2020
DOI: 10.5194/wes-5-721-2020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Is the Blade Element Momentum theory overestimating wind turbine loads? – An aeroelastic comparison between OpenFAST's AeroDyn and QBlade's Lifting-Line Free Vortex Wake method

Abstract: Abstract. Load calculations play a key role in determining the design loads of different wind turbine components. To obtain the aerodynamic loads for these calculations, the industry relies heavily on the Blade Element Momentum (BEM) theory. BEM methods use several engineering correction models to capture the aerodynamic phenomena present in Design Load Cases (DLCs) with turbulent wind. Because of this, BEM methods can overestimate aerodynamic loads under challenging conditions when compared to higher-order ae… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
17
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
4
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Vortex methods can model the wake with far fewer assumptions and engineering corrections compared to BEM methods. Especially when the wind turbine is subjected to unsteady inflow or varying blade loads, the LLFVW method increases the accuracy compared to BEM methods (Perez-Becker et al, 2020). To model the dynamic stall of the blade elements, QBlade uses the ATE-Flap unsteady aerodynamic model (Bergami and Gaunaa, 2012), modified so that it excludes contribution of the wake in the attached flow region (Wendler et al, 2016).…”
Section: Qbladementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Vortex methods can model the wake with far fewer assumptions and engineering corrections compared to BEM methods. Especially when the wind turbine is subjected to unsteady inflow or varying blade loads, the LLFVW method increases the accuracy compared to BEM methods (Perez-Becker et al, 2020). To model the dynamic stall of the blade elements, QBlade uses the ATE-Flap unsteady aerodynamic model (Bergami and Gaunaa, 2012), modified so that it excludes contribution of the wake in the attached flow region (Wendler et al, 2016).…”
Section: Qbladementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A more detailed comparison between QBlade and (Open)FAST can be found in Perez-Becker et al (2020).…”
Section: Qbladementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Recently Perez-Becker et al (2020) and Boorsma et al (2020) compared aeroelastic simulations based on Blade Element Momentum (BEM) theory and Free Vortex Wake Methods (FVWM). In addition to the need of engineering models for dynamic inflow effects, BEM is based on the assumption of axial and uniform inflow.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CFD applications with arbitrary motions are still challenging and not readily available. Vorticity-based methods have long been considered as the intermediate solution between the computationally intensive CFD methods and the engineering models such as BEM (Perez-Becker et al, 2020;Boorsma et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%