OC6 project Phase III: validation of the aerodynamic loading on a wind turbine rotor undergoing large motion caused by a floating support structure

Abstract

This paper provides a summary of the work done within Phase III of the Offshore Code Comparison Collaboration, Continued, with Correlation and unCertainty (OC6) project, under the International Energy Agency Wind Technology Collaboration Programme Task 30. This phase focused on validating the aerodynamic loading on a wind turbine rotor undergoing large motion caused by a floating support structure. Numerical models of the Technical University of Denmark 10¿MW reference wind turbine were validated using measurement data from a 1:75 scale test performed during the UNsteady Aerodynamics for FLOating Wind (UNAFLOW) project and a follow-on experimental campaign, both performed at the Politecnico di Milano wind tunnel. Validation of the models was performed by comparing the loads for steady (fixed platform) and unsteady (harmonic motion of the platform) wind conditions. For the unsteady wind conditions, the platform was forced to oscillate in the surge and pitch directions under several frequencies and amplitudes. These oscillations result in a wind variation that impacts the rotor loads (e.g., thrust and torque). For the conditions studied in these tests, the system aerodynamic response was almost steady. Only a small hysteresis in airfoil performance undergoing angle of attack variations in attached flow was observed. During the experiments, the rotor speed and blade pitch angle were held constant. However, in real wind turbine operating conditions, the surge and pitch variations would result in rotor speed variations and/or blade pitch actuations, depending on the wind turbine controller region that the system is operating. Additional simulations with these control parameters were conducted to verify the fidelity of different models. Participant results showed, in general, a good agreement with the experimental measurements and the need to account for dynamic inflow when there are changes in the flow conditions due to the rotor speed variations or blade pitch actuations in response to surge and pitch motion. Numerical models not accounting for dynamic inflow effects predicted rotor loads that were 9¿% lower in amplitude during rotor speed variations and 18¿% higher in amplitude during blade pitch actuations.This research has been supported by the office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (grant no. DE-AC36-08GO28308).Peer ReviewedRoger Bergua1, Amy Robertson1, Jason Jonkman1, Emmanuel Branlard1, Alessandro Fontanella2, Marco Belloli2, Paolo Schito2, Alberto Zasso2, Giacomo Persico3, Andrea Sanvito3, Ervin Amet4, Cédric Brun5, Guillén Campaña-Alonso6, Raquel Martín-San-Román6, Ruolin Cai7, Jifeng Cai7, Quan Qian8, Wen Maoshi8, Alec Beardsell9, Georg Pirrung10, Néstor Ramos-García10, Wei Shi11, Jie Fu11, Rémi Corniglion12, Anaïs Lovera12, Josean Galván13, Tor Anders Nygaard14, Carlos Renan dos Santos14, Philippe Gilbert15, Pierre-Antoine Joulin15, Frédéric Blondel15, Eelco Frickel16, Peng Chen17, Zhiqiang Hu17, Ronan Boisard18, Kutay Yilmazlar19, Alessandro Croce19, Violette Harnois20, Lijun Zhang21, Ye Li21, Ander Aristondo22, Iñigo Mendikoa Alonso22, Simone Mancini23, Koen Boorsma23, Feike Savenije23, David Marten24, Rodrigo Soto-Valle24, Christian W. Schulz25, Stefan Netzband25, Alessandro Bianchini26, Francesco Papi26, Stefano Cioni26, Pau Trubat27, Daniel Alarcon27, Climent Molins27, Marion Cormier28, Konstantin Brüker28, Thorsten Lutz28, Qing Xiao29, Zhongsheng Deng29, Florence Haudin30, and Akhilesh Goveas31 1National Wind Technology Center, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO 80401, USA 2Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan 20156, Italy 3Laboratory of Fluid-Machines, Dipartimento di Energia, Politecnico di Milano, Milan 20156, Italy 4Wind Department, Bureau Veritas, Paris 92937, France 5Marine Division, Research Department, Bureau Veritas, Saint-Herblain 44818, France 6Wind Turbine Technologies, Centro Nacional de Energías Renovables, Sarriguren 31621, Spain 7Integrated Simulation Department, China General Certification Center, Beijing 100013, China 8Research Institute, China State Shipbuilding Corporation, Chongqing 401122, China 9Offshore Technology Department, DNV, Bristol BS2 0PS, UK 10Department of Wind Energy, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby 2800, Denmark 11State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China 12Département Electrotechnique et Mécanique des Structures, Électricité de France, Paris 91120, France 13Wind Energy Department, eureka!, Errigoiti 48309, Spain 14Department of Wind Energy, Institute for Energy Technology, Kjeller 2027, Norway 15Département Mécanique des Fluides, IFP Energies nouvelles, Rueil-Malmaison 92852, France 16Research and Development, Maritime Research Institute Netherlands, Wageningen 6708, the Netherlands 17Marine, Offshore and Subsea Technology, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 7RU, UK 18Aerodynamic Department, Office National d’Etudes et de Recherches Aérospatiales, Paris 92190, France 19Department of Aerospace Science and Technology, Politecnico di Milano, Milan 20156, Italy 20Floating Offshore Group, PRINCIPIA, La Ciotat 13600, France 21Wind Energy Group, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China 22Department of Offshore Renewable Energy, Tecnalia Research & Innovation, Donostia-San Sebastián 20009, Spain 23Wind Energy Department, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Petten 1755, the Netherlands 24Wind Energy Department, Technische Universität Berlin, 10623 Berlin, Germany 25Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Ship Theory, Hamburg University of Technology, 21073 Hamburg, Germany 26Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, Florence 50139, ItalyPostprint (published version