38 Meter Wind Turbine Blade Design

Internship Report
Mickal Edon

Supervisor, French teacher:

Main supervisor:
Project supervisor:
Project co-worker:
Project co-worker:

Florence Tamet
Jane Kruse
Tupac Daz Lopez
Joan Pros Garcia
Tong Wu

June 2007

Acknowledgements
Firstly, I would like to thank the Nordic Folkecenter for Renewable Energy for their
hospitality and for having welcomed me in Ydby (North Denmark). I am especially grateful
to all the working staff that helped in my project. Without their help, it would not have been
possible.
I am deeply indebted to my supervisors, Jane Kruse and Tupac Daz Lopez for their
friendship and help throughout the project. Your organization, technical advice, and access to
outside resources have been a tremendous gift and I for one wont soon forget.
I would also like to extend a special thank you to Joan Pros Garcia and Tong Wu, my
co-workers on this project for their motivation and taste for hard work. I am particularly
thankful to the Ingenirhjskolen i rhus and its teachers for having welcomed and trained
me in rhus (West Denmark).
I am truly grateful to the Region Rhne-Alpes for according me the grant explora sup
2006-2007
Last but not least, I would like to thank the IUT of Annecy-le-Vieux and the
Mesures Physiques department teachers for the broad teaching I was given and for the
enjoyment and interest they encouraged.

Table of contents
General Introduction...... 4
1. Nordisk Folkecenter for Renewable Energy description...... 4
2. Internship Description... 4
3. Project Description.... 5
II Blade characterization.... 6

III Introduction to wind turbine and wind classes.. 7

1. Vertical axis turbines.... 7
2. Horizontal axis turbines.... 7
3. Wind speed classes... 8
IV Dimensions..... 10
1. Profile type........
2. Chord lengths........
3. Transition parts.....
4. Angle of attack......
5. Twisting angles.....
6. Tip speed ratio .........

10
11
13
13
14
16

V Pitch control and power curves..... 17

1. Why pitching?....... 17
2. Pitch control results....... 19
VI Blade materials...... 22
1. Materials .. 22
2. Inner support and shell thickness . 23
VII Loads calculations........ 24

VIII Wind Rotor Design system 2.0...... 26

1. Programme outline.... 26
2. Instructions.... 28
IX Future development....... 31
X Conclusion....
XI Glossary......
XII References.....
XIII Appendix.....

33
35
37
38

-3-

Introduction
1. Nordisk Folkecenter for Renewable Energy description

The Nordic Folkecenter for Renewable Energy (http://www.folkecenter.net/gb/) is a

non-profit, independent, organization that provides research, development of technology,
training and information for the manufacture, industrial innovation and implementation of
renewable energy technologies and energy savings in Denmark and throughout the world.
Folkecenter intends to achieve measurable increases in the utilization of renewable energy
technologies and thereby significant reductions in environmental pollution associated with
energy use in Denmark and elsewhere. It obtains support from local authorities, national and
international agencies, and the industry. The ultimate long term purpose is a complete
replacement of fossil fuels and atomic power with renewable energies.

Folkecenter works on four major fronts:

The research/development and the implementation of renewable energy systems such
as small scale wind turbine power innovation and design, advanced generator
construction, farm biogas design and demonstration, CO2 neutral transportation with
hydrogen and plant oil, solar architecture and integration of solar cells in buildings,
wave energy testing.
Consultation to manufacturers, local groups, and relevant initiators within renewable
energy.
Disseminating information on renewable energy in Denmark and elsewhere in the
world, to trainees, concerned citizen groups, and political decision makers focusing on
decentralized solutions.
The last front is the Village for Green Research, where Folkecenter is situated to
demonstrate practical examples of integration of several energy solutions; solar
housing, water recycling systems etc. as experimental and functional examples of a
future ecological society.

2. Internship Description
My internship wasnt only about wind turbine blade designing. Because the
Folkecenter has resources involving many different kinds of energy I learned a bit of
everything and had to get to know the centre and all the different building in the park as well as
the different test sites. Of course, this was really interesting to me and I had the opportunity to
learn a lot, especially about solar cells, off-grid houses (autonomous houses), heating system,
biogas, plant oil, and so on. But I devoted most of my time to wind energy and the project that
was defined for me at the beginning of April.
I had multiple opportunities to visit the large near shore wind turbine that FC owns
which has an annual production of over 1.4 million KWh. After climbing to the top of the 40
meter tower I viewed the nacelle and observed its contents and the inter-working of the
generator, gearbox, shaft, yawing system and their associated systems. In addition to the large
wind turbine systems had some practical work in the Folkecenter small to medium wind

-4-

turbine test site. The Folkecenter possesses several different small to medium wind turbines at
their test site and it was possible for me to make different experiments (power calculation,
generator replacement work) on these turbines.
The programme I used for designing the blade was made at the Folkecenter circa 1992.
This programme is written in turbo Pascal and is working only with the first version of DOS so
it is only working on only one of the computers at the centre. This programme is called Wind
Rotor Design System (WRD) and a good part of the report is based on its output. I also
designed an other blade (29.140 m) on this programme, as training for the 38 meter blade and
did the power calculations for this blade. Because this report is limited in term of page number
it will only be about the 38 meter wind rotor blade design project. I presented the WRD
programme to new trainees several times during my stay at the Folkecenter.
3. Project Description
I was given the project of designing a 38 meter blade for a 1.5 MW wind turbine at the
very beginning of my internship. I received documentation on aerodynamics, wind turbines,
wind turbine design, and the computer where Wind Rotor Design system is installed. I was
given the manual for the programme and I started studying about aerodynamics in general, in
English. Then my supervisor, a wind expert from Cuba, put me in touch with two students
from the Ingenirhjskolen i rhus, an engineering school in the city of rhus. These two
Erasmus students started the project at the same time as me and we then started to work
together. They came to Ydby and I went to rhus for some weeks so we could realise and end
this project together. We did most of the research in rhus, and the blade design on Wind
Rotor Design System was done at Folkecenter.
The first two weeks I familiarized myself on the WRD programme, while my coworkers Joan and Tong worked on the profile research. What we call profile is the shape of the
section, all along the blade. They studied different profiles and chose the best one, the FX66S196-V1. They did four different modifications on this profile to study their influences.
Those modifications were shape modification: more or less thick on different point of the
airfoil. Then, they built those airfoils in wood and, thanks to a wind tunnel, could appreciate
the result on the lift and drag coefficient. Because they didnt get good results their conclusion
was that the original airfoil is still the best, they could not improve it. So we decided to use the
Airfoil FX66-S196-V1 unmodified for our blade. More explanations about this airfoil will be
given further in the report. Because I did not take part of those experimentations the results of
the tests are not in this report. The characteristics of the profile we used are given, as they can
be found on the Ris National laboratory website. This report is personal but nevertheless, a
presentation of our work. It is built in the order we did the blade design and investigations.
The different chapters are linked together and for a quicker and better understanding this report
includes a glossary at the end, page 35 and 36. The next chapter will present the methods steps
we followed to design our blade.

-5-

II Blade characterization
The purpose of this project is to design a blade for a big wind turbine, taking into
consideration the aerodynamic and loads calculations, brake system, and dimension details.
The blade description is what we want. The Method steps, described bellow shows in what
order we designed our blade.
Blade description:
-

38 meters long.
Wind Turbine Class III.
Pitch controlled system
1800kW of nominal power (mechanical power).

Method steps:
1. Profile research: search information about blade profiles, do wind tunnel experiments
and choose the best. This report only includes the presentation of the profile we used.
2. Calculate the blade dimensions and angles: calculate the chord lengths, twisting
angles.
3. Power calculations: using a pitch controlled system, make the power calculations,
keeping a nominal power of 1800kW.
4. Choose the blade material: research about blade materials, find the properties, make
a comparison and choose the best blade material. calculate the material layer thickness
5. Loads calculations: calculate the forces and moments with high wind speeds to make
sure that the wind turbine will work and survive.

-6-

III Introduction to wind turbine and wind classes

A wind turbine is a generic term for machines with rotating blades that convert the
kinetic energy of wind into useful power. The basic idea has been around for a long time but
modern wind turbines are a far cry from the original designs. Towards the end of the 20th
century, wind turbine designs followed three basics philosophies on supporting loads:
-

Withstanding loads.
Shedding or avoiding loads.
Managing loads mechanically, electrically, or both.

