0 Voturi pozitive0 Voturi negative

1 (de) vizualizări26 paginiFloating wind turbines are subjected to more severe structural loads than fixed-bottom
wind turbines due to additional degrees of freedom (DOFs) of their floating foundations.

Nov 26, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

Floating wind turbines are subjected to more severe structural loads than fixed-bottom
wind turbines due to additional degrees of freedom (DOFs) of their floating foundations.

© All Rights Reserved

1 (de) vizualizări

Floating wind turbines are subjected to more severe structural loads than fixed-bottom
wind turbines due to additional degrees of freedom (DOFs) of their floating foundations.

© All Rights Reserved

- Neuromancer
- The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and
- How Not to Be Wrong: The Power of Mathematical Thinking
- Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
- Chaos: Making a New Science
- The Joy of x: A Guided Tour of Math, from One to Infinity
- How to Read a Person Like a Book
- Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything
- The Wright Brothers
- The Other Einstein: A Novel
- The 6th Extinction
- The Housekeeper and the Professor: A Novel
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- A Short History of Nearly Everything
- The Kiss Quotient: A Novel
- The End of Average: How We Succeed in a World That Values Sameness
- Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die
- Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
- The Universe in a Nutshell

Sunteți pe pagina 1din 26

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsvi

stroke-limited hybrid mass damper

Yaqi Hu*, Erming He

School of Aeronautics, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an 710072, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Floating wind turbines are subjected to more severe structural loads than xed-bottom

Received 16 March 2017 wind turbines due to additional degrees of freedom (DOFs) of their oating foundations.

Received in revised form 19 July 2017 It's a promising way of using active structural control method to improve the structural

Accepted 24 August 2017

responses of oating wind turbines. This paper investigates an active vibration control

strategy for a barge-type oating wind turbine by setting a stroke-limited hybrid mass

damper (HMD) in the turbine's nacelle. Firstly, a contact nonlinear modeling method for

Keywords:

the oating wind turbine with clearance between the HMD and the stroke limiters is

Floating wind turbine

Dynamic modeling

presented based on Euler-Lagrange's equations and an active control model of the whole

Active vibration control system is established. The structural parameters are validated for the active control model

Hybrid mass damper (HMD) and an equivalent load coefcient method is presented for identifying the wind and wave

Linear quadratic regulator (LQR) disturbances. Then, a state-feedback linear quadratic regulator (LQR) controller is designed

Contact nonlinear to reduce vibration and loads of the wind turbine, and two optimization methods are

combined to optimize the weighting coefcients when considering the stroke of the HMD

and the active control power consumption as constraints. Finally, the designed controllers

are implemented in high delity simulations under ve typical wind and wave conditions.

The results show that active HMD control strategy is shown to be achievable and the

designed controllers could further reduce more vibration and loads of the wind turbine

under the constraints of stroke limitation and power consumption. V-shaped distribu-

tion of the TMD suppression effect is inconsistent with the Weibull distribution in practical

offshore oating wind farms, and the active HMD control could overcome this short-

coming of the passive TMD.

2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction

As a kind of rich and important renewable energy, wind energy has become one of the most promising energy and

attracted people's increasing attention in recent years [1,2]. Currently, most wind power is still generated from land-based

wind turbines which are generally installed in vast and sparsely populated lands. However, in many countries, such as

China, America and others, most residents live in coastal areas where land are valuable and relatively rare while power

demand is huge. Therefore, developing offshore wind energy is a good choice, as it can save more land resources and reduce

* Corresponding author.

E-mail address: ah1985@163.com (Y. Hu).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2017.08.050

0022-460X/ 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

448 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

Nomenclature

kp, kt, kT the equivalent spring stiffness coefcients of the platform, the tower and the TMD

dp, dt, dT the equivalent damping coefcients of the platform, the tower and the TMD

mp, mt, mT the masses of the platform, the tower and the TMD

Rp, Rt, RT the distances from the tower hinge to the mass centers of the platform, the tower and the TMD

kUlim, kDlim the equivalent spring stiffness coefcients of upwind and downwind stroke limiters

cUlim, cDlim the damping coefcients of upwind and downwind stroke limiters

xUlim, xDlim the distances of the neutral static HMD to the upwind and downwind stroke limiters

DxU, DxD the deections of the upwind and downwind stroke limiters

xT the displacement of the TMD relative to the z-axis

xnT the displacement of the TMD relative to the neutral static position in the nacelle coordinate

qp, qt the rotation angles of the platform and the tower relative to the z-axis

fa the driving force of the actuator

fk , fd the stiffness restoring force and the damping force of the HMD

g gravitational acceleration

Qlim the damping force of the stroke limiters

Vlim the potential energy of the stroke limiters

Mwind, Mwave the bending moments caused by the wind and wave loads

LM LevenbergeMarquardt

SSE sum of squared errors

TwrBsMxt side-side tower base bending moment

TwrBsMyt fore-aft tower base bending moment

TTD tower top displacement

PtfmPitch platform pitch angle

PtfmRoll platform roll angle

TTDspFA tower top fore-aft displacement

TTDspSS tower top side-side displacement

GenPwr generator power

HmdPwr HMD driving power

BldPitch1 blade pitch angle

TmdDxn TMD/HMD displacement

TmdVxn TMD/HMD velocity

LQR linear quadratic regulator

OoPDe blade-tip out-of-plane displacement

RootMyc1 blade root out-of-plane moment

PGAc parallel genetic algorithm with constraints

STD standard deviation

RMS root mean square

Ave average

power transmission loss. More important is that offshore wind resources are known to be of higher quality than that on land

[3]. Thus global wind power development has been gradually shifting to the sea. Shallow sea wind power has been developed

in recent years, but they are often criticized for visual and noise pollution [4], and foundations of shallow sea wind turbines

are also relatively huge and with complex structures and in high construction costs [5]. By comparison, with less space

limitations and more strong and steady wind resources, deep sea wind power has great potential to be exploited.

Foundation structures of offshore wind turbines play a key role in the sea wind energy development. According to

different foundation types, offshore wind turbines can be broadly categorized into two types: nearshore xed-bottom wind

turbines and deep sea oating wind turbines [6]. The rst one is installed on xed-bottom foundations, including monopile,

gravity based structure, and suction bucket [5]. Currently, these foundations are the mature construction method, and they

are suitable for installation in shallow sea, but not meet economic feasibility in deep sea with depth more than approximately

60 m. The second type uses oating platforms and mooring lines as the supporting structures, which are economical and

feasible for deeper water up to 900 m [7]. Nonetheless, oating foundations are still at an early development stage, and many

different platforms are in proof-of-concept study and they are being tested with scale model in real or laboratory conditions,

including type of barge, spar, tension-leg (TLP) and semi-submersible [5,8].

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 449

It's a new characteristic and also one of the challenges for oating wind turbines that the platform's tilt motion is induced

by the wind and wave excitation. This tilt motion greatly increases the loads of wind turbine due to the effect of large gravity

and inertial [9]. Large tilt motion has a remarkable inuence on tower top deection, which would give rise to unacceptable

huge loads at tower bottom and blades' roots. Jonkman et al. [10] compared the fatigue damage equivalent loads (DELs) of

three types of oating wind turbine and the same wind turbine model with xed-bottom monopile structure, the oating-to-

xed ratio of the tower base pitching moment DEL is 1.7 for the spar type and 2.5 for the TLP type, and worst of all, the ratio

exceeds 7 for the barge type. This phenomenon can denitely result in higher possibility of structural failures and the cost of

maintenance. Thus, advanced control method is required to reduce the loads and improve the structural responses of oating

wind turbines. In addition, exible foundation characteristics of oating wind turbines determines very low platform motion

frequency, which would results in that the traditional blade pitch control method may give rise to negative damping or

unstable motion [11]. These problems have attracted increasing attention from global academia and industrial community to

study effective control method for reducing the loads of oating wind turbines. Currently, there are two categories of control

methods are proposed to reduce the large loads of oating wind turbines.

