Industrial Management & Data Systems

New procedure for wind farm maintenance

Jose Antonio Orosa Armando C. Oliveira Angel Martn Costa

Article information:

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

To cite this document:

Jose Antonio Orosa Armando C. Oliveira Angel Martn Costa, (2010),"New procedure for wind farm
maintenance", Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 110 Iss 6 pp. 861 - 882
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02635571011055090
Downloaded on: 14 April 2015, At: 19:05 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 47 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 741 times since 2010*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

Idriss El-Thalji, Jayantha P. Liyanage, (2012),"On the operation and maintenance practices of wind power
asset: A status review and observations", Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 18 Iss 3 pp.
232-266 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552511211265785
Ingrid Bouwer Utne, (2010),"Maintenance strategies for deep-sea offshore wind turbines", Journal of Quality
in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 16 Iss 4 pp. 367-381 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552511011084526

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 478311 []

For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-5577.htm

New procedure for wind farm

maintenance

Wind farm
maintenance

Jose Antonio Orosa

Department of Energy and Marine Propulsion, University of A Coruna,
A Coruna, Spain

Armando C. Oliveira
Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal., and

861
Received 16 November 2009
Revised 4 January 2010
Accepted 22 March 2010

Angel Martn Costa

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

Department of Energy and Marine Propulsion, University of A Coruna,

A Coruna, Spain
Abstract
Purpose Conditions monitoring system (CMS) is a tool for describing the present condition of the
components of a system. To achieve this objective, there is a need to develop an efficient fault
prediction algorithm. This paper seeks to address this issue.
Design/methodology/approach The paper analyses four real wind farms with control charts of
indices derived from UNE EN15341:2008 standard indicators, as the main CMS algorithm to define
which index must be considered for improving wind farm maintenance and related costs.
Findings The findings show that climatic conditions are related to maintenance cost indices.
Employing the statistical control process of various wind energy converter (WEC) indices proposed by
wind farm operators is an adequate procedure to monitor and control wind farm performance. In
particular, only the maintenance cost index and the hourly maintenance cost index presented a clear
relationship with respect to weather conditions.
Practical implications Climatic conditions must form the basis for organising maintenance
activities. Despite this, future maintenance models must be centred on indices obtained from
experience, like the maintenance cost index and hourly maintenance cost index, and not solely in
general indicators defined by standards.
Originality/value A practical case study of wind farm maintenance based in the new UNE
EN15341:2008 standard and wind farm operators experience is shown, defining real indices to be
employed in future maintenance procedures.
Keywords Maintenance, Wind power, Climatology
Paper type Case study

1. Introduction
A recent review work (Alsyouf and EI-Thalji, 2009) on wind farm maintenance,
classified it according to relevant life cycle processes of wind power systems: design
and development, production and construction, diagnostic, autonomous, proactive,
predictive and preventive maintenance.
Design and development maintenance shows the importance of considering
maintenance when designing wind turbines (Kuhn et al., 1999; van Bussel and Zaaijer,
The authors wish to thank University of A Coruna for the financial support of project number
5230252906.541A.64902.

Industrial Management & Data

Systems
Vol. 110 No. 6, 2010
pp. 861-882
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0263-5577
DOI 10.1108/02635571011055090

IMDS
110,6

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

862

2001; Teresa, 2007), and production and construction maintenance is related with
technical failures like manufacturing problems, weather conditions and storing
problems (Wood, 2004).
On the other hand, the diagnostic group (Aroatia.lbizu et al., 2004) is based on
on-line condition monitoring of components like, for example, induction generators.
The autonomus (TPM) group (Krokoszinski, 2003; Tavner et al., 2007) is based on
mathematical models that quantify wind farm production losses in terms of planned
and unplanned downtimes. In particular, this last group analyses how weather can
affect the observed results.
The proactive group (Rademakers et al., 2010; Braam et al., 2010) is based on a
structure approach of operation and maintenance (O&M) issues and towards
optimisation of maintenance strategies in wind farms. This group showed the need of a
tool that assists operators in taking cost effective decisions in their day-to-day work.
Finally, the preventive group (Iniyan et al., 1996) showed that downtime
fluctuations of a wind farm depend on wind velocity, and the predictive group shows
the integration of condition monitoring systems (CMS) in wind farm technology. It
showed that current maintenance planning is not optimised (Caselitz et al., 1994;
Jefferies et al., 1998; Wilkinson and Tavner, 2004; Khan et al., 2006; Nilsson and
Bertling, 2007).
Conditions monitoring system (CMS) is a tool for describing the present condition of
the components of a system. CMS is being used today in many other applications, but
in the wind power industry it is relatively new, so it is very interesting to analyse a
practical case study that allows to define the main parameters to be considered
(Verbruggen, 2003). It plays an important role in establishing a condition-based
maintenance and repair (M&R), which can be more beneficial than corrective and
preventive maintenance. To achieve this objective, there is a need to develop an
efficient fault prediction algorithm and this algorithm shall be the basis of CMS.
The development and application of algorithms is one way to establish an efficient
and reliable operational and repair (O&R) system (Hameed et al., 2009). These
algorithms are developed and then implemented by keeping in view the main
characteristics of the WEC. In this sense, one of the main algorithm sources is the
quality control process of different indices.
Once an algorithm is proposed, it must be employed over some indices. These
indices were usually obtained from operators experience and are usually defined as a
function of standard indicators. An indicator is a numerical parameter that provides
information on critical facilities identified in the processes or individuals with regard to
their expectations or perceptions of cost, quality, and lead times. Care must be
exercised in choosing various indicators, as there is a risk involved in using a lot of
numbers that do not provide any useful information.
When a wind farm has a computerised maintenance management system (CMMS),
the calculation of these indices is often much quicker. An additional advantage is that
once they are automated, we can periodically generate reports with minimal effort
according to our needs. In recent years, several studies have been carried out on the
application of these indices to maintenance (Pastor Calvo and Sacristan, 2005; Maza
Sabalote, 2007), particularly, wind power generation (Moratilla, 2008; Ro Chao, 2004
and Bilbao et al., 2005). For example, (Krokoszinski, 2003) concluded that the definition
of a Layout Factor (LF), the adoption of the Planning Factor (PF) and the Overall