Modern turbines evolved from the early designs and are typically classified as two or
three blade rotors. Most of the turbines used today have three blades. The rotational speed is
also a very important design factor. Turbines operating at a constant rotor speed have been
fomenting up to now, but turbines with variable rotational speed are becoming increasingly
more common with the desire to optimize the energy captured, to lower stress, and to obtain
better power quality. There are many different wind turbine classes, but two stand out as the
best known: the vertical axis turbine, and the horizontal axis turbine.
1. Vertical axis turbines
Vertical axis turbines with C shaped blades were
turbines commonly used in the past century. They work like
water wheels which allow the water to arrive tangentially to
the wheel at a right angle to the rotational axis. These kind
of wind turbines are designed to act towards the air.
Commonly vertical axis turbines are mounted on the ground.
This also makes them easily accessible and no yaw
mechanism is needed. However, the efficiency is much
lower, it needs total dismantling just to repair the main
bearing and the rotor is placed very close to the ground where
there is less wind power.
Figure 1: Vertical axis wind turbine

2. Horizontal axis turbines

Horizontal axis wind turbines are the most common
type of wind turbine in use today. There are a lot of different
classes with different numbers of blades, directions to the
wind, and brake systems among other things.
The advantage of a one or two blades rotor is the
possible savings in production costs and weight. However, the
use of fewer blades requires a higher rotational speed or a
larger chord length to yield the same energy output. A three
blade design also decreases fluctuating loads from inertia
variation.
Figure 2: Horizontal axis wind turbines

-7-

3. Wind speed classes

One of the most important considerations in wind turbine design is the environment
where it will be installed. Wind turbines can work in almost all the places, but the design
dimensions shall be different depending on the design place. To classify those places, the
IEC standards (International Electrotechnical Commission) provide four groups. These
classifications are dependent on wind velocity and the intensity of the turbulence.
Wind turbine
class
Vref
(m/s)
A
Iref
B
Iref
C
Iref

I
50

II
42,5
0,16
0,14
0,12

III
37,5

S
-

Table1: wind turbine classes

Vref is the reference wind speed average over 10 min.
A designates the category for higher turbulence characteristics.
B designates the category for medium turbulence characteristics.
C designates the category for lower turbulence characteristics.
Iref is the expected value of the turbulence intensity at 15 m/s.

For the fourth wind turbine class, the class S, the manufacturer shall describe the
models used and provide values of design parameters in the design documentation (two
examples of use are off-shore wind turbine and places with hurricanes).
In accordance with the IEC standards, the average wind speed shall be chosen as
Vave=0,2Vref
The probability distribution of the wind speed over a time of 10 minutes is estimated
using a Rayleigh distribution given by this expression:
PR (Vhub ) = 1 e (Vhub / 2Vave )

The class we use for our 38 meter blade is class III. The wind turbine will be located
in a place that doesnt have very strong winds. The wind speed average will be 7.5 m.s-1. We
will have a cut-in between 2 and 3 m.s-1 and a Cut-out between 20 and 21 m.s-1. For a class I
we have a cut-in between 3 and 4 m.s-1 and a Cut-out between 25 and 26 m.s-1

-8-

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 3: probability of win speeds in class I (blue line) and class III (red line), Mathcad calculations
Figure 4: Energy output depending on wind speeds for class I (blue line) and class III (red line), Mathcad calculations

On Figure 3 we can see that the maximum wind speed probability for a class III is
between 3 and 7 m.s-1. This probability is equal to 0.114. A class I has this probability equal
to 0.086 for wind speeds between 5 and 10 m.s-1. This means that a wind turbine working in
a class III place is producing power, for a wind speed between 3 and 7 m.s-1, 6446 hours per
year. For a class I and between 5 and 10 m.s-1 the result is 5394 hours. We define the
nominal wind speed as the one from which we get the most of its energy. It equals to 10 m.s-1
for a class III and 13 m.s-1 for a class I. We can notice that the curve is sharper for class III
than for class I and this is this is the design condition for our blade. It will be designed for a
smaller range of wind speed and we will be consequently more efficient on that range.
The figure 4 shows us how the power is distributed, per wind speed. We can see that,
for the nominal wind speed of the class I and class II we get more energy from the wind for a
class I than for a class III. The explanation is that the energy we can extract from the wind
depends on the cubic of its speed.
Taking into account that the wind speed is lower in a class III, we need a bigger blade
than class I or class II to achieve the same power. In fact, the figure 4 is helping us a lot for
designing our blade. We want that our blade reaches its nominal power at the nominal wind
speed which is 10 m.s-1. This is how my supervisor decided to make a 38 meter blade. We
want to have 1800 kW of power, with an efficiency of 0.5 (this value is from average). The
power formula is the following one:
P=0.5*1.24*0.5*(*D2/4)*Vnom3
1.24 is the air density, in kg.m-3 and D is the rotor diameter (38*2 + 3 meters of hub).
Vnom is the nominal wind speed.
The loads and momentums may be the same for a class I, II or III. The class III wind
turbines will start to produce power at lower wind speeds than classes I or II .Even if the
probability of getting wind speeds between 3 and 7 m.s-1 is larger than other speeds we dont
use a class III wind turbine because it is an advantage. We use the class III wind turbine
because its a need. It can be used more widely but it has the main disadvantage of being less
cost effective that the class I ones.

-9-

IV Dimensions
1. Profile type
Two very important elements of a successful wind turbine are the blade and the power
control system. In designing the blade, the most essential thing is to choose a good profile.
A blade profile is typically similar to the wing of an aircraft. In fact, we used to
choose a classical aircraft wing profile as a cross section in the past. We used them because
there were not any other profiles available and the shape has a big similarity. In more recent
times and thanks to new researches, engineers have begun to design profiles specific to wind
turbines.

photo 1: blade example (2MW offshore wind turbine, in Copenhagen)

It is important to say here that a wind turbine blade use lift at all moment. The lift
makes the rotor turn, even for low wind speed. If the wind is pushing the blade it means the
blade turns because of drag. We can compare it to a sail boat. If the wind is pushing the boat
from the rear, the boat will move thanks to the drag. If the boat moves perpendicularly to the
wind it will use lift and will be ten times faster than the wind speed. That is why a blade is
designed in order to use only the lift as a turning force.
When we select a profile we must check several important criteria: it should have a
high coefficient of lift while maintaining a low coefficient of drag. Consequently the CL/CD
coefficient should have a high value. Before designing the blade, a number of compromises
including good lift and stall characteristics are also taken into consideration. The blades must
be easy to produce and resistant to the weather. The profile must be still efficient for the
blade stability according to dust and dirt accretion
Based on the above criteria, we picked the FX66-S196-V1 design in the book wind
turbine airfoil catalogue, from Ris National Laboratory (appendix page 39).

Figure 5: FX66-S196-V1, WRD design

- 10 -

This profile was tested into a wind tunnel with a wooden model. The results were put
into an Excel programme and the different coefficients were checked (appendix page 42).
This programme was made by Professor Sren, from the Ingenirhjskolen i rhus. Those
tests produced satisfactory results and we decided to go with the FX66-S196-V1 design.
The FX66 shape is neither too thick nor too thin at the beginning or end of the blade.
From the book wind turbine airfoil catalogue, it is also said that the FX66 is one of the best
airfoil profiles available.
FX66-S196-V1
1.6

60
50

1.2
1.0
C_L

0.8

C_D

C_l/C_d

C_L and C_D [-]

1.4

40
30

0.6

20

0.4

10

0.2

C_l/C_d

0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Alfa []

Graph 1: CL and CD vs. angle of attack

10

20

30

40

alfa

Graph 2: CL/CD vs. angle of attack

CL can start from almost 0.6 and reach the peak at 1.413 when the alpha is 9 degree.
The ratio value of CL/CD is also very high, up to 49 when alpha equals to 6.
Even if the FX66-S196-V1 profile meets all the criteria above, it does have one big
disadvantage; it doesnt have a shape family. Usually, blade manufacturers use several
different profiles throughout the blade. They tend to be bigger near the root, flatter near the
tip, and derive from the same profile family. In this case the profile has a thickness of 19,6 %
of the chord, all along the blade. Engineers always choose one or more good profile family to
apply to the whole blade. It is better to do so because on a blade the speed increases with the
radius and not all the profiles have the best efficiency at the same speed (or angle of attack).
We want to use only one family so we will use the FX66-S196-V1 profile all along the blade.
2. Chord lengths
When the wind passes through the rotor plane and makes contact with the moving
rotor, it provides the lift force on the blade. This force can be found using the equations
below:
1
CL c W 2
2
The drag is force:
1
FD = C D c W 2
2
Where,
C L is the lift coefficient
C D is the drag coefficient
is the density of the air
c is the chord length
FL =