The rst method utilizes the blade pitch control strategy to change rotor thrust for load mitigation. Jonkman et al.

[7,10,12,13] performed a large number of researches on three main oating wind turbines using a gain-scheduled propor-

tional-integral approach for designing a baseline collective blade pitch controller. The idea of this approach is that reducing

the controller gain could reduce the blade pitch angle, thus increasing rotor thrust and platform pitch damping. Nielsen et al.

[14] proposed an approach in which a basic pitch controller is augmented by an increment pitch angle controller. The pre-

sented approaches are mainly frequency-based controller design methods. There are several approaches in model based

control for oating wind turbines like the LQ approach in Ref. [15], the H approach in Ref. [16], and the variable power

collective pitch approach in Ref. [17]. In Ref. [18], Namik et al. rst presented an advanced individual blade pitch control for

oating wind turbines, which could suppress more platform motion and reduce more tower loads than the baseline collective

blade pitch controller. Later, many researchers were attracted to study on it [19e21]. Focusing on blades, Staino and Basu [22]

discussed the disadvantages of using active pitch control to alleviate aerodynamic loads on blades and proposed an innovative

dual control strategy combining passive pitch control and active tendons inside the hollow structure of the blades.

Although the blade pitch control methods have certain positive role in improving the response of oating wind turbines,

they still suffer from two shortcomings. Firstly, it reduces the motions and loads of the wind turbine always at the cost of more

blade pitch usage, larger output power uctuation, and increased loads at blades' roots. Secondly, it still results in a relatively

remarkable and unacceptable loads and motions after the implementation of the blade pitch control for some oating wind

turbines, such as the barge type [23,24]. It seems that using blade pitch control methods to reduce the response of oating

wind turbines may be not ideal. Therefore, alternatively, the passive or active structural control methods which have been

successfully applied in civil engineering may be capable.

It is a relatively new eld that using passive or active structural control methods to control the vibrations of oating wind

turbines, and these methods are regarded as a recommended way to extend the service life of oating wind turbines. Murtagh

et al. [25] investigated the passive suppression for a simplied wind turbine with a tuned mass damper (TMD) installed at the

tower top. Colwell et al. [26] proposed the idea of using tuned liquid column damper (TLCD) to reduce the vibration response

of a xed-bottom oating wind turbine with the installation position at tower top. Later, Mensah and Duen ~ as-Osorio [27]

assessed the reliability of this idea. Recently, Ikeda et al. [28] derived a 2-degree-of-freedom (DOF) TMD-blade theoretical

model for suppressing the apwise vibration of the wind turbine blades. Moreover, Li et al. [29] made a test on a nearshore

wind turbine using a ball vibration absorber installed in the nacelle. However, these researches are about vibration reduction

of xed-bottom wind turbines, but the dynamic characteristics of them are very different from the oating wind turbines.

Besides, their investigations are not used the state of the art codes FAST (fatigue, aerodynamics, structures, and turbulence)

[30] for modeling wind turbine models, which may not reect the full coupled nonlinear dynamic characteristics of oating

wind turbines.

Based on the FAST codes, Lackner et al. [23] developed a new simulator FAST-SC for considering structural control design of

wind turbines, which added two TMD DOFs in the kinetic equations of wind turbines for load reduction. Utilizing this code,

they conducted a preliminary study on the application of TMD to the large offshore oating wind turbines [23]. With the

consideration of the oating wind turbine as a lump mass, a TLCD is utilized to suppress its surge motion by Luo et al. [31].

Unfortunately, the pitch motion, which is the most essential motion type, cannot be analyzed by this oversimplied model.

Stewart et al. [32e34] built a 3-DOF dynamic model for three types of oating wind turbine based on Newton's second law of

motion, which installed a TMD in the nacelle and platform for load mitigation. Si established a 5-DOF model for spar-type

oating wind turbine based on the D'Alembert's principle of inertial forces and investigated the vibration and load sup-

pression effect by a TMD installed into the nacelle [35] and platform [36] respectively. Even though the TMD spring and

damping were determined by different optimization methods, all of them did not optimize the TMD mass. He et al. estab-

lished a fully coupled aero-hydro-TMD-structural dynamics model [37,38] and a 3-DOF dynamic model [39] of the barge-type

oating wind turbine based on FAST-SC and Euler-Lagrange's equations respectively, in which the TMD mass was optimized

and the control effect of the TMD installed in nacelle was investigated.

Compared with passive design, recent research shows that active structural control could bring about further load and

motion reduction. The hybrid mass damper (HMD) is a hybrid device consisting of a passive TMD supplemented by an actuator

parallel to the spring and damper. It is a well-known concept in structural control, especially for mitigation of excessive dynamic

450 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

response of high-rise buildings subjected to strong wind and earthquake loads, where the HMD has been proven to yield

enhanced damping performance compared with the passive TMD [40]. The concept has been implemented in a number of high-

rise buildings, but its application in wind turbines is rare. To date, the authors are aware of only a few literature on this eld

[41e45]. Lackner and Rotea [41] made a HMD structural control design of a barge-type oating wind turbine by solving an H

loop shaping problem, which is conditionally stable and provides effective damping performance when properly tuned. The

actuator dynamics and control-structure interaction were also considered by them [42]. Namik et al. [43] investigated the

performance and comparison of TMD and HMD for damping of the barge-type oating wind turbine by combined with the FAST

wind turbine model used in Ref. [41] and the actuator model used in Ref. [42]. Si et al. [44] designed a gain scheduling state-

feedback H2/H HMD structural controller for load mitigation of a spar-type oating wind turbine. Li et al. [45] designed a

static output-feedback HMD structural controller for the barge-type oating wind turbine by solving a generalized H problem.

It can be known that the HMD control for oating wind turbines is nearly concentrated in H or its related method. All of these

studies suffer from one critical drawback: they didn't consider the stroke of the HMD. Different from civil engineering struc-

tures, offshore oating wind turbines usually have large displacement or deection due to their soft foundations and the

extreme wind and wave conditions. This will directly result in the stroke of HMD much larger than the displacement of the wind

turbine structures (As seen in Ref. [41], the HMD stroke could achieve unacceptable 40 m). The stroke of the HMD is a critical

constraint for actual applications as the practical limitation on the space available for the HMD.

Motivated by the above mentioned problems, this work will present a nonlinear modelling method for wind turbine

structures with clearances and design a LQR controller for load mitigation of a barge-type oating wind turbine, where a HMD

is installed in the nacelle and the HMD stroke is limited by setting stroke limiters. Modelling, identication, controller design,

weighting coefcient optimization and simulation will be investigated to evaluate the effect of the stroke-limited HMD

structural control method.

The rest sections of this paper are organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the considered barge-type wind turbine,

HMD system and the stroke limiters. A 3-DOF contact nonlinear model caused by clearance between the HMD and the

stroke limiters is established based on Euler-Lagrange's equations. The control subroutine based on Fortran language is

developed for implementing a simulation for HMD structural control of wind turbines directly in FAST-SC rather than using

the traditional FAST-Simulink interface. In Section 3, the passive structural parameters of the wind turbine and the TMD,

which were identied by using the nonlinear least squares LevenbergeMarquardt (LM) algorithm previously, are validated

for the active control model of the wind turbine and the HMD used in this paper. Besides, an equivalent load coefcient

method is presented for identifying the wind and wave disturbances. In Section 4, a state-feedback LQR structural

controller is designed, and two different optimization methods are combined to optimize the weighting coefcients by

selecting the standard deviation of the tower top fore-aft deection as the objective function and considering the stroke of

the HMD and the active control power consumption as constraints. In Section 5, the designed controllers are simulated by

the modied FAST-SC code and the discussions are provided for the simulation results. At last, we draw conclusions and

future works in Section 6.

