to have a lower repair cost for the same type of damage that we see an integral blade.
But the integral plate will more, will, will, will have less of them, and you will also be able to detect them earlier. So the chance of preparing. Is higher on an integral plate is what I would normally that, that, that’s how I would normally, you know, pro think of it.
Allen Hall: Okay. That’s that’s good to know. Can we talk carbon protrusions and knowledge of them because it, it has seemed like over time there was, they were really hot in like the mid two thousands, into the 10 20, 10 20 12, 20 15 ish, and then it kinda went away for a little bit ’cause of the cost and now they’re coming back again because of the links.
It’s really. Important that you know if your blades have carbon in them, correct?
Morten Handberg: Yes. Um, one because, uh, carbon is more rigid, um, than, than than glass fiber. It is, uh, it is, it is multiple the times, multiple times stronger than glass fiber. That’s also why it’s favorable to use, [00:11:00]because you can produce a, a longer blade while, um, minimizing the weight increase that you would have.
Um, so that is a very, uh, that is a very appealing trait to have. The problem with carbon is two things. One, it is a, uh, conducted material, which means that it does, uh, create a, um, a mag, uh, how do you say, magnetic seal, if there’s any kind of, uh. Lightning activity if there’s any static develop, uh, uh, buildup inside the blade.
So that can be, that can cause its own set of problems and something where you have to be very observant of what, what kind of LPS system you have and what, what kind of lightning conditions you have. The second part is. Carbon fiber is so rigid. Then that also means if you have any kind of manufacturing defect, the effect of it is multiplied.
Um, because carbon fiber doesn’t, it doesn’t have the same elasticity. Glass fiber is very forgiving if you have a defect there. While it will develop over time [00:12:00] at some point for a large part of the time, they, because it’s so elastic, the loads they get distributed better. For carbon, it will centralize around the, the manufacturing defect and will just grow.
And once it starts growing, then it will, it will expand rapidly. So that’s also why when we see a, a, um, a blade damage where the defect started in the carbon spot, the the blade is simply just cut off. It’s simply like someone just took. Took a, uh, took a hacksaw and then cut the, the blade, uh, blade, blade section off because the, the, because of the rapid growth of that defect.
Um, so that, that’s sort of the, the trade off, but that’s also why we have to be even more observant. If an OEM is using carbon fiber to reinforce it, that they do NDT off their, um, off their blades before sending ’em out. And they do quality control off the protrusions when they receive them so that the owner doesn’t take over an inherited risk.
So that, I would really say that if you have wind turbines with carbon fiber, [00:13:00] if you’re planning to build them. You should make sure that there, that NDT is done, because you cannot verify this by visual. It’s, you know, if you can see them, that’s great, but it, it’s not a guarantee that there is nothing there.
Um, and the amount of defect that we see out there that does suggest that this is, this is not a, uh, a nice to have. It’s an absolute must to, must, must do to do NDT.
Allen Hall: Yeah, the carbon protrusions, if you looked at that process, it’s not a easy process, but they’re trying to orient the fiber in one direction all the time, and even slight variations can reduce the strength inside the protrusion.
So it becomes critical that the quality of the protrusion is good and, and the reason they. Make protrusions is to lower the cost. So the protrusion itself is really set into this fiberglass shell. So you’re really, you have merging two technologies together, which always doesn’t always work as well as you would want it to work.
But it has gotten, at least in my opinion, Morgan, and that’s why I’m asking you. Has it gotten better over time that we’ve gotten used to using [00:14:00]protrusions and are better at and applying them and in and maintaining them? At this point?
Morten Handberg: I think the OEMs are really good at using them in designs. I think they’ve done a really good job at using, utilizing the carbon fiber to its maximum potential, uh, to build blades that are plus a hundred meters.
Uh, what we have to be make sure is that whatever we then do in manufacturing quality control, operation maintenance. That adheres to the, to the same standard that would apply in design. So, you know, that that’s sort of the, that, that, that’s sort of the crux of it. Because if you, if you, if you design something perfect and then you have more, you know, how do you say it more, you know, less, uh, pristine approach to when you’re manufacturing or when you’re servicing it, then you know it, then it causes problem down, problems down the line.
Um, because. It will need maintenance, it will need very strict project control. So that’s why we have to be very vigilant.
Allen Hall: And I wanna talk about the difference between box beams and sort of standard [00:15:00] share. Web I beams, I’ll call ’em, that we typically see a lot more of today. There’s a number of blades, particularly early on that were box beam.
And when I talk to operators of these terms that have box beams and I say, Hey, do you have a box beam? I don’t, I don’t know. I don’t know. Uh, but those blades act uniquely different than sort of the blades we’re buying today, right?
Morten Handberg: Well, the B Beam is still in production. You can still acquire a turbine with a box beam in it.
It’s a, uh, it’s a investor design. It’s something that they invented, that they’ve used for ages, uh, decades. Uh, uh, think that goes all the way back to some of the first way business space. So it’s a very, uh, it’s, it’s a very strong design that they’ve utilized for, for. For the history of Vestas. Um, and it was originally a carbon based spark cap in a box beam.
There was a, it was a closed square that was a elongated. So, um, and then narrowing as you get further to the tip, uh, and then later on with the B [00:16:00] 90, they introduced carbon fiber protrusions instead of glass cyber in it to make it stronger and also enable building longer blades, but while keeping the low weight, because that’s really where they won a lot, is that they could keep extremely low blade weights.
