Meeting Notes - General

[Dynorat]

The below meeting notes are a copy from the issue log #117 (comment)

16-Dec-2021

SH, JF, AB

Floating Lidar

1. NS has forwarded on some contacts that would be interested. Also JF has been in contact with 2 people from PNNL that would also be interested as they manage offshore floating lidars. SH proposes that once the DCC is merged and v1 released that we have an initial meeting all about floating lidar in place of our usual tech call on either the 6th or 20th Jan?
   1. Ask them to prepare by bringing a sample of the metadata they currently provide (e.g. spreadsheet table or something) that covers 80% of their typical use cases.
   2. They may not know what the data model is so still need a bit of an intro. During the first call try and get interest from people to pursue adapting the WRA Data Model for floating lidar. @kersting been present would be critical.
   3. Go for the 20th. SH to send invite.

Blog progress:

1. AB update?
   1. Working on an introductory blog. Gave a walk through what he has so far. It gives an example of how data is transferred currently, will show a sample JSON of that. Based on this simple JSON introduce the WRA Data Model schema to show how to structure this data in a standard format so everyone knows how to parse it.
   2. JF; be explicit in how people can populate the JSON, what tools would they use. Give some more examples of how useful it is. AB; e.g. automated calibration.
   3. Maybe split it into separate blog posts, the first the intro and the second the example usage and sparkle. Show some screen shots from AB's platform.
   4. Discussion about where it can be hosted. Maybe GitHub Wiki could work. AB will look into options.
   5. Publish target date of Tue 11th Jan.

Workshop:

1. Agenda?
   1. As AB's part is so intro it should go after JF near the start. SH's contribution can be after. Update the google doc.

AOB:

1. Anyone know anything about GitHub Discussions area?
   2. Duplicate the meeting notes for now and see how it goes.
2. Cancel meetings on 23rd and 30th Dec? Didn't get to ask.

Actions:

• SH to send invite to people interested in floating lidar for the 20th Jan.
• AB to look into blog hosting options.
• AB to target 11th Jan as publish date. Others to help him review before then.
• SH update agenda doc with order of talks.
• JF create issue to remember to update readme to add hyperlinks for meeting notes and list of presentations modify readme to add sections for meeting notes and presentations  #130

[stephenholleran]

6-Jan-2022

SH, JF, HW, AB

Happy new year everyone!

Technical

1. Version 1 is currently been reviewed. It can be released once this is done. Expectation is in a few days resulting in a version number of v1.0.0-2022.01.
2. Cancel the bi-weekly DCC technical meeting and hopefully replace it with another after the workshop and floating lidar meetings.

Blogs progress:

1. AB on introducing the WRA Data Model? He will have something for review tomorrow or Monday.
2. HW on introducing the Digital Calibration Certificate? He will build on AB's so is waiting on that first.

Floating Lidar:

1. Invite was sent out to those that expressed an interest. Date for the exploratory call is 20th January.
2. Agenda? SH suggestions:
   1. Objective is to get contributors to expand the WRA Data Model to include floating lidar.
   2. After intros, suggest AB's blog as an intro to explain how the WRA Data Model can be used? Someone from RWE to express their reasons for wanting this. Gauge interest in contributing to expanding the WRA Data Model to include floating lidars.
3. JF: What would the major gaps be between what we have now and what would be required?

Workshop:

1. Draft agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1loglQBoMuSyL85iqRSVI32Wyp8SfuPEPJIgWykgBh1o/edit?usp=sharing
2. We reorganized the agenda to flow a bit better.
3. Asking people what developments would help them start using the data model are items that can go onto a development road map so therefore ask them specifically about application developments too.
4. Slido open response; describe features that would help you start using the data model?
5. What is the killer App for the data model?
   1. We can come up with some suggestions e.g. incorporate floating lidar, mast shadowing and put them in the responses along with others.
6. Based on responses group and prioritize them and try to spark conversation during the workshop. JF to take the lead.

AOB:

1. The GitHub documentation is not the greatest at finding descriptions of a particular property. Maybe there is a better tree view available that we can use instead?

Actions:

• SH: Cancel the bi-weekly DCC technical meeting.
• SH: Chase someone from RWE about what they would talk about for the floating lidar call and the workshop.
• JF: first cut at Slido/? questions and how to curate the responses on the fly.
• HW: Investigate if we can also trigger the documentation creation on the dev branch.
• AB/HW: Investigate if there is better documentation for a JSON Schema, something that is an expanding tree view.

[stephenholleran]

13-Jan-2022

SH, JF, ID, GK, MP, AB

Technical

1. Version 1 is now released and ready to be used!

Blogs / promotion

1. AB has completed his blog and is awaiting feedback.
2. Add version 1 to blog.
3. Publish it Mon/Tue next week.
4. Separate post for the launch of v1 and then follow up or even link within that post to AB blog. AB does his first.

Floating Lidar:

1. SH reached out to GK and NS in RWE asking what/how they are going to contribute.
   1. GB/NS will provide something once they catch up with each other.
2. GB to chase NS to chase participants?

Workshop

1. Need to send out agenda.
2. GK contribution? GB is waiting on approval to talk and what info that can be disclosed at this workshop.
3. Updated the agenda and discussed the content of each section.
4. Went through initial questions to go through in the interactive session. JF to post some on the Slack channel to start the conversation in drafting them.

AOB

1. No

Actions

• AB to add version 1.0 into his blog post.
• SH to produce the launch of v1 post. ASAP. (Switched from JF as he is doing the workshop one)
• GB to chase NS to chase participants for floating lidar call.
• SH to update the agenda doc ASAP.
• JF polish the Eventbrite invite and send out post/link ASAP.
• JF to post potential questions on Slack channel.

[stephenholleran]

27-Jan-2022

SH, GK, ID, MP, AB

Technical

1. N/A

Blogs / promotion

1. DCC blog by HW to be reviewed.

Floating Lidar:

1. The first meeting went well. See Floating Lidar extension #148 (comment). Two floating lidar providers attended among others from other organizations. We introduced the data model and explained what we would like to do. There was interest in the idea but we agreed to have a second call to narrow down on the scope.
2. Next meeting Thur, 17th Feb.

Workshop

1. Reminder; Purpose of workshop:
   1. How to get people using/adopting it.
   2. Draft a high level development roadmap.
2. Went through each section of the agenda and made comments there about what is to be covered. See that document for the detailed comments in each section.

AOB

1. The wider Task 43 group Collaboration workshop went well with lots of subgroups forming combining people from different TAs and WPs. SH pitched making the WRA Data Model FAIR. Anna Maria Sempreviva is interested in contributing.

Actions

• JF to post potential questions on Slack channel.

[stephenholleran]

10-Feb-2022

I lost the meeting notes from this meeting. I will try and remember as much as I can.

SH, ID, JF, AB, GK, HW, MG

Mats Goldberg from Research Institutes of Sweden (RISE) joined for the first time.

Workshop

1. We started going through the survey results but didn't get very far. We decided that we would go through them ourselves and consolidate our findings for the next meeting.
2. @abohara I think you had some comments about some of the results but I can't remember what they were. Feel free to add here. EDIT: I think it was the importing/exporting into software is very similar to converters of logger files?
3. Lot of calls for the video of the workshop.

Actions

• All: review survey results from workshop and categorize.
• JF: to try and get that edited and published to YouTube.

[stephenholleran]

24-Feb-2022

SH, JM, MP, ID, GK, AB

John Medley from ZX joined.

Technical

1. Some new issues to deal with, specifically height offsets from WindCube and ZX. I need to write the issue yet.
   1. JM: the offset height doesn't effect the measurements. The data will always be stamped 80m above window. There is a direction offset however that does change the data and it doesn't come in the data file header. It is on ZX's bug fix list.