Equipment Effectiveness (OEE), represent the external losses and the technical losses
of wind farms. This enables a systematic description and quantification of the losses
that reduce the overall output capacity of wind farms and, therefore, it is of interest to
understand these indices.
For wind farms, one defines the layout factor (LF) as the maximum possible output
of electrical energy that could be fed into the grid per year, if the complete reference
electrical energy (Eref) was transformed (transported to the grid connection) with
exactly the specified reference productivity. It combines the specified wake losses due
to the arrangement of WECs in the wind farm and the calculated electrical losses
(described by the electrical efficiency) of the cables and devices, all the way down the
line from the WEC-terminals to the grid connection point (Krokoszinski, 2003).
The planning factor PF is the ratio between the available electrical energy and the
theoretical electrical energy of a wind farm, so that:

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

E avail park E theo park PF

The overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) is the ratio between valuable production
time and available production time. Hence, compared with the theoretical production
time (the theoretical maximum of deliverable electrical energy) the actual valuable
production time (corresponding to finally sold electrical energy) is described by the
total overall equipment effectiveness, defined through:
T valu T theo TotalOEE

The total efficiency of the wind farm describes the losses that are already determined
in the engineering and operation planning phases of the wind farm, i.e. the park
efficiency and the electrical efficiency due to positioning and cabling of the WECs
(combined in the layout factor) and the planned downtimes, as shown by:
Efficiency LF PF

Finally, despite the fact that these indices are commonly employed in maintenance
studies, they are very difficult to be employed with the different algorithms of a control
system to assist operators. As a consequence, new and easier indices are needed. In this
sense, wind farm operators experience enables us to define new indices. A practical
case study to analyse new indices derived from standard indicators is needed.
In this sense, recent studies presented different models for monitoring wind farm
power (Orosa et al., 2009a; Orosa et al., 2009b, c). In particular, these models employed
wind speed as the input to predict the total power output of a wind farm, based on
real-time measured data (Kusiak et al., 2009; SIAM, n.d.; Caselitz et al. 1994). These
studies are based on statistical studies of wind energy (Sen, 1997) and particularly
employed control charts of measured wind characteristics to detect abnormal or wrong
data (Kusiak et al., 2009).
In this study, we intend to analyse the main wind farm indices with control charts
methods as control algorithm, to define the consumption of resources in all processes,
the performance of the organisation, the cost of quality achieved and, in general, to
define the procedure that must be followed in real wind farms to improve maintenance.

Wind farm
maintenance

863

IMDS
110,6

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

864

2. Equipment and methodology

In this section, the maintenance of four real wind farms will be analysed, based on
indicators proposed by standards and literature, and based on five indices derived
from these indicators proposed by wind farm operators experience.
2.1 Wind farms
The useful lifetime of wind farms is supposed to be about 20 years. Each plant is
installed in a similar manner and all of them are exposed to the same weather
conditions. Currently, maintenance is carried out in technical plants, when the plant
fails or according to a mandatory preventive schedule imposed by law. In our case
study the electricity companies, however, schedule maintenance and control cycles,
specifying a daily inspection during the operation period and, afterwards, one
inspection every two to three weeks.
Normal maintenance cycles are scheduled two or three times/year. They mostly
involve periodic inspections of equipment, oil and filter changes, calibration and
adjustment of sensors and actuators, and replacement of consumable such as brake
pads and seals. Finally, housekeeping and blade cleaning generally fall into this
scheduled (preventive) maintenance.
On the other hand, unscheduled (failure related) maintenance is anticipated with
any project based in previous failure data but not in a particular indicator. Failure or
malfunction of a minor component will frequently shut down the turbine and require
the attention of maintenance personnel. Additional maintenance is planned according
to common international practices and suggestions of the companys personnel
(Ardente et al., 2008).
In our case study each of the four wind farms shows 24 wind turbines of five
different technologies that exist in Galicia with a total nominal power of 17.56 MW and
an annual production of 38.500 MWh. All wind turbines present a horizontal axis rotor
and, consequently, their wind power conversion will begin at 3m/s and they will be
disconnected from the electrical network when winds reach values higher than 25m/s
with Southwest and Northwest predominant winds. All data of power production is
stored in a control center with a ten-minute time frequency. Maintenance is mainly a
corrective maintenance and a preventive maintenance based in a wind farm operators
experience. Finally, a predictive maintenance based in the integration of condition
monitoring systems (CMS) is being considered for future deployment.
2.2 Maintenance cost indicators
The development and application of algorithms is one way to establish an efficient
and reliable operational and repair (O&R) system. These algorithms are developed
and then implemented by keeping in view the main characteristics of the WEC,
previous failure data, identifying components which will cause more downtime,
components which are more prone to the initiation of crack, wear, misalignment, etc.
Focus should be given to rotating components, and the structures that directly
support those rotations, like the bearing which supports the generator shaft
(Hameed et al. 2009).
In accordance with Krokoszinski (2003), the external losses, which are analysed on
the basis of a general theory, can be classified into three types: external downtime
losses, external speed losses, and external quality losses. Among these types, only a

