Special Section Articles

Fully Coupled Three-Dimensional Dynamic Response of a Tension-Leg Platform Floating Wind Turbine in Waves and Wind

[+] Author and Article Information
G. K. V. Ramachandran

DTU Wind Energy,
DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby,
e-mail: gkvr@dtu.dk

H. Bredmose

DTU Wind Energy,
DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby,
e-mail: hbre@dtu.dk

J. N. Sørensen

DTU Wind Energy,
DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby,
e-mail: jnso@dtu.dk

J. J. Jensen

DTU Mechanical Engineering,
DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby,
e-mail: jjj@mek.dtu.dk

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received January 18, 2013; final manuscript received September 26, 2013; published online March 24, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Krish Thiagarajan.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 136(2), 020901 (Mar 24, 2014) (12 pages) Paper No: OMAE-13-1011; doi: 10.1115/1.4025599 History: Received January 18, 2013; Revised September 26, 2013

A dynamic model for a tension-leg platform (TLP) floating offshore wind turbine is proposed. The model includes three-dimensional wind and wave loads and the associated structural response. The total system is formulated using 17 degrees of freedom (DOF), 6 for the platform motions and 11 for the wind turbine. Three-dimensional hydrodynamic loads have been formulated using a frequency- and direction-dependent spectrum. While wave loads are computed from the wave kinematics using Morison's equation, the aerodynamic loads are modeled by means of unsteady blade-element-momentum (BEM) theory, including Glauert correction for high values of the axial induction factor, dynamic stall, dynamic wake, and dynamic yaw. The aerodynamic model takes into account the wind shear and turbulence effects. For a representative geographical location, platform responses are obtained for a set of wind and wave climatic conditions. The platform responses show an influence from the aerodynamic loads, most clearly through quasi-steady mean surge and pitch responses associated with the mean wind. Further, the aerodynamic loads show an influence from the platform motion through a fluctuating rotor load contribution, which is a consequence of the wave-induced rotor dynamics. Loads and coupled responses are predicted for a set of load cases with different wave headings. Further, an advanced aero-elastic code, Flex5, is extended for the TLP wind turbine configuration and the response comparison with the simpler model shows a generally good agreement, except for the yaw motion. This deviation is found to be a result of the missing lateral tower flexibility in the simpler model.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

TLP configuration sketch and dimensions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

2D and 3D responses comparison

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Rotor loads - load case 2 with a wave direction of 0 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Floater response - load case 2 with a wave direction of 0 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Response comparison - load case 2 for all wave headings

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Response statistics comparison - load cases 1 and 2 for all wave headings

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Instantaneous tension comparison for all wave headings - load cases 1 and 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

(a) Surge response comparison (3D code and Flex5) and (b) heave response comparison (3D code and Flex5)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Pitch response comparison (3D code and Flex5) and (b) yaw response comparison (3D code and Flex5)




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