Free-flow wind speed from a blade-mounted flow sensor

Abstract

Abstract. This paper presents a method for obtaining the free-inflow velocities from a 3-D flow sensor mounted on the blade of a wind turbine.From its position on the rotating blade, e.g. one-third from the tip, a blade-mounted flow sensor (BMFS) is able to provide valuable information about the turbulent sheared inflow in different regions of the rotor. At the rotor, however, the inflow is affected by the wind turbine, and in most cases the wind of interest is the inflow that the wind turbine is exposed to, i.e. the free-inflow velocities.The current method applies a combination of aerodynamic models and procedures to estimate the induced velocities, i.e. the disturbance of the flow field caused by the wind turbine. These velocities are subtracted from the flow velocities measured by the BMFS to obtain the free-inflow velocities. Aeroelastic codes, like HAWC2, typically use a similar approach to calculate the induction, but they use it for the reversed process, i.e. they add the induction to the free inflow to get the flow velocities at the blades, which are required to calculate the resulting aerodynamic forces.The aerodynamic models included in the current method comprise models based on blade element momentum (BEM) for axial and tangential induction, a radial induction model and tip loss correction, and models for skew and dynamic inflow.It is shown that the method is able to calculate the free-inflow velocities with high accuracy when applied to aeroelastic HAWC2 simulations with a stiff structural model while some deviations are seen in simulations with a flexible structure.Furthermore, the method is tested on simulations performed by a flexible structural model coupled with a large-eddy simulation (LES) flow solver. The results of this higher-fidelity verification confirm the HAWC2-based conclusion.

More accurate aeroelastic wind-turbine load simulations using detailed inflow information

“…The parameters can, however, be fitted to spectra representing non-neutral stability classes where slightly different parameters are obtained. The stabilitydependent parameters used for cases 2 and 3 (see Table 3) are extracted from Peña et al (2010), where the turbulence at the current site was investigated. Standard or long-term-average values may be appropriate for L and , but as we want to simulate the current situation, and not a monthly or yearly average, another approach is required for the α 2/3 parameter; this parameter is proportional to the turbulence intensity for fixed L and and, in turn, related to the fatigue equivalent loads.…”

Reply to RC2: 'Review' by Anonymous Referee #2

“…The parameters can, however, be fitted to spectra representing non-neutral stability classes where slightly different parameters are obtained. The stabilitydependent parameters used for cases 2 and 3 (see Table 3) are extracted from Peña et al (2010), where the turbulence at the current site was investigated.…”