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

few of the causes of external losses are related to the operation and maintenance of
wind farms. For example, external downtime losses are caused by planned downtime
for preventive maintenance and is called scheduled maintenance of systems, such as
with auto control stops for regular maintenance. External speed losses are only
external losses related to operation and maintenance by the excessive input due to
wind velocity and are caused by blade- and cable-overload protection. Finally, external
quality losses do not include external losses related to operation and maintenance.
Consequently, operation and maintenance scheduling calls for planning downtime
for preventive maintenance and for the losses related to excessive input due to wind
velocity, call for predicting climatic conditions, particularly when many plants
distributed in the territory are considered (Concetti et al. 2009).
In March 2007, a new maintenance-related British Standard was published BS EN
15341, maintenance maintenance key performance indicators. It describes a system
for measuring maintenance performance. The standard aims to help organisations in
all sectors to appraise and improve their asset maintenance efficiency and effectiveness
in pursuit of better global performance and competitive advantage.
The new standard presents a superb set of indices for measuring the outcome of
complex maintenance activities. It brings a welcome degree of clarity, order and
authority to this crucial, yet insufficiently understood area of maintenance
management.
The standard defines a structure of key performance indicators (KPIs) 24
economical, 21 technical and 26 organisational. Each operator is urged to select
the indicators that align directly with each business objectives, and then apply them to
the management of maintenance activities within the organisation using a CMMS.
To implement this schedule, the analysis of the main maintenance indicators listed
below is required. As a first step of the analysis of the measured data, maintenance cost
indicators listed in Table I must be described in accordance with the UNE EN
15341:2008 (AENOR, 2008) and UNE EN 13306 (AENOR, 2003):
(1) Mid time to repair (MTTR): it is a basic measure of the maintainability of
repairable items. It represents the average (mean) time required to repair a
failed component or device.

Wind farm
maintenance

865

Maintenance cost indicator

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

MTTR
Total cost of corrective maintenance due to faults
Time spent on preventive maintenance
Expenditure on time spent on preventive work (in euros)
Expenditure on the material used for preventive maintenance (in euros)
Total cost of preventive maintenance
Total maintenance cost (TMC)
Time devoted to other work
Available maintenance time
Time actually spent on maintenance-related activities
Time of stoppage of production machinery and equipment
Time of work by production personnel
Cost of downtime losses due to corrective maintenance caused by failures
Total production cost

Table I.
Maintenance cost
indicators

IMDS
110,6

866

(2)
(3)

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

(4)

(5)

(6)
(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)
(13)

(14)

This value considers the hours spent to address failures in different

production processes. Faults arising from production and earlier maintenance
activities for repairing the damage account for some of these hours. They
include the total hours spent on repair, corrective maintenance, and breakage or
damage. This indicator is related with the mean time between failure (MTBF)
that expresses the frequency of failures.
Total cost of corrective maintenance due to faults: this value is obtained by
considering the labour and materials employed for corrective action.
Time spent on preventive maintenance: this value is obtained by totalling the
hours spent in each preventive maintenance task. Each task must include the
total number of hours devoted to preventive maintenance or inspection.
Expenditure (in euros) on time spent on preventive work: this is the product of
the number of hours dedicated to interventions for preventive maintenance (5)
and the cost per hour allocated to maintenance services.
Expenditure (in euros) on the material used for preventive maintenance: this
value summarises the cost of the materials used in preventive inspections
carried out at production centres.
Total cost of preventive maintenance: this is the total sum of the value of labour
deployed and materials consumed, expressed in euros (4 5).
Total maintenance cost (TMC): this value represents the total expenditure on
corrective and preventive interventions by maintenance personnel and the
materials used (2 6).
Time devoted to other work: this summarises the hours devoted to special work
requests (changes, implementing improvements, etc) and the maintenance tasks
undertaken by maintenance services.
Available maintenance time: these are the hours spent by skilled service and
maintenance personnel divided by the hours spent on other work and the
number of hours actually spent on corrective and preventive maintenance.
Time actually spent on maintenance-related activities: the total number of hours
spent for corrective maintenance due to troubleshooting and preventive
maintenance.
Time of stoppage of production machinery and equipment: it is the total
number of hours during which the machines are stopped in a production line
due to breakdowns, resulting in production losses. Preventive maintenance
must bring a reduction in the time spent on these activities.
Time of work by production personnel: these include operators belonging to
different production lines.
Cost of downtime losses due to corrective maintenance caused by failures: it is
the product of the number of hours of stoppage due to failures and the cost per
hour allocated to each product line.
Total production cost: it is the product of the number of hours of production
staff turnout and the cost per hour allocated to each product line.

