0
Research Papers: Ocean Engineering

Vertical Wind Profiles in Non-Neutral Conditions: Comparison of Models and Measurements From Frøya

[+] Author and Article Information
Piotr Domagalski

Institute of Turbomachinery,
Lodz University of Technology,
Wolczanska 219/223,
Lodz 90-924, Poland
e-mail: piotr.domagalski@p.lodz.pl

Lars Morten Bardal

Department of Energy and Process Engineering,
Norwegian University of
Science and Technology,
Trondheim 7491, Norway
e-mail: lars.m.bardal@ntnu.no

Lars Roar Sætran

Department of Energy and Process Engineering,
Norwegian University of
Science and Technology,
Trondheim 7491, Norway
e-mail: lars.satran@ntnu.no

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received September 21, 2017; final manuscript received October 18, 2018; published online January 17, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Qing Xiao.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 141(4), 041101 (Jan 17, 2019) (8 pages) Paper No: OMAE-17-1172; doi: 10.1115/1.4041816 History: Received September 21, 2017; Revised October 18, 2018

This paper presents an analysis of stratification-dependent mean velocity profiles measured in a Norwegian coastal wind climate, and its comparison with models available in the literature. For this purpose, we use 3 years of observations from a 100 m meteorological mast located at the Frøya island (150 km west of Trondheim, Norway), equipped with a set of two-dimensional (2D) ultrasonic anemometers. The presented analysis is preceded by a general description of the site wind climate, the atmospheric stratification, the roughness length, and the surface layer height. Finally, the measured wind velocity profile is compared with selected models: the basic power and logarithmic law and the stability-corrected models: stability-corrected logarithmic wind profile, the Panofsky and Dutton model, the Peña boundary layer height corrected model, and the correlation-based Smedman-Högström model.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Kettle, A. J. , 2014, “Unexpected Vertical Wind Speed Profiles in the Boundary Layer Over the Southern North Sea,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 134, pp. 149–162. [CrossRef]
Gualtieri, G. , and Secci, S. , 2011, “Comparing Methods to Calculate Atmospheric Stability-Dependent Wind Speed Profiles: A Case Study on Coastal Location,” Renewable Energy, 36(8), pp. 2189–2204. [CrossRef]
Rodrigo, J. S. , Cantero, E. , García, B. , Borbón, F. , Irigoyen, U. , Lozano, S. , Fernande, P. M. , and Chávez, R. A. , 2015, “Atmospheric Stability Assessment for the Characterization of Offshore Wind Conditions,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 625(1), p. 012044. [CrossRef]
Alblas, L. , Bierbooms, W. , and Veldkamp, D. , 2014, “Power Output of Offshore Wind Farms in Relation to Atmospheric Stability,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 555(1), p. 012004. [CrossRef]
Andersen, O. J. , and Løvseth, J. , 2006, “The Frøya Database and Maritime Boundary Layer Wind Description,” Mar. Struct., 19(2–3), pp. 173–192. [CrossRef]
Bierbooms, W. , and Cheng, P. W. , 2002, “Stochastic Gust Model for Design Calculations of Wind Turbines,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 90(11), pp. 1237–1251. [CrossRef]
Kalvig, S. , Gudmestad, O. T. , and Winther, N. , 2014, “Exploring the Gap Between ‘Best Knowledge’ and ‘Best Practice’ in Boundary Layer Meteorology for Offshore Wind Energy,” Wind Energy, 17(1), pp. 161–171. [CrossRef]
Fisher, B. E. A. , Erbrink, H. , Finardi, S. , Jeannet, P. , Joffre, S. , Morselli, M. G. , Pechinger, U. , Seibert, P. , and Thomson, D. , 1998, “COST Action 710: Final Report: Harmonization of the Pre-Processing of Meteorological Data for Atmospheric Dispersion Models,” European Commission, Luxembourg, Report No. EUR 18195 EN. https://cordis.europa.eu/publication/rcn/199811141_en.html
Det Norske Veritas, 2010, “Environmental Conditions and Environmental Loads,” International Standard, Det Norske Veritas AS, Høvik, Norway, Standard No. DNV-RP-C205. https://rules.dnvgl.com/docs/pdf/dnv/codes/docs/2010-10/rp-c205.pdf
Peña, A. , Gryning, S. E. , and Hasager, C. B. , 2008, “Measurements and Modelling of the Wind Speed Profile in the Marine Atmospheric Boundary Layer,” Boundary Layer Meteorol., 129(3), pp. 479–495. [CrossRef]
Panofsky, H. A. , and Dutton, J. A. , 1984, Atmospheric Turbulence: Models and Methods for Engineering Applications, Wiley, New York.
