Optimisation of visual inspection regime for
offshore wind farms
Stephen Gabriel McCann
University of Strathclyde
Department of Naval Architecture
Glasgow, United Kingdom
Email: s.g.mccann@strath.ac.uk
Abstract—The abstract goes here.
I. I NTRODUCTION
It is estimated that there will be 2,293 large scale and
operational offshore wind turbines the in UK at the time of
writing [1], equating to 6,879 individual blades to be inspected
periodically. Advances in manufacturing, materials and power
electronics have granted major wind turbine manufacturers
the ability to produce massive turbines, such as the MHI
Vestas V164 9.5 MW with its swept diameter of 160 m and
each blade weighing in at 33 metric tonnes [2]. While the
cost of electricity from offshore wind had reduced due to
economies of scale, the process of inspecting and maintaining
these ever growing structures has become increasingly more
difficult. Currently there are several options available to the
market for inspection which range from the predominantly
manned operations to state of the art autonomous systems.
This paper will look at the current state of the offshore wind
market, discuss some key factors dealing with operations in
maintenance, and undertake a brief case study of a real wind
farm development.
A. Growth Market
The aerial drones market is set to grow to $3.55 billion
by 2024 [3]. Other analysis sets the bar higher by stating
that the total unrealised commercial market for drones is
$127 billion, with $45.2 billion of that figure allocated to
infrastructure [4]. Amazon’s founder Jeff Bezos claimed in
2013 that his company would be delivering products to house-
holds using drone technology. Recent legislative movements
in the American politico have seen this nearing trial and
implementation phase [5]. With big players such as Amazon
entering the fold it is clear that there will be huge advances
in autonomy and reliability of drones, mostly borne by the
developers. Not all advances are being made in government or
corporate laboratories; the hobbyist community are working on
open platforms developing algorithms and exploiting current
technologies. Regardless of the source, technological advances
will expand into other industries such as offshore inspection
where synergies will develop, with the possibly that remote
and un-manned assets could operate and maintain themselves
autonomously no longer strictly a thought exercise.
B. Born of Necessity
A recent revelation into the reliability of offshore wind
design has come to light as it has been discovered that blades
are failing in less than five years service [6]. The owners of
the London Array and West of Duddon Sands wind farms
are currently in process of developing a retrofit to the blades.
The leading edges of the blades are eroding quickly due to
environmental influences requiring all blades to be fitted with
a protective coating. At the time of writing there was no data
available as to how this would actually take place; however,
the referring article estimates this will require the removal of
the blades. The manufacturer states that there are 950 such
turbines, all of which will likely require this maintenance.
This will undoubtedly have a big impact to offshore wind
community and has potential to re-write the levelised cost of
energy on these assets if the cost is not borne by the manu-
facturer. Whatever the physical outcome there will be some
serious financial impacts and fuel the naysayers arguments
against the industry. It is not clear if the blade failure is the
result of a recurring problem, accountancy over engineering;
or some fundamental mistakes throughout the design and
manufacturing processes. It is evident that high quality and
accurate inspection is of paramount importance, whatever the
outcome. There are many reports from consultancies, financial
institutions and academics all stating the same thing; drone
technology and their utilisation is a huge opportunity and
growth market for offshore wind.
C. Health and Safety
One does not have to be a maintenance engineer to have
the correct assumption that working on offshore wind tur-
bines is fraught with difficulties and dangerous. The scale of
projects, remoteness of the assets and physical dimensions of
turbines require competent and skilled personnel to complete
maintenance and inspection tasks safely. Oil and Gas UK
estimates that there were in excess of 52,000 persons travelling
offshore to UK oil and gas assets in 2016 [10]. As wind
turbines are normally unmanned installations it would be safe
to assume that only a small fraction of the number put forth
by Oil and Gas UK would be visiting wind assets. No firm
numbers were available for the personnel visiting offshore
wind assets: however, it is a strong possibility that many
 AGENCY
G+ Global
STATISTIC Oil & Gas UK [7][8] Offshore Wind
[9]
Lost Time Incident 0.57 1.98
Frequency (LTIF)
Fatalities 1 0
Dangerous Occurrences 292 272
Dropped Objects 59 68
TABLE I: Key health and safety figures for 2016-2017.
of the same engineers and technicians who visit oil and gas
facilities also visit offshore wind assets. Some interesting facts
arise on inspection of reported health and safety statistics
shown in table I. Clearly there is an unsatisfactory level of
safety with respect to offshore wind for many reasons. In
fact, it is imperative that the human costs be reduced to
keep the electricity producing and maintain efficient generation
philosophy for the asset holder.
II. M AINTENANCE P HILOSOPHY
A. The Case for Autonomous Inspection
How and when the various maintenance inspection tasks
are completed is rather a form of art in project management
and to the authors knowledge there is no one system that
is effective. The most obvious advantage to an autonomous
drone is the removal of personnel from the actual inspection
process, however; they still require personnel who can interpret
the results. All inspection types have their respective merits
and limitations which shall be discussed in detail in chapter
3. Having a self prioritising system such as an autonomous
drone would be a highly valued addition to the operation and
maintenance toolbox for any large asset holder. In practice the
inspections of blades will be tied in with other work scopes to
maximise work in the minimal time frame. An example of the
hierarchy and requirements of inspection is shown in figure 1.
When maintenance tasks are statutory the asset holder must
comply or risk losing either their licence to operate, which may
further complicate the matter by invalidating their insurance.
Fig. 1: Categorisation of inspection.