Blogs / promotion

1. N/A

Floating Lidar:

1. 2nd meeting notes are: Floating Lidar extension #148 (comment)
2. Some new people so spent a good bit explaining the WRA Data Model.
3. Established a full list of measurement types that are measure by a floating lidar.
4. Next meeting 3rd March.
5. In addition Chitra Sivaraman (PNNL) explained a tiny bit about CF and the ARM Data Standard which follows CF as much as possible. ARM is Atmospheric Radiation Measurement and is part of the U.S. D.O.E. The ARM Data Standard describes how the header of a NetCDF file shouldbe structured to contain metadata for the self describing file. It can track configuration changes however this results in a new NetCDF file.
   1. The documentation: https://www.arm.gov/publications/programdocs/doe-sc-arm-15-004.pdf
   2. An example: https://engineering.arm.gov/ncreview/?sivaraman.emerald.adc.arm.gov.94
6. AB reached out to Orsted and UL in North America. Both are interested. AB to send on meeting invite to Orsted.

Workshop

1. Reminder; Purpose of workshop:
   1. How to get people using/adopting it.
   2. Draft a high level development roadmap.
2. Roadmap development. We categorized the survey feedback from the workshop and prioritized them as below. These are currently as notes in the Kanban board we use under Roadmap Backlog.
   1. Importing/Exporting/Converters
   2. Training material
   3. Populating tool
   4. Preprocessing/Analysis tools
   5. Extend to floating lidar
   6. Extend to solar
   7. Extend to scanning lidars
   8. Extend to maintenance documentation
3. As the Importing/exporting/converter development is outside of our control we will next focus on training material. At the next meeting we will develop some tasks to be done for this.
   1. Any of the WRA software could potentially read in a csv with standardized column names and understand what it means. Currently they use only a very small proportion of what the WRA Data Model captures.
   2. JM and MP could work together in coming up with some converters for both NRG loggers and ZX.
4. Populating the WRA Data Model got mentioned a lot and it was felt that this should be next as there was feedback that trying to populate the data model as far upstream as possible is the best way for this to get traction.
5. Though the extending to floating lidar is lower down the list, we have already started this process and so we will continue with that.

AOB

Actions

• Send AB the floating lidar invite so he can forward to Orsted.

[stephenholleran]

10-Mar-2022

SH, AB, GK, JF

Technical

1. Even more issues have been raised. List them off here:
   1. Height/direction offsets programmed into lidars.
   2. Mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config.
   3. Mast section height vs height of braces. We quickly spoke about this one:
      4. Add in mast section height.
      5. Leave the braces height alone.
      6. We need to record the number of diagonal braces vertically or the number of repetitive sections?
   4. Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate.
2. When are we going to get time to discuss these?
   1. We will try and do this remotely in the GitHub issue log. If doesn't work we can carve out some time in this call.
   2. GH can take the responsibility in updating

Blogs / vlogs / tutorials / promotion

1. Main objective for this meeting now.
2. What use cases could we explain?

Floating Lidar:

1. 3rd meeting notes are here.
2. Some more new people attended.
3. Reviewed the full list of measurement types, added a few extra and prioritized them. Some confusion about some definitions of the wind speed coming from the provider (motion corrected vs raw).
4. Action is for me (SH) to start adding some of these new measurement types to the data model for review in the next meeting.
5. Next meeting 17th March I am not going to make so I think we should cancel it? Yes.
6. GH has found 13 different floating lidar providers.

Workshop

1. Reminder; Purpose of workshop:
   1. How to get people using/adopting it.
   2. Draft a high level development roadmap.
2. Roadmap development:
   1. Importing/Exporting/Converters
   2. Training material
   3. Populating tool
   4. Preprocessing/Analysis tools
   5. Extend to floating lidar
   6. Extend to solar
   7. Extend to scanning lidars
   8. Extend to maintenance documentation
3. Give feedback to all attendees on the roadmap?
4. Recording publishing?
   4. Consider sub-contracting this out to Upwork or similar.

WindEurope Tech Workshop, June (sometime), Brussels

1. URL: https://windeurope.org/tech2022/
2. Deadline for submission of abstracts is Friday 18th March. Do we want to submit anything?
   1. Update on development, roadmap, list adoptees?
   2. Experience of building the standard?
   3. Need a podium spot as poster is not worth the effort.

AOB

1. IEC are going to start digitizing energy yield assessment reports.

Actions

• JF to try and edit the workshop recording.
• SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. JF to pass on attendee list.
• JF to draft an abstract for WindEurope.

[Dynorat]

abstract submitted and posted to shared drive

[stephenholleran]

24-Mar-2022

SH, ID, MG, HW, GK, JF, MP

WindEurope Tech Workshop, June 23rd, 24th, Brussels

1. URL: https://windeurope.org/tech2022/
2. JF submitted an abstract.
3. Task 43 is planning an in person/hybrid meeting the 2 days before this. Keep these dates open in your diary.

Technical Development

1. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:
   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151. HW thinks it is a good thing to add to the DCC. GK will share an image showing this requirement. The tube length during calibration will be different to that used in installation but the installed one needs to be the same length or longer than the calibration one.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Section height vs height of braces #152. Discussed this last meeting.
   3. [IEC validation requirements] Area of additional members in mast section geometry #154.
   4. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155. HW maybe have a sensor table that captures the classification and also the sensor body diameter along with other static anemometer characteristics. We should include this info in the data model but lets discuss further about an anemometer sensor database.
   5. [IEC validation requirements] Lighting finial diameter #156.
2. [DataBase] introduce a mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config #150.
3. [DCC] add version key to schema #147.
4. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153.
5. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88
6. Height/direction offsets programmed into lidars. Still need to create an issue for this.

Floating Lidar:

1. No update. SH needs to do some work before next weeks call.

Blogs / vlogs / tutorials / promotion

1. Main objective for this meeting now.
2. What use cases could we explain?
   1. A vlog filling out the data model in our form APP?
      1. Break into small videos.
      2. Just do a few simple ones and then try and get feedback from users if these are any good.
      3. It makes sense to do this video.
      4. Instead of this, showing a parser working would be hugely beneficial for the first logger OEM that does it!! (The vendor should be the one providing the converters/parser to avoid any inconsistencies.)
      5. MP is working on a converter and training material for NRG Systems.
3. What can you do with the populated file?
   7. The brightwind library is an option for this.
   8. GK have a function for corrections to true north. He may be able to share this which could be used for a tutorial.
4. The 'Presentations' page on GitHub can be filled in with some content?
   1. Is GitHub the place to store this documentation. Would Zenodo be better?
   2. GitHub links can change whereas Zenodo shouldn't https://zenodo.org/communities/iea_wind_task_43
5. 'User Workshops' page? Idea was for the workshop recording. This can go under videos.

AOB

1. No.

Actions

• JF to try and edit the workshop recording. After April 1st.
• SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
• JF to pass on attendee list.
• SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters.
• SH to have a go at producing a video to populate the data model using the Form App.
• SH to create an issue for Height/direction offsets programmed into lidars.
• ALL contribute to the technical discussions in the issue logs.

[stephenholleran]

7-Apr-2022

SH, MG, GK, JF

Floating Lidar:

1. Created a demo data model file for floating lidar using the current schema.
2. Added motion_corrected_wind_speed/direction/vertical to the schema and included it in the demo file.
3. On the call Floating Lidar extension #148 (comment) discussed the next parameters and have some actions.

Blogs / vlogs / tutorials / promotion

1. Ongoing actions:
   • JF to try and edit the workshop recording. After April 1st.
   • SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
   • SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters.
   • SH to have a go at producing a video to populate the data model using the Form App.
2. What use cases/scenarios could we explain?
   1. Where to put lidar configurations into the data model?
      1. User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub.
3. If anyone has suggestions please write your suggesting as a reply to this comment below.
4. We probably have enough actions to work on for now instead of coming up with more suggestions.