And thereby very light turbines. Uh. While still, uh, uh, uh, how do you say producing, uh, having the same rated power as an equivalent turbine from any other m So that was really a, a, a, a unique design that this they had or have. Um, so the, if you want to know, if you have a box beam blade or an SST blade, you simply just have to look inside the plate.
It’s very easy. Uh, if you have a bucketing plate, all you will see is a, is a, is a square. Um, where at and, and you know, at, at a large tunnel and nothing else, if you have an I-beam with one or two share webs, if you look inside the blade, you will see, see these two share webs, but you also see the chamber and the trailing edge.
And in the leading edge. And that’s because it’s an open design. [00:17:00] So it’s actually very easy to detect if you have one or the other. But they’re very different from each other, uh, in a lot of other senses. Um, the. The box beam design is inherently non-structural shells. The, the blade shells are really, really thin, also very easy to repair because they’re so thin, but they’re very thin because the, all the loads is taken up by the box beam.
For the SST or the eye beam design, the loads are, while still thin skin relative is taken up more load. But, and, and in the design, they’re considered as being part of the load carrying structure. So you have to be more observant of maintaining the shell structure as well as the, as as the, the, how do you say, the low carrying structure on an, on an, uh, SST or I beam Blade.
Then you had to on a, on a box beam. And a good example of this is that you sometimes see that blade shields coming apart, coming apart on, um, on, on, on blade damages. And what is unique for [00:18:00] the i, for, for the box beam is that the box beam will just stay in place. It doesn’t it? It’s. Basically the, the turbine doesn’t seem, seem to care if it’s there or not.
It will just continue operating. Uh, so, so you can have, uh, shells, uh, part of the shell missing for a period of time. And the you, they only notice because, you know, you look up and then, hey, part of the, part of the blades look like it is looking like a, like a pine cone, a squirrel chew that, uh, because the part of the, the, uh, the shelves are missing and it, it’s quite weird.
Um, but, but that, that is how it is.
Allen Hall: Box beams. SST, that all makes sense to me. Uh, one of the things that we’re running into more recently is as blades get longer and the costs go up and the risk goes up along with it, as the blades get longer, of course, uh, there’s there’s much more instrumentation going on to the blades in the manufacturing process.
So now we’re seeing. Uh, thermal couples being applied during the manufacturing process to verify that [00:19:00] everything is cured out properly, which is a wonderful thing to do, honestly, in the manufacturing area, but. If they’re not removed, and I think more recently we have seen some thermocouples left in blades.
It can become a problem later on in life.
Morten Handberg: Well, I mean, uh, it’s actually something that’s been used for, for quite a while. It is, uh, thermocouples is something you would use to verify that your adhesive have seen the right curing temperature to make sure that it has the right mechanical properties. Which makes a lot of sense.
Um, obviously, you know, as an electrical engineers, you are, you know, you, you would know that, you know any, any, uh, conductive material. Whenever ex uh, and lighting expert, then when exposed to a lightning current will start to generate its own ma own magnetic fields that will, uh, that will on its own, uh, create a potential problem because then the, um, then, then they will start to react with each other.
And that can cause, um, that can cause risk of flashover, uh, it can cause lighting attachment [00:20:00] on its own. And that really applies to any kind of conductive component that you would have in your plate. Including your carbon beams. Uh, it’s not something that is unique for, for cabling inside the blades. It’s actually also something that if you have sense installation that you have to be very concerned about, you know, if you’re installing it.
How will it then, you know, react with the LPS system so that your census don’t start to become a flashover points that you introduce that. So that’s something that typically, uh, especially OEMs, they’re very concerned about, uh, that how will it interact with the LPS system and how will it interact with their carbon reinforcement?
And I think that’s fair. Um, how widespread an issue it is that we see flashover, I don’t know that many cases, but again. We don’t want to just install a lot and then find out there was a problem later on. You know, that’s really what we as an industry cloud should start to move away from. So I think there’s lot of good sense if you want, you know, I’m a big proponent for condition monitoring, but I [00:21:00] also am a big opponent that we need to verify things and understand the risk before starting to instrument their left and right.
Um. And for carbon fiber, fiber blades, you know, if they’re not integrated into the LPS system, that means that then they will, they will have their, they, they will create, create their own magnetic field during a lightning search. And that can then cause flash overs that we’ve seen with some, uh, historic and some, uh, current.
Models. Um, but the problem is, is is there for any carbon blade if the LPS system is not designed with intent, that to handle any, um, any lightning issues in, in the carbon fibers.
Allen Hall: And I think it gets down to inspection and regimes and timing depending on what is inside of your blade or, and even how it’s constructed.
In my opinion. I think what I see from operators is based upon their knowledge of what is happening in the blade. They’ll, uh, add a internal rover or drone, not internal, maybe sometimes internal drone, but usually a rover, [00:22:00] uh, will go inside the blade and start taking pictures. That has become more prevalent, I’d say in the last two years where you hear of full campaigns, and I know down in Brazil, earth, wind does them all the time down in Brazil because the, they have a capacity factor over 50%, so the blades are really getting used.
Those internal inspections have been eye-opening in, in terms of. Detecting problems early, and is that, is that where we’re headed right now is that we just need to know visually what’s going on more because the, the blade variations, OEM to OEM and factory to factory, that we just need to have a little more monitoring for a while until we get into an alignment.
Morten Handberg: I think that inspections is a symptom of not having the right tools to, to monitor. Not wanting the right tools to monitor because if we had condition monitoring and every blade, and every blade was fitted at with it from birth, we would know a lot more about what’s going on in the blades from day one.
