Mahmoud Shafiee

Prof. Mahmoud Shafiee

School of Mechanical Engineering Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, UK
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications

1 October 2015 in Reliability Engineering & System Safety
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Mahmoud ShafieeMahmoud Shafiee
Mahmoud Shafiee
MFMaxim Finkelstein
Maxim Finkelstein
CBChristophe Bérenguer
Christophe Bérenguer

15 November 2018 in Sensors
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MAMuntazir Abbas
Muntazir Abbas
Mahmoud ShafieeMahmoud Shafiee
Mahmoud Shafiee
Ultrasonic guided wave (UGW) is one of the most commonly used technologies for non-destructive evaluation (NDE) and structural health monitoring (SHM) of structural components. Because of its excellent long-range diagnostic capability, this method is effective in detecting cracks, material loss, and fatigue-based defects in isotropic and anisotropic structures. The shape and orientation of structural defects are critical parameters during the investigation of crack propagation, assessment of damage severity, and prediction of remaining useful life (RUL) of structures. These parameters become even more important in cases where the crack intensity is associated with the safety of men, environment, and material, such as ship’s hull, aero-structures, rail tracks and subsea pipelines. This paper reviews the research literature on UGWs and their application in defect diagnosis and health monitoring of metallic structures. It has been observed that no significant research work has been convened to identify the shape and orientation of defects in plate-like structures. We also propose an experimental research work assisted by numerical simulations to investigate the response of UGWs upon interaction with cracks in different shapes and orientations. A framework for an empirical model may be considered to determine these structural flaws.

1 December 2019 in Reliability Engineering & System Safety
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Mahmoud ShafieeMahmoud Shafiee
Mahmoud Shafiee
JSJohn Dalsgaard Sørensen
John Dalsgaard Sørensen

1 February 2021 in Robotics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Mahmoud ShafieeMahmoud Shafiee
Mahmoud Shafiee
ZZZeyu Zhou
Zeyu Zhou
LMLuyao Mei
Luyao Mei
FDFateme Dinmohammadi
Fateme Dinmohammadi
JKJackson Karama
Jackson Karama
David FlynnDavid Flynn
David Flynn
With increasing global investment in offshore wind energy and rapid deployment of wind power technologies in deep water hazardous environments, the in-service inspection of wind turbines and their related infrastructure plays an important role in the safe and efficient operation of wind farm fleets. The use of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and remotely piloted aircraft (RPA)—commonly known as “drones”—for remote inspection of wind energy infrastructure has received a great deal of attention in recent years. Drones have significant potential to reduce not only the number of times that personnel will need to travel to and climb up the wind turbines, but also the amount of heavy lifting equipment required to carry out the dangerous inspection works. Drones can also shorten the duration of downtime needed to detect defects and collect diagnostic information from the entire wind farm. Despite all these potential benefits, the drone-based inspection technology in the offshore wind industry is still at an early stage of development and its reliability has yet to be proven. Any unforeseen failure of the drone system during its mission may cause an interruption in inspection operations, and thereby, significant reduction in the electricity generated by wind turbines. In this paper, we propose a semiquantitative reliability analysis framework to identify and evaluate the criticality of mission failures—at both system and component levels—in inspection drones, with the goal of lowering the operation and maintenance (O&M) costs as well as improving personnel safety in offshore wind farms. Our framework is built based upon two well-established failure analysis methodologies, namely, fault tree analysis (FTA) and failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA). It is then tested and verified on a drone prototype, which was developed in the laboratory for taking aerial photography and video of both onshore and offshore wind turbines. The most significant failure modes and underlying root causes within the drone system are identified, and the effects of the failures on the system’s operation are analysed. Finally, some innovative solutions are proposed on how to minimize the risks associated with mission failures in inspection drones.

10 February 2014 in Energies
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Mahmoud ShafieeMahmoud Shafiee
Mahmoud Shafiee
FDFateme Dinmohammadi
Fateme Dinmohammadi
Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) has been extensively used by wind turbine assembly manufacturers for analyzing, evaluating and prioritizing potential/known failure modes. However, several limitations are associated with its practical implementation in wind farms. First, the Risk-Priority-Number (RPN) of a wind turbine system is not informative enough for wind farm managers from the perspective of criticality; second, there are variety of wind turbines with different structures and hence, it is not correct to compare the RPN values of different wind turbines with each other for prioritization purposes; and lastly, some important economical aspects such as power production losses, and the costs of logistics and transportation are not taken into account in the RPN value. In order to overcome these drawbacks, we develop a mathematical tool for risk and failure mode analysis of wind turbine systems (both onshore and offshore) by integrating the aspects of traditional FMEA and some economic considerations. Then, a quantitative comparative study is carried out using the traditional and the proposed FMEA methodologies on two same type of onshore and offshore wind turbine systems. The results show that the both systems face many of the same risks, however there are some main differences worth considering.