Figure 6: lift & drag forces

- 11 -

W is the relative wind speed (Vrel)

If the chord length increases, the lift force also increases. We are not interested in the
increase of the drag coefficient because its applying bending moment at the blade.
As we know, the force on the blade is related to the wind speed and the swept area (of
the rotor). The forces within a blade are increasing with the radius and the loads in the root
are higher than the loads on the tip. This is why the chord length must change from the root
to the tip.
One of the best ways to design the dimensions for a blade is to use an element method.
Depending on the radius we can design different chord lengths in different sections,
specifically bigger at the root and smaller at the tip.
We calculated all the chord lengths and twist angle for a given radius with the Excel
programme. It calculated the chord lengths for 9 sections, from the very root to the very tip of
the blade. Some of the elements had chord dimensions larger than 4 meters. That seemed too
big for a 38 meter blade, so we applied a reduction of 20 % at all the chord lengths. Professor
Sren agreed that we make this correction because his programme is only giving theoretical
data and, in practical, if the root is too wide it makes the blade a lot heavier but does not
increase the efficiency so much.
The Excel programme only gave us an estimation of the twist angle and the chord
lengths for 9 elements (9 sections). After the reduction the maximum chord equals 3.92
meters, at a distance of 4.75 meters from the root. At the tip this distance is 0.85 (See all
chord lengths in appendix, page 41). For a 38 meter blade, 9 elements are very few. WRD 2.0
gives us the opportunity to add as many elements as we want. We input the chord lengths and
twist angle from the Excel file and then the WRD 2.0 interpolated the data to create 40
elements.

Figure 7: twist angle and chord ratio all along the blade

Figure 7 clearly shows the chord length all along the blade as well as the twist angle.
The twist angle will be described further in this chapter. We can notice that the decreasing of
chord length is not linear with the increasing of the radius. We could compare by
proportionality those data to the 29 meter blade I had previously designed from confidential
data of a real blade. The chords for our blade looked good and it mainly reassured us about
our reduction coefficient of 20%.

- 12 -

3. Transition parts
The transition part on our blade is the section between the circle at the root and the
first shape of our FX66-S196-V1 airfoil. The root of the blade cannot have the shape of an
airfoil and must have, for practical and technical reasons the shape of a circle. There will be
too much stress on the root if the connection to the hub was an airfoil shape. The circle shape
is also more practical for the pitching system.
We measured this transition region, on an existing 20 meters blade at Folkecenter. Its
length, from the base of the cylinder to the first profile section is about 3 meters. The
transition part will not produce any power for the wind turbine, so we want it to be as short as
possible. We decided that 5m for this transition section would be reasonable. In the Excel
programme, we calculated 4.75m, as the transition section length.

4. Angle of attack
The angle of attack, or angle between the chord line and the relative velocity, is calculated by
this expression:
= ( + P )
Where,
is the flow angle
is the twist of the blade
P is the pitch angle

Figure 8: Flow around section of a wind turbine blade

The angle of attack for a wind turbine may be determined by the coefficient of lift and
drag. The design angle should be the angle where the lift is the biggest, and the drag is the
smallest.

C_lift

C_drag

0.500

0.009

120,00000

0.942

0.010

100,00000

1.160

0.012

80,00000

1.374

0.013

10

1.518

0.018

12

1.370

0.040

14

1.225

0.065

16

1.220

0.084

18

1.233

0.105

C_l / C_d

Best angle of attack

60,00000
40,00000
20,00000
0,00000
0

10
alpha

15

20

Figure 9: CL/CD vs. angle of attack

Table2: Lift and Drag coefficient, fonction of

- 13 -

Based on this data, we determined the best angle of attack for an FX66-S196-V1 is 9
degrees.

5. Twisting angles
There are some important angles in blade design.

Idem as figure 8

1. The angle of attack is the angle between the profile's chord line and the direction of the
airflow wind.
2. The flow angle is the angle between the relative velocity and the rotor plane.
3. The pitch angle p is the angle between the tip chord and the rotor plane.
4. The twisting angle , which is the angle measured relative to the tip chord. We can
calculate this value using the expression = + +p.
A rotor blade will stop providing enough lift once the wind hits the blade at a steeper
angle of attack. The rotor blades must therefore be twisted to achieve an optimal angle of
attack throughout the length of the blade.
Assume that the tip pitch angle p is zero. will equal + . The angle between the
profiles chord line and the rotor plane should be the twisting angle .
Considering W, the induced velocity constant we can easily see from Figure 8 that if
we grow the rotational speed, r it will reduce the flow angle consequently the blade needs
to be twisted to keep the same angle of attack . This angle is equal to 9 degrees, from the
previous chapter. The twisted angles are not linear all along the blade (twist angle versus the
blade length on figure 7, page 12.). The WRD makes the twisting linear all along the blade
but we kept the data from the Excel programme.
For our design, the blade starts its FX66-S196-V1 profile at around 4.75 meters.
Although the twisting begins after the cylinder part, during the transition part, we calculated
the twisting angle from 4.75 meter as 25.3. We then got the values for at least 9 parts with
the Excel programme (see all twisting angles in appendix, page 41). At the tip there is no
twist. We have set the twisting centre at 50% on the chord. The twisting centre is closer to
60 to 70 % on a real blade but we didnt find any data about it but it makes no big difference.
We put these values into WRD, exploded them into 40 sections, and received the following
figures:

- 14 -

Figure 10: rotor view 1, WRD print screen

Figure 11: rotor view 2, WRD print screen

- 15 -

6. Tip speed ratio

The tip speed ratio is the ratio of the speed of the blades tip, over the wind speed.
After choosing a satisfying profile, we had to design the blade with this profile. We took
everything including the tip speed ratio, transition part length, angle of attack, chord lengths,
twisting angles, shell thickness, and material into account .
For the tip speed ratio, we used the formula:

X =

VTIP R
=
V0
V0

We went through several industry wind turbine papers and using WRD tested each
using a similar blade. We assumed that our blade would be operated at rotational speed of
22.5 rpm with a nominal wind speed of 11m/s. (in the following pages, we will prove that
those assumptions are accurate. See further details in Wind speed classes and Pitch
control parts). If we implement our assumption in this formula, R becomes 38 meters, and
we can get the tip speed ratio
X=8
This ratio should not exceed 10, if we take in account noise consideration.

- 16 -

V Pitch control and power curves

1. Why pitching?
The following Figure 12 perfectly explains the need to change the angle of attack of
the whole blade when the speed of the wind changes.