And that will also mean that we would know if [00:23:00] two or three or five blades in a, in a 15, uh, turbine wind farm had problems we could focus on inspection regime on that. So, but right now, because we don’t have that, then we need to, to roll out a very large, very complex, uh, inspection regimes that takes a lot of downtime, is very expensive because we don’t have the necessary dataset to, to, uh, to, to determine accurately which turbines are actually at risk.
So I think it’s more of a symptom of, of the need for, for, for CMS. Um, I’m not, I’m not have nothing against rovers. I think they’re great for what they do, but I would prefer that we use them for these specific issues instead of having it as a, as a, as a major rollout over the entire wind farm.
Allen Hall: Oh, I, I agree with you there.
I think CMS is getting utilized more and more and more, and, and in fact, uh, as we talked to operators this year, because of, of rule changes in the United States, a lot of operators in the United States are now moving to a CMS system that they previously probably wouldn’t have done, [00:24:00] uh, because of the lifetime of the blade.
Right. So that, that’s something that I think. Uh, Denmark and Europe has done so much better. And Morton, you’re in the middle of all that, being based in Denmark, that CMS is a way of life, uh, on a lot of turbines in Europe and, but in the States and other places, even Australia, it, it may not be that widely used.
Morten Handberg: Well, I would say for the Australian market where we’ve done some work, they are, uh, very positive towards CMS and we know, we know quite a few operators that are actively either looking into it or looking at it from the, from day one in their wind farms. Uh, operators in Europe, I would say we we’re still not there yet.
Owners, there are some owners that are installing it, um, actively. It’s not something that, you know, we’re not seeing on the majority of the wind farm shed. It’s not, it’s not commonplace. It’s still, I would say, compared to the amount of turbines we have, it’s still a novelty. So our, I’m, I’m still, I’m, it’s still one of my, uh, my, uh, month, uh, how do you say my, uh, catchphrases [00:25:00] when I come out to onus and we’re talking about the problems, is that, you know, you can hand your blood damages, uh, on X, Y, and z.
You know, going forward, if you want to catch ’em early on or you want to understand them better, how they affect your blade, you need to look into CMS. Um, and again, it’s, there are a lot of good CMS options out there. A lot of them have actually been, been verified and, uh. I would say, you know, some higher tier systems, they make a lot of sense.
They give you a lot more data, but it’s, you know, something is better than nothing. I would say, let’s get some data in, let’s get started on the process. Let’s get some learnings, and then we can develop the technology. If we’re always waiting for the perfect system, then we’ll never get anywhere.
Allen Hall: I’m gonna bring up zero defects because I think this is all headed towards zero defects and we’ve, we’ve talked to a number of operators in the last six months who say to themselves.
In my, uh, TSA, I had a serial defect clause, but we missed the window opportunity. Usually it’s a year or two and you have to show a certain percentage. It’s like 25% have this [00:26:00] problem. If you’re not measuring a turbine or blade or anything on your, you will never figure out if you have a serial defect, and, and particularly if you don’t know what the architecture of each blade is, you won’t be able to connect the dots of these blades made at a particular factory, have this issue.
CMS becomes really vital in, in that aspect. As we’re putting billions of dollars into a farm, the value return is very high.
Morten Handberg: Yes, I would say so. The problem is that for a lot of operators then the operational margins, they’re very low. So if you don’t get it installed, uh, during CapEx, then to find budget for it during oex is something that’s really, is really hurting.
Uh, the budget and, and, and, you know, with elec the electricity prices in a lot of places being really low, then there might be a need for it, but it’s really difficult for to, to find a, a budget for it, that, that can then send that investment unless there is some really something really critical where it says it’s a do or die [00:27:00] thing.
Um. So, so I would, I would agree with you, yes. For, you know, it’s something that can help us identify if there is, uh, serial issues, because then the defect will develop and, you know, even if there is a serial issue, it can help us prevent the worst case scenario that the, that we see blade collapses, blades being replaced.
So, so there’s a lot of, you know, downstream, uh, um, advantages of, uh, of installing CMS and I, I truly believe that it will help us with the green transition as well, because as you know, with the number of blades that we’re replacing right now, you know, you know, scrapping blades is not green transition. If we can prolong lives, if we can repair them in, in, in due time, that’s how we get to, to, uh, to a green transition where the, where wind industry becomes profitable and affordable and where it’s, it, you don’t create an issue for some part of the industries, uh, because it’s a big problem for owners.
It’s a big problem for insurance [00:28:00] companies that we see this big turnover of blades because of, of catastrophic damages. So more, the more we can do to prolong life of blades. Prevent damages from happening or capture damages early on, and then get them repaired, will, will really help that, uh, uh, that move moving forward.
Allen Hall: Wow. That’s why we love having you on Morton because you can explain the complex and simple terms, and I think you’re right. You, you’re moving the industry. Uh, you’re recommendations are, are being heard by operators and by OEMs. I think. The industry is changing, and that’s great to hear. Morton, how do people get ahold of you?
Is it best to reach you on LinkedIn?
Morten Handberg: Well, either LinkedIn or you can also reach me on my, um, on my company email, MEH, at wind power app.com. Uh, that, that would be the, the far easiest way to get in. Hold me to, uh, uh, uh, where we can discuss any kind of late issues you might have. Always happy to, to support any owners or insurance insurers.
Allen Hall: More than I love having you on. We gotta have you on sooner next time and, and keep talking to these issues because a lot of [00:29:00] operators are struggling and there’s so much technology being applied to blades. We need to have you back on pretty soon.
Morten Handberg: Absolutely. I would love to be on to, uh, uh, to, to explain more complex issues and to puncture more, more myths.