Smedman-Högström, A. S. , and Högström, U. , 1978, “A Practical Method for Determining Wind Frequency Distributions for the Lowest 200 m From Routine Meteorological Data,” J. Appl. Meteorol., 17(7), pp. 942–954. [CrossRef]
Arya, P. S. , 2001, Introduction to Micrometeorology, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, Chap. 11.2.
Foken, T. , 2008, Micrometeorology, Springer-Verlag Berlin, Chap. 2.3.2.
Irwin, J. S. , 1979, “A Theoretical Variation of the Wind Profile Power-Law Exponent as a Function of Surface Roughness and Stability,” Atmos. Environ, 13(1), pp. 191–194. [CrossRef]
Lange, B. , Larsen, S. , Højstrup, J. , and Barthelmie, R. , 2004, “The Influence of Thermal Effects on the Wind Speed Profile of the Coastal Marine Boundary Layer,” Boundary Layer Meteorol., 112(3), pp. 587–617. [CrossRef]
ISO, 1975, “Standard Atmosphere,” International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 2533.
Andersen, O. J. , and Løvseth, J. , 1995, “Gale Force Maritime Wind. The Frøya Data Base—Part 1: Sites and Instrumentation. Review of the Data Base,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 57(1), pp. 97–109. [CrossRef]
IHS ESDU, 2001, “Characteristics of Atmospheric Turbulence Near the Ground—Part II: Single Point Data for Strong Winds (Neutral Atmosphere),” Engineering Sciences Data Unit, IHS Inc., London, UK, Report No. ESDU 85020.
Det Norske Veritas, 2013, “Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures,” International Standard, Det Norske Veritas AS, Høvik, Norway, Standard No. DNV-OS-J101. https://rules.dnvgl.com/docs/pdf/DNV/codes/docs/2014-05/Os-J101.pdf
IEC, 2009, “Wind Turbines—Part 3: Design Requirements for Offshore Wind Turbines,” International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. IEC61400-3. https://collections.iec.ch/std/series/iec61400-3%7Bed1.0%7Den.nsf/doc.xsp?open&documentId=5A5C5AD96C9C1BD9C1257CCA0030D028
Buck, A. L. , 1981, “New Equations for Computing Vapor Pressure and Enhancement Factor,” J. Appl. Meteorol., 20(12), pp. 1527–1532. [CrossRef]
Barthelmie, R. J. , Churchfield, M. J. , Moriarty, P. J. , Lundquist, J. K. , Oxley, G. S. , Hahn, S. , and Pryor, S. C. , 2015, “The Role of Atmospheric Stability/Turbulence on Wakes at the Egmond Aan Zee Offshore Wind Farm,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 625(1), p. 012002. [CrossRef]
Sathe, A. , Gryning, S. E. , and Peña, A. , 2011, “Comparison of the Atmospheric Stability and Wind Profiles at Two Wind Farm Sites Over a Long Marine Fetch in the North Sea,” Wind Energy, 14(6), pp. 767–780. [CrossRef]
Webb, E. K. , 1970, “Profile Relationships: The Log‐Linear Range, and Extension to Strong Stability,” Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 96(407), pp. 67–90. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Measurement site location (Adapted from Norwegian Mapping Authority)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Wind rose (outer graph) and direction dependent roughness length (inner graph)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Distribution of the Richardson number

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Distribution of the Obukhov length

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Atmospheric stability distribution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Stability binned mean velocity profiles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Stability binned mean velocity profiles, normalized by velocity at z1 = 10 m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Wind speed ratio between the measured and predicted wind velocity at z2 = 100 m against atmospheric stability

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of logarithmic model (z0 = 0.0008–0.01 m) and power law (α = 0.12–0.14) with measured wind velocities. Results binned in three stability classes.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of logarithmic model (z0 = 0.0008–0.01 m) and power law (α = 0.12–0.14) with measured wind velocities (normalized by velocity at z1 = 10 m). Results binned in three stability classes.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of calculated and measured profiles for stability corrected logarithmic profile

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of calculated and measured profiles for Panofsky and Dutton model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of calculated and measured profiles for Peña model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of calculated and measured profiles for Smedman-Högström and Högström model

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In