2.3 Maintenance indicators

Table I shows performance data for maintenance cost indicators for the four wind
farms, expressed in different units of measure (UM).
Once the indicators noted in the previous section are listed, we need to develop
indices that facilitate the monitoring of maintenance management. Due to the
excessive information obtained in a reduced period of time, it is very difficult for
wind farm operators to take decisions. These indices must be obtained from
previous experiences in real wind farms, as those shown in the following equations
(4 to 8):
(1) Index of staff actually utilised in maintenance activities (indicator 1): this is
expressed as a percentage of the total working time spent on maintenance
activities, as expressed by:

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

ID1

Time actually spent on maintenance 2 related activities

100
Time worked by production personnel

(2) Index of extension of preventive maintenance beyond the hours available for
maintenance activities (indicator 2): this index expresses the percentage
between the number of hours spent on preventive maintenance and the
difference between maintenance time (hours) and time spent on other works:
ID2

Time spent on preventive maintenance

100
Time actually spent on maintenance 2 related activities

(3) Ratio of interventions by faults to the total available hours (indicator 3): it is
expressed as the relationship between the hours spent on corrective
maintenance for breakdowns and the number of available maintenance hours:
ID3

MTTR
100
Available maintenance time

(4) Maintenance cost index: this index expresses the relationship between the total
cost of troubleshooting and preventive maintenance and the number of hours
actually spent on corrective and preventive maintenance (indicator 4):
ID4

TMC
Time actually spent on maintenance 2 related activities

(5) Maintenance cost index related to the cost of production (indicator 5): it
expresses the relationship of the sum of the total cost of production for
corrective maintenance, preventive maintenance, and production stoppages for
corrective action with the total cost of production:
ID5

TMC Cost of downtime losses due to corrective maintenance

100 8
Total production cost

Table II lists the maintenance cost indicators employed.

Wind farm
maintenance

867

IMDS
110,6

868

2.4 Limitations of process control: variables control charts

In any production process, there is always some unavoidable variation. This is a
normal variation and the cumulative effect of many small uncontrollable causes. When
the variation is relatively small and associated with unforeseen causes in a stable
system, it is considered acceptable in the course of normal operation of the process and
treated as if it is within the statistical control limits. In contrast, there are other causes
of variation arising from the process that are derived from three different sources:
(1) Rectifying malfunctioning machines.
(2) Human errors of the people who operate the machines.
(3) Defective raw materials.

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

The variations produced by these assignable causes are usually large compared to
normal process variations. Consequently, the process attains an unacceptable level of
performance and is treated as a process out of control. Statistical process control is
basically intended to detect the presence of assignable causes calling for corrective
action. In particular, mid-range control charts are used when the controlled quality
characteristic is a continuous variable.
As has been explained, the control chart is one of the most important and commonly
used the statistical quality control (SQC) methods for monitoring process stability and
variability (Montgomery, 1991). It is a graphical display of a process parameter plotted
against time, with a centre line and two control limits (Jennings and Drake, 1997). In
our case study, we can measure some continuously varying quality characteristics of
interest (EN15341 indicators) and eventually the variable control charts were selected.
Once we measured the time evolution of different indicators, a statistical process
had to be developed to establish the control limits. These limits are usually set above
and below the mean value equivalent to three times the standard deviation of the
process.
The calculation of the average of all measures, and the upper and lower control
limits are given by:
UCL m 3 s

LCL m 2 3 s

10

where:

is the mean of each indicator.

is the standard deviation of each indicator.

Indices of costs
1
2
Table II.
Cost indices

3
4
5

Index of programmed maintenance

Index of extension of preventive maintenance beyond the hours available for maintenance
activities themselves
Ratio of interventions by faults on the total available hours
Maintenance cost index related to the cost of production
Index of cost of maintenance hours related to production