2. Floating wind turbine model and stroke-limited HMD structural control strategy

The schematic of a barge-type oating wind turbine and a fore-aft HMD with stroke limiters is shown in Fig. 1. The wind

turbine model used for analysis and synthesis is the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 5-MW wind turbine [7].

Fig. 1. ITI Energy Barge turbine with a fore-aft stroke-limited HMD in the nacelle.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 451

Table 1

Properties of the 5 MW wind turbine and the barge platform.

Item Value

Rating power 5 MW

Baseline control Variable speed, collective pitch

Cut-in, rated, cut-out wind speed 3 m s1, 11.4 m s1, 25 m s1

Cut-in, rated rotor speed 6.9 rpm, 12.1 rpm

Rotor, hub Diameter 126 m, 3 m

Hub, tower top height 90 m, 87.6 m

Nacelle dimension (L W H) 22 m 6 m 6 m

Platform dimension (L W H) 40 m 40 m 10 m

Rotor nacelle assembly mass 350,000 kg

Tower mass 347,460 kg

Platform mass 5,452,000 kg

Number of mooring lines 8

Line length, diameter 473.3 m, 0.0809 m

Anchor depth, radius 150 m, 423.4 m

Table 2

Adopted parameters of the TMD and the stroke limiters.

110,700 8815 28,720 500,000 500,000 8

This turbine is widely adopted by many other researchers. The adopted oating support structure is the ITI Energy barge, a

big cubic platform attached to eight mooring lines. The adopted wind turbine and oating platform are also widely used for

proof of concept, loads verication and structural control of offshore wind turbines by many other researchers. Detailed

properties of the wind turbine and the oating platform can be seen in Ref. [7], of which some basic properties are shown in

Table 1.

A HMD is drawn out in Fig. 1 for illustrating the situation that it is installed in the nacelle for reducing wind turbine vi-

bration. Here, kT, cT and mT are the stiffness coefcient, the damping coefcient and the mass of the HMD, respectively. Two

stroke limiters are also drawn out in Fig. 1 for limiting the maximum displacement of the moving HMD mass. klim term is the

stiffness coefcient of the stroke limiters, clim term is the damping coefcient of the stroke limiters, and xlim term is the

distance or clearance between the HMD and the stroke limiters when the HMD is under the neutral static position. The words

U and D before the subscript lim represent upwind and downwind, respectively. Besides, fa is the driving force of the

actuator used for active control. It's known that platform pitch motion is the dominant factor causing load increases for the

barge-type oating wind turbine, so the HMD as shown in Fig. 1 is congured in a way that the mass moves in the fore-aft

direction. In Ref. [39], the authors optimized the parameters of the passive stroke-limited TMD for the barge-type wind

turbine. For this research, the parameters of the passive TMD and the stroke limiters in Table 2 (see also in Ref. [39]) will be

adopted, in which for simplicity, klim, clim and xlim are representative of kDlim kUlim, cDlim cUlim and xDlim xUlim, respectively,

i.e., there are same properties of the downwind stroke limiter and the upwind stroke limiter.

As shown in Fig. 2, a reduced model of the wind turbine consists of masses representing the barge, tower and HMD,

which corresponds to 3 DOF that each one of the barge and tower has a single rotary DOF, and the HMD mass has a single

translational DOF. This model contains enough complexity to model the effects of the HMD on the dynamics of the

structure, and is able to be described by a set of three equations. This model does not consider any other structural

components such as blades, because the main goal for this research is to reduce the tower base loads, and it has been shown

[7,10,41] that blade and other component dynamics have a small effect on tower loads compared to the effects of the 3-

DOFs used in the reduced model.

The barge is connected to a rotary spring and damper representing the hydrostatic restoring force and damping from the

water. The damping from the water is non-linear and complex, including viscous and wave radiation effects, but a linear

approximation can be used for small barge displacements and velocities. The tower also has a rotary spring and damper

representing structural stiffness and damping. The HMD is assumed to slide on a perfectly smooth track along the fore-aft

direction. Fig. 2 is also drawn out for illustrating the motion state of the HMD, no contact with any stroke limiter, contact

with the downwind stroke limiter and contact with the upwind stroke limiter from top to bottom, respectively. DxD and DxU

are representative of the distances after the HMD striking the downwind and upwind stroke limiter, respectively. The stroke

limiter is essentially a large spring and damper that come into contact with the HMD mass at a certain set distance xDlim or

xUlim from the undeected HMD spring position. This makes system highly nonlinear. There need a series of if-else-then

statements used for modeling this contact nonlinear model caused by the clearance between the HMD and the stroke limiter.

These statements are needed to insert in the motion equations such that if the mass is hitting the stroke limiter, an additional

force is applied to the mass and an equal opposite force is applied to the nacelle.

452 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

2.1. Dynamic model of a barge-type wind turbine with a fore-aft stroke-limited HMD

Different from the Kane's modelling method used by FAST or FAST-SC [30], the Newton's law of motion used by Refs.

[33e35,42] and the D'Alembert's principle of inertial forces used by [35,36,44], this study will establish the governing

equations for the 3-DOFs dynamic model using the Euler-Lagrange's equations. It will be discovered that our proposed

model based on Euler-Lagrange's equations essentially leads to the same form as that from Kane's, Newton's and

D'Alembert's modelling method, but in this case, the Euler-Lagrange's equations could provide a more simple and clear

modelling process than the Kane's method, and could avoid the complex force vector formulation of the Newton's and

D'Alembert's method.

The Euler-Lagrange's equations of a non-conservative system with n generalized coordinates or DOFs are described

as

d vL vL

Qi i 1; 2; /; n (1)

dt vq_ i vqi

LT V (2)

where T and V are the total kinetic energy and total potential energy of the system, respectively. L is the Lagrange operator. Qi

is the generalized non-potential force.

The total kinetic energy and total potential energy of the Barge-type oating wind turbine can be expressed as Eqs. (3) and

(4), respectively, and the generalized non-potential forces consist of the damping force and the external wind and wave loads

can be expressed as Eq. (5).

1 2 1 2 1

T It q_ t Ip q_ p mT x_2T (3)

2 2 2

1 2 1 x RT sin qt 2 1 2

V kt qt qp kT T kp qp mt gRt cos qt

2 2 cos qt 2 (4)

mp gRp cos qp mT gRT cos qt xT RT sin qt tan qt Vlim

Fig. 2. Simplied model of oating wind turbine with a fore-aft stroke-limited HMD in the nacelle.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 453

8

>

>

>

> Qqt dt q_ t q_ p dT RT x_nT Mwind fa RT Qlim RT

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> dT RT x_T cos qt RT q_ t xT q_ t sin qt

>

> dt q_ t q_ p dT RT Mwind fa RT Qlim RT

>

>

< cos2 qt

(5)

> Qqp dp q_ p dt q_ t q_ p Mwave

>

>

>

>

> QxT dT x_nT fa Qlim

>

>

>

>

>

>

> x_ cos qt RT q_ t xT q_ t sin qt

>

> dT T fa Qlim

>

: cos2 qt

where

8

Dx2 : xnT > xDlim

1 < Dlim 2D

K

2 : KUlim DxU : xnT < xUlim

Vlim

0 : otherwise

8

< CDlim Dx_D : xnT > xDlim x_nT > 0

Qlim CUlim Dx_U : xnT < xUlim x_nT < 0

:

0 : otherwise

xT RT sin qt

xnT

cos qt

where q and x are the rotation angle and the displacement of the HMD from the vertical axis z, respectively. k and d are the

equivalent spring stiffness coefcient and the equivalent damping coefcient, respectively. I is the moment of inertia about

the mass center. m is the mass, and R is the distance from the mass center to the tower hinge. The subscripts p, t, and T

represent the platform, the tower, and the TMD, respectively. The superscript n represents the nacelle coordinate. Vlim and Qlim

are the potential energy and the damping force of the stroke limiters, respectively. Mwind and Mwave are the bending moments

caused by the external wind and wave loads acting on the tower base and the platform top, respectively.