Technical Development

1. Ongoing actions:
   • SH to create an issue for Height/direction offsets programmed into lidars.
   • ALL contribute to the technical discussions in the issue logs.
2. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:
   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151. Discussed this last meeting.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Section height vs height of braces #152. GK has made some suggestions for new terms. Check out issue to agree/disagree.
   3. [IEC validation requirements] Area of additional members in mast section geometry #154. GK worked out impact. Suggestion is not to account for it. Check out issue to agree/disagree.
   4. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155. Discussed this last meeting.
   5. [IEC validation requirements] Lighting finial diameter #156. GK has it done and will create a pull request.
3. [DataBase] introduce a mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config #150.
4. [DCC] add version key to schema #147.
5. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153.
6. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88

AOB

1. The Task 43 organizing committee had a call with various people from Vestas that work on digitalization. They were mostly O&M and turbine design people, however, from WP4 perspective I informed them that the WRA Data Model can be used for permanent met masts.
   1. There was an interesting discussion on power curves though. They see a real problem in sharing power curve data via pdf especially when turbines are getting large with more complex control systems that will require a power curve lookup table. I think this is something where we could really have an impact if we did the same for power curves as we have done for calibration certificates.
   2. NREL have a power curve archive which may be a foundation for a data model: https://github.com/NREL/turbine-models
2. JF hasn't heard anything back from WindEurope Tech Conf.
3. Vision? Should we revisit and write down the vision for this work package.
   1. It is important to have a vision that helps guide the work, decision making.
   2. Suggestion: "Our mission is to make the energy yield estimates process more efficient, transparent and reproducible."
   3. Keep this alive until we get a quorum.
4. Task 43 Merch?
   1. This company Teemill https://teemill.com/the-journey/ allows you to create a shop on their website so people can order their own t-shirts. They use 100% organic cotton and try to be as sustainable as possible using renewable energy in the factories. They are based in the UK which may not be great for shipping.
   2. Follow up with JF.

New Actions

• ???? User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub. Can someone volunteer?
• SH to follow up with JF regarding Task 43 merchandise.

[stephenholleran]

5-May-2022

SH, GK, JF, PW, AB

Floating Lidar:

1. Progressing the development and agreeing on some terms to include. See Floating Lidar extension #148

Blogs / vlogs / tutorials / promotion

1. Ongoing actions:
   • JF to try and edit the workshop recording. Almost done. Will send link when ready.
   • SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
   • SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters.
   • SH to have a go at producing a video to populate the data model using the Form App.
   • ???? User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub. Where to put lidar configurations e.g. serial number, averaging period, into the data model. That is, into the 'logger_main_config' area. Can someone volunteer?

Vision

1. From the last call we agreed this would be good to discuss when we have a quorum.
2. Suggestion: "Our mission is to make the energy yield estimates process more efficient, transparent and reproducible."
3. digitizing and automation of the wind resource assessment process
4. Want people to add value, automate dumb stuff, make space for analysts to deal with the high value issues.
5. Open source projects can break down the barriers between what organization think are proprietary processes. We can get better much faster if we collaborate. Coopetition. Not that easy though!
6. A single data model is an enabler, many data models is not. A single open source software is the opposite. Many methods/softwares can give different answers which is useful depending on the context.
7. "Our mission is to make the energy yield assessment process more efficient, transparent and reproducible through digitizing and automation."

Technical Development

1. Ongoing actions:
   • SH to create an issue for Height/direction offsets programmed into lidars.
   • ALL contribute to the technical discussions in the issue logs.
2. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:
   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151. Discussed this last meeting.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Section height vs height of braces #152. GK has made some suggestions for new terms. Check out issue to agree/disagree.
   3. [IEC validation requirements] Area of additional members in mast section geometry #154. GK worked out impact. Suggestion is not to account for it. Check out issue to agree/disagree.
   4. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155. Discussed this last meeting.
   5. [IEC validation requirements] Lighting finial diameter #156. SH reviewing pull request.
3. [DataBase] introduce a mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config #150.
4. [DCC] add version key to schema #147.
5. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153.
6. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88.
7. [SCHEMA] Improve lattice face width description #157. SH to implement.
8. Missing units for legacy US projects #164. GK, or anyone, to add to the list.
9. [DEPRECIATION] Remove incorrect measurement unit for density (kg/m^2) #165. SH to implement.
10. uncertainty_k_factor for logger_main_config table #166. GK to include.

AOB

1. Task 43 having in person/hybrid meeting the 2 days (21st and 22nd June) before the WindEurope Tech Workshop (23rd and 24th June) in Brussels.
   1. How many of us might attend in person? 3 out of 5 of us so far.
2. Accepted for a WindEurope Tech Workshop poster. Do we want to accept or not? We wanted a podium presentation. Accept to keep us in the conversation but don't spend much time on it. JF to accept.

• SH to follow up with JF regarding Task 43 merchandise. Sent Slack msg.

New Actions

• JF to accept poster slot for Wind Europe Tech W.

[stephenholleran]

19-May-2022

SH, GK, SC, MG, PW, AB

Scott Campbell (Vattenfall) joined and introduced himself.

Floating Lidar:

1. No meeting last week. I will have to cancel next weeks too.

Blogs / vlogs / tutorials / promotion

1. Ongoing actions:
   • JF to try and edit the workshop recording. Almost done. Will send link when ready.
   • SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
   • SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters. SC: These would be useful to have.
   • SH to have a go at producing a video to populate the data model using the Form App. I have actually started this.
   • ???? User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub. Where to put lidar configurations e.g. serial number, averaging period, into the data model. That is, into the 'logger_main_config' area. Can someone volunteer?
2. Update the contributing file to:
   1. Make explicit to merge feature branch into the dev branch.
   2. List off what files to update, the json file, sql, demo, CHANGELOG.
   • GK is willing to make a video on how to contribute in the coming months.
   • SH to make an issue to capture these updates
3. What issues do people have with learning about the data model:
   1. SC: No story on how the different modules tie together. The video from the workshop could be useful here.
   2. SC: Integration with software providers.
   3. PW: Hard to get info from GitHub, a lot of digging. Again the video from the workshop could be useful here but we may need to produce more tutorials on how to navigate the GitHub repo.
   4. MG: An annotated walk through of the demo file.

Mission Vision

1. "Our mission is to make the energy yield assessment process more efficient, transparent and reproducible through digitizing and automation."

Technical Development

1. Ongoing actions:
   • SH to create an issue for Height/direction offsets programmed into lidars.
2. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:
   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155.
   3. [IEC validation requirements] Lighting finial diameter #156. Awaiting GK to give ok to close.
3. [DataBase] introduce a mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config #150. Working on it at the moment.
4. [DCC] add version key to schema #147.
5. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153.
6. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88.
7. [SCHEMA] Improve lattice face width description #157. Awaiting review by GK.
8. Including additional information about diagonal braces in mast_section_geometry #170.

AOB

• JF to accept poster slot for Wind Europe Tech W.
• SH to follow up with JF regarding Task 43 merchandise. Sent Slack msg.

New Actions

• GK is willing to make a video on how to contribute in the coming months.
• SH to create an issue to enhance the contributing text

[stephenholleran]

16-Jun-2022

SH, ID, PW, AB

Floating Lidar:

1. No meeting recently and next weeks one is canceled too due to WindEurope.
2. Andy Clifton in Task 52 (old 32) is having a digitalization subgroup. We should make sure we communicate and compliment each other. Their next meeting is on July 12th.

Blogs / vlogs / tutorials / promotion

1. Ongoing tutorial actions:
   • JF to try and edit the workshop recording. Almost done. Will send link when ready.
   • SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
   • SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters. SC: These would be useful to have.
   • SH to have a go at producing a video to populate the data model using the Form App.
   • ???? User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub. Where to put lidar configurations e.g. serial number, averaging period, into the data model. That is, into the 'logger_main_config' area. Can someone volunteer?
   • GK is willing to make a video on how to contribute in the coming months.
2. SH has:
   1. Produced 2 video tutorials walking through the demo JSON file and showing the layout of GitHub. Got some feedback from MP that I will go through.
   2. Updated the contributing file
   3. Created an Entity Relational Diagram (ERD) of the database.
3. Next weeks presentations;
   1. Task 43 meeting, audience will be ourselves plus others from other work packages.
      1. What have we done, we have delivered an actual product, Q. since Boulder we have so much conceptual work and papers but little usable work, we spent a lot of time and effort, this is what it takes to deliver a product, we need more people to come and help us.
      2. Lesson learned: need a lead contributor (an ambassador, a champion) that has the time. Funding would greatly help. Organisations are solving these internally, instead of funding the internal work, contribute to a collaborative effort such as this. Hoping another core group volunteers to get together to do similar work is not practical or proactive, it just won't get done or will take much longer to deliver anything.
   2. WindEurope, audience will be wind analysts, they most likely will have heard of the WRA Data Model.
      1. Should have a call for helping us develop it further.
      2. Established a template for how these things can be done.
      3. Draft mission statement.