Let, let’s do it.
https://weatherguardwind.com/blade-morten-handberg/
Pardalote Studies Australian Blade Erosion and Heat Fatigue
Rosemary Barnes, CEO and founder of Pardalote Consulting, joins to discuss their new grant-funded study of blade erosion and heat fatigue in Australia.
Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!
Welcome to Uptime Spotlight, shining light on wind energy’s brightest innovators. This is the progress powering tomorrow
Allen Hall 2025: Well, Rosemary, welcome back to the show.
Rosemary Barnes: Thanks, Allen. Great to be here. For, it’s been a while since we did one of these one-on-one episodes, like a, yeah, a proper, proper guest.
Allen Hall 2025: Well, this is kind of a celebratory episode because your company, Pardalote Consulting, has been awarded, uh, some funding from the Australian Capital Territory’s government for the Energy Innovation Fund.
Rosemary Barnes: It’s a really good program that the ACT government has to try and get energy innovation In the state. It’s not a state actually, it’s technically a territory. Little more than just Canberra, the city. Uh, but there are actually quite a few, like, really interesting energy-related companies here, partly ’cause of the, the fund I think helps, but also just tracing back like, [00:01:00] uh, y- you know, in the 20-teens, Australia had a really conservative government that hated renewable energy, and the ACT government had a commitment at that time to 100%, um, 100% renewable electricity for the, the government.
And that was one of the only programs that was resulting in a lot of, um, you know, clean energy projects being built, and one of the conditions that they put on that, uh, for people that would win PPAs with the ACT was that you had to have your headquarters in Canberra. So we’ve actually got quite a few, quite a few really cool, innovative companies out of here.
Um, like Neoen’s headquarters here. Windlab, uh, yeah, was, was founded here and still has a lot of people here. Pardalote obviously, and you know, a few other companies as well. So despite it being a small city of like, I don’t know, maybe it’s up to 400,000 or something people by now, um, yeah, there is actually quite a lot going on here for energy.
Allen Hall 2025: And the Energy Innovation Fund is funded by the wind and solar operators in the area, and your particular [00:02:00] effort has really global consequences. You’re focusing on two areas involving how wind turbines survive Australia, but more, uh, of relevance is to just really tough conditions which exist not just in Australia but around the world.
What two areas are you going to focus on?
Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. So the two focus areas are leading edge erosion and high temperature fatigue, which we can probably get into the definitions of those in a minute. But basically my, um– what led me to wanna have a project like this was that when I moved back to Australia in 2021, I– and I started working in O&M, uh, I noticed that the wind turbines that I would look at, the blades that I would look at here behaved really differently to the ones that I worked with overseas.
You know, es- especially with leading edge erosion, like often I would be doing a condition assessment of a, you know, a new wind farm. Um, might only have been operating for, you know, two years. That’s a pretty common time for people to get in and do a condition assessment [00:03:00] because their warranty period is about to end and they wanna, you know, make sure that everything is okay.
Um, and I would just notice that often, like 90, 100% of blades would already have bad erosion after just a couple of years, which is super-duper fast. And then there are some tools available to check, um, like what kind of erosion are you likely to experience on your site. Like is it a higher severity erosion site or a, a low severity one?
Um, and you basically, you know, the status quo globally is to just look at the annual rainfall, um, and the tip speed. And if you’ve got, you know, high for both of those, that’s a bad erosion site. And if you’ve got low for both of those, it’s a, a low erosion site. But when I plotted out the wind farms that I knew had really bad erosion problems onto, you know, a chart with those two axes, I just saw a random distribution of dots.
You know? Like, this was not– uh, this had no predictive value for Australian wind farms. And so that led me to believe that, okay, um, you know, things are a bit [00:04:00] different here. Makes sense, you know, most of the knowledge that we have about how wind turbines operate, it’s been developed and validated mostly in Northern Europe.
You know? Like it’s, it’s Denmark and the surrounding countries that had, like, the bulk of the early wind energy. First few decades of knowledge were, you know, were mostly there. Of course, there were some other, um, places that had wind turbines, but, you know, most of the The OEMs have been operating for decades, came from Denmark.
And I know when I lived in Denmark, the rain there is very different to the rain in Australia. So in Denmark, it’s basically always raining, right? Like, it’s just… Like, even if it’s not raining, you’re still gonna get wet when you go outside ’cause it’s just, like, the air has this just amazing ability to just hold onto moisture.
Um, but it’s very, very gentle. But, you know, over an entire year of most days having gentle rain, that adds up to a lot. Whereas in Australia, and especially if you go, like, north to Queensland, it rarely rains. It’s mostly just dry, and when it [00:05:00] does rain, it’s like a tap turns on, and I, I swear you will get bruised from the rain droplets hitting your skin.
You know, they just have so much energy in them. So I think that that i- you know, when you look at just the overall rainfall, you really hide something important about how erosion, um, can progress. Then, um, there’s other places in Australia that have very different characteristics. Again, they don’t have that kind of really intense rain but, you know, some of those sites are also having really bad erosion.
And so it just occurred to me, I did a lot of research, you know, into what’s going on and, you know, the academics are studying erosion a whole lot, and they’ve got, you know, a lot of standardized tests and, you know, products are developed according to these standardized tests. But the standardized tests don’t actually resemble reality, and especially they don’t resemble reality in Australia.