Substituting Eqs. (3)e(5) into Eqs. (1) and (2), the contact nonlinear dynamic model of the barge oating wind turbine can

be established as

8

>

> Ip qp kt qt qp kp qp mp gRp sin qp dp q_ p dt q_ t q_.

p Mwave

>

>

>

> It qt kt qt qp kT klim xT RT sin qt xT sin qt RT cos3 qt

>

> .

>

>

< klim xlim xT sin qt RT cos2 qt mt gRt sin qt mT gRT sin qt xT sec2 qt

. (6)

>

> dt q_ t q_ p Mwind RT fa dT clim RT q_ t x_T cos qt xT q_ t sin qt RT cos2 qt

>

> .

>

>

> mT xT kT klim xT RT sin qt cos2 qt klim xlim =cos qt mT g tan qt

>

>

> .

: d c R q_ x_ cos q x q_ sin q cos2 q f

T lim T t T t T t t t a

where

8

< kDlim : xnT > xDlim

klim kUlim : xnT < xUlim

:

0 : otherwise

8

< cDlim : xnT > xDlim x_ nT > 0

clim cUlim : xnT < xUlim x_ nT < 0

:

0 : otherwise

454 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

xDlim : xnac

tmd > 0

xlim

xUlim : xnac

tmd < 0

Small angle approximations are appropriate throughout this article because in simulations, none of the platforms exceed

10 degrees of pitch, even in the heaviest wind and wave loadings [32,42], and the angle used for all simulations can also be

shown in Ref. [39] for illustrating this feasible assumption. The simplied equations by using small angle assumption can be

obtained as Eq. (7), in which the klim, clim and xlim are same as that in Eq. (6).

8

>

> Ip qp kt qt qp kp qp mp gRp qp dp q_ p dt q_ t q_ p Mwave

>

>

>

>

< It qt kt qt qp kT klim xT RT qt RT klim xlim RT mt gRt qt

(7)

>

>

> mT gRT qt xT dt q_ t q_ p Mwind RT fa dT clim RT q_ t x_T RT

>

>

>

:

mT xT kT klim xT RT qt klim xlim mT g qt dT clim RT q_ t x_T fa

Eq. (7) can be described as Eq. (8), which is in the form of matrix equation. In Eq. (8), M, D and K are the mass, damping and

stiffness matrix, respectively, and we can see all these three matrixes are symmetric. Fa is the control input matrix repre-

senting the position of the applied active control force. Fd is the external wind and wave input disturbance matrix repre-

senting the acting position of the external wind and wave loads. Const is a constant matrix that is the resulting item caused by

the stroke limiters, i.e., the distance between the neutral nacelle position and the position of undeformed stroke limiters.

where the detailed expanded terms of these matrices are given in the appendix.

From Eq. (7) or (8), we can nd that the HMD control system with stroke limiters of the wind turbine has the charac-

teristics of piecewise stiffness and damping. The stiffness restoring force and the damping force of the HMD mass can be

formulated as Eqs. (9) and (10), respectively, which also has the piecewise characteristics, as shown in Fig. 3.

8 n

n < kT x T : xnT > xDlim

fk xT kT kDlim xT kDlim xDlim : xnT < xUlim

n

(9)

:

0 : otherwise

8 n

n < dT dDlim x_T : xT > xDlim x_nT > 0

n

:

dT x_nT : otherwise

For the convenience of structural control research, it is necessary to transform the model (8) into the following state-space

representation:

Fig. 3. Stiffness restoring force and damping force characteristic of the HMD mass: (a) Stiffness restoring force; (b) Damping force.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 455

x_ Ax Bf a Bd ud StaConst

(11)

y Cx

where, x XT X _ T is the state vector. y Rtop qt qp qp xT RT qt T is the output measurements representing the

tower top deection in the fore-aft direction, the platform pitch angular and the HMD mass displacement with respect to the

nacelle neutral position from top to bottom, respectively. A is the state matrix. B is the control input matrix. Bd is the wind and

wave disturbance matrix. C DspC VelC is the output state matrix, in which the DspC is the displacement output matrix

and the VelC is the velocity output matrix. The detailed expanded terms of these matrices are given in the appendix.

The FAST simulator [30] has been widely used in scientic research and engineering application. This code is capable of the

fully coupled dynamic modeling and load analysis of both onshore and offshore wind turbines, and system simulation

analysis can be done by selecting different DOFs combinations under various wind and wave conditions. Based on the FAST

code, Lackner et al. developed the FAST-SC code [23] by adding additional structural control module. FAST-SC adds two TMD

DOFs into the dynamic equations of the FAST code, and each TMD mass, spring stiffness, damping, and translation direction

can be dened by users. The FAST-SC code also has the ability of designing active structural control for wind turbines, with

each TMD actuated by external active control force input.

The FAST-SC needs to be compiled as a Simulink S-Function block for structural active control by using the FAST-Simulink

interface, which is a complicated process not easy to get succeed [30]. Different from this traditional implementation of the

FAST-Simulink interface, we directly develop the Fortran subroutine HmdXCntrl () in FAST-SC for implementing the HMD

structural control of wind turbines. We use this modied FAST-SC to estimate the unknown structural parameters, identify

the wind and wave loads and evaluate the control effect of the HMD.

A brief description of the subroutine is given here for clarity. The function of the subroutine is to calculate the HMD control

force and return it to the fully coupled aero-hydro-servo-elastic dynamic equations of wind turbines for the active control

force applying at each time step. The input of the subroutine is the control feedback gain matrix and the state vector, so the

output control force of the subroutine is easy to calculate by multiplying the two input items. The feedback gain matrix can be

get by control algorithm and passed into the modied input le of the FAST-SC automatically by using Matlab. The state vector

can be extracted from FAST-SC at each time step. It is important to note that the extracted state vector in FAST-SC is need to

consistent with that in the state-space model (11). In other words, there are some DOFs in model (11) is not consistent with

that in FAST-SC, so we should make some transformation, such as the DOF qt that is not appeared in FAST-SC, so we need to

transform the FAST-SC's tower top deection in the fore-aft direction xtop into it by the relationship xtop RT sinqt qp .

In this section, the modied FAST-SC is used to estimate the unknown parameters in the proposed model. In total, there are

8 parameters to be identied, and they are classied into two categories, i.e. U U1 U2 T , where

U1 d p dt kp kt Ip It ;

U2 Mwind Mwave ;

U1 is the structural parameter vector of the wind turbine, and U2 is the load parameter vector of the wind and wave.

The authors identied the parameters of the wind turbine by using the nonlinear least squares Levenberg-Marquardt (LM)

algorithm in previous research [39]. Here we don't explain the identication process for saving space, and only list the

identication results as Table 3.

Table 3

Parameter identication results of the wind turbine.

dp (N m s rad1) 3.6374 107 kt (N m rad1) 9.7990 109

dt (N m s rad1) 2.1032 107 Ip (kg m2) 1.6945 109

kp (N m rad1) 1.4171 109 It (kg m2) 1.8217 109

456 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

The parameters listed in Tables 2 and 3 are acquired from the authors' previous research [39], which is based on the passive

structural control system. It's still need to verify that whether these parameters t the proposed active control system. The

modied FAST-SC is used as a baseline tool to make a simulation and the results are compared with the results made by the

proposed model (8) for illustrating the validation of these parameters. The data for validation is obtained by applying a

specic control force fa and recording the tower top fore-aft deection (TTDFA), the platform pitching angular (PtfmPitch) and

the HMD mass stroke (HmdDxn).