Figure 12: velocity triangles for a section in a blade with constant pitch and constant
rotational speed for two different wind speeds

We can note on those drawings that the angle of attack of our blade is not the same if
the wind speed, V0 changes. Vrel is the relative velocity. Consequently we need to pitch our
blade to keep the desired angle of attack (9, from the previous chapter).
Actually, the pitch of the blade is not changing with the speed of the wind, the pitch is
changing with the output power of the generator. In order to avoid damage from the strong
winds, every wind turbine has a power control system. As it controls the wind turbine output
it produces stable power after the nominal wind speed is reached. There are several different
ways to control the power. Some techniques include pitch control, active stall control,
passive stall control and yaw control. We will discuss these different methods in this section.
Our blade only uses pitch control. The other methods for controlling the power are also
quickly explained because they help to understand why we pitch the blade for controlling the
output power.
a. Pitch control:
If a wind turbine is pitch controlled, the turbines electronic controller will check the
output power several times per second. When the power becomes too high, the controller will
send an order to pitch the blade slightly into the wind until the output power reduces to an
acceptable value. As we just saw, this will reduce the angle of attack of our blade. Whenever
the wind goes down again, the blade will turn back to its original position to produce
maximum power. Because the blade is twisted we need to put a reference for the zero of the
pitching system. A pitching angle of zero degrees corresponds to an angle of zero degrees at
the tip. Before reaching the nominal wind speed the blade is pitched in order to get the
maximum power (or efficiency). Once the nominal wind speed has been reached the blade is
pitched in order to keep the maximum power until the Cut-out.
A turbine with a pitch controller requires smart engineering to make sure that the rotor
blades pitch the exact amount. This means that the controller should be sensitive to wind
changes. On a pitch controlled wind turbine, in order to keep the rotor blades at the optimum

- 17 -

angle and producing output no more than rated power through all wind speeds, the computer
will generally pitch the blades a few degrees every time the wind changes. The disadvantage
is that the time scales for the fluctuations are so small compared to the time it takes to
physically pitch the blades. That is why the pitch controlled system must be accompanied
with a variable speed asynchronous generator. After reaching the nominal wind speed the
rotor is supposed to keep a constant rpm but it will in fact accelerate in the case of a gust. The
speed variation can be up to 35%. The variable speed reduces the fatigue loads and improves
the power quality. The system needs converters to keep the same output frequency.
Consequently the extra cost of the control system and the necessary converters has to be
considerated.
b. Active stall control:
There is another power control system called an active stall control. When the wind
turbine reaches its rated power it will control the turbine in a very different manner than the
pitch control does. If the generator is about to be overloaded, the controller will pitch its
blades in the opposite direction than a pitch controlled machine would. It will increase the
angle of attack of the rotor blades in order to make the blades go into a deeper stall, not using
the excess energy in the wind.
The advantage of active stall is that the output power of the wind turbine can be
controlled more accurately than a pitch control. It can also run in very high wind situations.
The disadvantage is that a turbine using active stall control will waste more power and
will be subjected to larger loads.
c. Passive stall control:
Passive stall controlled wind turbines have a fixed angle on the rotor blades, a constant
rotational speed and a specific profile. When the wind speed is too high, the power is
controlled through the blades profile and aerodynamic design.
One of the advantages of stall control is that it avoids moving parts in the rotor itself.
The disadvantage is that passive stall control requires a very complex aerodynamic
design and that the blades have to support high loads. There are additional design related
challenges in the structural dynamics of the whole wind turbine. For example it requires
engineers to choose an outstanding performing profile and pay close attention to the blade and
wind turbine vibration. If the rotor needs to be stopped because the wind is too high, the
blade has an aerodynamic brake called tip break. It is in fact a flap that will be deployed at
the tip (as seen on following Photo 2) when the centrifugal force is too important. The disc
brake, mounted on the shaft is only used when the rotor is stopped, it cannot stop a rotor that
is over speeding.

- 18 -

Photo 2: deployed tip break, Nordic Folkecenters

wind turbine, in Hanstholm.

d. Yaw control:
There is another possible control that can be added to a wind turbine. This system will
yaw the rotor partly out of the wind so it will also decrease the output power and forces on the
system. Yawing the rotor will reduce its swept area. Yaw control is especially suitable for
small wind turbines (1 kW or less), as it subjects the rotor to cyclically varying stress which
may ultimately damage the entire structure. This kind of control is called furling.

2. Pitch control results

Following Folkecenters requirements, our 38 meter blade will operate with pitch
control and the wind turbine will have a 1.5 MW output. In our design we have to take into
account an efficiency of 80%. It means that our blade must have a nominal output power of
1800 kW, if we want the generator to have an output of 1500 kW. This efficiency coefficient
comes from the fact that the gearbox has an efficiency of 0.9 and the generator has an
efficiency of 0.9 also. Consequently we will control the wind turbine to produce an output
power of 1.8 MW. From the wind class III and the wind characteristics, we determined the
cut-in wind speed to be 2 m.s-1, and a cut-out wind speed of 25m.s-1. In this range we can
take advantage of almost all the power we can harvest.
As a first experience we wanted to see how our blade would behave if we try to get the
maximum power from the cut-in to the cut-out wind speed. We also wanted to know the
nominal wind speed of our blade. The nominal wind speed is the speed of the wind when the
nominal power of the blade is reached. We expected to have a large output power. But we
dont want the maximum power of the blade and this experience will demonstrate the need for
a pitch control and a constant rpm. As explained in the chapter dealing with future
development we didnt take into consideration the gusts so we are only speaking about pitch
control. We dont need to use variable speed because our wind is constant, for each wind
speed.
As a second experience we want to use our blade as a stall controlled one. We know
that keeping the rpm constant will prevent the power from increasing too strongly, and
probably will reach steadily at wind speed around 25 m.s-1. As it is a stall controlled blade
there will be no pitch. In this case we only keep the rpm constant once we have reached the
nominal wind speed. The rpm is held constant, not by use of the mechanical breaks but by
using the generator itself. The generator in this kind of wind turbine is asynchronous and the
rpm can be changed by changing the frequency. For example an asynchronous generator of 6

- 19 -

poles has a rpm of 1000 with 50 Hz and 1200 with 60 Hz output. The following figure
presents the two curves of our experiments.

Figure 13: Power curves with passive stall control (in pink)
and free system (in blue), from WRD data

For this first experience WRD calculated a maximum power output of 1509 kW at 10
m.s-1 and a rotational speed of 22.5 rpm. When the wind speed is increased to 11 m.s-1, the
maximum power goes to 2009 kW with a rotational speed of 24.7 rpm. Since we chose a
Wind Class III turbine, the nominal wind speed should be 10 m.s-1. We calculated the
nominal wind speed of our blade to be 10.75 m.s-1. At this speed the power output is 1861
kW and the rotational speed reaches 22.5 rpm. When the wind speed is 20 m.s-1, the output
power can reach up to 12,047 kW with the rotational speed as high as 45 rpm. This high
rotational velocity would burn the wind turbine up.
If we use our blade as a stall regulated one we can notice on the graph that the output
power at wind speed of 20 m.s-1 will still reach more than 5500 kW. This power is still too
high and this kind of control will not avoid the damage on the wind turbine, it will ruin it. By
testing these two situations we were able to verify the important role the pitch control plays in
power control and blade protection.
The next thing to calculate is the output power, using the pitch control system. Now
we want to keep it equal to 1800 kW, after reaching 11m.s-1, the nominal wind speed. With
each wind speed, we tested multiple pitch angles in the WRD programme. WRD would then
display the output powers for each pitch. This allowed us to determine the most efficient
pitch angle at each wind speed. After running this test multiple times, we verified that the
control could maintain an output power of around 1800 kW successfully. At the highest wind
speed tested, 25m.s-1, we set the pitch angle to 24.4 degrees. For further explanations about
the way we worked on the WRD programme, see the WRD chapter, page 26. The next figure
shows us the output power curve, from 2 m.s-1 to 25 m.s-1.

- 20 -

Figure 14: Power curve with pitch control, from WRD data

We can see that it is possible the keep the output power constant to the wanted value
after the nominal wind speed is reached. We can see that the pitching control system allows
us to keep the curve flat so the wind turbine is constantly producing 1500 kW of power after
the nominal power has been reached. We compared the data we got from the programme to
existing blades. We obtained some confidential data from LM Glasfiber (worlds leading
manufacturer of wind turbine blades) and their results were similar to ours. We also
compared our results with a 1.8 MW wind turbine. This wind turbine is from Vestas (Vestas
is the world leading and Danish company for wind turbine). The wind turbine we used for
comparison is the V90-1.8 MW. We were given its booklet and could make comparison with
the electrical power curve, the power curves had the same shape. The electrical power curves
differ from one generator to another. For example, a generator of 2 MW could be mounted on
this Vestas wind turbine but most of the time blades and generators go together, they should
be designed for the same wanted power. The data for figure 13 and 14 are given in appendix,
page 44 and 45.
Power Coefficient
0,6
0,5

Cp

0,4
0,3

Power Coefficient

0,2
0,1
0
0

10

20

30

Wind speed in m/s

Figure 15: Power coefficient of our blade

The power coefficient tells us how efficiently a turbine converts the energy in the wind
to electricity. The average efficiency of this coefficient is somewhat above 20%. It may
seem little but we have to keep in mind that our fuel (the wind) is free so there is not really
any need to save it. The optimal turbine is therefore not necessarily the turbine with the
highest energy output per year. When we did the power calculations on WRD, the blade was
a wooden blade but it does not really matter because in this part of the experiment we are only
interested in the aerodynamics point of view.