Mission Vision

1. "Our mission is to make the energy yield assessment process more efficient, transparent and reproducible through digitizing and automation."

Technical Development

8. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:

   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155.

9. [DataBase] introduce a mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config #150. Discussion between SH and AB. See issue and pull request iss #150 add meas_point log_meas_cfg mapping table #178. AB: Think of the scenario where two anemometers have the exact same logger_measurement_confg. With the mapping table this would cause problems as you wouldn't be able to distinguish between the configs. The duplication is probably an acceptable loosening of database normalization rules.

10. [DCC] add version key to schema #147.

11. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153.

12. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88.

13. [SCHEMA] Account for height/direction offsets programmed into lidars #177.

AOB

• SH to follow up with JF regarding Task 43 merchandise. Sent Slack msg.

New Actions

[stephenholleran]

30-Jun-2022

SH, ID, AB

Floating Lidar:

1. No update.

• Andy Clifton in Task 52 (old 32) is having a digitalization subgroup. We should make sure we communicate and compliment each other. Their next meeting is on July 12th. Andy wasn't at WindEurope.

Blogs / vlogs / tutorials / promotion

1. Ongoing tutorial actions:
   • JF to try and edit the workshop recording. Almost done. Will send link when ready.
   • AB has edited the videos. They look good. I propose that we release the Intro by Jason and the data model intro by Amit first. Follow up with the walkthrough by Stephen + Gibson's talk a week later followed by the interactive roadmap by Jason and Mike's recap the following week? AB: Maybe the LinkedIn posts could be weekly but put all the videos up there in one go?
   • SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
   • SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters. SC: These would be useful to have.
   • SH to have a go at producing a video to populate the data model using the Form App. This might be redundant with the workshop videos now done.
   • ???? User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub. Where to put lidar configurations e.g. serial number, averaging period, into the data model. That is, into the 'logger_main_config' area. Can someone volunteer?
   • GK is willing to make a video on how to contribute in the coming months.
   • AB: a tool to show a use case of the data model so the user doesn't need to know about the data model? A software tool to paste in a data model on the left and render it on the right with tables or a graphic.
2. SH has:
   1. Produced 2 video tutorials walking through the demo JSON file and showing the layout of GitHub. Got some feedback from MP that I will go through. Thanks for the feedback Mike!
3. AB: a tool to show a use case of the data model so the user doesn't need to know about the data model? A software tool to paste in a data model on the left and render it on the right with tables or a graphic.

Mission

1. "Our mission is to make the energy yield assessment process more efficient, transparent and reproducible through digitizing and automation."

Technical Development

1. Released v1.1 just before WindEurope. This included some updates to the DCC. See release notes: https://github.com/IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard/releases/tag/v1.1.0-2022.06
2. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:
   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155.
3. [DataBase] introduce a mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config #150. Discussion between SH and AB. See issue and pull request iss #150 add meas_point log_meas_cfg mapping table #178. AB: Think of the scenario where two anemometers have the exact same logger_measurement_confg. With the mapping table this would cause problems as you wouldn't be able to distinguish between the configs. The duplication is probably an acceptable loosening of database normalization rules.
4. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153. I had a discussion with GK at Task 43 meeting and so now have a better understanding of his proposal. I will follow up on it.
5. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88.
6. [SCHEMA] Account for height/direction offsets programmed into lidars #177.

AOB

1. Task 43 meeting update.
   2. SH gave a quick update of WP4 and talked about how we have been lucky with such great volunteers but this isn't proactive or productive for the wind industry to push forward. Slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1m5ETLkqbLiMnlvX1etawB3axtPC9bhhCwK7c8bB6L4E/edit?usp=sharing
2. WindEurope Tech Workshop update.
   1. SH gave a walkthrough of the demo json implementation. It was well received.
   2. Via JF; OWC can donate a week of a data scientists time to Task 43. Not sure how we could use this person as our current priority is promotion/training. It would also depend on the person's background/capabilities but still a great offer.
   3. eWindLidar has a data model in yaml to represent the meta data of the raw lidar data. They have tools to merge that with the raw data into a netcdf file.

• SH to follow up with JF regarding Task 43 merchandise. Sent Slack msg.

New Actions

[stephenholleran]

14-Jul-2022

SH, PW, AB, JF, GK

Floating Lidar:

1. Got through wave parameters and added. Currents are next.
2. Update on the open letter? GK to send it out.

Blogs / vlogs / tutorials / promotion

1. Ongoing tutorial actions:

   • Videos published.
   • SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
   • Link the new videos from the Wiki. Do it
   • SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters. SC: These would be useful to have.
   • SH to have a go at producing a video to populate the data model using the Form App. This might be redundant with the workshop videos now done.
   • ???? User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub. Where to put lidar configurations e.g. serial number, averaging period, into the data model. That is, into the 'logger_main_config' area. Can someone volunteer?
   • GK is willing to make a video on how to contribute in the coming months.

2. AB: a tool to show a use case of the data model so the user doesn't need to know about the data model? A software tool to paste in a data model on the left and render it on the right with tables or a graphic. Anymore thoughts?

   1. JF: Could be a good proprietary add-on for someone. Can have a related companies page which points to these tools.
   2. AB: The best data model is the one you don't know about.
   3. JF: This is somewhat similar to the Jupyter Notebook (binder) project. A video tutorial specifically using the Notebook would make it less scary.
   4. PW: It would help with organizations understand how it can be used internally.
   5. AB: Time to demo through tools.

Mission

1. "Our mission is to make the energy yield assessment process more efficient, transparent and reproducible through digitizing and automation."

Technical Development

1. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:
   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151. Implemented in DCC, need to add to WRA DM.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155.
   3. Adding number of horizontal bracing members to mast_section_geometry table #174 I am leaning towards just capturing the main part of a lattice section and not the joins of sections, for now, until we get more traction.
2. [DataBase] introduce a mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config #150. Discussion between SH and AB. See issue and pull request iss #150 add meas_point log_meas_cfg mapping table #178. AB: Think of the scenario where two anemometers have the exact same logger_measurement_confg. With the mapping table this would cause problems as you wouldn't be able to distinguish between the configs. The duplication is probably an acceptable loosening of database normalization rules.
3. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153. I had a discussion with GK at Task 43 meeting and so now have a better understanding of his proposal. I will follow up on it.
4. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88.
5. [SCHEMA] Account for height/direction offsets programmed into lidars #177.
6. Obukhov length for stability #182

AOB

1. JF: IEC -15 update: section in the reporting standard about met tower data. We have an opportunity to inject the WRA DM into this.
   1. Maybe do some demo to them?
2. Apache Arrow, similar sort of project to this. Get someone from there to come talk to us?
3. In the next meeting, talk about derived values from sensors and how we capture them in the WRA DM.

New Actions

[stephenholleran]

11-Aug-2022

SH, AB, GK

Floating Lidar:

1. Letter sent out to providers and new meeting invite sent out to start back up on the 1st September.

Promotional blogs / vlogs / tutorials

1. Ongoing tutorial actions:

   • SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
   • Link the new videos from the Wiki. Yes, do it
   • SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters. SC: These would be useful to have.
   • ???? User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub. Where to put lidar configurations e.g. serial number, averaging period, into the data model. That is, into the 'logger_main_config' area. Can someone volunteer?
   • GK is willing to make a video on how to contribute in the coming months.
   • AB idea about developing a tool to show the user the contents of sample data model file, as discussed in Meeting Notes - General #129 (comment)

2. Posted on LinkedIn about the 3rd presentation video.

3. David McCracken posed a question on the WRAG mailing list about Python and WRA & Metocean. This sparked off big interest and as a result he has set up a forum called PY_WRAM. This is potentially the perfect forum to post some tutorials about the WRA Data Model.

Mission

1. "Our mission is to make the energy yield assessment process more efficient, transparent and reproducible through digitizing and automation."