B. Seasonal Impact and Impact on Maintenance
It is well understood within the UK’s offshore oil and gas
industry that heavy maintenance projects should be avoided
during the winter months, typically from October through
March, as wind and wave activity is often outside of safe
operational conditions. This six month period also introduces
the problem of reduced daylight where it varies between
eight to eleven hours per day. A lot of the difficulty deals
with mobilisation of technicians and engineers to the asset as
the weather conditions will be unfavourable. After a serious
of aviation incidents up to 2014, the UK’s Civil Aviation
Authority put restrictions on helicopter flights through Safety
Directive 2014/001, which states that no flights shall occur
when the sea state exceeds the maximum safe ditching state
for a particular helicopter, and that no flights shall occur
at all when the sea state exceeds 6 m significant wave
height [11]. This complicates crew transfers to vessels and
turbine winching platforms and may prevent search and rescue
operations. Abseilers will restrict work per IRATA standards
subject to the on-site level 3 competent supervisor, normally
when wind speeds are in excess of 25 knots; however, the
site may have restrictions reduced to knots as set by the asset
operators health and safety policy.
C. Inspection Points
A good starting point for defining an inspection regime
for a wind turbine is the standard DNVGL-ST-0262 Lifetime
extension of wind turbines. This is required for certification of
a turbine past its design life per DNVGL standard DNVGL-
SE-0263 Certification of lifetime extension of wind turbines.
Appendix B in the DNVGL standard has a table which breaks
down a typical turbine into its sub-assemblies and indicates the
testing and inspection programme. Blades are covered under
section 4.a which states that they must be inspected regularly
for damages and cracks [12]. The inspection requirements
set by DNVGL stand as a good baseline even if many of
the turbines installed offshore are not even half way through
their design lives. As an exercise the author has expanded on
this table to include lifting gear and the supporting monopile,
with further detail on inspection frequencies, available in the
appendix of this report.
D. Periodic Inspection
Mechanical items such as hydraulic gearboxes, pumps and
motors routinely have their inspections frequency based on
usage in hours. In the case of those supplied in the wind
turbine these items will include: yaw drives, blade pitch drive
systems, brakes and epicyclical gearboxes used for indirect
drive / induction type generator packages. Similar philosophy
applies to electrical and electro-mechanical equipment. This
is especially important during the infancy portion of the
reliability ’bathtub’ curve as this maintenance is a requirement
to keep warranty.
E. Inspection Categories
1) Non-Intrusive: Typically this inspection category allows
the system to continue to operate and may even be used while
the system is energised. These include such inspection tech-
niques as visual inspections and some NDE techniques, tem-
perature, humidity, displacement, torque, pressure, vibration
analysis and even oil/lubricant sampling if there is facility to
extract while operational. Electrical properties such as power,
impedance, voltage and current can be monitored continuously.
Many of these operational parameters will be recorded and
analysed using PLC, DCS or SCADA.
2) Intrusive: This inspection category normally requires the
system to be stopped and de-energised, typically with some
lockout regime in place to prevent accidental re-energising
during maintenance operations. Manufacturers of common
wind turbine components such as GE, Zollern, Bonfiglioli,
Bosch Rexroth, ABB, SKF, INA/FAG will have their own
respective maintenance techniques and plans which will be
integrated into the larger maintenance programme for an asset
holder. A typical maintenance programme for wind turbines,
developed from cross examination of various manufacturer’s
recommendations and the authors own industrial experience is
presented in figure 2.
Fig. 2: Typical preventative maintenance routine for wind
turbines.
F. Statutory Inspections
Systems and equipment as part of an offshore wind turbine,
if fitted, are required by law under the UK’s Health and Safety
Executive (HSE) to be periodically inspected. These typically
deal with equipment and systems where there exists stored
energy and/or temporary or permanent safeguards for persons
working on and near the equipment. The following list of HSE
regulations is typical of that which a wind farm licence holder
must adhere to in the UKCS.
• Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH)
• Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974
• Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations
1998 (LOLER)
• Pressure Equipment Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/2001)
(PER)
• Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000 (PSSR)
• The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989
• The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations
1998 (PUWER)
All HSE regulations refer to ’written schemes of thorough
examination’ and ’competent persons’ in terms of inspection.
Periodicity of these inspections when dealing with the lifting
or transfer of personnel is six months. All other lifting
operational equipment must be inspected on 12 monthly
intervals. When not directly mandated by the HSE regulations
the inspection requirements revert to those of national and
international standards, such as those by British Standards
(BS), International Organization for Standardization (ISO),
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and other
regional standards organisations. Further, all inspection
requirements and written schemes are to be regularly audited
through a company’s quality management system such as
ISO 9001 to ensure they are compliant with current statutes,
codes, regulations and industry standards.
Further requirements will be at the recommendation of the
manufacturer or OEM of the particular items of equipment.
Generally these are where there is a governing International
Association of Classification Societies (IACS) classification
body, such as Lloyd’s Register (LR), DNVGL or Bureau
Veritas (BV). Where none of the above exist and there exists
the need for inspection and maintenance it will be left for
the development of a written scheme by a competent person.
There is a new standard in development which will act as
the high water mark for maintenance philosophy, IEC TS
61400-28: Wind energy generation systems - Through life
management and life extension of wind power assets, forecast
for release in 2020. When this is implemented by industry
there be a common standard by all turbine providers and
asset holders to comply with.
III. C URRENT I NSPECTION M ETHODS
There are currently three offerings to wind farm asset
holders for blade inspection; abseilers, optical fixed and optical
drone systems. The on-board SCADA and control systems
must also be considered as these may be fitted with advanced
transducers and sensors which can detect performance changes
or faults and initiate investigation. Each system has its merits
and detractors, but when all are available and weighed against
cost and risk to persons it becomes clear that the abseiler be
put into service only as last resort.