- 21 -

VI Blade materials
1. Materials
The blade endures many loads during its life. A list of those loads is given in the next
chapter. The two main loads are gravity and centrifugal forces. The rotating mass load is a
very important factor to take into consideration when designing a blade. The inertia depends
on the mass thus we want a light blade. Therefore the choice of material is very important.
The blades must be lightweight but strong enough to resist the different loads. This section
will explain why we chose the carbon fibre.
We have the choice between different material for our blade, fibre glass, Fibre
Reinforced Polyester (FRP), epoxy and carbon fibre. A rotor blade can be made from
different materials. The most commonly used materials are fibre glass and FRP (used to
manufacture both, internal and external parts of the blade). Each one of these materials has
different characteristics, they have two different chemical compositions and mechanical
properties. Carbon fibre is the strongest, and has the best fatigue strength (the fatigue strength
is the stress level that a material can endure for N cycles. For a wind turbine blade it is about
108). The prices of these two kinds of fibres may vary depending on the manufacturer.
Typically the carbon fibre is more expensive than the glass fibre.
After much discussion and calculations, we realised that a fibre glass blade needed
more thickness to reach the fatigue limits of the carbon fibre ones. This meant that we need
more material to build the same blade; this would make the blade heavier.
In the end we decided to design a carbon fibre reinforced epoxy blade with these
properties:
Material
Density (g/cm^3)
Tensile modullus or
Youngs modulus(Gpa)
Tensile strength (Mpa)
Fatigue strength (Mpa)

Carbon Fiber
1,76

Fiber glass
2

Steel
7,85

235

20

210

3920
-----

----300

1860
1200

Table3: Blade materials comparison.

Because we could not find the fatigue strength of the carbon fibre, we used the data for
steel. Professor Sren told us that the carbon fibre has a better fatigue strength than the steel
and because we obtained very good results it was a good solution. The data of the carbon
fibre are given in appendix, page 45.

- 22 -

2. Inner support and shell thickness

To withstand the loads and stresses, the blade needs beams and an appropriate shell
thickness. The stresses in a blade are bigger in the middle and lower in the tip and the root
(see the loads calculation page 25). Consequently, the material in the middle part must be
thicker than the other parts of the blade. We do not want to make the blade overly thick at the
root also in order to save the expensive carbon fibre. We can make the blade thinner at the tip
because the bending moment is very low. The figure 16 shows the thickness dimensions and
the figure 17 shows the characteristics of a typical blade section.

Figure 16: thickness, function of the radius

Figure 17: Shell and support, WRD design

The inner elements (the inside rectangle) were designed from examples taken from the
internet. We also did measurements on a 20 meter blade, in the blade exposition at the
Folkecenter. We decided, after having tested different shapes that the one in Figure 17 is the
best. It made the blade the strongest. We used the same element all along the blade by
keeping the proportionality.

- 23 -

VII Loads calculations

As part of the design process, a wind turbine must be analysed for the different loads it
will experience during its life. The first purpose is to be sure that the turbine will be able to
support the loads with a sufficient safety margin.
The external loads acting on a wind turbine are mainly wind forces. In most cases the
loads on a wind turbine can be classified as follows:
-

Aerodynamic blade loads.

Gravity loads on the rotor blades.
Aerodynamic drag forces on nacelle and tower.
Gyroscopic loads caused by the yaw motion.
Centrifugal forces and Coriolis forces during the rotor rotation.

In this part we are going to focus on the loads affecting the blades, especially
aerodynamic and gravity loads.

Figure 18: Projection of lift and drag to calculate normal

and tangential load on blade section

We can see on Figure 18 how the normal (Pn) and tangential (Pt) loads can be found
by projecting the lift and drag into a direction normal to and tangential to the rotor plane. The
normal load is responsible for the thrust force and the integrated tangential loads give the
mechanical shaft torque.
The gravity loads on the rotor blades cause bending moments in the blades in the
edgewise direction.
All the graphs and calculations in the Figure 19 show a blade sketch, the
bending moments (Max_M) diagram and all the stresses along the blade.
Wind loads distribution:
The blade loads are related to the bending momentum and the area A where they are
applied. The section of the blade closest to the tip experiences a higher wind speed. Its area
A is small but the bending momentum is minimum so the loads are little in this area. In the

- 24 -

middle section though, the increase in wind speed is greater than the decrease in area. This
leads to higher stress in the middle section, making it the most likely to fail.

Figure 19: loads graph, print screen of WRD

WRD calculated the different momentums for us; these included the operating
condition, the yawing condition and the case of the extreme condition. The maximum
bending moment is 4145.242 kNm and its situated in the root of the blade. This value is
calculated with the Danish security coefficients. Further explanations are given in the chapter
dealing with WRD, page 30 (more data are given in appendix, page 43).
We can see that the maximum stress is in the middle of the blade and its value is 279
Mpa. This value is a lot under the fatigue strength so we can be sure that our blade wont
break for a period for 20 years.

- 25 -

VIII Wind Rotor Design system 2.0

Figure 20: First screen of WRD

Wind Rotor Design System (WRD) is a powerful European design tool. The first
version was created in 1992 and the second version, which is the one we used, was introduced
in 1995. This programme was created at the Nordic Folkecenter for renewable energy and is
used to design wind rotor blades and do power and loads calculations. This programme can
be, and has been, compared to AeroDyn. AeroDyn is not a programme though; it is a library
of subroutines that can be called from a structural-dynamics code such as FAST. WRD is
more precise than AeroDyn and is much more user friendly. The only weak point of WRD
is that it doesnt take aeroelastics into consideration. Because of this, WRD should be used
alongside the Fast programme, a free software that also includes AeroDyn, to get more
accurate results. It is possible with WRD to output results in a table or graph. It is also
possible to have different views of the rotor and to upload the drawing in AutoCad. WRD can
be described as a virtual wind tunnel because it is very easy to change different parameters
and see the affect. Parameters such as the tip angle (min and max), rpm (min and max), wind
speed (min and max) can be set very easily in the programme. WRD was not designed for
pitch controlled blades, but only for stall controlled blades. It can be used for pitch controlled
blade though by going from curve to curve in the result graph. A notable characteristic of the
WRD system is the convenience and reliable data treatment. The time spent on inputting data
into the system is reduced by using user-friendly interface and logical steps for rotor design.

1. Programme outline:
The hierarchical structure of this programme consists of the following units:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Design
Power calculation
Load calculation
Airfoil library

a) The Design menu allows us to set up all the parameters of the rotor, the blade, and the
blade section.
This is the correct order for Blade Data Editing:
- Input the rotor diameter or blade length.

- 26 -

- Input the hub diameter.

- Modify the radius, chord, twist, twist centre, profile ordinates and CL/CD data at the blade
root and tip.
- Input the section data for multiple airfoils.
- Change the sections number to the number of real airfoil sections
- Modify the radius, chord, twist, twist centre and airfoil of the real airfoil sections and insert
the interpolated sections using the insert option.
- Modify the radius, chord, twist and twist centre of interpolated sections.
It is possible in this section to determine the size of the rotor, the number of blades, the
size of blades, and the construction of the blade section. It is also possible to have a 2D or 3D
view of the blade. This makes an excellent interface in designing the geometry of blade and
even its twist angle. There is a built-in mini CAD for designing the geometry of the blade,
including the twist.
The blade section can be one section with the option of holes and different materials.
The blade section can also be a shelled (thin walled) section. In this case, the programme
automatically calculates the coordinates of the sectional internal profile. The moments of
inertia, the mass centre, and the relative elastic centre and other properties of the blade are
also calculated automatically.

