Progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field data
<p>Within the framework of the fourth phase of the International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Task 29, a large comparison exercise between measurements and aeroelastic simulations has been carried out featuring three simulation cases in axial, sheared and yawed inflow conditions. Results were obta...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2023-02-01
|
| Series: | Wind Energy Science |
| Online Access: | https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/8/211/2023/wes-8-211-2023.pdf |
| _version_ | 1797902560863977472 |
|---|---|
| author | K. Boorsma G. Schepers H. Aagard Madsen G. Pirrung N. Sørensen G. Bangga M. Imiela C. Grinderslev A. Meyer Forsting W. Z. Shen A. Croce S. Cacciola A. P. Schaffarczyk B. Lobo F. Blondel P. Gilbert R. Boisard L. Höning L. Greco C. Testa E. Branlard J. Jonkman G. Vijayakumar |
| author_facet | K. Boorsma G. Schepers H. Aagard Madsen G. Pirrung N. Sørensen G. Bangga M. Imiela C. Grinderslev A. Meyer Forsting W. Z. Shen A. Croce S. Cacciola A. P. Schaffarczyk B. Lobo F. Blondel P. Gilbert R. Boisard L. Höning L. Greco C. Testa E. Branlard J. Jonkman G. Vijayakumar |
| author_sort | K. Boorsma |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p>Within the framework of the fourth phase of the International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Task 29, a large comparison exercise between measurements and aeroelastic simulations has been carried out featuring three simulation cases in axial, sheared and yawed inflow conditions. Results were obtained from more than 19 simulation tools originating from 12 institutes, ranging in fidelity from blade element momentum (BEM) to computational fluid dynamics (CFDs) and compared to state-of-the-art field measurements from the 2 MW DanAero turbine. More than 15 different variable types ranging from lifting-line variables to blade surface pressures, loads and velocities have been compared for the different conditions, resulting in over 250 comparison plots. The result is a unique insight into the current status and accuracy of rotor aerodynamic modeling.</p>
<p>For axial flow conditions, a good agreement was found between the various code types, where a dedicated grid sensitivity study was necessary for the CFD simulations. However, compared to wind tunnel experiments on rotors
featuring controlled conditions, it remains a challenge to achieve good agreement of absolute levels between simulations and measurements in the field. For sheared inflow conditions, uncertainties due to rotational and unsteady effects on airfoil data result in the CFD predictions standing out above the codes that need input of sectional airfoil data. However, it was demonstrated that using CFD-synthesized airfoil data is an effective means to bypass this shortcoming. For yawed flow conditions, it was observed that modeling of the skewed wake effect is still problematic for BEM codes where CFD and free vortex wake codes inherently model the underlying physics correctly. The next step is a comparison in turbulent inflow conditions, which is featured in IEA Wind Task 47.</p>
<p>Doing this analysis in cooperation under the auspices of the IEA Wind Technology Collaboration Program (TCP) has led to many mutual benefits for the participants. The large size of the consortium brought ample manpower for the analysis where the learning process by combining several complementary experiences and modeling techniques gave valuable insights that could not be found when the analysis is carried out individually.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T09:19:32Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-330b1eb6ed1c40adb4e30f2c40a506ed |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2366-7443 2366-7451 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T09:19:32Z |
| publishDate | 2023-02-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Wind Energy Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-330b1eb6ed1c40adb4e30f2c40a506ed2023-02-20T14:14:15ZengCopernicus PublicationsWind Energy Science2366-74432366-74512023-02-01821123010.5194/wes-8-211-2023Progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field dataK. Boorsma0G. Schepers1H. Aagard Madsen2G. Pirrung3N. Sørensen4G. Bangga5M. Imiela6C. Grinderslev7A. Meyer Forsting8W. Z. Shen9A. Croce10S. Cacciola11A. P. Schaffarczyk12B. Lobo13F. Blondel14P. Gilbert15R. Boisard16L. Höning17L. Greco18C. Testa19E. Branlard20J. Jonkman21G. Vijayakumar22Energy Transition, TNO, Petten, the NetherlandsEnergy Transition, TNO, Petten, the NetherlandsDepartment of Wind and Energy Systems, DTU Wind, Roskilde, DenmarkDepartment of Wind and Energy Systems, DTU Wind, Roskilde, DenmarkDepartment of Wind and Energy Systems, DTU Wind, Roskilde, DenmarkInstitute of Aerodynamics and Gas Dynamics, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, GermanyInstitute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology, DLR, Braunschweig, GermanyDepartment of Wind and Energy Systems, DTU Wind, Roskilde, DenmarkDepartment of Wind and Energy Systems, DTU Wind, Roskilde, DenmarkDepartment of Wind and Energy Systems, DTU Wind, Roskilde, DenmarkWind Energy Lab, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, ItalyWind Energy Lab, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, ItalyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Kiel University of Applied Sciences, Kiel, GermanyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Kiel University of Applied Sciences, Kiel, GermanyFluid Mechanics Department, IFP