Primarily inspection has been dominated by abseilers, also
referred to as rope access technicians. In the western hemi-
sphere are two rope professional organisations which gov-
ern qualification mantra and how work is completed safely:
SPRAT in North America, and IRATA in UK and Europe.
IRATA specifies that rope access work (RAT) operate in teams
of three with competency ratings from levels 1 through 3.

Fig. 3: Incumbent inspection methods [13], [14], [15].
Level 3 technicians are considered the most competent and
able to lead teams, prepare work scopes and are the ones
responsible for the team while in-field.
A process flow chart has been developed to illustrate the
inspection cycle with an important exclusion of a finish termi-
nator as this is a continual process and will persist through to
decommissioning. The left hand side of the chart details how
the process works under a purely manned inspection regime.
The right hand side of the chart illustrates how the drone
technology (or optical system) can easily be integrated and
become a primary source of prognostic data. Drones or ground
based optical variants can also be utilised as a powerful tool
along side the manned interventions.
A. Visual Testing Criteria
In the UK there are several organisations which govern
the visual inspectors competency standards. These tests and
the procedures cover metallic and non-metallic materials;
however, the testing and pass criteria should be applicable to
all testing types including those on drones and fixed optical
systems. It is important to note that all key decisions on
integrity must be made by a competent person as legislated
by the UK’s Health and Safety Executive. In all cases where
a defect is found the data must be evaluated by a qualified and
competent person who will ultimately sanction or condemn the
equipment based on their judgement. There are many providers
Fig. 4: Flow chart for inspection.
DEFECT ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA [16]
Cracks L 6 2 mm
Delaminations A 6 10 mm2
Inclusions D 6 2 mm
Voids D 6 2 mm
Impacts Further investigation
TABLE II: Non-metallic visual inspection pass criteria for
candidates under test conditions.
of specialist equipment which use advanced optical systems
and proprietary image processing algorithms to asset the
condition of wind turbines. These can operate across the visual
and infrared spectra; however, any optical system operating
outside of the visible spectrum carries more costs. Infrared
and ultraviolet optics requires significantly more training and
specialist knowledge to operate and interpret results, and,
there are less equipment options with higher costs. Specific
capabilities of drone providers are a tightly kept secret and
financially sensitive information.
1) Ultraviolet Spectrum (10 - 400 nm): Ultraviolet optical
systems have been used to perform power line surveying in
seeking out coronal discharges power line cables, fittings and
insulators [17]. This may have some application on a wind
farm substation but is not as practical for the actual turbines
as the cabling runs are within the tower and down to the
seabed via j-tubes. There may be options for smaller systems
used by technicians who will visit the turbines and perform
maintenance on the electrical system.
2) Visible Spectrum (390 - 700 nm): Visual testing is
covered by the standard, BS EN 13018: 2016 Non-destructive
testing - Visual testing - General principles. The British Insti-
tute of Non-Destructive Testing states that a visual inspection
candidate under test conditions must obtain a pass mark of
70% with illumination in controlled environment at 500 lux
for normal tests and 1000 lux for critical testing scenarios [16].
A cloudy day has approximately 1000 lux [18]. Researchers at
the University of Strathclyde have claimed optical resolution to
0.5 mm under laboratory conditions [19]. This is comparable
to the capability of a skilled human visual inspector.
Fig. 5: Electromagnetic spectrum [20].
3) Infrared Spectrum (700 nm - 1 mm): Field testing with
7.5-13 µm long infrared systems has shown that delaminations
introduces temperature variations of 0.5 ◦C, and variations
between 1 ◦C to 3 ◦C for cracks and impacts [21]. The British
Institute of Non-Destructive Testing states that candidates shall
be able to discriminate temperature variations of 0.1 ◦C over a
range of ambient temperatures [22]. The particular wavelength
chosen to assess the equipment will be that which best suits
the environmental conditions and ambient temperatures.
B. Rope Access
Rope access personnel are perhaps the most utilitarian of
trades in the energy and infrastructure business. They forgo
the requirement for scaffold and fixed access requirements
in favour of their harnesses, ropes, climbing gear and an all
important fixed rigging point to suspend themselves from. As
mentioned in the chapter introduction, they work in teams
of three persons with a level 3 supervisor in charge. In the
case of a complex job like wind turbine blade inspection
they employ multi-disciplined personnel who can operate
non-destructive examination (NDE) equipment and affect
repairs. Their competency on the ropes is continually assessed
and they keep log books noting how long and what kind of
climbing they have carried out on sites.
There are many companies globally competing for the
work of inspection, maintenance and repair of offshore and
onshore wind turbines. Rates for abseilers vary regionally,
Fig. 6: Method statements and instructions from Bladena [23],
[24], [25].
but in the UK energy and infrastructure sector base salaries
vary from £25,000 to £50,000 per annum [26]. The rates will
be subject to the individual competencies of the technician
and the agreed contractual rate between the asset holder and
service provider.
There is normally an uplift in pay to compensate for the time
away from home and inherent risk specific to the task. Further,
a common practice for the service industry is to add surcharges
including mobilisation fees, disturbance allowances, travel and
sustenance for their personnel. Equipment charges will also
be levied to include costs for; climbing rope and harnesses,
recovery equipment, personnel protective equipment, tools and
consumables, and repair materials if required. Bladena has
a publicly available manual on their rope access and repair
procedures, which states that their technicians will carry out
repairs according to their categorisation of defects to level
three, with their scale ranging from one to five [23]. A
level three category cover defects such as paintwork damage,
smaller laminate areas and cracks which should generally
cover the majority of issues found on blades.
C. Mobile Optical Systems
This section covers drones and robots, operator controlled
or autonomous. The market for this sector is massive and
there are many companies vying for the opportunity to
become the defacto provider of optical inspection systems.
