Matthew Harrison | Searcharxiv

arXiv2026

Towards Formalising Stakeholder Context using SysML v2

This paper presents a framework to bridge the gap between subjective stakeholder context and formal system architecture. This is achieved using Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) and Systems Modelling Language version 2 (SysML v2). The methodology utilises the precision of Kernel Modelling Language (KerML) and the alignment of SysML v2 with ISO 42010 to define a reference architecture for the mapping of SSM outputs to SysML v2 concepts such as stakeholders and concerns. Application of the framework is demonstrated through the use of a case study, highlighting the traceable path from stakeholder context to system architecture. The structured mapping and increased semantic precision of SysML v2 are anticipated to reduce the risk of misinterpretation compared to less formal approaches, though empirical validation across diverse stakeholder contexts remains as future work. The primary identified trade-off is the increased barrier to entry associated with SysML v2's textual notation.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2026

Assessing engineering wake models against operational data: insights from the Lillgrund wind farm wake steering campaign

Validating engineering wake models under real-world operational conditions is essential for improving wind farm performance predictions. This study uses a unique dataset from the Lillgrund offshore wind farm, collected during the Horizon 2020 TotalControl campaign, integrating synchronous Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) measurements under both baseline operation and active wake steering conditions. Four analytical wake-model combinations, implemented in the LongSim software developed by DNV, are evaluated using different formulations for velocity deficit, added turbulence, wake superposition and wake deflection. The analysis focuses on time-averaged wake velocity deficit profiles and turbine- and farm-wide power output, normalised by reference velocity and power. Model accuracy is assessed using mean absolute error (MAE) metrics. The models generally reproduce wake deficit trends associated with varying wake overlap under baseline conditions, as well as wake deflection caused by intentional yaw misalignment during wake steering operation. Normalised velocity deficit MAE values range from 7% to 15%, with discrepancies mainly linked to inflow heterogeneity, near-wake complexity and model-specific parameterisations. Power prediction errors increase with farm depth. Model combinations incorporating cumulative wake superposition and refined turbulence formulations show improved agreement with field measurements; however, all models struggle to capture localised flow features. Normalised turbine-level power output MAE ranges from 3% to 23%, while farm-wide power output errors range between -13% and +30%. Accurate farm-level predictions may conceal compensating errors at individual turbines. Future work should focus on improved inflow characterisation and blockage effects to enhance predictive reliability.

physics.flu-dyn↗