Technical Development

1. AB: Derived values; how are they captured?
   1. Loggers can calculate values based on measurements, e.g. soiling, Obukov. It might be useful to flag these as derived as opposed to directly measured. A logger file can have 200 columns, distinguishing between measured and derived might be useful.
   2. An open text field that a user can note what the algorithm is to derive this filed.
   3. Extending this, this could be used to flag a post processed data column e.g. shearing up to a new height. This wasn't produced by the logger but an analyst may have calculated a new wind speed at a new height and wants to send this data onto a 3rd party and use the data model to describe the contents of the data file.
   4. Windographer distinguishes "calculated" columns such as selective averaged but not sheared.
   5. Provide a flag in the measurement_point or logger_measurement_config to show if the data is_calculated. Leaning towarrds putting it in logger_measurement_config as it is more approriate for the original motivation for this. Even if this is used in the future for post processed fields, the logger_measurement_config will still be needed as this is where the measurement units is located. Also associate a text field so notes can be put in to explain it. AB to implement it.
2. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:
   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151. Implemented in DCC, need to add to WRA DM.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155.
   3. Adding number of horizontal bracing members to mast_section_geometry table #174 I am leaning towards just capturing the main part of a lattice section and not the joins of sections, for now, until we get more traction.
3. [DataBase] introduce a mapping table between meas_point and logger_meas_config #150. Discussion between SH and AB. See issue and pull request iss #150 add meas_point log_meas_cfg mapping table #178. AB: Think of the scenario where two anemometers have the exact same logger_measurement_confg. With the mapping table this would cause problems as you wouldn't be able to distinguish between the configs. The duplication is probably an acceptable loosening of database normalization rules.
4. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153. I had a discussion with GK at Task 43 meeting and so now have a better understanding of his proposal. I will follow up on it.
5. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88.
6. [SCHEMA] Account for height/direction offsets programmed into lidars #177.
7. Obukhov length for stability #182

AOB

New Actions

• AB to start a branch for a is_calculated flag.

[stephenholleran]

25-Aug-2022

SH, JF, GK

Floating Lidar:

1. Start back up on the 1st September.
   1. GK to send letter to other floating lidar providers provided TG gives the ok.
2. Outline of call
   1. Purpose: Digital Exchange Format (for floating lidar more so) leading to automation. (They provide the parser.)
   2. What we have accomplished so far with the WRA Data Model (use for lidars already)
   3. For floating lidars where we are.
   4. Who has been involved so far.

Promotional blogs / vlogs / tutorials

1. Ongoing tutorial actions:
   • SH to send update to all workshop attendees about the roadmap. Waiting on recordings to be edited.
   • Link the new videos from the Wiki. See https://github.com/IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard/wiki/Presentations
   • SH, MP to get together the list of presentations/posters. SC: These would be useful to have.
   • ???? User guide/tutorial for how to populate the data model for a lidar. A tutorial that could go into the Wiki area of GitHub. Where to put lidar configurations e.g. serial number, averaging period, into the data model. That is, into the 'logger_main_config' area. Can someone volunteer?
   • GK is willing to make a video on how to contribute in the coming months.
   • AB idea about developing a tool to show the user the contents of sample data model file, as discussed in Meeting Notes - General #129 (comment)
2. JF: Could we promote organizations to encourage providers of data equipment & services to adopt the WRA Data Model? That is, for example an organization puts a requirement in their procurement process to provide a parser to convert their data file into the WRA Data Model format for example. Template language could be provided to help organizations easily insert it into their procurement processes.
3. Re PY_WRAM; how can we link up with it? Mirror or link tutorials that we write on our on Wiki to Py_WRAM.

Mission

1. "Our mission is to make the energy yield assessment process more efficient, transparent and reproducible through digitizing and automation."

Technical Development

• AB to start a branch for a is_calculated flag. See last meeting for discussion.

1. The issues relating to [IEC validation requirements]:
   1. [DCC], [IEC validation requirements] Missing tube length both in the data model and in the digital calibration certificate #151. Implemented in DCC, need to add to WRA DM.
   2. [IEC validation requirements] Sensor body size #155.
   3. Adding number of horizontal bracing members to mast_section_geometry table #174 I am leaning towards just capturing the main part of a lattice section and not the joins of sections, for now, until we get more traction.
2. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153. I had a discussion with GK at Task 43 meeting and so now have a better understanding of his proposal. I will follow up on it. Edit: GK has a new proposal.
3. Including uncertainty and classification information in the sensor table #88.
4. [SCHEMA] Account for height/direction offsets programmed into lidars #177.
5. Obukhov length for stability #182 NS to implement.

AOB

New Actions

• [ ]

[stephenholleran]

14-Sep-2023 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), CB (Vaisala), DN (Eolos), GT (OW), JF (NREL), JU (Shell), AB (Altosphere

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. JF abstract to ACP Resource & Tech conf. Nov-2023 update? No update yet.
4. Tutorial/Tool development:
   1. DN update:
      1. Finished the implementation of the data model for their buoys. Have given the data model to one of their clients.
      2. Updated the Jupyter Notebook used in the workshop to work with the NYSERDA buoys.
      3. DN went through his Notebook.
      4. Next code snippet should be a shear plot. SH to do it.
5. SCHEMA updates:
   1. PR merged Feature/#226 #228
   2. PR merged iss #215 add null to height_reference enum #230
   3. PR merged iss #217 remove double quotes around null in plant_type #231
6. Christian Johnson from IEC 61400-15 EYA DEF queries [SCHEMA] Measurement location UUID #232
   1. We can add in an 'uuid' at the measurement location level, make it optional and use the uuid format.
   2. For the name abbreviation we are not inclined to include as it may cause confusion as to what the measurement location name is. We can review in the future if it becomes more of an issue.

New Actions

• SH: Update the Wiki with the workshop recordings and DN notebook example.
• DN: Create PR to upload your Notebook to tools and the JSON file to demo data.
• SH: Create tutorial expanding on DN Notebook to plot the shear of the N06 buoy.
• SH: respond to Christian's issue.

[stephenholleran]

28-Sep-2023 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), DN (Eolos), GK (RWE), JF (NREL), AB (Altosphere)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. JF abstract to ACP Resource & Tech conf. 14th-15th Nov-2023, Austin, TX, was accepted for podium presentation.
   1. Who should present? JF to present. JF, GK and SH to work on slides beforehand.
   2. New version of data model which includes floating lidar.
   3. Case for adoption, current activities, next steps.
4. Possibly conference 5th edition windpower data and digital innovation forum to consider presenting at.
5. Tutorial/Tool development:
   1. SH working on tutorial for plotting shear quickly.
6. SCHEMA updates:
   1. [SCHEMA] Measurement location UUID #232 responded to Christian Johnson
   2. Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205 GK will chase up with Leon Hailstones
   3. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153 GK will provide a solution he has worked on.

New Actions

• JF: Start on ACP presentation
• SH: Update the Wiki with DN notebook example.
• DN: Create PR to upload your Notebook to tools and the JSON file to demo data.
• SH: Create tutorial expanding on DN Notebook to plot the shear of the N06 buoy.
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• GK: Will provide his solution for uncertainties in Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153

[stephenholleran]

12-Oct-2023 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), JU (Shell), GK (RWE)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. ACP Resource & Tech conf. 14th-15th Nov-2023, Austin, TX, abstract was accepted for podium presentation.
   1. Slides update? Don't know.
   2. GK to chase JF to confirm if he is presenting.
5. Tutorial/Tool development:
   1. DN can't push to GitHub because of the docs folder.
   2. Should the E06 timeseries data go into our repo? It is 128 MB. Let's go with the default and get the user to download the data themselves. We can add the file and therefore can use Binder to run the notebook in the repo at a later date.
   3. Can these will get merged straight into the master branch (after a review) as they don't impact a release? Yes.
   4. SH nearly finished tutorial for plotting shear of the E06 floating lidar.
6. SCHEMA updates:
   1. I added issue templates to help people describe a bug, request a new feature or just ask a question.
   2. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153 GK will provide a solution he has worked on.
      1. The solution is in the issue already. The cleanest thing to do is to rename the existing 'reference' properties and add the new ones. This would be a breaking change however we are building up a few issues that are breaking changes so maybe it is time to do a v2.0 release with this and the other breaking changes. GK to review with HW.
   3. [SCHEMA] device_vertical_orientation inconsistent naming, missing the '_id' on the end for an enum #234 added new, a breaking change we can include when we do a breaking change update.

