Recently, wind turbine research has switched focus to vertical axis wind turbines due to the extensive research that has been performed on horizontal axis wind turbines and the potential of vertical axis wind turbines in built-up areas. This study aims to analyse the performance of a small-scale hybrid vertical axis wind turbine that can switch from functioning as a Darrieus (lift) turbine to a Savonius (drag) turbine by rotating the blades. The turbine was analysed using 3D computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations in ANSYS Fluent as the primary method, and the findings were verified using wind tunnel experiments. During the analysis, design parameters such as the blade length, diameter, and number of blades were varied to determine if the design had room for improvement. It was found that the current design of the turbine has an optimal efficiency of 12.5% in the Darrieus configuration, which was found to increase when the diameter or blade length was increased. The Savonius configuration was found to be more efficient at low tip-speed ratios (<0.14), and its efficiency could be increased by adding more blades. The experiments found similar trends to the simulations; however, the efficiencies obtained were on average a tenfold increase from the simulation. Implementing the changes that increased efficiency leads to an increased wake recovery distance, making it less suitable for use in a wind farm.

Background: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are becoming well recognized as an important component of health care outcomes and determinants of value in patient-centered care. Yet, there is emerging recognition that guidance is lacking in the utilization of PROMs in hip fracture patients. The aim of this study was to collect input from hip fracture patients and their health care advocates as proxies to identify outcomes that are important and to gain insight into which ones are of greatest importance. Methods: A cross-section of patients aged 65 and older treated for hip fractures at a single level 1 trauma center within the previous 3 to 9 months was identified. Semistructured telephone interviews of patients and/or health care proxies were performed in 2 phases: (1) concept identification and conceptual framework development and (2) item generation and assessment of relative importance of health care outcomes. Each phase was completed by separate patient cohorts. Results: Sixty-four interviews were completed. Eighteen interviews with 13 patients and 5 proxies were completed for framework development. Forty-six interviews with 33 patients and 13 proxies were completed for the assessment of relative importance. Care team and communication were reported as important in hip fracture patients. Physical outcomes were ranked as most important by only 9% of respondents. “Having confidence that I/my loved one received the best care possible” was perceived as very important by 98% of respondents and “Having access to the surgeon” was perceived as very important by 76% of the respondents. Conclusions: In our study, communication between patients and care providers as well as collaboration among patients’ care providers ranked as the most important postoperative preferences in our cohort. Notably, physical outcomes were ranked as most important by only 9% of respondents.

No abstract