Energies nouvelles, Rueil-Malmaison, FranceFluid Mechanics Department, IFP Energies nouvelles, Rueil-Malmaison, FranceDepartment of Aerodynamics, Aeroelasticity and Acoustics, ONERA, Paris, FranceAerodynamics Group, Fraunhofer IWES, Bremerhaven, GermanyDepartment of Engineering, ICT and Technology for Energy and Transport, CNR-INM, Rome, ItalyDepartment of Engineering, ICT and Technology for Energy and Transport, CNR-INM, Rome, ItalyNational Wind Technology Center, NREL, Golden, CO, USANational Wind Technology Center, NREL, Golden, CO, USANational Wind Technology Center, NREL, Golden, CO, USA<p>Within the framework of the fourth phase of the International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Task 29, a large comparison exercise between measurements and aeroelastic simulations has been carried out featuring three simulation cases in axial, sheared and yawed inflow conditions. Results were obtained from more than 19 simulation tools originating from 12 institutes, ranging in fidelity from blade element momentum (BEM) to computational fluid dynamics (CFDs) and compared to state-of-the-art field measurements from the 2 MW DanAero turbine. More than 15 different variable types ranging from lifting-line variables to blade surface pressures, loads and velocities have been compared for the different conditions, resulting in over 250 comparison plots. The result is a unique insight into the current status and accuracy of rotor aerodynamic modeling.</p> <p>For axial flow conditions, a good agreement was found between the various code types, where a dedicated grid sensitivity study was necessary for the CFD simulations. However, compared to wind tunnel experiments on rotors featuring controlled conditions, it remains a challenge to achieve good agreement of absolute levels between simulations and measurements in the field. For sheared inflow conditions, uncertainties due to rotational and unsteady effects on airfoil data result in the CFD predictions standing out above the codes that need input of sectional airfoil data. However, it was demonstrated that using CFD-synthesized airfoil data is an effective means to bypass this shortcoming. For yawed flow conditions, it was observed that modeling of the skewed wake effect is still problematic for BEM codes where CFD and free vortex wake codes inherently model the underlying physics correctly. The next step is a comparison in turbulent inflow conditions, which is featured in IEA Wind Task 47.</p> <p>Doing this analysis in cooperation under the auspices of the IEA Wind Technology Collaboration Program (TCP) has led to many mutual benefits for the participants. The large size of the consortium brought ample manpower for the analysis where the learning process by combining several complementary experiences and modeling techniques gave valuable insights that could not be found when the analysis is carried out individually.</p>https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/8/211/2023/wes-8-211-2023.pdf |
| spellingShingle | K. Boorsma G. Schepers H. Aagard Madsen G. Pirrung N. Sørensen G. Bangga M. Imiela C. Grinderslev A. Meyer Forsting W. Z. Shen A. Croce S. Cacciola A. P. Schaffarczyk B. Lobo F. Blondel P. Gilbert R. Boisard L. Höning L. Greco C. Testa E. Branlard J. Jonkman G. Vijayakumar Progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field data Wind Energy Science |
| title | Progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field data |
| title_full | Progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field data |
| title_fullStr | Progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field data |
| title_full_unstemmed | Progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field data |
| title_short | Progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field data |
| title_sort | progress in the validation of rotor aerodynamic codes using field data |
| url | https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/8/211/2023/wes-8-211-2023.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kboorsma progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT gschepers progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT haagardmadsen progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT gpirrung progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT nsørensen progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT gbangga progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT mimiela progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT cgrinderslev progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT ameyerforsting progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT wzshen progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT acroce progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT scacciola progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT apschaffarczyk progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT blobo progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT fblondel progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT pgilbert progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT rboisard progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT lhoning progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT lgreco progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT ctesta progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT ebranlard progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT jjonkman progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata AT gvijayakumar progressinthevalidationofrotoraerodynamiccodesusingfielddata |