And so my client started asking me, “Okay, you know, the products that we have are, are terrible. We have to replace them every couple of years. It’s, um, causing big problems with also [00:06:00] the amount of energy that you’re losing.” One of the types of, um, leading-edge erosion or leading-edge problems that we have in Australia is that the, the coatings tend to peel off and make these, like, big flakes which will just massively disrupt the airflow, can cause y- you know, at least a few percent AEP loss, and maybe up to five.
And even worse than the AEP loss is the revenue loss because it affects it most at, you know, lower wind speeds. Um, you get a bigger hit than at rated wind speeds. So there’s a variety of problems going on with leading edges in Australia, which mean that I, I basically… My clients would ask, “What product should we put on to prevent having to, you know, constantly replace this?”
‘Cause it costs, like- you know, 30, $40,000 per turbine to replace the protection, not to mention, you know, one or two days of downtime. It’s expensive, and I basically, I didn’t have a good answer for them. What, what product should they put on? I don’t know. No, we, we don’t know. One, we don’t know what the [00:07:00] specific, um, characteristics are that are…
what the specific local environment, local conditions are that are accelerating leading-edge erosion, one. And two, all of the products tend to be tested around this, you know, there’s this protocol that academics have come up with, and they’ve kind of like assumed that this is representative of how things behave in the field, and it’s– I don’t think it’s particularly true anyway, but it’s especially not true in Australia.
There are a few companies that are testing to different standards. Um, definitely applaud them. But without knowing wha- what are the conditions truly like in Australia, uh, it’s really hard to advise, like, what kind of tests should you be demanding from a product you’re considering to be sure that you’re gonna put it on and not gonna be replacing it again in two years.
Allen Hall 2025: Because that’s really the trouble in Australia is when you get offered products They have been tested generally in somewhere in Europe and maybe in the United States, and then when they go to [00:08:00] Australia, it’s really unknown as to how those products will do, which is a huge risk for the Australian wind market as to what to choose, how to choose, is it– what’s real in terms of test data.
So now you’re gonna go out and do what? Are you gonna put sensors out by the wind farms? Are you gonna try to do more of a statistical summary of the actual environment around wind farms using existing data? What’s the approach here?
Rosemary Barnes: It’s all of the above, but the part that is supported by the grant is that we’re gonna have enough money to be able to buy some scientific-grade sensors and put them on, um, a sample of Australian wind farms.
So we’re gonna be looking at a lot more characteristics about the rain than simply is it raining now, you know, how many millimeters per hour. We’re also gonna be investigating, you know, every kind of characteristic of, of that, um, of that rain, um, including, yeah, like the, the energy that’s in it, for example.
A, a bunch of stuff. I won’t get into every single [00:09:00] parameter. Um, and you know, other things as well, like measuring UV, solar radiation, um, particles, because, you know, in Australia we have a lot of dirt roads, which I know is very common in wind farms around the world, but Australian dirt roa- roads are always dry and dusty, like 99% of the time, so that’s one of the things that y- you know, maybe that’s causing a difference.
Um, so basically putting sensors all over a bunch of wind turbines and then monitoring the erosion, um, a combination of some real-time monitoring and also looking at inspection, um, drone inspection images annually. We also have a- an option where we’ll just be using SCADA data and inspection images, so that’s like a lower cost version where we can combine that with the findings from the scientific-grade instrumented turbines to build up a picture of what types of conditions lead to accelerated erosion.[00:10:00]
Allen Hall 2025: So the SCADA data will, will have some information inside of it, you think, that, uh, will correlate to the weather outside?
Rosemary Barnes: It has some Additionally, we can look up, um, you know, just the weather data, like how many millimeters fell during which 15-minute interval throughout the day, what was the temperature.
SCADA will tell us also what the temperature was, um, what the speed of the turbine was, so you can calculate the tip speed, ’cause that’s an important thing. Um, yeah, so it’s, it’s two, it’s two tiers of data collection. The scientific grade sensors, as you can imagine, are, are really expensive and y- you know, the, the grant project has contributed a, a lot of funding, um, but it’s not enough to put those, yeah, put a little mini lab on top of every turbine across Australia, obviously.
So that we’re using s- doing selectively, and then we can increase the number of wind farms that are included in the study by just doing this, um, cheaper version of the SCADA [00:11:00] plus, uh, weather data that’s available.
Allen Hall 2025: So what are some of the risks on the temperature side for all the high-temperature regions of Australia that have wind turbines?
Clearly it’s generally warmer in Australia than it is in, in Scandinavia and Northern Europe. What kind of temperatures are we talking about on the ground?
Rosemary Barnes: Uh, well, temperatures here can get pretty close to 50 degrees. Um, and if you’ve ever been inside a wind turbine blade on a, even a mildly hot day, you’ll know that the temperature inside a wind turbine, and especially inside the blade, is much hotter than what it is, uh, what the ambient temperature is.
So this project is one– I’ve actually been talking about this project for, yeah, like over 10 years now. Ever since I started, I moved to Denmark, started working for a wind turbine manufacturer, I had done– I had just finished doing my PhD on composite materials, structural design, and analysis. So, um, yeah, very, very familiar with, [00:12:00] you know, how composite materials work and, in particular, the effect that temperature has on them.
I mean, like most materials, when composites get warmer, they get softer, and that is really important for a w- a wind turbine blade. You know, if it gets, um, less stiff, then you’re gonna get a lot more strain, and that is going to affect your fatigue behavior. Y- you know, fatigue is just the application of a little bit of, a small amount of strain.
It’s not gonna cause damage, but when you apply it millions, tens of millions of times, like you do in a, o- over a wind turbine’s operate, um, operating lifetime, then that builds up. And, you know, wind turbine blades are a very fatigue-driven design. Um, it’s one of the most important things to consider when you’re designing a wind turbine blade.