They key point here is that the drone itself serves as the
tool to bring the optical system into proximity with the
wind turbine and record high quality images and videos. The
defining characteristics for the physical survey capabilities
will be in the drones payload, stability in gusts, and flight
durations. Drones available to the public are capable of 30
minutes flight time and payload capacity of a few kilograms
and this is generally the case with those used by inspection
service providers. Most of the drone systems are operating
with action cameras such as the GoPro or similar, recording
images in high definition.
Comprehensive machine learning vision based software
is of great interest. A leading American provider of drone
inspection services has received an $8 millon research grant to
advance their drone decision making capacity [27]. Skyspecs equipment and control system, tripod and accessories.
already offer the services of autonomous inspections and
have completed thousands of surveys successfully. However, Cornis SAS, Braendler Engineering and AtSite have all
the current service offering creates a massive inventory of developed similar systems utilising telephoto lenses. These can
digital images which must be examined and archived. Clearly, operate semi-autonomously and require minimal technician set
having an algorithm to detect anomalies or defects will be of up time on site. For the case of offshore wind this requires
great interest to the asset holders. In the UK, a consortium the technician to mount the monopile and set up on the
between Bristol University start-up Perpetual Robotics and working platform. As with the mobile drone systems, these
their partner AGV Global received a research grant of £1.2 inspection service providers gather graphic data and present it
million for similar research and development [28]. It is not to their client for review. The techniques used in their image
known how many other similar projects are being developed processing and data handling are also proprietary and not for
for private interests; however, with big players like Amazon public review; however, the same business model of capturing
developing autonomous drone technology we can expect and presenting data is applied with the ultimate decision to
some impressive technological achievements. sanction operation left to the client or their approved technical
authority.
Perhaps the biggest advantage of the drone systems is that IV. C ASE S TUDY
they can effectively remove the human element and reduce
This section will carry out a high level and cost modelling
the risk profile down to negligible values. In the case of
exercise to develop a quantitative interpretation of the available
a piloted drone in the offshore environment, the operator
inspection options. This model has been developed using a real
does not physically have to be on the asset and can operate
wind farm development as the case study and includes options
the drone while onboard a support vessel. Drones can also
for logistics, labour and the main inspection options discussed
operate in swarms which could further reduce the timings
in this report. This is a cursory review exercise and excludes
for inspection, and with enough development, they may be
the full spectrum of maintenance tasks, instead focussing on
able to provide some more inspection options in line with
inspection of blades and the requirements in transport and
NDE methods which require physical contact. Costs of a
labour to carry out inspections. The author realises that the
drone system for wind turbine inspection applications will
figures presented are not representative of a true operations
vary greatly with operating environment and their level of
and maintenance budget; however, the methodology and de-
autonomy, although specific figures are not readily available
velopment criterion are true to current project management
for public domain due to their financially sensitive nature.
mantra in the offshore energy business and serve as a valid
argument for and against the inspection options.
A further option is available which consists of a small
robotic vehicle which is in physical contact with the turbine A. Location
blade [29]. This small vehicle would carry a compliment of The E.ON Rampion wind farm currently under construction
optical surveying tools and is in physical contact with the on the south coast of England has been used for the purposes
blade. The demonstrator shows it to require a tether of some of developing a cost model. This field has 116 turbines with a
sort to ensure it does not become a dropped object itself. This 400 MW installed capacity operating 140 m tall turbines [32].
is an interesting option as it could be developed into something There is also a meteorological mast and a sub-station with
that can apply small repairs. From the available literature it the nearest turbine operating 13 km from the Sussex coast.
appears that this option is not capable of fully autonomous Power will be delivered to the National Grid Bolney Substation
functioning. through the South Downs National Park via two 14 km long
150 kV HVAC export cables.
D. Fixed Optical Systems
This class of optical system covers permanent and semi-
permanent systems such as fixed high definition webcams
or tripod mounted telescopic cameras. For the case of a
fixed system such as a webcam on the nacelle or tower,
there remains a requirement for periodic maintenance of
the camera. Ground based telescopic variety of inspection
systems can utilise 35 mm cameras with 300-600 mm focal
lengths [30]. These can either be operated directly, through
a human machine interface or autonomously. These large
telephoto lenses will have superior optical quality to any
drone based systems. Their size and weight will restrict them
Fig. 7: Location of E.ON’s Rampion wind farm development
to ground operations with a typical 600 mm focal length lens
[33].
having a physical length of 442 mm and mass of 3.92 kg [31],
excluding the extra dimension of a DSLR camera, recording
B. Logistics
The big push for offshore wind in recent times has seen huge
developments being installed further from the shoreline. Larger
turbines rely on higher average wind speeds and this is made
possible by using remote seaborne geographical locations
allowing longer catch lengths for wind. The down side of
being remote is the increased complexity and cost in getting
personnel and equipment to the wind farm. In general, the
largest contributor to costs for operations and maintenance
are logistical; specifically, the vessels carrying personnel and
equipment to the wind farm consume massive quantities of
capital in a budget. A summary of water-borne vehicles used
in this cost exercise is shown in figure 8, with a more detailed
table available in the appendix.
Fig. 8: Transport options suitable for Rampion.
C. Vessels
1) Walk to Work: The innovative ’walk to work’ class of
vessels owned by Royal Wagenborg B.V has a capacity of
60 personnel on board (POB) with 20 reserved for crew. The
vessel has a motion compensated gantry and allows for safe
personnel transfer to and from the vessel in sea states to 2.5 m
significant wave height (Hs). This vessel is hired by contract
of a set minimum number of days, and is capable to be on
station within the bounds of a wind farm allowing for the
transportation of men and materials for extended periods of
time.
