0
Research Papers: Ocean Renewable Energy

Characterization of a Wind Generation System for Use in Offshore Wind Turbine Development

[+] Author and Article Information
Raul Urbina, James M. Newton, Matthew P. Cameron, Andrew J. Goupee, Krish P. Thiagarajan

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Maine,
5711 Boardman Hall,
Orono, ME 04469

Richard W. Kimball

Maine Maritime Academy,
301 Dismukes Hall,
Castine, ME 04420

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received February 5, 2016; final manuscript received August 7, 2017; published online October 27, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Yi-Hsiang Yu.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 140(2), 021901 (Oct 27, 2017) (8 pages) Paper No: OMAE-16-1012; doi: 10.1115/1.4037826 History: Received February 05, 2016; Revised August 07, 2017

Environmental conditions created by winds blowing oblique to the direction of the waves are necessary to conduct some survivability tests of offshore wind turbines. However, some facilities lack the capability to generate quality waves at a wide range of angles. Thus, having a wind generation system that can be rotated makes generating winds that blow oblique to the waves possible during survivability tests. Rotating the wind generation system may disrupt the flow generated by the fans because of the effect of adjacent walls. Closed or semiclosed wind tunnels may eliminate the issue of wall effects, but these types of wind tunnels could be difficult to position within a wave basin. In this work, a prototype wind generation system that can be adapted for offshore wind turbine testing is investigated. The wind generation system presented in this work has a return that minimizes the effect that the walls could potentially have on the fans. This study characterizes the configuration of a wind generation system using measurements of the velocity field, detailing mean velocities, flow directionality, and turbulence intensities. Measurements were taken downstream to evaluate the expected area of turbine operation and the shear zone. The dataset has aided in the identification of conditions that could potentially prevent the production of the desired flows. Therefore, this work provides a useful dataset that could be used in the design of wind generation systems and in the evaluation of the benefits of recirculating wind generation systems for offshore wind turbine research.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Heronemus, W. E. , 1972, “ Pollution-Free Energy From Offshore Winds,” Eighth Annual Conference and Exposition Marine Technology Society, Washington, DC, Sept. 11–13.
Musial, W. D. , and Butterfield, C. P. , 2004, “ Future for Offshore Wind Energy in the United States,” Energy Ocean Conference, Palm Beach, FL, June 28–29, pp. 4–6. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/36313.pdf
Chakrabarti, S. K. , 1994, Offshore Structure Modeling, World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, Chap. 7. [CrossRef]
Jonkman, J. M. , 2007, “ Dynamics Modeling and Loads Analysis of an Offshore Floating Wind Turbine,” National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, Report No. NREL/TP-500-41958. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy08osti/41958.pdf
Jonkman, J. M. , and Sclavounos, P. D. , 2006, “ Development of Fully Coupled Aeroelastic and Hydrodynamic Models for Offshore Wind Turbines,” National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, Technical Report No. NREL/CP-500-39066. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.491.3308&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Browning, J. R. , Jonkman, J. , Robertson, A. , and Goupee, A. J. , 2014, “ Calibration and Validation of a Spar-Type Floating Offshore Wind Turbine Model Using the FAST Dynamic Simulation Tool,” J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 555(1), p. 012015.
Roddier, D. , Cermelli, C. , Aubault, A. , and Weinstein, A. , 2010, “ WindFloat: A Floating Foundation for Offshore Wind Turbines,” J. Renewable Sustainable Energy, 2(3), p. 033104. [CrossRef]
Butterfield, S. , Musial, W. , Jonkman, J. , Sclavounos, P. , and Wayman, L. , 2007, “ Engineering Challenges for Floating Offshore Wind Turbines,” National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, Report No. NREL/CP-500-38776. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/38776.pdf
de Ridder, E. , Otto, W. , Zondervan, G. , Savenije, F. , and Huijs, F. , 2013, “ State of the Art Model Testing Techniques for Floating Wind Turbines,” EWEA Offshore, Frankfurt, Germany, Nov. 19–21. http://www.marin.nl/web/Publications/Publication-items/State-of-the-art-model-testing-techniques-for-floating-wind-turbines.htm
Courbois, A. , Flamand, O. , Toularastel, J.-L. , Ferrant, P. , and Rousset, J.-M. , 2011, “ Applying Relevant Wind Generation Techniques to the Case of Floating Wind Turbines,” Sixth European and African Conference on Wind Engineering (EACWE), Nantes, France, July 7–13, pp. 1–8. http://www.iawe.org/Proceedings/EACWE2013/A.Courbois.pdf
Ohana, J. , Le Boulluec, M. , Peron, E. , Klinghammer, C. , Tancray, A. , and Mansuy, E. , 2014, “ Open Jet Blower Type Wind Generator With Variable Wind Speed Capability for Physical Model Testing of Offshore Structures,” Fifth International Conference on the Application of Physical Modelling to Port and Coastal Protection (Coastlab14), Varna, Bulgaria, Sept. 29–Oct. 2.
Bredmose, H. , Mikkelsen, R. , Hansen, A. M. , Laugesen, R. , Heilskov, N. , Jensen, B. , and Kirkegaard, J. , 2015, “ Experimental Study of the DTU 10 MW Wind Turbine on a TLP Floater in Waves and Wind,” EWEA Offshore Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, Mar. 10 http://orbit.dtu.dk/files/106718982/xperimental_study_of_the_DTU_10_MW_wind_turbine_on_a_TLP_floater_in_waves_presentation.pdf.
Nielsen, F. G. , Hanson, T. D. , and Skaare, B. , 2006, “ Integrated Dynamic Analysis of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines,” ASME Paper No. OMAE2006-92291.
Kimball, R. W. , Goupee, A. J. , Coulling, A. J. , and Dagher, H. J. , 2012, “ Model Test Comparisons of TLP, Spar-Buoy and Semi-Submersible Floating Offshore Wind Turbine Systems,” SNAME Annual Meeting and Expo, Providence, RI, Oct. 24–26, pp. 24–26. http://www.sname.org/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=078baa8f-e19b-414f-a6c6-414f1459eb56
Robertson, A. N. , Jonkman, J. M. , Masciola, M. D. , Molta, P. , Goupee, A. J. , and Coulling, A. J. , 2013, “ Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations Drawn From the DeepCWind Scaled Floating Offshore Wind System Test Campaign,” National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, Report No. NREL/CP-5000-58076. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/58076.pdf
Barj, L. , Stewart, S. , Stewart, G. , Lackner, M. , Jonkman, J. , and Robertson, A. , 2014, “ Wind/Wave Misalignment in the Loads Analysis of a Floating Offshore Wind Turbine,” AIAA Paper No. 2014-0363.
Navqvi, S. K. , 2012, “ Scale Model Experiments on Floating Offshore Wind Turbines,” Ph.D. dissertation, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA. https://web.wpi.edu/Pubs/ETD/Available/etd-052312-133921/unrestricted/knaqvi1.pdf
Bradshaw, P. , and Mehta, R. D. , 1979, “ Design Rules for Small Low Speed Wind Tunnels,” Aeronaut. J. R. Aeronaut. Soc., 83(827), pp. 443–449.
Farell, C. , and Youssef, S. , 1992, “ Experiments on Turbulence Management Using Screens and Honeycombs,” University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, Project Report No. 338. https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/108725/pr338.pdf?sequence=1
Batchelor, G. K. , 1953, The Theory of Homogeneous Turbulence, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 55–75.
Barlow, J. , Rae, W. , and Pope, A. , 1999, Low Speed Wind Tunnel Testing, Wiley, New York, Chap. 2.
McDonalogue, D. J. , and Srivastava, R. S. , 1968, “ Motion of a Fluid in a Curved Tube,” Proc. R. Soc. A, 307(1488), pp. 37–57. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The different sections of the prototype wind-tunnel with recirculation are shown