And so when I got to Denmark and I learned how materials are qualified and how the qualification is treated in the certification process, I just realized it’s not particularly conservative, and also that some of the assumptions that are made that [00:13:00] wo- again, they worked really well in more moderate climates where wind turbines have had most of their developmental history.
You know, it’s not such a big deal there if you test at room temperature. Your wind turbine blade is spending most of its operating lifetime at room temperature or below. It’s, it’s rarely, you know, above 30 degrees in Denmark and most of Northern Europe and, you know, also a lot of, um, a lot of America, not, not all of it But, um, in Australia it has just extended periods above that temperature and even exceeding the temperature where, you know, wind turbines have an operating limit and after that they will shut down.
But the operating limits are based on ambient temperature. It’s not based on what’s the temperature in the laminate, which is what really matters for blade lifetime. So anyway, I’ve been obsessed, like honestly obsessed about this issue for 10 years. Talked about it with anybody who would listen . But then when I started working in O&M in [00:14:00] Australia and I started seeing some wind farms with an abnormal number of cracks early…
again, early in their lifetime, you know, I think one of the wind farms I was looking at was maybe three years old or four at the time. I think it was three actually, and had a lot of cracks, and I looked at a few years in a row and it was more and more cracks every year and I’m like, “Oof, this really looks like end of life fatigue behavior.”
A- actually it’s not, y- you know, there’s this concept of a bathtub curve where, um, when you’re looking at failures in components, in, in anything, not just in, um, wind turbine blades, but you know, like you’d start– it’s called a bathtub because, you know, when it starts operating, you’ll get quite a lot of failures.
Anything big, any manufacturing defects or anything are gonna cause failures quite fast, and that kind of drops off over time as all of those, uh, get addressed. And then you have, you know, the bulk of your operating life, it’s like pretty low level, pretty, pretty constant for a long time and then as you get towards the end of the [00:15:00] life, you start to see failure rates rise up again.
That’s your fatigue failures, your end of life fatigue failures. And so when I saw the same types of cracks more and more each year, I’m like, “This looks like, you know, the foot end of the bathtub, not the head end.” And, uh, it made me worried and I’ve now seen that across a few wind farms in Australia at, um, hotter places.
There’s a few blade types that are more prone to it than others, but at this point it’s still a suspicion that that’s what’s going on. I mean, a suspicion backed by a lot of, a lot of theory and knowledge of how the certification process works. But this project now we’ve got some funding to actually go put some sensors onto wind turbines, actually learn what the temperatures are in the blades throughout the whole laminate, um, not just the, you know, on the outside surface or not just the ambient temperature, but actually, you know, develop a temperature gradient across the whole, um, the whole laminate in the blade shell.
Um, and [00:16:00] then we’re going to be doing a bunch of modeling basically to look at what is the effect of these different temperatures that blades are really seeing and how much would we expect to… that to decrease a lifetime. And then we should also be able to say, you know, if you have this issue in your wind farm, you might be able to change your operation a little bit and extend your lifetime a lot.
Because this one, it’s real– like, in contrast to leading edge erosion, leading edge erosion is just, it’s, you know, every wind turbine has it to a certain extent, and it, it’s always there, but it’s a relatively minor cost to fix it. You know, like it sounds like a lot, like 30, $40,000 per wind turbine, but, um, you know, compared to if you’ve got to replace every blade across your fleet because they’re all, you know, at the end of their life after five years, you know, that’s obviously shocking.
And, you know, that’s a bad example, but even in a y- you know, like a less extreme example, maybe [00:17:00] after 15 years you have to do a, you know, a f- a fleet-wide campaign to strengthen blades or something. It’s, you know, m- many millions of dollars for that, and so it c- could make sense to be able to learn, okay, what, what hours of operation should we be avoiding?
Additionally, because when it’s super-duper hot in Australia, usually you’ve got heaps of solar power and the electricity price is not that high. So I, I think that there– and I don’t, obviously, before we’ve done the project, I don’t know what the threshold is. But in both cases, we will be aiming to improve the knowledge of how you can operate to avoid these periods of accelerated damage.
Allen Hall 2025: Do you think you’re seeing more fatigue-like damage due to the blades operating when it’s hot or not operating when it’s hot, with maybe less airflow around the blade and maybe less cooling going on is just a temperature soak At rest? [00:18:00]
Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. It’s interesting because the temperature is higher if it’s not rotating, um, because you get a whole lot of, um, convective heat, heat transfer when the turbine is operating.
So your temperatures are not gonna get as hot when operating as when they’re standing still. However, if it’s standing still, they’re only very lightly loaded. Like, yes, they’re gonna get, um, blown by, by gusts and, um, have a little bit of bending, but it’s, it’s very, very small compared to, uh, if it is y- you know, operational loads.
Uh, assuming that you’re not in the middle of a s- a storm. But yeah, a storm probably doesn’t come with 50 degrees temperatures.
Allen Hall 2025: And what part of the blade is susceptible to these higher temperatures? Is it the resin? Is it the fiberglass or carbon fiber? Or is it the, the glue, the bond joints? What part are you focused on?
Rosemary Barnes: The resin is the main part that I’m focused on. It gl- it could be an issue for glue too, actually. I haven’t even looked into what the, um, yeah, temperature assumptions are with, with glue, with [00:19:00] bond lines. But the failures that I’m seeing in the field are not, are not bond line issues. It’s, it’s, um, a laminate problem.
Allen Hall 2025: What about balsa and foam inside of the blade? Are they affected by the temperatures or are they pretty temperature stable?