b) In the power calculation unit, we can calculate the power efficiency with varying wind
speeds and different rotor rotational velocities. It is important to mention here that the power
mentioned is the mechanical power. In order to get the electrical power we divide the
mechanical power by a coefficient of 1.2. The blade we designed in this project is for a 1.5
MW wind turbine so we should reach a mechanical power of 1.8 MW. With this calculated
result, it is possible to see under which conditions the rotor performs well. We can then
design the rotor according to the wind conditions (see wind speed classes, page 8). The
results can be displayed on the screen as a graphic picture or a data table. We are also given
the efficiency (CP). The output curves are RPM vs. Power and RPM vs. CP. These curves are
calculated for different wind speeds and we have the possibility to sweep different pitch
angle. We used this part to determine the pitch angle that our blade should reach, for a given
wind speed. This way we can get the best efficiency from the blade. After having reached
the wanted power, we need to keep the RPM constant and only make the pitch change. We
chose a maximum RPM of 22.5 by comparing data from existing LM blades.
The needed data for power calculation are as follows:
- Name of rotor: Mickal-Joan-Tong 38 m blade project
- Name of file with airfoil coordinates/A (multi)
- Name of file with CL and CD data: N/A (multi)
- Airfoil (shape) [single/multi type]: MULTI
- Airfoil (CL/CD) [single/multi type]: MULTI
- Blade length (mm): 3.8000000000E+04
- Zero-line of the blade (% of chord): 0.0000000000E+00
- Rotor diameter (mm): 7.8000000000E+04
- Hub diameter (mm): 2.0000000000E+03
- Number of blades: 3.0000000000E+00
- Air density (kg/m**3): 1.2400000000E+00
- Min. tip angle (deg): 0.0000000000E+00
- Max. tip angle (deg): 2.4400000000E+01
- Tip angle: Scale Division (deg): 5.0000000000E+00

- 27 -

- Min. wind speed (m/sec): 0.0000000000E+00

- Max. wind speed (m/sec): 2.5000000000E+01
- Wind speed: Scale Division (m/sec): 5.0000000000E+00
- Min. rotational speed limit (rpm): 5.3000000000E+00
- Max. rotational speed limit (rpm): 2.2500000000E+01
- Rotational speed: Scale Division (rpm) 4.0000000000E+00

c) The load calculation part executes the calculations of loads and stresses along the blade
and the rotor shaft. The stress calculations allow for massive and lightweight blades with the
use of different materials in the blade structure. These results are also shown as a graphic
picture or a data table. The load results are shown and explained in the chapter concerning
load in this report.
The extra data necessary for load calculation are as follows:
- Hub height (mm): 8.0000000000E+04
- Nominal electrical output (kW): 1.5000000000E+03
- Electrical efficiency: 8.0000000000E-01
- Angle of attack at max. lift (deg): 9.0000000000E+00
- Max. lift coefficient (CL): 1.4899000000E+00
- Max. drag coefficient (CD): 1.0000000000E+00
- Dist. from R_Cent. to the bearing(mm) 0.0000000000E+00
- Dist. from R_Cent. to the T_Cent.(mm) 0.0000000000E+00
- Dist. from R_Cent. to the B_Cent.(mm) 0.0000000000E+00
- Maximum yawing speed (rad/sec): 1.0000000000E+00
- Nominal yawing speed (rad/sec): 1.7453000000E-02
- Max. rotational speed ( % of nominal) 1.0000000000E+02
- Rated wind speed (m/sec): 7.5000000000E+00
- Mass of blade (kg) [calculated if 0 ] 0.0000000000E+00
- Mass of rotor (kg) [calculated if 0 ] 0.0000000000E+00
- Blade load factor, kbx: 1.0000000000E+00
- Blade load factor, kby: 1.0000000000E+00
- Rotor load factor, kx: 1.7000000000E+00
- Rotor load factor, ky: 1.0000000000E+00
- Rotor load factor, kz: 1.7000000000E+00

d) There is a large airfoil library in this system. The library contains the data for the NACA
63-1, 2, 3, 4 series airfoils which are widely used for modern wind rotors. It is also possible
to add customized airfoils if the lift/drag coefficient data and the airfoil coordinates are
known. We wrote new files for our FX66-S196-V1 airfoil and could easily insert them into
the WRD programme. It is possible to have a view of the airfoil, see its CL/CD coefficients,
and see function of the angle of attack. It is consequently very easy to detect any mistakes in
the data.
2. Instructions:
a) First, design of the blade.
The first thing we needed to input in the programme was the airfoil coordinates. If
desired, its possible to write a file similar the ones used in WRD using Notepad. We took the
data FX66-S196-V1 - Re=1.5x106 (Measured at Stuttgart) from the Ris website (See
appendix in page 38):

- 28 -

We then checked to make sure there were no mistakes in the airfoil by drawing it on
the built-in mini-cad.
We also entered the data for the CL and CD coefficients. We knew those coefficients
for angles between -2.8 degrees and 10.3 degrees. The angle scale may seem small, but WRD
can make predictions with angles up to 90 degrees.
Once the airfoil coordinates and the associated CL and CD data are in the programme,
we can start to design the blade. First, we need to set up the blade length. We already
determined this length to be 38 meters. Next, we need to input the hub diameter (we have
chosen 3 meters). After that, we need to change the section number to 10. We know the data
(radius, chord and twist angle) for 9 sections between the root and the tip, using the excel
programme. We need to add a tube before the airfoil. This tube will be the connection to the
hub and we set its length to 1 meter. This tube used to be long on the old blades but it is
better if the blade takes the shape of the airfoil at a smaller radius r, even if the moment is not
very important for such radius.
Before the next step, we need to enter all the parameters for each section: radius, chord
and twisting angle. After that, we need to make an interpolation line between the circle and
the airfoil. This is calculated automatically with WRD. Finally we need to tell the programme
that we want more sections to make the power calculations more precise. We chose to have
40 sections all along the blade. This number is a compromise between good precision and
calculation time (which can be very important depending on the parameters). Now the blade
exists and we do not need to input more parameters because the power calculation is complete
from an aerodynamics point of view.

Idem as figure 10

idem as figure 11

b) Second, power calculation of the blade.

Now we can start to calculate the mechanical power of the blade for each wind speed.
We set up the Cut-in wind speed at 2 m/s and the Cut-out wind speed at 25 m/s. For these
calculations, we can change the tip angle (which is the same as the pitch angle), the wind
speed, and the rotational speed limit (rpm of the rotor). The objective in these calculations is
to reach the nominal power as quick as possible by finding the best combination of rpm and
tip angle. There are different combinations of rpm and tip angle for a given power, but we
should find the ones that make the pitch angle increase with the wind speed so the blade is not
pitching all the time. We copied results for each wind speed and did the power graph on
excel:

- 29 -

Idem as figure 14

c) Third, Load Calculation of the Blade.

To make the load calculation, we now need to enter more data in WRD. First, we
enter the hub height. We set ours to 80 meters by examining existing Vestas wind turbine
designs. We then set up the nominal electrical output at 1500 kW and the electrical efficiency
at 0.8. We also need to enter the angle of attack at the maximum lift. This is equal to 9
degrees and can be determined from the CL graph. Then we entered the maximum lift and
drag coefficient and the maximum yawing speed. The maximum yawing speed is equal to 1
radian/sec (approximately 57,3 degrees/second). This value may look very big, but it is used
to account for bad gusts, earthquakes, or both. This value is used in the Danish safety
standard. We also enter the nominal yawing speed which is 1.75E-02 radian/sec (1
degree/sec).
We now need to define the blade material. We chose to use carbon fibre because it
has a great strength/weight ratio. We need to know the following data of the carbon fibre:
elastic modulus, fatigue strength, partial coefficient for fatigue load (1.5) and partial
coefficient for extreme load (1.5).
We included supports in our blades to increase their strength. We used some
examples found on the internet to design these supports along with taking measures of real
blades in the blade exposition park at Folkecenter, as said page 23.

Idem as figure 17

- 30 -

IX Future development
Many of our specifications derive from calculations and theories. We tried our best to
produce accurate estimations, but its difficult to produce a complicated design without at
least small errors. In our blade design, we tried to make our blades as close to industry
designs as close as we could, but they will still has some errors from the manufacturing
process. Those errors can be seen as uncertainty, but are more likely future development.

1. Chord lengths.
From the aerodynamic theory, the chord length c is calculated by the following formulas:
C = 1.868 +

5.957 3.1 0.5433 0.02917

c
2 +

= B CL X
3
4
x
R
x
x
x

Here, c is the chord length, C is factor, x is the speed ratio, B is the number of blade, R is
the blade radius, CL is the maximum lift coefficient and X is the tip speed ratio.
Based on these formulas, we can get chord length 4.902m at the root and 1.064m at the tip. In
the real commercial industry though, a chord length near 5 meters at the root is too large.
Although it would have the highest efficiency, we needed to scale it down by applying an
arbitrary coefficient of 0.8. A possible improvement here would be to do more precise
calculations for the chord lengths. It could be by using different mathematical formula for
example.