According to the proposed model (8), we only enable 3 corresponding DOFs in the modied FAST-SC while disabling all

other DOFs; zero initial conditions, except rotor speed at the rated 12.1 rpm. Both of the proposed model and the FAST-SC

don't consider the external disturbances, i.e. still water and no wind. The control force fa has to pass a low passed lter

which represents the actuator dynamics. Consequently, a fourth order Butterworth lter is designed with passband cutoff

frequency at 1.6 Hz, passband maximum attenuation 3 dB, stopband cutoff frequency at 5 Hz and stopband minimum

attenuation at 60 dB. Fig. 4 shows the amplitude-frequency curve of the designed fourth order Butterworth lter. Fig. 5

shows the input control force in time and frequency domain. Over 95% of the signal power is contained in the fre-

quency range 0 Hze2 Hz, which is consistent with the fact that the main modes of vibration have frequencies below 1 Hz

[23,41].

The input control force of Fig. 5 is applied to the proposed model and the modied FAST-SC respectively to obtain the

time and frequency domain responses of the above mentioned 3 recording results, as shown in Fig. 6. It is seen that these

outputs of the proposed model track well with that of the modied FAST-SC. The slightly difference is the high-frequency

components of the platform pitch angle, which can be attributed to non-linearity in the barge pitch spring and damper in

the modied FAST-SC. In this graph, three spectral peaks are apparent at 0.0364 Hz, 0.0874 Hz, and 0.5404 Hz, corre-

sponding to the vibration modes of the TMD, platform pitch and tower bending respectively. The poles of the proposed

model are shown in Table 4. The table also provides the interpretation for each vibration mode by indicating the uncoupled

degree of freedom giving rise to each mode in the last column. For example, recall that the TMD parameters in Table 2, these

parameters give rise to an undamped frequency 0.045 Hz and damping ratio 46%, which are close to the appropriate values

in the rst row of Table 4.

Fig. 5. HMD force fa used for validation: (a) Time series; (b) Power spectrum density.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 457

Fig. 6. Output comparisons of the proposed model and the modied FAST-SC under HMD control force: (a) Time series; (b) Power spectrum density.

For the subsequent identication of wind and wave disturbances and control simulation, in this section, we select ve

typical combined wind and wave load cases according to normal sea state data from Ref. [7], as shown in Table 5. Load case

numbers 1 to 5 represent the wind turbine running in different conditions: cut-in wind speed, below rated power, near rated

power, higher than rated power, and cut-out wind speed, respectively. The peak spectral periods are set to 11.8 s corre-

sponding to the peak spectral frequency at 0.08 Hz in all ve load cases. This peak spectral period or frequency is near the

platform pitch mode of the system, so this value represents a serious wave load scenario.

For wind conditions, the wind eld is generated by TurbSim [46], which is a stochastic, full-eld, turbulent-wind simu-

lator. The Kaimal spectra and the power-law wind prole with the power law exponent of 0.14 and the normal turbulence

model with B level turbulence intensity are used according to the IEC61400-3 offshore wind turbine design standard. For each

wind speed, three different wind inputs with different random seeds are generated. For wave conditions, the wave loads can

be set in the modied FAST-SC code. All wave inputs use the JONSWAP spectrum. The signicant wave height is set to 1.7 m for

4 m/s wind and increasingly increases to 5.6 m/s for 24 m/s wind. Also, different random seeds are used for different wave

inputs.

Each simulation uses one specic wind and wave input and lasts 630s, and the output data in rst 30s are not recorded,

waiting for generator torque and blade pitch motion arriving normal operation state. The traditional generator torque and

bladed pitch controller from NREL [7] is used in the form of a dynamic link library for all tests presented in this paper, and all

the results are compared to the results using this baseline controller.

Actually, the wind and wave acting on the oating wind turbine is a complex combined aero-elastic and hydro-elastic

problem, which means there is a coupling between the wind and wave load and the wind turbine's response, i.e. the wind

and wave excitation results in the structural response of the wind turbine, and the resulting structural response can results in

new wind and wave load in reverse, and that cycle repeats. This paper is focused on the implementation of HMD structural

control on the oating wind turbine, and the accurate simulation of the wind and wave load is outside the scope of this paper.

As an alternative, we propose a load coefcient method to identify the selected ve typical wind and wave load cases. For

simplicity, we choose rotor thrust (RotThrust) and wave elevation (WaveElev) as the parameters characterizing the effect of

wind on the blades and wave on the platform, respectively, where RotThrust and WaveElev can be got from the modied

FAST-SC. By introducing a wind load coefcient bwind and a wave load coefcient bwave, the bending moment Mwind in the

proposed model can be expressed as the product of bwind and RotThrust, and the Mwave can be expressed as the product of

bwave and WaveElev. Consequently, the proposed state space model (11) can be replaced as (12), and the unknown parameter

vector U2 can be replaced as U02 bwind bwave .

458 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

Table 4

Poles of the proposed model.

Eigenvalue (Hz) Damping ratio (%) Undamped freq. (Hz) Damped freq. (Hz) Uncoupled DOF origin

0.01397 0.0336i 38.4 0.0364 0.0336 TMD system

0.01198 0.0866i 13.7 0.0874 0.0866 Platform pitch

0.00580 0.5404i 1.07 0.5404 0.5404 Tower bending

Table 5

Five typical combined wind and wave load cases.

Hub-height wind speed (m s1) 4 8 12 18 24

Expected signicant wave height (m) 1.7 2.0 2.6 4.0 5.6

Peak spectral period (s) 11.8

x_ Ax Bf a B0d u0d StaConst

(12)

y Cx

T

0 0 0 0 bwind 0 RotThrust

where B0d ; u0d .

0 0 0 bwave 0 0 WaveElev

In this section, specically, we also use the LM algorithm to identify the unknown wind and wave coefcient by mini-

mizing the sum of squared errors (SSE) between the proposed model response and the modied FAST-SC simulation result.

The SSE between outputs from FAST-SC and the proposed model (12) is dened as

1X m X

n h i2

S U02 wj yj ti fj ti ; U02

2

j1 i1

(13)

n h i

1X T

Yti F ti ; U02 W Yti F ti ; U02

2 i1

where m denotes the number of outputs, and n is the data length for one output. yj ti is the jth output of the modied FAST-

SC at time ti, while fj ti ; U02 is the jth output of the proposed model with parameter vector U02 at time ti, Yti and Fti ; U02 are

their vector notations. W represents the diagonal weight matrix for normalization.

The ve typical wind and wave load cases are chosen here for their corresponding load coefcients identication. The

identication procedure has three steps. First, in the modied FAST-SC input le, activate the platform pitch, the rst tower

foreeaft bending and the HMD DOFs, deactivate all the others, input the wind and incident wave load cases as Table 5, and

set the initial motion conditions as zero. Then, run the modied FAST-SC code and obtain the fully coupled nonlinear

simulation result. Second, extract the RotThrust and WaveElev time series as disturbance input in the proposed model (12),

and acquire the simulation result by solving the proposed model. Third, quantify the difference of the responses between

the proposed model and the FAST-SC and estimate all the unknown parameters in U02 . Finally substitute the identied load

coefcients into the proposed model, run the simulation, and compare the results again in order to verify the identied load

coefcients.

The LM algorithm used in this work adopts the embedded lsqnonlin solver in MATLAB. Parameter and cost tolerance is set

as 0.001 when identication accuracy and efciency are both considered. It should be noted that the initial guess of unknown

parameters is important in this nonlinear iterative identication problem, since there are a big amount of parameters to be

estimated compared with the number of outputs, and it will usually lead to a slow convergence process and unsatised result

Fig. 7. Iteration process for load wind and wave coefcient identication.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 459

if the initial values are placed too far away from the best identication [36]. So that it needs to take some trial and error to

produce a rough initial guess for these parameters.