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

After setting the control limits, it is necessary to define when a process is said to be out
of control. To do this, we define A, B, and C as the regions between one, two, and three
times the standard deviation over and below the mean and apply the following rules:
.
two of three points in a row in Area C.
.
four of five points in a row in zone B or beyond.
.
six straight points up or down.
.
eight consecutive points outside the area A, on both sides of the centre line.
In any case, we must consider the presence of patterns or trends in control charts, 2009
(Molinero, 2003). The procedure is illustrated schematically in Figure 1.
Figure 1 shows the typical procedure that must be employed with variable control
charts. Once the information is analysed in a control chart, we may determine if each of
the indicators is under or out of control, in accordance with the previous rules. If the
process is out of control, we only have to eliminate the assignable causes. If the process
is under control, we must assess the capability to control the process. If the process is
not capable to control each indicator within control limits, we must take a general
decision over the process. On the other hand, if the process is capable to control the
indicators within the control limits, we must try to optimise the process. If the process
is centred within the control limits, the optimisation was obtained.
3. Results
Having defined the benchmarks and indicators normally used for maintenance
analysis, we applied them to our case study of the four wind farms, for a period of two
years. Consequently, the data of Table I and each index of Table II were calculated for
each month, and are represented in Tables III and IV and Figures 2-8.
4. Discussion
As a first step, we analysed the average personnel index and its corresponding control
limits, as shown in Figure 2. This index represents the need for manpower dedicated to
curtailing the operation cost of production systems. Comparing this index with the
monthly value revealed that in December it was clearly lower and, consequently, the
number of hours of work spent for total maintenance had been reduced. Once the
yearly weather conditions are observed as shown in Figure 7, we can confirm that this
behaviour was related to weather conditions. For example, in Figure 7 we observe that
low wind speeds prevailed in the period from October to December and, therefore,
maintenance needs were low. On the other hand, when we examine the months of
highest wind speed, such as March, a distinct increase in working hours is visible.
In Figure 4, a similar correlation is observed in the increase of number of hours
spent in troubleshooting and available hours. This figure shows a rise in the number of
hours spent in rectifying damage from December to March and then a sharp decline. In
particular, plant reports showed that these hours were spent on replacing system
components causing errors and system failures. This same effect can also be seen in
Figure 3, which shows a decrease in the number of hours spent on preventive
maintenance with respect to the total time spent from November to March.
If we convert these indices to economic terms, we can say that, in most cases, the
cost of maintaining production related to the cost of maintenance hours reveals an

Wind farm
maintenance

869

IMDS
110,6

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

870

Figure 1.
Method of analysing
control chart variables

annual figure varying about the mean in the range of the standard deviation. Only in
February does the maintenance cost exceed the control limits, and can therefore be
associated with an assignable cause. On the other hand, the number of hours of failure
in Figure 4 indicates that preventive maintenance requirements in those months were
lower. In particular, this problem is associated with poor weather conditions as the
wind speed causes transient phenomena associated with equipment breakdown.

Maintenance cost indicators

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

11
12
13
14

Time (hours) devoted to correct failures

Total cost of corrective maintenance due to faults
Time (hours) spent on preventive maintenance
Expenditure (euros) on time spent on preventive work
Expenditure (euros) on the material used for preventive
maintenance
Total cost of preventive maintenance
Total cost of maintenance
Time (hours) devoted to other work
Available maintenance time (hours)
Time (number of hours) actually spent on maintenance-related
activities
Time (hours) of stoppage of production machinery and
equipment
Time (hours) worked by production personnel
Cost of downtime losses due to corrective maintenance caused
by failures
Total production cost

Total

UM

9,672.92
347,357.20
18,516.53
2,873,287.89

Hours
e
Hours
e

960,868.95
3,834,156.84
4,181,514.04
52,704.00
131,760.00

e
e
e
Hours
Hours

28,495.45

Hours

22,048.57
79,056.00

Hours
Hours

220,485.65
570,074.35

e
e

Wind farm
maintenance

871

Table III.
Maintenance cost
indicators for a month

Indices of costs

Total

UM

1 Index of staff actually utilised in maintenance activities

2 Index of extension of preventive maintenance over the hours available for
maintenance activities themselves
3 Summary of interventions by faults on the total available hours
4 Maintenance cost index related to the cost of production
5 Index of maintenance hours cost related to production

36.04

64.98
7.57
7.72
52.89

%
%
%
e

Prior to this research work, trends have been observed in all indices due to weather
conditions. To demonstrate the existence of assignable causes, a correlation analysis
between the monthly mean value of each index and the mean monthly wind velocity
was developed. As new added knowledge, this correlation factor is plotted in Figure 8
and shows that despite most indices being employed to evaluate the performance of
wind farms, only the maintenance cost index and the index of maintenance hourly cost
present a clear relationship with weather conditions. In particular, these parameters
reached values of 0.78 and 0.82, which are considered as acceptable for defining a
statistical relationship between the variables.
Some solutions for this problematic situation are proposed. As pointed out before,
we can conclude that the maintenance cost of a wind farm depends on the weather
conditions, and these conditions can be predicted once the weather patterns are known.
In this sense, the first solution is to raise the maintenance on these components based
on weekly weather conditions. This consideration enables weekly modifications of
preventive maintenance work, which can result in only ten more minutes per machine.
The expected result is the dramatic improvement in maintenance levels that will
significantly reduce the number of errors and failures.

Table IV.
Indices of costs for a
month

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

IMDS
110,6

872

Figure 2.
Index of personnel (I1)

Wind farm
maintenance

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

873

Figure 3.
Index of extension
preventive maintenance
(I2)

IMDS
110,6

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

874

Figure 4.
Index of repairs due to
failures (I3)

Wind farm
maintenance

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

875

Figure 5.
Maintenance cost index
related to the cost of
production (I4)

IMDS
110,6

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

876

Figure 6.
Index of hourly
maintenance cost related
to production (I5)

Wind farm
maintenance

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

877

Figure 7.
Wind velocity during the
year

IMDS
110,6

878

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

Figure 8.
Correlation coefficient of
each index with respect to
climatic conditions