2. Profile
As said before for many modern and commercial blades, more than one profile is used
all along the blade. All the NACA profiles, for example, have their families. It means that
engineers can use several profiles based on one type all along the blade they are designing.
When we look at the CL coefficient (page 11) we can see that the curve is too steep
around the maximum lift. We know that the pitching system is accurate but the wind is not
and because of that it creates vibrations on the tip. We need to use a profile with a CL
coefficient flatter in this area, even we are sacrificing power.

Figure 21: example with different profiles, from root to tip

It would also be an idea to make tests without the tube at the root. This is done today
with companies like Enercon who design blades which have no tube at the root but start
directly with a very large profile. In this case the hub is completely different. Other research

- 31 -

is currently being undertaken to put not a tube but a cone at the root. It could be stronger and
more stable.

3. Shell thickness.
For the blade to perform well, it should have good aerodynamics features and it should
have a good compromise between weight and wall thickness. If we want the blade to be light
we should make the shell as thin as possible. Considering the loads on the blade we should
also make sure that the blade will not collapse in extreme conditions.
In the loads distribution section of this paper, we reported that the most fail prone
point is not at the tip, but in the middle. When the wind speed becomes higher the stress
increases in this section. In order to keep the blade safe, we have to increase the thickness
inside. This increases the blades strength but also increases the weight and consequently the
distance to the centre of mass. Increasing this distance makes the centre of gravity moving to
the tip. Some researches may be done in this direction.

4. Turbulence
In our study we only made the first approach with laminar flow. We did not include
turbulence into considerations in our design but at some point though, the wind turbine design
should contain them. This will lead to more efficient, longer lasting wind turbines. Taking
this into consideration will make us take into account the variable speed of the generator. The
wind turbine will still be pitch controlled so the rotor will have a constant rpm after the
nominal wind speed is reached. In fact this rpm will be constant within 35%. That is why the
variable speed generator is needed, in the case of turbulence

5. Vortex generators
We have noticed that the blade manufactures are putting some fins on a certain length
of the blade. Those ones create a thin layer of turbulence and curiously it makes the blade
stall at a steeper angle. This technology has been used on aircraft for a long time. With more
time we could have included this in our researches.

Photo3: Vortex generators, Nordic Folkecenters wind turbine.

- 32 -

X Conclusion
In a word, our blade finally comes out as a success, with following features:
The blade is designed to run under wind class III, whose reference wind speed is 37.5
m.s-1, the average wind speed is 7.5m.s-1. The nominal wind speed for class III is 10 m.s-1
(theoretical value). The blade length is 38 meters, the hub is 3 meters wide. It makes a 78
meters diameter rotor, as seen on the following picture:

Figure 22: rotor view 3, WRD print screen

Selected blade profile: FX66-S196-V1

Best angle of attack for the profile: 9 degrees
Designed rotor rotation: clockwise
Profiles chord length at root: 3.92 meters
Profiles chord length at tip: 0.85 meters
Biggest twisting angle: 24.4 degrees at 3.92 meters from the root
Twisting angle at the tip: none
Blades material: carbon fibre reinforced with epoxy
Density: 1,76 g/cm3

- 33 -

Tensile modulus (or youngs modulus): 235 GPa

Ultimate strength: 3920 MPa
Shell thickness at the root: 40 mm
Shell thickness in the middle: 78 mm
Shell thickness at the tip: 12 mm
Cut-in wind speed: 2m.s-1
Cut-out wind speed: 25 m.s-1
Practical nominal speed, for pitch control: 10.75 m.s-1
Rated rotational speed: 22.5 rpm
Output mechanical power: 1860 kW
Output electrical power: 1500 kW
Gearbox+generator efficiency: 80%
First pitching: 11m.s-1
First pitch angle: 2 degrees
Maximum pitch angle: 24.5 degrees, for the cut-out wind speed.
Maximum stress : 279 Mpa (in the middle of the blade), value under the limits.

This internship was a great experience for me, for many different reasons. Firstly I
had the opportunity to work on a completely new subject. Working on wind turbines and
studying aerodynamics was a real pleasure. I enjoyed working using English for nearly three
months. I did have very enriching exchanges with people coming from many places around
the world. I could discover a new country where there are wind turbines everywhere. I was
extremely happy visiting in person the large wind turbine at the Folkecenter many times and
visiting off-shore wind farm and large wind turbine plants. I had the chance to work in two
different places.
In the Folkecenter I had the opportunity to learn a lot about renewable energy. In
addition to learning a lot about wind power I learnt about wave energy, heating systems, solar
cells, passive houses, water recycling systems and so on. I did enjoy being taught by experts
in this area.
In rhus, a big student city, I could work in different conditions. I had the real
chance work in the Ingenirhjskolen i rhus, with two Erasmus students and I used the
schools equipment and was taught by their professors. This internship has been
unforgettable for me.
This report is available on the Folkecenters website for downloading.

- 34 -

XI Glossary
Airfoil. (profil daile) The cross section profile of the leeward side of a wind generator blade.
Designed to give low drag and good lift. Also found on an airplane wing.
Angle of Attack. (angle dattaque) The angle of relative air flow to the blade chord.
Blade. (pale) The part of a wind generator rotor that extracts the wind energy.
Chord. (corde) The distance between the trailing edge and the leading edge of a profile.
Cut-In. (vitesse minimale pour produire une puissance) The wind speed when the wind
turbine starts operating.
Drag. (trane) In a wind generator, the force exerted by an object because of the moving air
results it to move in the opposite direction. Also refers to a type of wind generator or
anemometer design that uses cups instead of a blades with airfoils.
Efficiency. (rendement) The ratio of energy output to energy input in a device.
Epoxy. A 2-part adhesive system consisting of resin and hardener. It does not start to harden
until the elements are mixed together.
Fatigue. (force de fatigue) Stress that causes material failure from repeated, cyclic vibration
or stress.
Furling. (carter le rotor de la direction du vent pour diminuer sa surface balaye, voir page
19) The act of a wind generator Yawing out of the wind either horizontally or vertically to
protect itself from high wind speeds.
Gearbox. (multiplicateur de vitesse) This device is making the connection between the low
speed of the rotor and the high speed of the generator.
Generator. (gnrateur) A device that produces electricity (DC or AC) from a rotating shaft.
Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine (HAWT). (olienne horizontale) Also called axial flow
wind turbine. The shaft has the same direction as the wind come.
Hub. (moyeu) The center of a wind generator rotor, which holds the blades in place and
attachs to the shaft.
Leading Edge. (partie frontale du profil) The edge of a blade that faces toward the direction
of rotation.
Lift. (portance) The force exerted by moving air on asymmetrically-shaped wind generator
blades at right angles to the direction of relative movement. Ideally, wind generator blades
should produce high Lift and low Drag.
Load. (charge) A force or moment applied on the blade.

- 35 -

Losses. (pertes) Power that is harvested by a wind generator but is not transferred to a usable
form. Losses can be from friction, electrical resistance, or other causes.
Moment. (moment) Action of a force attempting to produce motion around an axis.
Pitch. (angle adjustable de la pale) See Setting Angle.
Rated Power Output. (puissance de sortie nominale) Maximum power (electrical or
mechanical) to be obtained from the wind turbine.
Root. (racine) The area of a blade nearest to the hub. Generally the thickest and widest part of
the blade.
Setting Angle. (angle adjustable de la pale) The angle between the blade Chord and the plane
of the blade's rotation. Also called Pitch or blade angle. A blade carved with a Twist has a
different setting angle at the Tip than at the Root.
Shaft. (axe liant le moyeu la bote de vitesse) The rotating part in the centre of a rotor of a
wind generator or motor that transfers power.
Start-Up. (vitesse minimale de rotation du rotor) The windspeed at which a wind turbine
rotor starts to rotate. It does not necessarily produce any power until it reaches cut-in speed.
Thrust. (puissance) In a wind generator, wind forces pushing back against the rotor. Wind
generator bearings must be designed to handle thrust or else they will fail.
Tip. (extrmit de la pale) The end of a wind generator blade farthest from the hub.
Tip Speed Ration. (ratio de la vitesse de lextrmite de la pale/vitesse du vent) The ratio of
how much faster than the windspeed that the blade tips are moving. Abbreviation TSR.
Torque. (couple) See moment.
Trailing edge. (partie arrire du profil) The edge of a blade that faces away from the direction
of rotation.
Twist. (vrille) In a wind generator blade, the difference in Pitch between the blade root and
the blade tip. Generally, the twist allows more Pitch at the blade root for easier Startup, and
less Pitch at the tip for better high-speed performance.
Wind Turbine. (olienne) A machine that extracts the force of the wind. Called a Wind
Generator when used to produce electricity. Called a Windmill when used to crush grain or
pump water.
Windward. (dans la direction du vent) Toward the direction from which the wind blows
Yaw. (rotation de la nacelle, la tour tant laxe) Rotation parallel to the ground. A wind
generator yaws to face winds coming from different directions.
Yaw axis. (plus ou moins laxe de la tour) Vertical axis through the center of gravity.