New Actions

• JF: Start on ACP presentation
• SH: Create PR for DN to upload his Notebook to tools and the JSON file to demo data.
• SH: Create tutorial expanding on DN Notebook to plot the shear of the N06 buoy.
• SH: Update the Wiki with DN notebook example.
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• GK: Will reach out to HW (Deutsche Windguard) to make sure this solution is acceptable to calibration facilities Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153

[stephenholleran]

26-Oct-2023 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), DN (Eolos), JU (Shell), GT (OW), JF (Empowr), NS (RWE)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. ACP Resource & Tech conf. 14th-15th Nov-2023, Austin, TX, abstract was accepted for podium presentation.
   1. JF is still on for doing it. Draft due tomorrow. Final version due 10th Nov.
   2. JF will work on the slides.
4. WG1 Task voting: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UN5Q0J1Q_er0PsAtg5DVyjPop34ii1iWmBhuJvDrrfE/edit#gid=0
5. Tutorial/Tool development:
   1. DN's notebook is now up and Wiki updated. How do we promote this now? DN will create LinkedIn post.
   2. SH's notebook update?
      1. Pull request ready Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
      2. Update Wiki to link to it once it is merged.
6. SCHEMA updates:
   1. Sensor uncertainty in sensor table #153 GK checked with HW and he seems ok with this solution.
   2. Calculated columns #223 NS will take a look at this. Thanks.
   3. [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214 SH will tackle these.
   4. Including licensing information / terms of use in the metadata? #225 SH will tackle these.

Actions

• JF: Start on ACP presentation
• DN, JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• DN: Create LinkedIn post.
• SH: Update Wiki with new notebook.
• SH: [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214
• SH: Including licensing information / terms of use in the metadata? #225
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205

[stephenholleran]

09-Nov-2023 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), JF (Empowr), DN (Eolos)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. ACP Resource & Tech conf. 14th-15th Nov-2023, Austin, TX. Final version of presentation due 10th Nov.
   2. JF has had meetings with session team so there is a plan.
   3. The audience is mixed between wind and solar.
   4. We went through the presentation.
4. Can everyone fill in the Task 43 extension sign up form regardless of already been a member of the task? https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeCkRR2oIVB1KT-Og6Ckgl5Vp12a8eNs9VQcrp_MpCMk_M-JA/viewform This is to understand who is contributing to the task and what country you reside. Very useful for the organizing committee.
5. Tutorial/Tool development:
   1. SH's notebook update. Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
      1. DN has reviewed and came back with comments.
      2. Update Wiki to link to it once it is merged.
      3. SH should go back and render DN's one.
6. SCHEMA updates:
   1. PR iss #225 add license at the top level #242 needs review. I have asked Andy Clifton (the proposer) and AB.

Actions

• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205

[stephenholleran]

07-Dec-2023 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), JF (Empowr), OL (Vortex), GK (RWE), AB (Altosphere)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros. OL introduced himself.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. ACP Resource & Tech conf. 14th-15th Nov-2023, Austin, TX. JF to give feedback about presentation.
   1. It might be worth rebranding the data model to be more inclusive of solar technologies as most companies are now doing both wind and solar
   2. DNV is offering a discount for customers that utilize the data model. Specifically a 20% discount on data cleaning/data ETL. apparently this can add up quickly for sites with multiple masts/RSDs
   3. we still need to sort out with logger vendors how/if to natively support the data model. There appears to be a disconnect between use of the data model and IE's wanting raw data.
   4. installers are getting requests to support data model. that may be a near term priority to help some of those folks come up to speed and/or develop tooling around it. Specifically in the US that would be Harness Energy and Anemometry Specialists
   5. GK: we need more sparkle to show and demonstrate the usefulness of the data model.
4. GK: For climate change data there are lots of different formats as they are produced by lots of different organisations/universities. Is this something we could help with? This is different type of data so probably not, however we will want to help where we can.
5. WindEurope Tech Workshop abstract deadline in the 26th January. We should discuss on next call.
6. Tutorial/Tool development:
   1. SH's notebook update. Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238 awaiting review feedback.
7. SCHEMA updates:
   1. PR iss #225 add license at the top level #242 is now merged into dev.
   2. PR Iss #241 add cm/s and mm/s #245 is now merged into dev.
   3. Issue [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214 about expanding to VMM or reanalysis data, review proposal and continue discussion already taking place within the issue ticket.
      1. CJ (Natural Power) shared a document from IEC 61400-15 where they have discussed reference datasets, back around 2018 and earlier. They have a definition for VMM. They also list properties that should be included for either a reanalysis or VMM dataset. We pretty much cover the reanalysis properties but not all the VMM properties. These include for e.g. nudging method, PBL schemes, number of nests, domain size, orography, land use, etc. The feeling was that though these are important for comparing downscaling models, these details are generally available on the providers websites/scientific papers and are not necessarily needed to be included in every single dataset. Similar to lidar data, there are lots of parameters/technology that are important to compare different lidars, however these are not required for a wind analyst when performing an energy yield assessment and so are not included in the WRA Data Model. Therefore, we will leave these out for now. As we will have a new table to capture model settings (this is the big change) we can easily add any or all of these in the future quite quickly.
      2. On the new table name, provisionally called main_config it was decided that this may be confusing for a user as it is not specific enough. We already have logger_main_config which a user knows they need to fill out when they have loggers but they may also think they need to fill out something in main_config as it is not specific. Therefore, we decided we should be more specific and rename it..
      3. It was decided to rename main_config to model_config as opposed to simulation_config or synthetic_config. Model is more generic for this type of data. An AI generated dataset is not a simulation and so should be more flexible for future use to capture AI generated datasets. The results of the modelling is synthetic data but you don't have a synthetic configuration.
      4. SH to continue the iterations on this and continue the discussion on the GitHub issue log.
   4. Should we include instantaneous as a statistic_type as opposed to using avg? Aren't all measurements considered an average since their previous sample? Issue Schema Definition Questions #241. Didn't get to this.

Actions

• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• SH: Continue the iterations on [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214

[stephenholleran]

18-Jan-2024 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), JF (Empowr), AB (Altosphere)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. WindEurope Tech Workshop abstract deadline in the 26th January.
   1. Anyone want to submit something? Joining up with IEC -15 and -16 to suggest an open-data, data standard session. JF to lead.
4. Tutorial/Tool development:
   1. SH's notebook update. Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238 awaiting review feedback.
5. SCHEMA updates:
   1. Issue [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214 about expanding to VMM or reanalysis data, review proposal and continue discussion already taking place within the issue ticket.
      1. Should we include all available reanalysis datasets or just MERRA-2 and ERA5? Am I missing any? Keep the full list so it is complete.
      2. I think reanalysis_source should just be reanalysis as it is not a "source" when the data is an actual reanalysis. The definition would still include "source". "The name of the reanalysis dataset that is the source or the result of this model." No consensus. Post question in issue log.
      3. For final_resolution_m what do we put in when this changes e.g. for a reanalysis dataset? It also changes between N-S and E-W?
      4. Do we need the word final? Is it not obvious that the resolution we are taking about is the resolution of the model that actually resulted in the dataset that is been described in the implemented data model? I would be inclined to put the word horizontal in there? No decision on the word 'final'. grid_resolution maybe a better term or even horizontal_grid_resolution. Been specific that it is a horizontal resolution would be preferred.
      5. Units for final_resolution_m, 'm', 'km' or 'decimal degrees? 'm' might make more sense for a modelled dataset but for reanalysis this could be left out.
      6. Definition: "The final horizontal resolution, in meters, of the model used to create this dataset. If a reanalysis dataset this can be an approximation."
      7. I think offset_from_utc_hrs, averaging_period_minutes and timestamp_is_end_of_period should all be definitions as they are now duplicated in both the 'model_config' and 'logger_main_config' tables? Yes, this is good.
      8. I think it is possible in the schema to limit using only one of these tables. That is, a user can use either the 'model_config' or the 'logger_main_config' but not both. Do we want to implement this limit? Not critical but would be useful. It could be included in future. If not implemented this time around, add an issue to track it.
   2. Should we include instantaneous as a statistic_type as opposed to using avg? Aren't all measurements considered an average since their previous sample? Issue Schema Definition Questions #241. Didn't get to this.