Rosemary Barnes: I don’t think they’re affected at these kinds of temperatures, no. They, they don’t really do much actually. The, the core materials, like it, it is very important that they’re, that they’re there, but their job is really to keep the fiberglass separated from its- itself to make it stiffer.
So, um, yeah, that’s, that’s unlikely to be a, a major source of problems.
Allen Hall 2025: So this study is gonna work over about three years, and you have a number of wind farms that are participating. Are you looking for more wind farms to participate in Australia?
Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. Yeah, definitely. I mean, we can, um, have as many as, as people want to join.
We’ve got quite a good selection so far. Definitely can always welcome more. A, a bit limited in how many can get the really, um, good sensor [00:20:00]package, because the grant funding is a, you know, a certain amount, and that’s paying the bulk of those sensors. So, um, those spots are limited. So if anybody wants to really zone in on what is specifically causing erosion on their site, you know, if you know that you have got leading edge protection that is not good enough and you have to replace it soon, but you don’t know what to replace it with, then, you know, that would be the kind of wind farm that might want to consider, yeah, joining this and, um, you know, getting these sensors on their, um…
We’re putting them on top of the nacelles, most of them. Um, yeah, so that would be a good match then. Um, and then, yeah, for the ones that are doing the SCADA data and, um, weather data- There’s not such a, a hard limit on how many we can have join like that. So yeah, we can have more, more like that.
Allen Hall 2025: In the temperature fatigue effort, i- is that still looking for participants or are there particular wind turbine types or manufacturers that you’re [00:21:00] looking for to participate?
Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, I think, um, I, I mean yes, we can have more of those. That’s a simpler, a, a simpler issue as well. The sensors are not so expensive and, um, it’s, yeah, it’s a, it’s a simpler project to join that one. We only need, you know, a couple of turbines per site, so it won’t be such a, uh, an involved process to get everything up on into the turbines.
And in terms of who might like to join that, I would say anybody that is in a really hot area where, you know, where they see a lot of days over 30 degrees, and if they see any days, you know, getting into the high 40s, then I would say that that’s worthwhile. Or even I have seen this issue in some milder sites, um, yeah, depending on the, on the blade type as well.
It is more common with polyester resins. They have a, a lower op- uh, maximum operating temperature than epoxy resins. But then also just anybody that has noticed just, hey, [00:22:00] we’ve got a lot of cracks, and it seems like we’re getting more and more cracks every year, which to be honest, can be hard to keep track of if you’re…
If you’ve got a full service agreement, uh, you know, an OEM managing your wind farm The early signs of this are gonna be category one and category two cracks. They’re not in exactly the same location. It’s, you know, it’s a tricky one. Normally, if you’re looking at a serial issue, then you’re going to have, uh, well, you know, your ideal pattern for a serial issue is the exact same thing happening over and over again.
And so it is harder to pull this out. It also really would be very rare for it to be happening in the first two years or three years, whatever your serial defect liability period is. So it’s quite hard. But, um, another group of wind farms that might like to consider it is if you know that in, you know, a certain number of years you have to renegotiate your service agreement or, you know, it ends and you might have to take over yourself, then this’ll be a really good way for you to [00:23:00] understand, you know, have I got a ticking time bomb here?
Um, because it’s not something that you’re gonna be aware of if you haven’t been, you know, doing some really, really in-depth shadow, shadow monitoring of your blades, you know, running your own inspections and looking at every single damage, not just category three, four, five, but lower ones. So yeah, I mean, there’s a, a wide variety of people that, that could be interested in joining.
Allen Hall 2025: Are you expecting a number of manufacturers that make leading-edge protection or involved in resin creation, some– there’s a number of resin companies and a variety of resins that are used globally, sort of interchangeably at times. Are you expecting some of those companies to participate in this effort just to learn about the Australian environment?
Rosemary Barnes: I think it would be a good opportunity to test out some products and see how they behave in the Australian context. I think that that would be a really good selling point, but I, I have to say that most of the companies doing that sort of thing that wanna enter Australia, they don’t [00:24:00] really consider…
Like, from the perspective of wind farm owners in Australia, if you can’t show us wind farms in Australia where this has worked and, you know, show us a before or after, you know, the old LEP lasted Two years and our LEP is going on four years now with no damage. It, you know, unless you’ve got a before and after like that, you can tell us however many turbines that you’ve got installed around the world, but, um, we don’t consider it validated, y- you know?
It’s not validated for Australian conditions yet. And I do have this same discussion over and over again with, you know, not just leading edge protection, but all kinds of, um, you know, manufacturers of whatever doodads that you put on to improve a, a wind turbine. It’s so different to Australia. Things break so fast.
And I’m talking everything, you know, like vortex generators fall off and, um, yeah, like, uh, you know, bits of lightning protection systems fall off, seals just [00:25:00] crumble and disintegrate. Um, and it, you know, we’re very wary of, of new products. So I, I do– I mean, I’m thinking of it more from my client’s point of view than from the product manufacturer’s point of view.
But one thing that I wanna get out of this pro- project is to be able to answer one of the most common questions that I get is, which is, what leading edge protection should I be putting on my turbine? And for now, I don’t know. I, I know a range of products that don’t work in Australia, and not much more than that.
So, um, yeah. And it’s also, you know, Australia’s a very varied place with lots of different kinds of climate too. So it’s not gonna be like, you know, the product that works in Queensland is the same one that’s gonna work in Tasmania, which is the same one that’s gonna work in Western Australia. You know, um, so it, this project is gonna really pull out what are the site specific issues you’ve got at your site and what kinds of, um, you know, tests would we need to see a product um, perform in order to know that this [00:26:00] is gonna last on your site.
