# Expert-review checklist (wind O&M) — Turbine 7

> Kit 9 · Turbine 7 · for a wind operations and maintenance SME · to complete before any pilot · fictional case

## Status

Not yet reviewed. The cases, figures and 3D machine were written from public, general knowledge of offshore wind operations. An SME has not checked them. This checklist is what the review should cover.

## How to review

Play two shifts in the simulator (2D is quicker; 3D shows the machine). Then go through the list. For each item mark **OK**, **Change** (with a note) or **Not applicable**.

## 1. The decision patterns

| # | Check | OK / Change / N/A | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | The four patterns are a fair simplification of how restart calls are made after alarms | | |
| 1.2 | "Rising trend, no inspection" should be a hold in every case shown, at the figures shown | | |
| 1.3 | "Fault came back after a reset" should be a hold for the pitch (094) and yaw (105) cases | | |
| 1.4 | The two restart patterns would not be held at a typical site | | |
| 1.5 | Escalate is defensible (1 point) but not best in the hold cases; would your site agree? | | |
| 1.6 | Derating a rising trend is rightly treated as a critical error | | |

## 2. The cases and evidence

| # | Check | OK / Change / N/A | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1 | Alarm titles and readings are plausible for a large offshore turbine (no specific OEM) | | |
| 2.2 | Alarm bands (vibration 4.5 mm/s, bearing 70/80 °C, coolant 25 l/min, pitch error 2°, yaw 25 A) are plausible as illustrative values | | |
| 2.3 | The evidence on each part (inspection card, work order, reset log, trip record) is what a technician would actually check | | |
| 2.4 | The sister-turbine comparison is used the way a control room would use it | | |
| 2.5 | The storm cut-out and restart figures (25 m/s cut-out, restart after the mean falls) are plausible | | |
| 2.6 | The grid ride-through figures (0.62 p.u., 380 ms) are plausible | | |

## 3. The consequences

| # | Check | OK / Change / N/A | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 | A gearbox or main-bearing failure leading to a jack-up vessel and a multi-week wait is a fair illustration | | |
| 3.2 | Crew transfer by CTV to the boat landing, at first light or at the next transfer, is shown realistically | | |
| 3.3 | A recurring pitch fault leading to an unbalanced rotor and a trip is a fair illustration | | |
| 3.4 | The €/day figures are in a plausible range as illustrations (they are labelled as such) | | |

## 4. The machine (3D)

| # | Check | OK / Change / N/A | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1 | Drivetrain layout (main bearing, three-stage gearbox, brake, generator, converter, transformer, yaw drives) is recognisable for a geared turbine | | |
| 4.2 | Nothing shown would teach a wrong physical habit (for example, standing where you should not) | | |
| 4.3 | The opening roof and sliding spinner nose are acceptable as explanatory cutaways, given the on-screen notice that says what real hatches and spinners do | | |
| 4.4 | Twelve yaw drives inside the yaw bearing, with brake calipers between them, is plausible for an offshore machine of this size | | |

## 5. The production-desk voice and the handover note

| # | Check | OK / Change / N/A | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5.1 | The production-desk lines sound like real pressure, not a caricature | | |
| 5.2 | The "number, risk, next step" reply would work with a real production desk | | |
| 5.3 | The model handover notes read like a real technician's note | | |

## 6. Safety and scope

| # | Check | OK / Change / N/A | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1 | Nothing contradicts standard lock-out / tag-out or site safety rules | | |
| 6.2 | The disclaimers (illustrative figures, not OEM procedures) are clear enough | | |
| 6.3 | Anything a site would need to localise (escalation boundary, alarm codes) is flagged | | |

## Sign-off

Reviewer role and years in wind O&M: ________ · Date: ________ · Cases to change before the pilot: ________