Fig. 9: One of the Royal Wagenborg B.V. fleet of walk to work
vessels on location [34].
2) Specialist Personnel Transfer Boats: Further transfers
are facilitated by smaller vessels, typically catamaran vessels
which conform to the MCA Category 2 (60 miles from safe
harbour). These can shuttle upwards of a dozen technicians
to and from wind farm assets. They will generally have a set
of rubber fenders on the bow and will make contact with the
turbine, allowing the visiting personnel to mount a monopile
or jacket using the fixed access ladder.
Fig. 10: Specialist personnel transfer boat on location [35].
3) Small Light Craft: In calm seas and where a service
ship working in the wind farm is equipped with launch
facilities a rigid hull inflatable boat (RHIB) may be utilised.
Typical examples are those manufactured by Zodiac, which
are commonly used as rescue and service craft onboard of the
host ship, such as can be observed on the starboard side of
Wagenborg vessel in figure 9.
D. Helicopter
This is a very fast option for personnel transfer in com-
parison to the water craft and vessels. Personnel and freight
are lowered onto the winch platform atop the nacelle from a
specialised man riding winch on the helicopter. The winch is
generally a re-purposed rescue winch as used by the coast
guard and military rescue helicopters which is capable of
hoisting a few hundred kilograms. The UK’s Civilian Aviation
Authority standards 437 and 764 provide guidance and policy
on the use of helicopters with wind turbines. While a quick
method of transferring people, this does require the blades to
be stopped and locked during winching operations. This option
is utilised by many European wind farm operators; however,
Rampion has not been designed to accommodate helicopter
transfers.
V. I NSPECTION T IMINGS
A. Variations of Inspection Pathways
Several simulations were developed to get a better under-
standing of the dimensional constraints for attendances to the
Rampion wind farm. This involved using the map as shown
in figure 7 and digitising all the points using AutoCad with
these results then output into a comma delimited file allowing
MATLAB to import the data. There were 116 individual points
on this particular map to work with, and when removing the
substation and met mast there were 114 turbine location points
Fig. 11: Helicopter lowering technician onto turbine winch
platform [36].

PER TURBINE

Abseilers 2x 12 hour days

Drone Optics 1 hour [37]

Ground Optics 2 hours [38]

TABLE III: Inspection timings for the available options. Fig. 12: Simulation reference table.

to work with. The author acknowledges that this isn’t entirely

representative of the actual wind farm development but the
method is valid and gives results for any arbitrary number of
points. Figure 13 shows the results of the map reference data
from figure 7 displayed in a MATLAB plot. Distance and
time simulations were carried out in sections V-B, V-C and
V-D. Distances can are applicable to the costing of vessels for
fuel and consumables required for transit, while the timings
can be applied to labour and hired equipment. Results for
inspection costings in this report are focussed on the timings
with distances available as a reference only and a product of
the simulation processes.

B. Travelling Salesman

The first simulation used a simulated annealing optimisation

based on the classic travelling salesmen problem with the
individual turbine coordinates representatives of the cities.
This is modelled on the option for a large vessel like a
Royal Wagenborg walk to work ship departing Newhaven
harbour and making single continuous journey through the
field, with the result of 2500 simulations converging around
130 km for the complete journey. Ideally in a scenario such
as this there would be multiple teams of abseilers on board
allowing multiple turbines to be visited daily. This model can
be applied to inspection options I, I.a and I.b with respect
to the simulation reference in figure 12. In this option the
inspection technicians have accommodations and meals on the
walk to work vessel, and are either shuttled to wind turbines by
fast boat or by gantry. With a drone team there is the obvious
advantage of their remote piloting capability and not having
to board the turbine.
Fig. 13: Wind farm coordinates in MATLAB.
C. Harbour Departures with Abseilers vs Drones/Ground
Based Optics
Daily trips could be made by abseilers who would visit each
turbine to complete a two day blade survey. MATLAB was
utilised to perform calculation and modelling of this scenario
as shown in figures 16 and 17. The first scenario is for single
trips from the harbour and visiting all turbines, one per trip.
This could apply to any of the inspection options, noting
that in this simulation applies to abseiler with the two day
inspection cycle per turbine. Alternatively, the other scenario
is to when an optical ground or drone system is deployed
from harbour where up to four turbines could be inspected
 Fig. 14: Simulated annealing optimisation curve.
Fig. 15: Optimised continuous routing for wind farm.
each trip. In this case the simulation was run over fifteen
iterations with an average inspection cycle of 40 days, reduced
from 228 and a savings of more than 50% on total distance
travelled. These models can be applied to inspection options
III, III.a and III.b with respect to the simulation reference in
figure 12. This option would allow for the asset holder to
contract local inspection service companies, perhaps through
a retention clause, which could remove the requirement for
accommodating crewmen out in the field.
D. Substation Departures with Abseilers vs Drones/Ground
Based Optics
This scenario is a variation of that with the harbour depar-
ture with the difference that abseilers or inspection technicians
are residing on the substation where they would be provided
Fig. 16: Single trip inspections from harbour.
Fig. 17: Single trip multiple (random) inspections from har-
bour.
accommodations and meals. They would be deployed to assets
by fast boats, and as with the previous scenario, there is
the possibility that the drone team could remote fly. This
option would be a big savings over the walk to work due to
running costs of the smaller boats which in this case could be
owned and operated by the asset holder to further bring down
cost. As with the previous scenario this simulation had fifteen
iterations, randomised up to four turbines daily, resulting in an
average inspection cycle of 58 days and a huge reduction on
distance travelled. These models can be applied to inspection
options II, II.a and II.b with respect to the simulation reference
in figure 12.