- 36 -

XII References
Books and documents:
1. Wind turbine aerodynamics : A state-of-the-art from Karman Institute if Fluid
Dynamics. Lecture Series (March 19-23, 2007).
2. Guidelines for design of wind turbines from Ris Laboratory.
3. Wind turbine types Author: Martin O.L.Hansen from DTU.
4. Aerodynamics of wind turbines Author Sren Gudntoft.
5. IEC 61400-1 Danish Standarts.
6. Preliminary Structural Design of Composite Blades for two and three blade rotors.
Authors G. Bir and P. Migliore from NREL
7. Wind turbine airfoil catalogue from Ris Laboratory.

Web sites:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/short.html
http://www.windpower.org/en/core.htm
http://www.risoe.dk/vea/profcat/WWW/HTML/a_index.htm
http://www.mh-aerotools.de/airfoils/javafoil.htm
http://www.yccarbon.com
www.wikipedia.com

Drawings, figures and tables:

Figure 1: http://www.dpa.unina.it/adag/eng/images/renewable_energy/002_turbine_vertical_schematic_a.png
Figure 2: http://ec.europa.eu/research/energy/nn/nn_rt/nn_rt_wind/images/wind_en_1370.gif
Table 1: Danish Standards IEC 61400-1 page 8.
Figure6: Wind turbine types Author: Martin O.L.Hansen from DTU page 11
Figure 8: Wind turbine types Author: Martin O.L.Hansen from DTU page 13.
Figure 12: Wind turbine types Author: Martin O.L.Hansen from DTU page 17.
Figure 21 : http://www.lr.tudelft.nl/live/binaries/7860c285-a659-498d-97fa-729fdefc229d/img/blade48_small.gif

- 37 -

XIII Appendix
A. The FX66-S196-V1 airfoil. 39
B. Excel Design programme..

40

a) Info...
b) Design......
c) Power...
d) Blade profile....
e) Example...

40
40
40
42
43

C. Rotor data, from WRD.

43

D. Power curves Excel table...

44

a) Without control 44
b) Stall control.. 44
c) Pitch control. 45

E. Carbon fibre properties

45

- 38 -

A. The FX66-S196-V1 airfoil (References form Ris laboratory)

Reynolds number = 1.5 x 10^6
Measured in the Laminar Wind Tunnel at the Institut for Aerodynamics and Gasdynamics of
Stuttgart

- 39 -

B. Design Excel programme

a) Info

b) Design

c) Power

- 40 -

- 41 -

d) Blade profil

The data in this board go up to alpha=90

- 42 -

e) Example

C. Rotor data, from WRD

 1 . Name of rotor........................loadcalc
 2 . Name of file with airfoil coordinatesN/A (multi)
 3 . Name of file with CL and CD data.....N/A (multi)
 4 . Airfoil (shape) [single/multi type]: MULTI
 5 . Airfoil (CL/CD) [single/multi type]: MULTI
 6 . Blade length (mm).................... 3.8000000000E+04
 7 . BLADE GEOMETRY//Number of sections = 4.0000000000E+01
 8 . Zero-line of the blade (% of chord).. 0.0000000000E+00
 9 . Rotor diameter (mm).................. 7.8000000000E+04
10 . Hub diameter (mm).................... 2.0000000000E+03
11 . Number of blades .................... 3.0000000000E+00
12 . Air density (kg/m**3)................ 1.2400000000E+00
13 . Min. tip angle (deg)................. 0.0000000000E+00
14 . Max. tip angle (deg)................. 2.4400000000E+01
15 . Tip angle: Scale Division (deg)...... 5.0000000000E+00
16 . Min. wind speed (m/sec).............. 0.0000000000E+00
17 . Max. wind speed (m/sec).............. 0.0000000000E+00
18 . Wind speed: Scale Division (m/sec)... 0.0000000000E+00
19 . Min. rotational speed limit (rpm).... 5.3000000000E+00
20 . Max. rotational speed limit (rpm).... 2.2500000000E+01
21 . Rotational speed: Scale Division(rpm) 4.0000000000E+00
22 . Hub height (mm)...................... 8.0000000000E+04
23 . Nominal electrical output (kW)....... 1.5000000000E+03
24 . Electrical efficiency................ 8.0000000000E-01
25 . Angle of attack at max. lift (deg)... 9.0000000000E+00
26 . Max. lift coefficient (CL)........... 1.4899000000E+00
27 . Max. drag coefficient (CD)........... 1.0000000000E+00
28 . Dist. from R_Cent. to the bearing(mm) 0.0000000000E+00
29 . Dist. from R_Cent. to the T_Cent.(mm) 0.0000000000E+00
30 . Dist. from R_Cent. to the B_Cent.(mm) 0.0000000000E+00
31 . Maximum yawing speed (rad/sec)....... 1.0000000000E+00
32 . Nominal yawing speed (rad/sec)....... 1.7453000000E-02
33 . Max. rotational speed ( % of nominal) 1.0000000000E+02
34 . Rated wind speed (m/sec)............. 7.5000000000E+00
35 . Mass of blade (kg) [calculated if 0 ] 0.0000000000E+00
36 . Mass of rotor (kg) [calculated if 0 ] 0.0000000000E+00
37 . Blade load factor, kbx............... 1.0000000000E+00
38 . Blade load factor, kby .............. 1.0000000000E+00
39 . Rotor load factor, kx................ 1.7000000000E+00
40 . Rotor load factor, ky................ 1.0000000000E+00
41 . Rotor load factor, kz................ 1.7000000000E+00

- 43 -

D. Power curves Excel table

a) Without control

b) Stall control

- 44 -

c) Pitch control

E. Carbon fibre properties

We were given the following data by You Chang Carbon co., Ltd
http://www.yccarbon.com/
This material has been tested in accordance with the Pyrofil test methods and confirms to the
requirements of specification reference.
Fiber type: 3K
Number of Filament: 3000
Yield tex: 200
Tensile strength (MPa): 3920
Tensile strength (kgf/m m2): 400
Tensile modulus (GPa): 235
Tensile modulus (tonf/mm2): 24.0
Elongation (%): 1.7
Filament dia. (micrometer): 7.0
Density (g/cm3): 1.76
Electrical resistivity (ohm.cm) : 1.5 x 10-3

- 45 -

After weeks of research I decided to locate my internship in the North of Denmark, in

a None Governmental Organization called Nordic Folkecenter for Renewable Energy. Their
focus is on renewable energies both technical and social aspects. I was given the project of
designing a 38 meters wind turbine blade with two other Erasmus student from the
Ingenirhjskolen i rhus. We did researches together in order to know more about blades,
and how to design ours, which parameters to set up, materials to use. We designed our blade
from two different programmes. The main one we used is called Wind Rotor Design System.
This programme was created at Folkecenter and because it is quite an old one its working on
only one computer. We could get access on the second programme, in rhus. This
programme mainly helped us to get the dimension of the blade (radius, chord, twist angle).
We used then WRD to make power calculations and load calculations.
We had opportunities to visit real wind turbines so it helped us a lot to understand
whats happening on the blade. This internship was incredibly enriching for me, I could
discover a new country, where there are wind turbines everywhere. I could also work in
English, for the very first time.

Keywords : Wind turbine Blade Design Aerodynamics

- 46 -