Allen Hall 2025: W- what is the outcome of this project or these two projects? Are they gonna be reports or, uh, a, a continual monitoring system that’s designed for the Australian environment? How do you see this going?
Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, so one part of it is, um, developing a way to identify periods of accelerated damage and to know not to operate during that time.
So we call it protective operation. Uh, so that would, uh, help you if, yeah, you’re trying to extend the life of something or increase the amount of time before you have to repair, then y- you know, that would be useful to have that knowledge. And it will be as simple as just an alert saying, “Hey, accelerated damage conditions.
Consider, you know, if you wanna keep on operating.” And, you know, if the price of electricity is super high at that time, they may want to push through, and if it’s low, they probably won’t want to. So that’s one thing. Um, especially, you know, as wind turbines get to their, near the end of their life. I’ve got some clients whose wind farms only have, you know, [00:27:00] maybe five years operation left.
They just simply don’t wanna repair their leading edge protection again. They just, they, they don’t wanna do that. So they would be happy to, you know, reduce operation a bit and have their turbine limp through to the end of the period. Y- you know, you want everything to wear out at once. You don’t want brand-new leading edge protection on a turbine that’s going to come down in a couple of years.
Um, so, you know, that’s, that’s one part of it. And then the other thing is, you know, turbines earlier in their lifetime, how can we optimize the maintenance schedule with leading edge erosion? Um, so, you know, like it’s a lot cheaper to, uh, replace the LEP if you get– catch it early, but then you don’t wanna be catching it too early and replacing it, you know, constantly when you, you don’t need to.
So, um, yeah, it, this, having this knowledge will enable a site-by-site operations and maintenance strategy with respect to leading edge protection. We also have some sites who are having trouble. They’ve got a full service agreement, and the OEM is [00:28:00] responsible for, um, doing the leading edge erosion repairs and protection replacement, but the owner is on the hook for paying for it.
At the other end, we’ve got people with full service agreements where technically the, um, manufacturer is supposed to be doing the leading edge protection and paying for it, but they argue about what, when does it need to be done. Because, you know, um, the operator might think if there’s no structural risk, then we don’t need to be replacing it.
And in the meantime, you’ve got turbines spinning around for years and years and years with, you know, these huge flakes of leading edge protection s- you know, causing the flow at the tip of the turbine to, to detach and to stall, and horrible aerodynamics, huge losses in power generation and revenue. And they’re having a big fight about, you know, is this necessary to do or not?
And then, you know, they’re just gonna put the exact same product on again ’cause the [00:29:00] OEMs are re- all really, really wedded to their own particular brand. It’s like, “Well, last time we had this product and it was factory applied, it lasted one year before it s- it was worse than, you know, if it wasn’t there at all.
Uh, we don’t really want you to put that one on again.” And so, you know, having the information that they need to be able to, you know, really bring data to these discussions and, you know, makes a, yeah, data not drama. That’s a, a good approach I think, um, for any kind of negotiation and especially in the case of leading edge erosion.
And then for the high temperature fatigue part of the problem, aside from, you know, just wanting to know are your blades aging, should you be looking at remediation action or changing the operation, the other really big key thing is, uh, you might need to have a fight with y- your OEM about if this turbine has been designed and operated correctly.
And so then having the data from this, um, project is going to give you the information that you need to come into that [00:30:00] argument with, again, the data not the drama. Um, and to, you know, in- increase your chances of succeeding in that kind of really tricky negotiation.
Allen Hall 2025: So if you’re an OEM or a manufacturer of equipment, an ISP, an operator, pretty much all aspects of wind operations, you probably ought to be getting a hold of Pardalote Consulting and Rosemary to talk about the opportunity to participate in this study.
How do people get ahold of you to, to do that?
Rosemary Barnes: People can go to our website, pardaloteconsulting.com, and get in touch via the contact form there, or you can, uh, look me up on LinkedIn, Rosemary Barnes. That’s probably the easiest, fastest way to get ahold of me personally.
Allen Hall 2025: Well, Rosemary, congratulations on the Energy Innovation Fund Awards and the new three-year effort.
If you are interested in participating with Pardalote Consulting and working with Rosemary and her team [00:31:00] in Australia, reach out to her on LinkedIn and get that process started, because this report and the data from all this analysis that’ll happen over the next couple of years will be important to the wind industry.
So you need to spend some time and get ahold of Rosemary and get this process started now. So Rosemary, congratulations. Uh, thanks for being back on the podcast, and looking forward to, uh, the next couple of years. It sh- should be exciting.
Rosemary Barnes: Thanks so much, Allen.
We all understand that there are ultra-conservatives living all around us, but does anyone truly believe that our schoolteachers are ruining our society by teaching children the truth about U.S. and world history? Science? Current events?
Slavery and Jim Crow laws were bad. Fascism is bad. Our scientists are telling us that CO2 emissions are causing world temperatures to rise, destroying our planet’s capacity to support life.
Whom do these concepts upset?
There is nothing dumb about the question posed at left. Democracies fail, falling into “banana republics” constantly. The rate at which democracies become tyrannies is so great that some of them never make the news. Can you tell me anything about the governments of Eritrea or Chad?
What makes the situation in the United States is, yes, that it’s happening here in the United States, the very last place anyone would have suspected it.
You might have thought that Americans wouldn’t have voted for their nation to become Russia or North Korea.
You would have been wrong.
-
Climate Change12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy9 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测