 Fig. 18: Single trip inspections from substation.
Fig. 19: Single trip multiple (random) inspections from sub-
station.
E. The Autonomous Option Using Drones Assigned to Sub-
Clusters of Turbines
An advanced statistical algorithm called k-means clustering
[39] was utilised in MATLAB to develop a model to break
down the wind farm into arbitrary numbers of clusters and
locate their centroids. Further manipulation was developed
to locate the closest turbine to the centroid. This allows the
dimensioning of a wind farm to specify the required range
and flight duration for a drone system. This model applies to
inspection options IV with respect to the simulation reference
in figure 12. Figure 20 shows the initial cluster and centroid
results with figure 21 showing the results of the nearest turbine
manipulation.
Fig. 20: Results of a 12 cluster trial showing centroids.
Fig. 21: Location of closest turbines to cluster centroids.
F. Weather Simulation
The purpose of randomising the number of inspections is
to simulate the real effects of weather. The simulations in this
report used a normal distribution of random numbers; however,
for a more realistic prediction model a Weibull or similar
distribution of random numbers could be utilised to simulate
the impacts of weather based on wave spectra models, such
as JONSWAP or Peirson Moskowitz.
G. Cost Exercise Results
Results of the costing exercise are shown in tabular form
on figure 27 and graphically in figures 28 and 29. Clearly any
option involving a walk to work vessel sees most of the budget
being consumed by the shipping company. It is common
knowledge in the offshore wind energy service industry that
Fig. 22: Solutions to the k-means test showing maximum
return distance flight distances.
Fig. 23: Results for clusters 1-9.
vessels routinely account for 75% of project costs and any
improvement on that number is of paramount importance. With
this exercise and the Rampion field, it would be beneficial to
engage local agents who specialise in small light craft and
have technicians depart from the harbour to the field. There is
also the option to house the technicians on the substation or
perhaps a floatel jack-up barge if the rates were favourable.
The actual figures used in the costing exercise were based upon
the authors knowledge of similar scopes of work and rates
during industrial tenure. They will be a reasonable estimate
and using this method a rough cost for any similar project can
be established in a relatively short time. Ultimately it can be
seen that options involving drones are more cost efficient than
with ground optics and that any inspection involving being on
the asset increases risks and costs.
H. Thought Exercise
The costs here are were developed to get an understanding
of the financial implication of the options available to the asset
holder maintenance managers. There is definitely a big advan-
tage in avoiding any vessel rates which require any minimum
contract hire time and those which are loaded with front end
mobilisation fees. If wholesale energy prices remain low there
is an advantage to investing in technology such as autonomous
drones to keep the future costs of operation and maintenance
low. Strike pricing regimes set in the UK’s Contracts for
Difference of £117.14/MWh [42] and £57.50/MWh [43] set in
the 2015 and 2017 auctions respectively with energy trading
Fig. 24: Results for clusters 10-12.
Fig. 25: Weibull distribution with various shape (k) and scale
(λ) factors. [40], [?].
at approximately £50/MWh [44]. Wind energy was producing
1.88 GW, or 4.2% of the UK’s energy requirement at the time
of writing [45].
I. A Step in the Right Direction
The author has decades of experience in project manage-
ment dealing with similar offshore structures, systems and ma-
chine. As stated, there is no one system that works and every
company has their own take on how jobs should be managed
and costed. The world of engineering services is competitive
and when a specialist firm for inspection is tendering for work
they are not often given the opportunity to model a problem in
such detail as shown here. While this is an academic project,
the philosophy is sound and could be applied to the real world
for costing.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
This report has discussed the complexities inherent when
working with offshore wind turbines. Beyond the obvious
problems with their remote location, growing dimension

Fig. 26: Example of JOHNSWAP and Pierson-Moskowitz
wave spectra [41].
Fig. 27: Full cost modelling results.
and distance from shore, there is the underlying issue of
reliability. The current fleet of megawatt producing units
could be argued as an immature technology where their
remains unacceptable failure rate in drive-train components
for indirect drive HAWT’s, and blades as noted in the
introduction. Efficient logistics and planning in concert with
a comprehensive and thorough inspection regime are the key
to keeping the blades turning and producing. The community
which is currently housekeeping the UK’s fleet of turbines
has a strong background oil and gas. While this is beneficial
in the fact that there are many experienced technicians,
service companies, vessels and support systems the money
available for maintenance is in orders of magnitude smaller
with very slim margins. It is imperative that costs remain low
and technology exploited in order to have a strong future.
The cost exercise noted that drones or other non-permanent
optical systems brought out the field for short survey trips
was the most financially effective method. Use of a walk
to work vessel solely for inspection is a poor choice when
looking at the vessel charter costs. As mentioned previously,
this study was only for inspection purposes and neglected
the influence on scheduling and costs that the full spectrum
Fig. 28: Graphical results for all modelling options.
Fig. 29: Graphical results excluding walk to work vessel.
of operations and maintenance tasks would have. The walk
to work vessel does have advantages such as being able
to deploy personnel in a much safer manner to turbine.
Having heave compensated multi-tonne cranes and being self
sufficient in terms of accommodating and catering for the
technicians visiting the field is an advantage over the smaller
scale solutions.
Use of abseilers will continue to remain a staple in offshore
wind due to their versatility and capabilities. They have a
quick setup time and can accomplish both inspection and
repairs on the same trip. As a former colleague of the author
who was well placed in the rope access inspection business
once stated, ”I can train anyone to climb if the are fit enough”.