Actions

• JF reach out to WindEurope suggesting an open data standards session and submit an abstract.
• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• SH: Continue the iterations on [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214

[stephenholleran]

1-Feb-2024 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), JMG (Eolos), GK (RWE), JF (Empowr), AB (Altosphere)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. WindEurope Tech Workshop abstract deadline the 26th January.
   1. JF submitted.
   2. JF will reach out to organizing committee to see if they are interested in an open data standards session.
4. Market assessment.
   1. What is the penetration of the data model?
   2. What is the total market size? How many developers? How many measurement stations?
   3. This information could be useful in estimating the value of the data model.
   4. Knowing the level of adoption can help encourage others to adopt the data model.
   5. To help quantify adoption, how many logger OEMs have created a parser.
   6. Adoption can be slow.
   7. Newer developers would be the best to target as they don't have legacy systems that works good enough for them.
   8. Discuss more on next call.
5. SCHEMA updates:
   1. Issue [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214 about expanding to VMM or reanalysis data.
      1. Updates made based on comments from last meetings discussion and in the issue log. It is ready for final review.
6. Should we do a release with this new expansion? Discuss on next call.

Actions

• JF reach out to WindEurope organizing committee to float the idea of an open data standards session.
• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• SH: Once reviewed, merge [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214

[stephenholleran]

15-Feb-2024 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), ET (DNV), GK (RWE), GT (OceanWinds), AB (Altosphere), JMG (Eolos)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
   1. WindFarmer Analyst accepts the data model.
   2. In North America, DNV give a discount if the data is provided in the data model format.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. Should we do a release now or make some further updates?
   1. Current changelog in dev branch.
   2. Link to Kanban board.
   3. I think maybe we should include Issue [SCHEMA] Measurement location UUID #232 as the IEC -15-2 group are hoping to get a draft in the next few months. There is a PR for it already. Include this in the release.
   4. To coordinate with others and send a consistent message to the new IEA Task, it may be best to do a release as soon as possible.
   5. Aim to do the release on the next call, 29th Feb.
   6. Most likely the next release afterwards will be a v2.0 with breaking changes.
4. Market assessment (continued from previous call).
   1. Feeling was that working from the GW installed down to the number of measurement stations would be reasonable.
   2. We could come up with better assumptions on how many stations per MW onshore/offshore and maybe regional.
   3. No immediate actions.
5. A new IEA Task is to be created linking reanalysis providers and wind analysts. Vortex folks and Rémi Gandoin (C2Wind) are involved from the wind analysis community.
   1. First meeting in April.
   2. RWE can send a representative.
   3. When they are established we can present to them about what we have accomplished so far.
6. SCHEMA updates:
   1. Issue [SCHEMA] - include a VMM or reanalysis measurement location type? #214 about expanding to VMM or reanalysis data. Merged.

Actions

• JF reach out to WindEurope organizing committee to float the idea of an open data standards session.
• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• GK: See if there is the possibility to present to the new IEA Task that will link up with reanalysis providers.
• SH: Prepare for a new release for the next call.

[stephenholleran]

14-Mar-2024 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), AB (Altosphere), GK (RWE)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. Review release v1.3.0-2024.03.
   1. Done.
   2. LinkedIn post to inform everyone.
4. WindEurope Tech Workshop, Dublin 10th June, accept poster or not? Yes
   1. Any feedback on possibility of an open data standards session? JF not on the call.
5. SCHEMA updates:
   1. New release release prep for version 1.3.0-2024.03 #251 and Release version 1.3.0-2024.03 #252 to be reviewed. Reviewed and merged.
   2. Cleaned up some of the issue log as some of the issues were 3+ years old.

Actions

• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• GK: See if there is the possibility to present to the new IEA Task that will link up with reanalysis providers.
• SH: Create LinkedIn post to inform users of the new release.

[stephenholleran]

11-Apr-2024 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), ET (DNV), NS (RWE), GK (RWE), JMG (Eolos), JF (Empowr)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. Released v1.3.0-2024.03 https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7174416886833532928/
4. GK: RWE are going to be doing a validation exercise of a product with the developing company. They will be sharing data to this company for the validation effort. Can RWE use this process to promote the usefulness of the data model? Absolutely.
5. WindEurope Tech Workshop, Dublin 10th June, poster prep. Title: "IEA Wind Task 43 WRA Data Model - New features and industry adoption update." Submit by 1st May.
   1. Any feedback on possibility of an open data standards session? Silence from their side. Forget about it.
   2. What should the message of the poster be?
      1. New is expanded to modelled data, wave buoys can exist on their own and continual maintenance / bug fixes.
      2. Still explain what a data model is? Yes, some discussion of what it is would still be good. Even only if it is a paragraph.
      3. Call for action to contribute? Can be very short at the end.
      4. Show adoption by also highlighting use cases? This would be the majority of the poster. Use case examples of validations. Lidar validation study for a data scientist. NS to provide a link. https://windeurope.org/tech2023/programme/posters/PO052/ Other user is a wind analyst sharing data with Windographer or a consultant. Offshore flow modelling validation. Highlight the ease. The term "data model" can evoke a big effort to adopt but this depends on the level of adoption, e.g. parsing to this format to share. It doesn't have to be that big an effort.
      5. Keep it generic so we can use it at other conferences? For offshore the buoys are important so good to highlight the new features. Isolate this section so it can be updated easily for future posters. It shows that we are keep updating.
6. ACP call is now open. https://cleanpower.org/rt-conference/ GK to submit an abstract. https://www.abstractscorecard.com/cfp/submit/login.asp?EventKey=MOJDCMPZ Tue 16th. Copy what we submitted for WindEurope. SH to send on.
7. SCHEMA updates:
   1. Cull some more issues? Didn't do this.
   2. load_demo_schema.ipynb - ValueError when "date_to": null #253 Fix code to run with Pandas v2+

Actions

• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• GK: See if there is the possibility to present to the new IEA Task that will link up with reanalysis providers.
• GK: Submit abstract for ACP

[stephenholleran]

25-Apr-2024 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), GK (RWE), JMG (Eolos), MS (Vaisala), AB (Altosphere)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. GitHub Actions not working for documentation and Form App. Something to do with Deploy Key. Anyone know how to fix this? Issue JSON Forms React seed App not starting #256. AB can help, give him access.
4. WindEurope Tech Workshop, Dublin 10th June, poster prep. Title: "IEA Wind Task 43 WRA Data Model - New features and industry adoption update." Submit by 1st May.
   1. Poster progress by SH. Feedback:
      1. AB: The key take away "This is the foundation to efficient, automated energy yield assessments." could be "organised, structured" data instead of "efficient, automated" as organised data is easier to share than non-organised? GK: The "efficient, automated" was more of a selling point internally to work on the data model. Prefer to keep "efficient, automated".
      2. Alternative to "foundation" could be "powering". Rephrased to "A data model powering efficient, automated energy yield assessments".
      3. The structure and the other "chapters" are all good.
5. ACP call is now open. https://cleanpower.org/rt-conference/ GK to submit an abstract. Was this submitted? Not yet but will submit.
6. SCHEMA updates:
   1. Adding device_datum_plane_height and device_orientation_deg to lidar_config #254 This is a duplicate to [SCHEMA] Account for height/direction offsets programmed into lidars #177. We will close that one. It seems reasonable to record the actual device datum plane height in the Vertical Profiler Properties and then to also record what was programmed into the lidar under the Lidar Config. What was programmed into the lidar and what it actually is may not be the same and they can both change independently over time. Could distinguish the new one in the Lidar Config by prepending "logger_stated_" to them.
   2. Cull some more issues? Didn't do this.
   3. load_demo_schema.ipynb - ValueError when "date_to": null #253 Fix code to run with Pandas v2+