For brevity, here we just show the identication process under load case 2 with one wind and wave seed, and other cases

are similar. Fig. 7 shows the identication iteration process, which can be seen good initial value could make a fast

convergence. Using the identied load coefcients, we can get the identied wind and wave load Mwind and Mwave, as seen in

Fig. 8. The time and frequency domain response comparison between the proposed model and the modied FAST-SC is

illustrated in Fig. 9. It can be seen that the two results coincide well with each other, which shows the effectiveness of the

wind and wave load identication. There are two spectral peaks in the frequency response in Fig. 9(b), and the peak fre-

quencies are happened at 0.0867 Hz and 0.5417 Hz. These two frequencies are close to the vibration modes of the last two row

in Table 4. There doesn't appear the HMD's frequency that listed in the rst row in Table 4, which imply that the HMD's

frequency is same as the platform pitch frequency, i.e. both the vibration frequencies of them are at 0.0867 Hz. This also

explains the resonant vibration absorption mechanism of the TMD or HMD. The identied load coefcients of all ve wind

and wave load cases are listed in Table 6, in which we can see that different load cases have more inuence on the identi-

cation values, but different random seeds have less inuence on them.

In this section, we will focus on the design of HMD structural controller for mitigation of vibrations and loads on the wind

turbine. The designed controller must satisfy the cost of active control power and HMD stroke which are the two most critical

constraints in practice. Two design stages will be adopted for this purpose: rst a LQR optimal controller is designed for its

free and convenient denition of objective function of control. It's very easy to introduce the constraints of control power and

Fig. 9. Output comparisons of the proposed model and the modied FAST-SC under wind and wave load: (a) Time series; (b) Power spectrum density.

460 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

Table 6

Identied wind and wave load coefcients.

bwind s1 1.304 1.779 2.055 1.910 1.788

105 () s2 1.304 1.791 2.066 1.902 1.805

s3 1.413 1.779 2.071 1.921 1.800

bwave s1 8.900 7.619 5.569 5.162 5.936

103 () s2 9.000 7.850 5.770 4.785 5.054

s3 9.000 8.159 6.488 5.390 5.717

HMD stroke into the LQR's objective function. Then, Based on this objective function with multiple constraints, the weight

parameters are optimized for maximizing the control effect.

LQR is one of the optimal control techniques that use state space approach to analyze such a system. Regarding vibration

and load reduction, the tower top fore-aft deection (TTDFA), the platform pitch angular (PtfmPitch), the HMD mass stroke

(HmdXDxn) and the HMD active control force (fa) are included in the control objective function, and the cost performance

index is given by:

Z

1

2

J q1 Rtop qt qp q2 q2p q3 xtmd Rtmd qt 2 ru2 dt (14)

2

0

where q1, q2, q3, r are the weighting coefcients corresponding to the TTDFA, PtfmPitch, HmdXDxn and fa respectively.

In this performance index, TTDFA and PtfmPitch are representative of the index of vibration reduction of the wind turbine,

and TTDFA correlates strongly with the tower base fore-aft bending moment, so it is also a representative of the index of load

reduction. The last two indexes HmdXDxn and fa are representative of the two constraints concerned in this paper. It can be

seen that the weighting coefcients could be allocated rationally for achieving maximum vibration and load reduction effect

and at the same time to satisfy the control power and HMD stroke constraint in practice. Substituting the output of Eq. (12)

into the Eq. (14), the performance index can be expressed as common form:

Z

1

J xT CT Q Cx uT Ru dt (15)

2

0

where Q and R are the weight matrices, and Q is a positive semi-denite matrix and R is a positive denite matrix. The value

of the elements in Q and R is related to its contribution to the performance index J. Since the proposed model (12) is

controllable and observable completely, the LQR control exists a unique solution which makes (15) achieving minimum. Using

(15), the correctional Riccati matrix equation can be obtained:

PA AT P PBR 1 BT P CT Q C 0 (16)

By solving (16), matrix P can be obtained and if it is positive denite, the system will be asymptotically stable and the

optimal feedback gain K and the optimal control force u(t) are obtained as

K R 1 BT P (17)

ut Kxt (18)

Actually, the motion state of the HMD mass includes two stages: before striking the stroke limiters (stage 1) and after

striking the stroke limiters (stage 2). We know the HMD mass mainly operate in stage 1, and stage 2 is a remarkably short time

for large stop stiffness and damping. So we will apply active control forces of Eq. (18) only when the HMD mass operate in

stage 1, i.e. before striking the stroke limiters, and not apply control forces in stage 2.

For LQR control problem, the weighting matrices Q and R in the performance index have a great inuence on the control

effect, and inappropriate weighting coefcients can lead to the control failure. In order to view a graphical representation of

the function that was being optimized, a surface response method was employed. There are four weighting coefcients in the

performance index, for simplicity, we set q1 q2 and r 1, so only two parameters q1 and q3 need to be optimized.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 461

The surface response plots, i.e. exhaustive search were created by inputting different combinations of q1 and q3 and

recording the standard deviation reduction percentage of the TTDFA. By inputting a range of spaced q1 and q3, and plotting this

array with the standard deviation reduction percentage of TTDFA on a surface plot, the optimum can be found graphically. The

parameter searching range and interval are chosen when both time consumption and accuracy are considered. This is a thorny

problem in LQR control. Here we take two steps to optimize the weighting coefcients: rst, a wide search range from 100 to

1021 and the 10 time interval, i.e. 100, 101, 102, , 1021 are adopted for reecting the total varying trend of the weighting

coefcient congurations. Then, based on the rough results of the rst step, the small good effect regions are used to make a

detail optimization with an evenly interval.

Here, we also use the proposed model and the modied FAST-SC to optimize the weighting coefcients. The simulation

time for one combination of q1 and q3 is approximately 1 min and 2.7 min for the proposed model and the modied FAST-SC,

respectively, and a full optimization process for each load case may need tens of thousands of parameter combinations to be

resolved, which denitely need a lot of time consumption. For this purpose, we developed the code in Matlab with parallel

running function for simulating different parameter combinations at the same time. We run this optimization on a computer

with 28 cores with all cores opening, which can deals with 28 parameter combinations in one time. This greatly saves the

simulation time, approximately 1/25 time consumption of its serial running.

Fig. 10 shows the nephogram of percentage reduction of s(TTDFA) vs. q1 and q3 under load case 2, compared to the passive

systems. There are a narrow and long belt distribution for conguring the weighting coefcients q1 and q3. The plots between

Fig. 10 (a) and (b) have different results, and the optimization domain in Fig. 10(b) is wider than that in Fig. 10(a), i.e. many

combinations of q1 and q3 are failure on control in the modied FAST-SC for verifying. This implies that the reduced 3-DOF

model is not suitable for optimizing the weighting coefcients for its reduced 3-DOFs, which includes the interaction be-

tween the control force and the 3-DOFs, but can't include the interaction between the control force and some other important

DOFs, such as the blades' pitch DOFs. Fig. 11 is the nephogram of the ratio of control power to output power vs. q1 and q3 under

load case 2, which is also seen the different results of the two models. We should combine the Figs. 10 and 11 to nd ranges

where need detail optimization. The general principle is that the places where values are large in Fig. 10 and small in Fig. 11

need to be selected for further optimization.

Fig. 10. Nephogram of percentage reduction of s(TTDFA) vs. q1 and q2 (load case 2): (a) Modied FAST-SC response; (b) Reduced 3-DOF model response.

Fig. 11. Nephogram of the ratio of control power to output power vs. q1 and q2 (load case 2): (a) Modied FAST-SC response; (b) Reduced 3-DOF model response.

After detail optimization by the modied FAST-SC code, compared to the passive systems, the percentage reductions of

s(TTDFA) and s(TwrBsMyt) with the ratio of control power to output power under all ve load cases are shown in Fig. 12. The

distributions of the percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) and s(TwrBsMyt) are similar, and there is a positive correlation be-

tween them. The distributions of the percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) and s(TwrBsMyt) in load case 1 are different from

other four load cases. In load case 1, the percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) and s(TwrBsMyt) increase with the ratio of control

462 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

Fig. 12. Percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) and s(TwrBsMyt) with the ratio of control power to output power: (a) Case 1; (b) Case 2; (c) Case 3; (d) Case 4; (e) Case 5.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 463

power to output power, but the percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) and s(TwrBsMyt) are increase rstly and then decrease

with the increase of the ratio of control power to output power. The maximum percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) and

s(TwrBsMyt) decrease gradually from load case 1 to load case 5. In load case 3, using the ratio of control power to output

power approximately 5% can achieve the maximum percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) and s(TwrBsMyt) at 23% and 26%, and

the rest load cases who is farther away from load case 3, more control power consumption need to be used to achieve the

maximum percentage reductions.