This is a very valid point and within a short period of time a
highly qualified technician or engineer can be trained to do
their job while suspended from climbing ropes. The same
cannot be said in the reverse order. Having the ability to
work along side of a drone or group optic system would be
a highly valued addition to the inspection program as these
technologies and human abilities can complement each other.
 The UK offshore wind industry is going to see a huge [15] Cornis, “Onshore & offshore panoblade inspec-
increase in its workforce with one report stating that there tion,” 2018, [Online; accessed March 16, 2018].
[Online]. Available: http://web.cornis.fr/assets/photo panoblade2-
may be 62,000 direct and indirect roles by 2032 [47]. Part e294cc3d1f2a8cd57acd3fad5adea1f3.jpg
of this growing workforce will be the personnel who are [16] T. B. I. of Non-Destructive Testing, “Acceptable criteria
inspecting the turbines which is not longer just a niche field - non-metallic materials,” CP25 - Annex A - General
Specification for Visual Testing, 2015. [Online]. Available:
of ex-oil and gas professionals. Perhaps in time organisation http://www.bindt.org/downloads/cp25annexa.pdf
such as the IEC, DNVGL and their ilk will be able to approve [17] H. Xie, Z. Liu, X. Xu, and Y. Zhang, “A multiple sensors platform
an automated inspection programme. method for power line inspection based on a large unmanned helicopter,”
Sensors, vol. 17, no. 6, p. 1222, 2017.
[18] “Recommended light levels,” The National Optical
Astronomy Observatory, Report, 2015. [Online]. Available:
ACKNOWLEDGMENT https://www.noao.edu/education/QLTkit/ACTIVITY Documents/Safety/LightLevels ou
[19] J. Flaig, “Go, go, gadget! drone inspectors can help make maintenance
The author would like to thank his partners Ali Mahboob cheaper and safer,” Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Report, 2017.
Hamedany, Ali Marjan, and Wael Nofal and Kuenwei Wu for [Online]. Available: https://www.imeche.org/news/news-article/go-go-
their support through the initial group project phase which gadget!-drone-inspectors-can-help-make-maintenance-cheaper-and-safer
[20] C. University, “The electromagnetic spectrrum,” [On-
spawned this research paper. line; accessed January 8, 2018]. [Online]. Available:
http://www.columbia.edu/ vjd1/electromag spectrum.htm
R EFERENCES [21] C. Galleguillos, A. Zorrilla, A. Jimenez, L. Diaz, Á. L. Montiano,
M. Barroso, A. Viguria, and F. Lasagni, “Thermographic non-destructive
[1] T. C. Estate, “January - december 2016,” Offshore inspection of wind turbine blades using umanned aerial systems,”
wind operational report, 2017. [Online]. Available: Plastic, Rubber and Composites, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 98–103, 2015.
https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/media/1050888/operationalwindreport2017[22] final.pdf
T. B. I. of Non-Destructive Testing, “Infrared thermography testing,”
[2] W. P. Monthly, “Ten of the biggest turbines,” 2017, Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) Operator - Assessment Plan, 2016.
[Online; accessed March 24, 2018]. [Online]. Available: [Online]. Available: http://www.bindt.org/admin/Downloads/Operator-
https://www.windpowermonthly.com/10-biggest-turbines Assessment-Plan.pdf
[3] E. Research and Consulting, “Commercial drone market by product [23] Bladena, “Blade inspections,” Instruction Manual, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
type (fixed wing, rotary blade, nano, hybrid), by application able: https://www.bladena.com/uploads/8/1/6/3/81635550/instruction -
(agriculture, energy, government, media & entertainment, product blade inspections.pdf
delivery & others), industry trends, estimation & forecast, 2016
[24] ——, “Blade photos,” Instruction Manual, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
- 2024,” Commerical Drone Market Report 2024, 2017. [Online].
able: https://www.bladena.com/uploads/8/1/6/3/81635550/instruction -
Available: https://www.esticastresearch.com/market-reports/commercial-
blade photos.pdf
drone-market
[25] ——, “Blade repair,” Instruction Manual, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
[4] PricewaterhouseCoopers, “What are the key commercial applications
able: https://www.bladena.com/uploads/8/1/6/3/81635550/instruction -
of drones?” Clarity from above. PwC global report on the
blade repair.pdf
commercial applications of drone technology, 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://www.pwc.pl/pl/pdf/clarity-from-above-pwc.pdf [26] B. Associates, “Turbine maintenance,” Job Roles
[5] A. Pasztor, “Coming soon to a front porch near you: Package in Offshore Wind, 2017. [Online]. Available:
delivery via drone,” The Wall Street Journal, 2018, an optional http://greenporthull.co.uk/uploads/files/Job Roles in Offshore Wind.pdf
note. [Online]. Available: https://www.wsj.com/articles/coming-soon-to- [27] M. Froese, “Skyspecs secures $8m to develop advanced
a-front-porch-near-you-package-delivery-via-drone-1520798822 software for drone-led turbine inspections,” Windpower
[6] E. Gosden, “Wind turbines are wearing too fast at Engineering & Development, Report, 2018. [Online].