A second option would be to stop the operation of the equipment during periods of
maximum wind instability, but this would waste precious wind energy when the wind
can transfer energy at a greater intensity. Therefore, a complementary option is to add
a new control system to avoid these faults before the abrupt changes of wind speed.
This control system must be tuned to climatic conditions.
The main implication of these new models, based on real time measured data by
networks (Walsh et al., 2000; Kehoe and Boughton, 2001), is that it can be sent to new
software tools (Sahay and Gupta, 2003; Robert and William, 1999; Schmidth, 1999)
designed and selected to implement the maintenance of a specific wind farm. These
software tools can propose the optimum working periods of each wind farm in
accordance with weather conditions and historical information of the wind farm.
From this, we may conclude that the analysis of real measured data reveals the
appropriate characteristics of wind farms (Apt, 2007 ). Furthermore, this new concept
of weather maintenance could be the basis of a new wind farm control system. For
example, the creation of a tele-maintenance intelligent system, based also on neural
networks and marked by result management logic, called GrAMS (Granted
Availability Management System), was recently evaluated as a real possibility
(Concetti et al. 2009). GrAMS is a system for the technical administrative management
of a technical plant system, with differing technical natures, distributed in the territory,
which gives the management and maintenance service contractor (Management
Organization) the possibility of being able to guarantee, even through monitoring and
control from a remote centre, a service characterized by total availability of plants
and zero failures.
As a consequence, this future tele-maintenance system can be improved by weather
maintenance indices. Moreover, these maintenance index models lead to reduction in
maintenance costs. However, care must be exercised in choosing them, because of the
risk of using a lot of numbers that do not provide any useful information. It is in this
sense that the indices of percentage of repair and preventive maintenance and the
percentage rate of corrective repair costs for damage are not suitable for the study of
control charts and, consequently, only instantaneous values clearly identify the
behaviour of these variables.

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

On the other hand, another way to define wind farm models is to correlate the wind
turbine power curve with wind characteristics. These models must be developed on the
basis of real scenarios, and the statistical techniques employed must be adapted to
filter the data obtained from real wind farm operation (Sainz et al., 2009). Furthermore,
it is well known that actual measurements are liable to include wrong data; so other
automatic filtering techniques are essential to deal with this problem
(Llombart-Estopinan, 2008).
Finally, it is interesting to consider as future research work that cultural dimensions
influence management behaviour in different countries (Ellemose Gulev, 2008) and that
there are a few real case studies about real measured data on wind farms, its
maintenance and the sustainability of the wildlife (Solari and Minervini, 2004;
Anderson et al. 1998), to consider the bio-naturalistic components when preventing
environmental impacts.
5. Conclusions
Previous research works showed that apparently the maintenance cost of a wind farm
depends on weather conditions, which could be predicted once the future weather
patterns are known.
To prove the real relationship between wind farm maintenance and weather
conditions, this work analysed four real wind farms from a total quality perspective,
helping to improve maintenance based on operators experience.
The findings showed that operators experience is a good method to select wind farm
maintenance indices derived from standard indicators. In this sense, employing the
statistical control process of these new indices resulted as an adequate algorithm to
monitor and control wind farm performance. Furthermore, once trends in all the new
indices have been observed, assignable causes can be established to explain variations. In
this sense, a correlation analysis between the monthly mean value of each index and the
mean monthly wind velocity was carried out. Only the maintenance cost index and the
hourly maintenance cost index presented a clear relationship with weather conditions.
Despite these indices being adequate to monitor and control wind farm
maintenance, care must be exercised in choosing them, because of the risk of using
many numbers that do not provide any useful information. In this sense, it was
revealed that the indices of percentages of repair and preventive maintenance and the
percentage rate of corrective repair costs are not suitable for the statistical control
process of wind farms.
Finally, this could be the basis of a new control system and of the indices to be
considered. Therefore, it is suggested that future research works and innovations (Orosa
et al., 2009a; Orosa et al., 2009b, c) define wind farm models by correlating the wind
turbine power curve to the wind characteristics based on real scenarios and statistical
techniques. In these models, actual measurements are liable to include wrong data, and
consequently, the application of other automatic filtering techniques is essential to deal
with this problem.
References
AENOR (2003), UNE EN 13306, Maintenance Terminology, UNI EN Standard, AENOR, Madrid.
AENOR (2008), UNE EN15341:2008, Maintenance Maintenance Key Performance Indicators,
AENOR, Madrid.