Fig. 13 shows the percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) with the HMD stroke. The stroke is measured using the maximum

downwind (in blue circles) or upwind displacement (in red points) and the 90th percentile of the displacement time series

(in green cross). The maximum downwind or upwind displacement is that the peak amplitude of the HMD strokes, and the

90th percentile value quanties the displacement value that is exceeded 10% of the time, which is a better descriptor of

stroke requirements than the peak amplitude (which occurs once typically) [41]. Note that we take a hard stroke con-

straints 8 m into consideration, which is a clear dividing line in Fig. 13. The probability of the HMD mass hitting the stroke

limiters gradually increases from load case 1 to load case 5 by the same weighting coefcient congurations, especially for

the load case 5, the probability arrives at 100%, i.e. the HMD mass hit the stroke limiters under all weighting coefcient

congurations. The maximum distance over the stroke limiters could arrive at approximately 1.3 m in load case 5 by the

effective weighting coefcient congurations, which shows the stroke limiters work normally and the over-limit distance

is allowable.

Although this exhaustive search could be regarded as a global optimization method and it seems simple, it is still limited

by pre-dened parameter searching range and interval. Besides, it is very computationally expensive, which will take hours or

days long to nish one optimization process. Moreover, there might exists better solution if the parameter interval is not small

enough. Therefore, more intelligent and efcient optimization algorithms are demanded. With this in mind, a more elegant

optimization algorithm is described next.

Fig. 13. Percentage reductions of s(TTDFA) with the HMD stroke: (a) Case 1; (b) Case 2; (c) Case 3; (d) Case 4; (e) Case 5.

464 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

Genetic algorithm (GA) is an evolution-inspired algorithm that includes mathematical representations of populations,

individual tness, mutation, and even mating to nd an optimum to a problem. This approach starts with randomly generated

population, and individuals with better tness will be selected as the basis of next generation. The improved population will

keep evolving after inheritance, mutation, selection, and crossover procedures until it meets the nal requirement. As a global

optimization method, GA is based on stochastic variables and does not require the derivatives of object function, which brings

the advantages of global evaluation and objective tolerance when compared with other gradient-based local optimization

methods [36]. It usually helps to obtain a better result in optimization problems with non-smooth objective functions, thus is

suitable for the optimization problem in this paper.

The capability of using multiple design variables is introduced so both the weighting coefcients q1 and q3 can be specied

in one individual. The algorithm starts by picking a population of random binary strings for both the q1 and q3 constants.

These designs are kept in pairs throughout the algorithm. The binary strings are simply binary encodings of the integer value

of the corresponding q1 or q3 constant. The length of these strings puts bounds on the variables. The tness function is the

reciprocal of the s(TTDFA). Note that the HMD stroke constraint is considered in the modied FAST-SC, and only the control

power constraint should be considered here. We treat the control power constraint as a penalty function, and the new tness

function is constructed by adding the penalty function.

Once the initial population is chosen, the rst step is to check tness values. The checking of the tness values is where the

majority of the computational time is taken because the modied FAST-SC model must be run for each design. For each

running of the modied FAST-SC code, the running time is approximately 2.7 min, so the serial running for the weighting

coefcient optimization seems infeasible for thousands of code calls. To speed up the computations, the PGAc is developed in

this research based on distribution of workload among multiple cores during the time consuming tness function evaluation

phase, followed by a single central population regeneration. Our model of PGAc exploits the fact that each individual in the

population represents an independent coding of the weighting coefcients and hence its tness function evaluation can be

done independently and concurrently. Next, the algorithm saves the elite and average tness and goes on to the scaling,

crossover, and mutation steps.

The scaling used is called sigma-scaling, which normalizes the tnesses by the standard deviation and removes individuals

which are more than 1 standard deviation below the mean of the population. A roulette wheel uniform crossover is used with

a Pcrossover 0.7. Roulette wheel crossover can be visualized as a weighted roulette wheel. The more t individuals have a

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 465

Table 7

Optimization results based on PGAc with the ratio of control power to output power as 10%.

s(TTDFA) (%) to output power (%)

PGA ES

1 15.37 15.13 9.96 3.0238 1011 2.9235 109

2 27.94 27.92 9.28 1.9430 1014 4.8730 1011

3 22.55 22.53 4.66 1.9044 1014 7.9057 1011

4 17.85 17.62 9.27 6.2093 1014 3.6328 1012

5 12.76 10.74 9.93 2.8218 1013 3.7359 1011

Table 8

Design model poles of passive and active system.

Control type Eigenvalue (Hz) Damping ratio (%) Damped freq. (Hz) Uncoupled DOF origin

Optimal passive 0.01198 0.0866i 13.7 0.0866 Platform pitch

0.00580 0.5404i 1.07 0.5404 Tower bending

Active Case 1 0.07349 0.0971i 60.4 0.0971 Platform pitch

0.03932 0.5414i 7.24 0.5414 Tower bending

Case 2 0.11344 0.1906i 51.1 0.1906 Platform pitch

0.66661 0.8467i 61.9 0.8467 Tower bending

Case 3 0.13071 0.2132i 52.3 0.2132 Platform pitch

0.66826 0.8450i 62.0 0.8450 Tower bending

Case 4 0.14068 0.2339i 51.5 0.2339 Platform pitch

0.95589 1.0837i 66.1 1.0837 Tower bending

Case 5 0.17221 0.2627i 54.8 0.2627 Platform pitch

0.35314 0.6172i 49.7 0.6172 Tower bending

larger slice of the wheel, and thus are more likely to be bred in the crossover. Uniform crossover takes random bits from the

strings of both the parents and swaps them. A mutation probability, Pmutation 0.01, per bit is applied, where the algorithm

switches 1% of the bits to the opposite of what it was. The mutation step helps to maintain genetic diversity in the population.

The process is then repeated. This process can be seen in Fig. 14.

The optimization results based on PGA are shown in Table 7. It can be noted that the PGAc gives a better result than the ES

method. The reason is that the ES approach is limited by pre-dened parameter searching range and interval, so there might

exists better solution if the parameter interval is not small enough.

4.3. Comparison of design model poles between passive and active system

Table 8 summarizes the values of the eigenvalues, damping ratios and damped frequencies for the platform pitch and

tower bending DOFs. Note that the design poles both have negative real part between passive and active systems, and the

active system poles are farther away from the imagine axis than the passive system poles, which implies the designed LQR

control can make the system get more degree of stability than the passive system. The mode associated with the platform

Table 9

Percentage reduction of evaluation indices obtained from simulation results.

Value Rel. Baseline (%) Value Rel. Baseline (%) Rel. Passive (%)

STD TTDspFA (m) 0.326 0.205 37.1 0.159 51.2 22.4

STD TwrBsMyt (kN m) 54,234 34,379 36.6 25,182 53.6 26.8

STD PtfmPitch (deg) 1.851 1.042 43.7 0.749 59.5 28.1

Max TmdDxn (m) e 8.080 e 7.990 e 1.1

Max TmdVxn (m s1) e 2.946 e 5.497 e 86.6

STD TmdDxn (m) e 2.051 e 2.160 e 5.3

STD TmdVxn (m s1) e 0.641 e 1.041 e 62.4

Ave. HmdPwr (kW) e e e 160.4 e e

RMS HmdPwr (kW) e e e 291.3 e e

STD GenPwr (kW) 557.9 496.6 4.9 468.9 7.0 12.9

STD BldPitch1 rate (deg s1) 0.30 0.21 30.0 0.18 40.0 14.3

STD RootMyc1 (kN m) 1769 1523 13.9 1443 18.4 5.3

STD OoPDe (m) 0.975 0.874 10.4 0.841 13.7 3.8

STD TTDspSS (m) 0.046 0.034 26.1 0.032 30.4 5.9

STD TwrBsMxt (kN m) 9018 6571 27.1 6180 31.5 6.0

STD PtfmRoll (deg) 0.314 0.209 33.4 0.197 37.3 5.7

466 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

Fig. 15. Percentage of reduction of some main evaluation indices in each wind and wave load case: (a) TTDspFA; (b) TwrBsMyt; (c) PtfmPitch; (d) RootMyc1.