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Front view of the wind generation system showing the ten fan arrangement and nozzle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

The acoustic and hot wire anemometers arrangement mounted on the traverse is shown

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The ten elevations relative to the nozzle at which measurements were taken are shown

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Flow field at 0.5 m from the nozzle using one screen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Flow field at 0.5 m from the nozzle using two screens

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Flow field at 0.5 m from the nozzle using three screens with a 5 m/s flow at the center point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Flow field at 1.0 m from the nozzle using three screens with a 5 m/s flow at the center point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Flow field at 1.5 m from the nozzle using three screens with a 5 m/s flow at the center point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Flow field at 2.0 m from the nozzle using three screens with a 5 m/s flow at the center point

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Flow field at 0.5 m from the nozzle using three screens with a 4 m/s flow at the center point (no turbine)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Flow field at 1.0 m from the nozzle using three screens with a 4 m/s flow at the center point (no turbine)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Flow field at 1.5 m from the nozzle using three screens with a 4 m/s flow at the center point (no turbine)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Flow field at 2.0 m from the nozzle using three screens with a 4 m/s flow at the center point (no turbine)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Flow directionality and error in flow direction at 0.5 m from the nozzle using one screen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Flow directionality and error in flow direction at 0.5 m from the nozzle using two screens

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Flow directionality and error in flow direction at 0.5 m from the nozzle using three screens at 5 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Flow directionality and error in flow direction at 2.0 m from the nozzle using three screens at 5 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Flow directionality and error in flow direction at 0.5 m from the nozzle using three screens at 4 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Flow directionality and error in flow direction at 2.0 m from the nozzle using three screens at 4 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Wind generation system response to a prescribed wind speed profile with different frequencies (mean flow 3.2 m/s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Wind generation system response to a prescribed wind speed profile with different frequencies (mean flow 4.5 m/s)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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