English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

CIGRE TB601 guide for thermal rating calculations recommends the use of ultrasonic anemometers over mechanical devices [1]. This paper aims to compare the mechanical and ultrasonic wind speed measurement technologies for the purpose of dynamic ampacity rating. The comparison consists of applying the measurements of both anemometers (placed in the same spot) to the computation of ampacity in the same overhead line, and evaluating the diferences at different speed ranges.

A comparison of mechanical and ultrasonic anemometers for ampacity thermal rating in overhead lines