Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Jason JonkmanSandy ButterfieldNeil Kelley Marshall BuhlGunjit BirBonnie Jonkman Pat MoriartyAlan WrightDaniel Laird 2006 Wind Program Peer Review May 10,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Jason JonkmanSandy ButterfieldNeil Kelley Marshall BuhlGunjit BirBonnie Jonkman Pat MoriartyAlan WrightDaniel Laird 2006 Wind Program Peer Review May 10,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Jason JonkmanSandy ButterfieldNeil Kelley Marshall BuhlGunjit BirBonnie Jonkman Pat MoriartyAlan WrightDaniel Laird 2006 Wind Program Peer Review May 10, 2006 Design Codes

2 2 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Outline of Presentation  Introduction & Background  State of the Art Modeling & Limitations  Program Contributions  Current & Future Work

3 3 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Introduction & Background The Big Picture

4 4 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Introduction & Background Design Loads Analysis  Design requirements are dictated by IEC standards  100s-1000s of design load case (DLC) simulations must be considered Load Case Matrix Critical Locations

5 5 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Introduction & Background Modeling Requirements  Fully coupled aero-hydro- servo-elastic interaction  Wind-Inflow: –discrete events –turbulence  Waves: –regular –irregular  Aerodynamics: –induction –rotational augmentation –skewed wake –dynamic stall  Hydrodynamics: –scattering –radiation –hydrostatics  Structural dynamics: –gravity / inertia –elasticity –foundations / moorings  Control system: –yaw, torque, pitch

6 6 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Introduction & Background Coupled Aero-Hydro-Servo-Elastic Simulation

7 7 2006 Wind Program Peer Review State of the Art Modeling & Limitations Wind-Inflow Current Approach Limitations  IEC-specified deterministic, discrete gusts/direction changes  IEC-specified turbulence (TurbSim)  Idealistic  Neutral stability conditions only  TurbSim includes models for site-specific environments: –flows over flat, homogenous terrain –flows in/near multi-row wind farms –flows at the NWTC Test Site (complex terrain) –flows in the Great Plains with/without the presence of a low-level jet (LLJ)  Need data between 120m – 230m to validate LLJ model  Need data above 50m within wind farms to validate and expand wind farm models  Need data from a variety of climates  Need offshore data Design Research

8 8 2006 Wind Program Peer Review State of the Art Modeling & Limitations Aerodynamics & Aeroacoustics Current Approach Limitations  Aerodynamics: – blade-element/momentum – generalized dynamic wake – empirical corrections: rotational augmentation dynamic stall, skewed flow  Aeroacoustics: – advanced empirical models  Post stall and high yaw aerodynamics not well predicted: –rotational augmentation –dynamic stall/unsteady wake coupling  Accurate noise predictions for airfoils, but less so for turbines: –no tower shadow model –inaccurate tip noise model  Aerodynamics: –vortex-wake methods –CFD  Aeroacoustics: –nonlinear propagation models –CAA  Need more experience & expertise with codes  Need aerodynamic wake and pressure distribution measurements  Need full wind turbine acoustic measurements Design (AeroDyn) Research

9 9 2006 Wind Program Peer Review State of the Art Modeling & Limitations Offshore Waves & Hydrodynamics ( HydroDyn ) Current Approach Limitations  Diffraction term only valid for slender base  No wave radiation or free surface memory  No added mass- induced coupling between modes  No nonlinear steep / breaking waves  No 2 nd order effects: –slow-drift –sum-frequency  No sea ice loading  Need validation data Design (Fixed) Research (Floating)

10 10 2006 Wind Program Peer Review State of the Art Modeling & Limitations Structural Dynamics Current Approach Limitations  Combined modal/multibody formulation (FAST): –modal: blades, tower –multibody: platform, nacelle, generator, hub, tail  Deflection limits  Conventional config- urations only: –no coupled modes –no flap/twist coupling –no precurve –no presweep  Multibody (MSC.ADAMS ® )  Finite-element method (FEM)  Modeling gearbox dynamics is difficult  Difficult to obtain reduced order models for controls & stability analysis  Computationally expensive Design Research GE 3.6 MW Prototype with Precurved Blades 1 st mode 2 nd mode Conventional 3- Bladed Upwind

11 11 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Program Contributions Users & Certification

12 12 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Program Contributions Success Stories AOC 15/50 Clipper 2.5MW Liberty Bergey XL50 Southwest Windpower STORM NorthWind 100 GE 1.5MW

13 13 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Program Contributions Development & Support  Why does the U.S. DOE support codes development?: –design codes are a practical way for us to transfer wind energy knowledge to the industry –allows for customization flexibility –commercial products are black boxes  We support U.S. wind industry through: –websites –technical support –solicitation of user requirements –workshops NWTC Design Codes Website

14 14 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Current & Future Work Wind-Inflow  Current work: –implemented Great Plains LLJ spectral model –use this spectral model to determine the effect these jets have on multi-MW LWSTs –document the development of TurbSim  Future plans (next 2 years): –analyze available Lamar LIDAR data to further validate Great Plains LLJ spectral model –hold a workshop on inflow turbulence issues and TurbSim training  Future opportunities: –plan field experiment to collect data on turbulence within large, multi-MW wind farms –form a multi-discipline, synergistic effort to understand the role of coherent turbulence on turbine drivetrain fatigue Sample TurbSim Wind Profiles

15 15 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Current & Future Work Aerodynamics & Aeroacoustics  Current aerodynamics work: –improved fidelity of unsteady wake model –tower influence  Current aeroacoustics work (reduced scope): –wind tunnel tests (Virginia Tech) –CFD, CAA & propagation codes (Penn State)  Future plans (next 2 years): –rewrite AeroDyn – make modular; provide hooks for other aerodynamic models –validation using wind tunnel (NASA Ames) and field measurements –add tower shadow noise model  Future Opportunities: –more wind tunnel and field tests –improve codes: aerodynamics – vortex-wake and CFD methods aeroacoustics – CAA prediction for tower shadow and tip noise CFD of Blade Tip Vortex (Uzun et al, 2006)

16 16 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Current & Future Work Offshore Waves & Hydrodynamics  Current work: –Develop HydroDyn for linear hydrodynamic loading of fixed- bottom and floating systems –benchmarking via participation in IEA Annex XXIII OC 3  Future plans (next 2 years): –offshore foundations: implement p-y & t-z curves –mooring dynamics: interface LINES module (MIT) –support SeaCon studies –WFO analysis of ITI floating barge concept  Future opportunities: –add nonlinear breaking waves –add sea ice loading –add 2 nd order effects –experimental validation Sample OC 3 Simulation Results

17 17 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Current & Future Work Structural Dynamics

18 18 2006 Wind Program Peer Review Current & Future Work New Horizons  Gearbox dynamics: –gearbox failures might be the result of our codes inability to capture the internal gear & bearing loads properly  Stability analysis: –the potential for instabilities increase for advanced concepts like flexible rotors and floating turbines  Tower shadow: –need tower wake measurements and model updates to support design improvements of downwind rotors  Code validation: –all models must be validated with experimental data

19 19 2006 Wind Program Peer Review


Download ppt "Jason JonkmanSandy ButterfieldNeil Kelley Marshall BuhlGunjit BirBonnie Jonkman Pat MoriartyAlan WrightDaniel Laird 2006 Wind Program Peer Review May 10,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google