Actions

• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• GK: See if there is the possibility to present to the new IEA Task that will link up with reanalysis providers.
• GK: Submit abstract for ACP

[stephenholleran]

23-May-2024 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), GK (RWE), ET (DNV), JMG (Eolos)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. Task 43 AGM June 17th-19th in Switzerland: https://www.ieawindtask43.org/gm2024
4. GitHub Actions not working for documentation and Form App. Something to do with Deploy Key. Anyone know how to fix this? Issue JSON Forms React seed App not starting #256.
   1. Issue still not resolved. The GitHub Action ran but it isn't capturing the newer changes to the JSON Schema?
5. WindEurope Tech Workshop, Dublin 10th June, poster prep. Title: "IEA Wind Task 43 WRA Data Model - New features and industry adoption update." Both poster and recording were submitted and confirmed receipt.
6. ACP call is now open. https://cleanpower.org/rt-conference/ GK to submit an abstract. Submitted
7. IEA Wind Topical Expert Meeting (TEM) on "Reanalyses for Wind Energy" - any update on this? Update on next call.
8. We had some spare time so discussed a bit about issue How to extend the data model to allow self-describing data files? #222. There are several ways to do this where some are outlined below. This is a much bigger discussion.
   1. Simply paste the csv timeseries data underneath the JSON in the same file. When you have configuration changes this can mean that some columns will be empty for parts of it.
   2. Restrict the Schema to not include configuration changes and therefore no date_from or date_to. The configuration would be consistent throughout the measurement period that the timeseries covers within that file. This would make the schema a lot smaller and more manageable. However, you would need a separate file for each configuration change and this would be impractical for measurement campaigns with lots of configuration changes.
   3. In the area of the data model for column_name include an additional field to capture the timeseries. This would probably be the cleanest as the timeseries under this column name would be linked directly with the configuration metadata and therefore the user would know exactly what this column means. It would be unwieldly for a user to interrogate without coding skills and helpful tools.
9. The above discussion led onto what next big thing should we be working on. (Before we do that though we want to clean up all the issues that currently exist.) Scanning lidar came up as one. This would most likely be a departure from the current data model and therefore would be a big piece of work. Much more than self describing files. The actions on this was to bring it up in discussion with other people, especially at WindEurope in 2 weeks, what is the general feeling in the industry about what we should work on.
10. SCHEMA updates:
11. Adding device_datum_plane_height and device_orientation_deg to lidar_config #254
    1. AB to review?
    2. Consequence of this change is that we need to change lidar_config to remote_sensing_config or something similar. New breaking issue? Yes, we should rename it. Discussed still keeping it in the separate table. SH will create an issue for this.
12. load_demo_schema.ipynb - ValueError when "date_to": null #253 Fix code to run with Pandas v2+
    1. SH has made a fix. AB to review?
13. Adding units to the slope and offset in the calibration table #248
    1. Discussed the benefit and we all think that it is a good idea. Don't forget to include 'sensitivity'.

Actions

• JF & NS: review PR Notebook demo to plot shear of the E06 data #238
• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• GK: Will chase NRG wrt Sensor calibration dependent on logger #205
• GK: See if there is the possibility to present to the new IEA Task that will link up with reanalysis providers.

[stephenholleran]

18-Jul-2024 Call

Attendance:
SH (Brightwind), GK (RWE), AB (Altosphere)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. GitHub Actions not working for documentation and Form App. Something to do with Deploy Key. Anyone know how to fix this? Issue JSON Forms React seed App not starting #256.
   1. Issue still not resolved. The GitHub Action ran but it isn't capturing the newer changes to the JSON Schema?
4. WindEurope Tech 24 feedback:
   1. SH had conversations around having a standardised file format that floating lidar providers could use. Floating lidar providers assemble their files from several loggers so are more flexible with the format. This would help users of the daily logger files to parse the data into our own systems. I think this could be a useful thing to do.
      1. Since WindEurope I have had conversations/emails with TGS, GreenRebel, Eolos, Fugro, BP and RWE. All are willing to investigate this idea. Should reach out to Shell, OceanWinds, Fraunhofer IWES and ??????
      2. Start the conversation September 19th.
   2. SH had conversations about creating an industrial group that can curate and validate open datasets. Could be linked with the below new IEA Wind TEM reanalysis group to provide validated datasets but also for wake model validations.
   3. Scanning lidars also came up a good bit.
5. IEA Wind Topical Expert Meeting (TEM) on "Reanalyses for Wind Energy" - any update on this?
   1. SH was talking to Rémi Gandoin (C2Wind) and Julia Gottschall (Fraunhofer) at WindEurope Tech24. One action for the wind analyst side is to look at curating and validating some open datasets that the reanalysis providers could use to help them validate their models. The WRA Data Model would be perfect for this.
6. Task 43 AGM June 17th-19th in Switzerland: https://www.ieawindtask43.org/gm2024
   1. About 30 people in person in and out over the 3 days and similar online.
   2. Lots going on, slides for the 3 days: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/11xUzI7hy5KvIwvjfM3mQ38Oj3sRSFtMi
      
7. ACP call is now open. https://cleanpower.org/rt-conference/ GK to submit an abstract. Accepted as a poster. Deadline for submission Sep 3rd.
8. Take a break from these calls and reconvene after the summer holidays on September 5th.
9. SCHEMA updates:
   1. Adding device_datum_plane_height and device_orientation_deg to lidar_config #254
      1. AB to review? Done and merged.
   2. load_demo_schema.ipynb - ValueError when "date_to": null #253 Fix code to run with Pandas v2+
      1. SH has made a fix. AB to review? SH merged it without review, only a tiny change to a notebook so not core schema changes.
   3. Adding units to the slope and offset in the calibration table #248
      1. In progress by GK. Currently been reviewed.
   4. When to work on the breaking changes? SH to create a dev-breaking-changes branch so we can at least work on them without impacting the dev branch and we can decide when to release later.

Actions

• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• SH: Create a breaking changes dev branch.
• SH: Organise floating lidar meeting invite and clean up our own one.
• SH: Create separate issue for the documentation GitHub actions not running.

[stephenholleran]

05-Sep-2024 Call

Attendance:
Stephen Holleran (Brightwind), Gibson Kersting (RWE), Amit Bohara (Altosphere)

Minutes:

1. Quick intros.
2. Recap on last meeting.
3. GitHub Actions not working for documentation and Form App. Something to do with Deploy Key. Anyone know how to fix this? Issue Documentation not generated with newest content #264.
   1. Issue still not resolved. The GitHub Action ran but it isn't capturing the newer changes to the JSON Schema?
4. ACP Resource & Tech, 1-2 Oct, Phoenix, https://cleanpower.org/rt-conference/ Accepted as a poster. Deadline for submission Sep 3rd. Did it get submitted? Yes, Amit taking the lead.
5. Floating Lidar standardised daily file format call:
   1. Call structure:
      1. Intros
      2. Presentation by Stephen:
         1. Outline the problem.
         2. Solution will align with the WRA Data Model so no new definitions required. This is about structuring that in a practical format. Put forward an example solution.
         3. Get commitment that people will contribute to this effort.
         4. Effort is turning up for 1 hour every 2 weeks to contribute, no homework involved.
      3. Open discussion.
      4. Ask for commitment.
   2. Send reminder email? Yes.
6. SCHEMA updates:
   1. Adding units to the slope and offset in the calibration table #248
      1. In progress by GK. Currently been reviewed.
      2. SH fixed it up and converted measurement_units to a definition. Needs review.
   2. Add mV to measurement_units enum list #260 Stephen will implement.
   3. Adding mast_datum_plane_height_m in the mast_properties table #265 discussed this topic, feeling is that it may not be needed, the measurement_point height_reference should be from an appropriate reference and not from the base of the mast.
   4. A new dev-breaking-changes branch was created so we can work on breaking change issues without impacting the dev branch. Therefore we have more flexibility when to release.**

Actions

• SH: Update Wiki with E06 shear profile notebook.
• SH: render DN's Notebook so people can follow it without needing to run it.
• NS: will take a look at Calculated columns #223
• SH: Send out reminder of floating lidar call.
• SH: implement Add mV to measurement_units enum list #260