the world’s largest offshore farm,” The Times, 2018. Available: https://www.windpowerengineering.com/business-news-
[Online]. Available: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/london-array- projects/skyspecs-secures-8m-develop-advanced-software-drone-led-
offshore-wind-turbines-near-kent-wearing-too-fast-qdv76g7cm turbine-inspections/
[7] O. . G. UK, “Key findings,” Health and Safety Report [28] C. Richard, “Group wins grant to develop drone inspection
2017, 2017. [Online]. Available: http://oilandgasuk.co.uk/wp- system,” Windpower Offshore, Report, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
content/uploads/2017/07/Health-Safety-Report-2017-Oil-Gas-UK.pdf able: https://www.windpoweroffshore.com/article/1450832/group-wins-
[8] Health and S. E. UK, “Full-year details and explanatory notes,” grant-develop-drone-inspection-system
Offshore Statistics & Regulatory Activity Report 2016, 2016. [Online]. [29] “Score innovation fund,” European Regional Development Fund, Report,
Available: http://www.hse.gov.uk/offshore/statistics/hsr2016.pdf 2017. [Online]. Available: http://www.scoregrants.co.uk/news/grant-
[9] G. G. O. W. H. . S. Organisation, “Spring/summer boost-for-wind-turbine-blade-robot/
2017,” G+ Newsletter, 2017. [Online]. Available: [30] J. Salmon, “Choosing the right blade maintenance regime,”
https://www.gplusoffshorewind.com/ data/assets/pdf file/0003/316668/G- Wind Power Monthly, Report, 2015. [Online]. Avail-
newsletter-Spring-Summer-2017.pdf able: https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1369612/choosing-
[10] O. . G. UK, “Key findings,” Workforce Report 2017, 2017. [Online]. right-blade-maintenance-regime
Available: http://oilandgasuk.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Health- [31] Canon, “Canon ef 600mm f/4l is ii usm specifica-
Safety-Report-2017-Oil-Gas-UK.pdf tion,” 2011, [Online; accessed March 17, 2018]. [On-
[11] C. A. Authority, “Cap 1243 - safety review of offshore public transport line]. Available: https://www.canon.co.uk/lenses/ef-600mm-f-4l-is-ii-
helicopter operations in support of the exploitation of oil and gas,” 2015, usm-lens/specification.aspx
[Online; accessed March 20, 2018]. [32] E.ON, “The uk south coast’s first offshore wind farm,”
[12] DNVGL, “Dnvgl-st-0262, lifetime extension of wind turbines,” 2018, 2018, [Online; accessed March 17, 2018]. [Online]. Available:
[Online; accessed January 8, 2018]. https://www.rampionoffshore.com/
[13] R. Partner, “Wind turbine blade repair and rotor ser- [33] T. C. Estate, “Rampion offshore windfarm pipeline route,”
vices,” 2017, [Online; accessed March 15, 2018]. [Online]. 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.southdowns.gov.uk/wp-
Available: https://www.ropepartner.com/rp-files/uploads/wind-turbine- content/uploads/2015/07/Map-showing-route-of-Rampion-cable-
fiberglass-blade-repair.jpg through-South-Downs-National-Park.pdf
[14] Skyspecs, “Wind power engineering & development,” 2017, [34] Wagenborg, “A new offshore standard: Unique vessel for
[Online; accessed March 16, 2018]. [Online]. Avail- servicing windfarms,” 2018, [Online; accessed March 18, 2018].
able: https://3ohkdk3zdzcq1dul50oqjvvf-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp- [Online]. Available: https://magazine.wagenborg.com/magazines/times-
content/uploads/2017/02/skyspecs.png/ 12/fleet-equipment/walk-to-work-an-introduction
[35] T. T. Ltd, “15m aft wheelhouse wind farm service vessel,”
2018, [Online; accessed March 18, 2018]. [Online]. Avail-
able: http://www.turbinetransfers.co.uk/portfolio/lynas-point-penmon-
point-rhoscolyn-head/
[36] H. Government, “Great yarmouth and lowestoft (new anglia)
enterprise zone,” 2018, [Online; accessed March 18, 2018]. [Online].
Available: http://enterprisezones.communities.gov.uk/enterprise-zone-
finder/great-yarmouth-and-lowestoft-enterprise-zone/
[37] B. DuBose, “New rotor blade inspection methods for offshore
wind turbines,” Materials Performance, Report, 2018. [Online].
Available: http://www.materialsperformance.com/articles/coating-
linings/2018/02/new-rotor-blade-inspection-methods-for-offshore-wind-
turbines
[38] “Cornis hired for major blade inspection job,”
offshorewind.biz, Report, 2015. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://www.offshorewind.biz/2015/10/13/cornis-hired-for-major-
blade-inspection-job/
[39] J. A. Hartigan and M. A. Wong., “Algorithm as 136: A k-means
clustering algorithm.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series
C (Applied Statistics), vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 100–108, 1979.
[40] “Weibull distribution,” 2018, [Online; accessed March 19, 2018].
[Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weibull distribution
[41] S. McCann, “Fluid mechanics and loading - assignment,” 2017, as part
of an assignmnet for Fluid Mechanics & Loading [N-AME-FML-17-
A17].
[42] D. Weston, “Uk awards first cfd round,” Wind
Power Monthly, Report, 2015. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1335815/uk-awards-
first-cfd-round
[43] “Analysis: Uk auction reveals offshore wind cheaper than
new gas,” Carbon Brief, Report, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-auction-offshore-wind-
cheaper-than-new-gas
[44] OFGEM, “Electricity prices: Day-ahead baseload contracts - monthly
average (gb),” 2018, [Online; accessed March 20, 2018]. [Online].
Available: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/data-portal/electricity-prices-day-
ahead-baseload-contracts-monthly-average-gb
[45] E. Portal and S. University, “G.b. national grid status,”
2018, [Online; accessed March 20, 2018]. [Online]. Available:
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
[46] “Seimens,” 2018, [Online; accessed
March 20, 2018]. [Online]. Available:
https://www.siemens.com/global/en/home/markets/wind/offshore.html
[47] “Future uk employment in the offshore wind industry,”
Cambridge Econometrics, Report, 2017. [Online]. Avail-
able: https://aurawindenergy.com/uploads/files/Cambride-Econometrics-
Future-UK-Employment-in-Offshore-Wind-June-2017.pdf