Wind farm
maintenance

879

IMDS
110,6

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

880

Alsyouf, I. and EI-Thalji, I. (2009), Maintenance Practices in Wind Power Systems: A Review and
Analysis, School of Technology and Design Vaxjo University, Vaxjo.
Anderson, R., Erickson, W., Strickland, D., Tom, J. and Neumann, N. (1998), Avian monitoring
and risk assessment at Tehachapi Pass and S. Gorgonio Pass wind resources areas,
California: phase 1, preliminary results, Proceedings of National Avian-wind Power
Planning Meeting III, San Diego, CA, May.
Apt, J. (2007), The spectrum of power from wind turbines, Journal of Power Sources, Vol. 169
No. 2, pp. 369-74.
Ardente, F., Beccali, M., Cellura, M.V. and Brano, L. (2008), Energy performances and life cycle
assessment of an Italian wind farm, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 200-17.
Aroatia.lbizu, I., Tapia, A., Saenz, J., Mazon, A.J. and Zamora, I. (2004), Online stator winding
fault diagnosis in induction generators for renewable generation, paper presented at
IEEE MELECON 2004, Dubrovnik.
Bilbao, M., Terradillos, J., Ciria, J.I. and Malaga, A. (2005), Analisis del aceite como herramienta
de mejora del comportamiento de las multiplicadoras de aerogeneradores: principales
problemas detectados a traves del lubricante, Mantenimiento: ingeniera industrial y de
edificios, Vol. 189, pp. 6-16.
Braam, H., Rademakers, L.W. and Verbruggen, M.M. (2010), T.W. CONMOW: condition
monitoring for offshore wind farms, available at: www.ecn.nl
Caselitz, P., Giebhardt, J. and Mevenkamp, M. (1994), Online fault detection and prediction in
wind energy converters, EWEC94 Thessaloniki, pp. 623-7.
Concetti, M., Cuccioletta, R., Fedele, I. and Mercuri, G. (2009), Tele-maintenance intelligent
system for technical plants result management, Reliability Engineering & System Safety,
Vol. 94, pp. 63-77.
Ellemose Gulev, R. (2008), Cultural repercussions. An analysis of management behaviour
through the lens of European cultural variation, Industrial Management & Data Systems,
Vol. 109 No. 6, pp. 793-808.
Hameed, Z., Hong, Y.S., Cho, Y.M., Ahn, S.H. and Song, C.K. (2009), Condition monitoring and
fault detection of wind turbines and related algorithms: a review, Renew Sustainable
Energy Review, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 1-39.
Iniyan, S., Suganthi, L. and Jagadeesan, T.R. (1996), Fault analysis of wind turbine generators in
India, Renewable Energy, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 772-5.
Jefferies, W.Q., Chambers, J.A. and Infield, D.G. (1998), Experience with bicoherence of electrical
power for condition monitoring of wind turbine blades, IEEE Proc. Image Signal Process,
Vol. 145 No. 3, pp. 141-8.
Jennings, A.D. and Drake, P.R. (1997), Machine tool condition monitoring using statistical
quality control charts, International Journal of Mach. Tools Manufact., Vol. 37 No. 9,
pp. 1243-9.
Kehoe, D. and Boughton, N. (2001), Internet-based supply chain management: a classification of
approaches to manufacturing planning and control, International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 516-25.
Khan, M.M., Iqbal, M.T. and Khan, F. (2006), Reliability and condition monitoring of a wind
turbine, paper presented at Electrical and Computer Engineering 2005, Canadian
Conference, 1978-1981.
Krokoszinski, H.J. (2003), Efficiency and effectiveness of wind farms keys to cost-optimized
operation and maintenance, Renewable Energy, Vol. 28 No. 14, pp. 2165-78.

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

Kuhn, M., Bierbooms, W., van Bussel, G.J.W., Cockerill, T.T., Harrison, R., Ferguson, M.C.,
Goransson, B., Harland, L.A., Vugts, J.H. and Wiecherink, R. (1999), Towards a mature
offshore wind energy technology guidelines from the Opi-OWECS project, Wind
Energy, Vol. 2, pp. 25-58.
Kusiak, A., Zheng, H. and Song, Z. (2009), Models for monitoring wind farm power, Renewable
Energy, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 583-90.
Llombart-Estopinan, A. (2008), Improving the operation and maintenance of wind farms:
determination of wind turbine performance, Icrepq08, available at: www.icrepq.com/
papers-icrepq08.htm
Maza Sabalote, J.P. (2007), El mantenimiento y la productividad, Ing. Qumica, Vol. 450,
pp. 64-5.
Molinero, L.M. (2003), Control de calidad (Quality control), Control charts, available at: www.
seh-lelha.org/calidad.htm (accessed October 2009).
Montgomery, D.C. (1991), Introduction to Statistical Quality Control, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York,
NY.
Moratilla, B.Y. (2008), Energa eolica: operacion y mantenimiento de parques eolicos,
Generacion electrica con energa eolica: presente y futuro/coord, pp. 101-4.
Nilsson, J. and Bertling, L. (2007), Maintenance management of wind power systems using
condition monitoring systems life cycle cost analysis for two case studies, IEEE
Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 229-32.
Orosa, J.A., Garca-Bustelo, E.J. and Oliveira, A. (2009a), Low speed wind concentrator to
improve wind farm power generation, 35th Annual Conference on the IEEE Industrial
Electronics Society, IECON 2009, IECON Proceedings.
Orosa, J.A., Garca-Bustelo, E.J. and Perez, J.A. (2009b), Galician climatic change effect on wind
power production, POWERENG2009, 978-1-4244-2291-3/09/$25.00 q2009 IEEE,
pp. 180-4.
Orosa, J.A., Garca-Bustelo, E.J. and Perez, J.A. (2009c), Wind turbine concentrator design based
on moist air phase change, POWERENG2009, 978-1-4244-2291-3/09/$25.00 q2009 IEEE,
pp. 180-4.
Pastor Calvo, E. and Sacristan, J.S. (2005), Avance estudios Grupos de Trabajo del Comite de
Mantenimiento en el Sector de la Energa (AEM): (1 parte), valor del mantenimiento y
cuadro de mando; formacion y cualificacion del personal, Mantenimiento: ingeniera
industrial y de edificios, Vol. No. 184, pp. 30-42.
Rademakers, L.W.M.M., Braam, H. and Verbruggen, T.W. (2010), R&D needs for O&M of wind
turbines, available at: www.ecn.nl
Ro Chao, C. (2004), Mantenimiento predictivo en la energa eolica, opcion rentable y
competitiva, Energa: Ingeniera energetica y medioambiental, Vol. 30 No. 177, pp. 118-20.
Robert, C.K. and William, D.S. (1999), Software selection guide, Quality, pp. 31-5.
Sahay, B.S. and Gupta, A.K. (2003), Development of software selection criteria for supply chain
solutions, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 103 No. 2, pp. 97-110.
Sainz, E., Llombart, A. and Guerrero, J.J. (2009), Robust filtering for the characterization of wind
turbines: improving its operation and maintenance, Energy Conversion and Management,
Vol. 50 No. 21, pp. 36-2147.
Schmidth, K. (1999), Software selection guide, Quality, Vol. 39 No. 12, pp. 5-18.
Sen, Z. (1997), Statistical investigation of wind energy reliability and its application, Renewable
Energy, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 71-9.

Wind farm
maintenance

881

IMDS
110,6

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

882

SIAM (n.d.), Environmental information system of Galicia, available at: www.meteogalicia.es

(accessed October 2009).
Solari, P. and Minervini, G. (2004), Exploitation of renewable energy sources and sustainable
management of the territory wind farms in Regione Liguria, Management of
Environmental Quality: An international Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 41-7.
Tavner, P.J., Xiang, J. and Spinato, F. (2007), Reliability analysis for wind turbines, Wind
Energy, Vol. 10 No. 81, pp. 1-18.
Teresa, H. (2007), Wind turbines: designing with maintenance in mind, Power Engineering.
van Bussel, G.J.W. and Zaaijer, M.B. (2001), DOWEC concepts study, reliability, availability,
and maintenance aspects, paper presented at European Wind Energy Conference and
Exhibition (EWEC).
Verbruggen, T.W. (2003), Wind turbine operation and maintenance based on condition
monitoring, Final report, ECN-C-03-047.
Walsh, P., Koumpis, A. and Barziv, O. (2000), Managing real time interactions in industrial
environments based on information supply chains: the ESPRIT ATLAS project, Logistic
Information Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 45-57.
Wilkinson, M.R. and Tavner, P.J. (2004), Extracting condition monitoring information from a
wind turbine drive train, 39th International Universities Power Engineering Conference
(UPEC), No. 2, pp. 591-4.
Wood, J. (2004), Up and running: as the offshore wind industry develops; its learning from some
painful experiences, paper presented at IEEE Power Engineering 2004.
About the authors
Jose Antonio Orosa has a PhD in Marine Engineering and graduated in Marine Engineering and
Naval Architecture from the University of A Coruna. His research is related to moist air and
energy saving. Recently, he has participated in the International Energy Agency Annex 41 and
collaborated with the University of Porto in research on energy saving. Presently, he is Professor
of quality control and Head of the Department of Energy and Marine Propulsion of the
University of A Coruna (Spain). He is a member of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine
Engineers (SNAME) and ASHRAE. Jose Antonio Orosa is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: jaorosa@udc.es
Armando C. Oliveira is Head of the New Energy Technologies Research Unit, which exists
within the Institute of Mechanical Engineering FEUP (Faculty of Engineering of the
University of Porto). He has coordinated and participated in 13 European research and
development projects related to the development of new and sustainable energy systems,
especially solar thermal systems (heating, cooling and CHP systems). Nowadays, he is
Secretary-General of the World Society of Sustainable Energy Technologies and co-responsible
for the conference series on Sustainable Energy Technologies, with several sessions held in
Europe, Asia and America.
Angel Martn Costa holds a Masters in Marine Engineering. In previous years he has worked
in ship maintenance and currently he is principally responsible for wind farms maintenance in
the northwest of Spain. He is developing his PhD in wind farms maintenances.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

This article has been cited by:

Downloaded by UFRN At 19:06 14 April 2015 (PT)

1. Kym Fraser, Hans-Henrik Hvolby, Tzu-Liang (Bill) Tseng. 2015. Maintenance management models:
a study of the published literature to identify empirical evidence. A greater practical focus is needed.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 32:6. . [Abstract] [PDF]
2. Mahmood Shafiee. 2015. Maintenance logistics organization for offshore wind energy: Current progress
and future perspectives. Renewable Energy 77, 182-193. [CrossRef]
3. Tuomo Heikkil. 2015. A decision support system to evaluate the business impacts of machine-tomachine system. Benchmarking: An International Journal 22:2, 201-221. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. ngel M. Costa, Gholamreza Roshan, Jos A. Orosa, ngel Rodrguez-Fernndez. 2014. Case Study of
Weather Maintenance in Wind Power Generation. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering . [CrossRef]
5. Phillip McKay, Rupp Carriveau, David S.-K. Ting. 2011. Farm Wide Dynamics: The Next Critical Wind
Energy Frontier. Wind Engineering 35, 397-418. [CrossRef]