Fig. 16. Stroke and velocity of the TMD/HMD in each load case.

pitch DOF increases damping from 13.7% to 60.4%, 51.1%, 52.3%, 51.5% and 54.8% from load case 1 to 5, respectively, while the

mode associated with the tower bending DOF increases damping from 1.07% to 7.24%, 61.9%, 62.0%, 66.1% and 49.7% from load

case 1 to 5, respectively.

In this section, using the modied FAST-SC simulations under realistic loading from the ve typical wind and wave load

cases, we evaluate the performance of the designed structural controller by comparing the results of active HMD and its

corresponding passive TMD and uncontrolled baseline system. All the relevant output parameters are compared with the

values for TMD and baseline simulations by rst taking the average of the evaluation indices across the three simulations for

each load case and then calculating the percentage change in the average values of the evaluation indices compared with the

average of the TMD and baseline values.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 467

Table 9 lists some wind turbine indices obtained from the simulations. Because a wind turbine in practice does not

experience an equal amount of time for each wind speed bin, the evaluation indices are then weighted according to the

Weibull distribution and nally averaged across all the ve wind and wave load cases. The selected parameters of the Weibull

distribution are the same as those in [47]. Twelve evaluation indices are considered: TTDspFA and TTDspSS reect the fore-aft

and side-side deections of the tower top, TwrBsMyt and TwrBsMxt reect the fore-aft and side-side loads of the tower

bottom, PtfmPitch and PtfmRoll reect the fore-aft and side-side rotational motions of the barge platform, TmdDxn and

TmdVxn reect the stroke and velocity of the mass of TMD/HMD, RootMyc1 and OoPDe reect the load of the blade root and

out of plane deection of the blade tip, and HmdPwr is the active control power consumption of the HMD. Besides, we also

consider the GenPwr error and BldPitch1 rate indices, which reect the general quality of generator power production and the

usage extent of the blade pitch actuator, respectively. GenPwr error in the table only accounts for 12e24 m/s mean wind

speed, that is, above the rated wind speed but below the cut out one. In the table, Rel. Ba and Rel. Pa are the corresponding

percentage of reduction relative to the baseline and passive TMD, respectively ( and - denote reduction and increasing,

respectively).

To see more details, we further show in Fig. 15 the exact percentage of reduction of some main evaluation indices for

passive and active control in each wind and wave load case. Fig. 16 to show one of the constraints TMD/HMD stroke in each

Fig. 18. Time responses of some indices in wind and wave load case 2.

468 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

load case, besides we also add its velocity plot. Fig. 17 is the other constraint active control power in each load case. Fig. 18 to

show a representative 300 s time responses of some indices for the baseline, passive TMD and active HMD conguration

under the wind and wave load case 2, and their power spectral density (PSD) plots are shown in Fig. 19, with the exception of

the power index.

From the results presented in Table 9 and Figs. 15e17, we have the following observations and analyses:

a) As is shown the results in Table 9, the largest (absolute) load in the wind turbine is the tower base fore-aft bending

moment (i.e., TwrBsMyt). On the positive side, the addition of structural control systems results in substantial positive im-

pacts on the vibrations, loads and performance of the wind turbine. The primary metrics are the reduction in tower base fore-

aft bending moment, tower top fore-aft deection and platform pitching motion, and the designed active structural con-

trollers are especially effective in reducing these indices. Compared with the passive TMD, the designed active structural

controllers are able to reduce them by 26.8%, 22.4% and 28.1%, respectively. The major reason for these vibration and load

reduction is that the platform pitching motion is reduced by active structural control.

b) It is seen from the results in Table 9, reduction of platform pitch motion also more or less leads to improvements of other

indices that are directly related with it. Less platform pitch vibration implies a smaller variation of the wind speed relative to

the rotor plane, so that the need to adjust the blade pitch angle is reduced, the generator power output is steadier and the

blade root load and blade tip deection are also mitigated. It seemly there is a causal link between the reduction of platform

pitch and other indices. The presented indices related with wind turbine side-side motions and loads are also improved by the

fore-aft structural control, but the reduction effect is approximately 5%, which is relatively much less than those in the fore-aft

direction.

c) From Fig. 15, it is seen that suppression rates of passive TMD present the V-shaped distribution characteristics, i.e.

control rates near the rated wind speed region are apparently lower than that regions near cut-in and cut-out wind speed

case. The reason for this phenomenon has explained in our previous research [39], so we don't explained here. From

Fig. 9(a)e(c), compared with passive TMD suppression, the active HMD control rates show that more vibration and load

reduction can be achieved, especially signicant improving the control effect of regions near the rated wind speed, such as

load case 2, 3 and 4. The control rates of the three most critical indices: TTDspFA, TwrBsMyt and PtfmPitch are improved more

than 20% by the designed HMD control in these three load cases, whereas relatively less control rates (approximately 10%) can

be achieved in the cut-in and cut-out load case, which implies that active HMD control could make up for the shortcoming of

passive TMD (The shortcoming is that the V-shaped distribution of the TMD suppression effect is inconsistent with the

Weibull distribution in practice).

The blue line represent the relative percentage reduction of the active HMD compared with the passive TMD, from

Fig. 9(a)e(c), we can see that the relative reduction is gradually decreasing with the increase of the wind and wave load case

Fig. 19. Frequency results of some indices in wind and wave load case 2.

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 469

number, with the exception of the load case 1 for which its less relative reduction is due to the constraint of that no more than

10% control power consumption (we can see the relative reduction of the TwrBsMyt can achieve at 38% when the control

power constraint is 30% from Fig. 12(a)).

From Table 9 and Fig. 9(d), there is limited improvement (less than 10%) on the vibration and load indices that related with

blades, which could explained by the fact that our control objective function is aimed at the vibration reduction of the tower

and platform, and future how to design the objective function included the index related with blades' vibration and loads

worth considering.

d) From Figs. 16, 18 and 19, the maximum strokes (absolute) of active HMD and passive TMD are all within the range of

7.5 me9.5 m for all ve wind and wave cases, which implies the 8 m stroke constraints is effective for limiting the

displacement of the TMD/HMD mass, satisfying the limited space in nacelle in practice. Overall, the maximum and standard

deviation strokes of HMD mass are a little bigger than the passive TMD mass strokes due to the external control force on the

HMD mass that results in a more severe strike into the stroke limiters. But the average stroke of the HMD mass is smaller than

that of the TMD mass, which implies that the designed active controller could enhance the ability of resisting deformation of

the wind turbine system under the wind and wave excitation.

Different from the mass stroke, the average velocities between active HMD and passive TMD are almost same (nearly zero),

whereas the maximum and standard deviation velocities between them are very different. The maximum and standard

deviation velocities of the HMD mass are apparent higher than that of the TMD mass, which implies more structural vibration

energy could be dissipated by the damping from the higher HMD mass velocity, and also explain the mechanism of why active

HMD could be more effective for vibration reduction than passive TMD. Combined with the plots of stroke and velocity, we

can see that our designed controller could magnify the velocity of HMD mass but couldn't increase its stroke due to the pre-

set stroke constraints of 8 m, which is different from active HMD control used in civil engineering structures where they

don't need to consider the constraint of the HMD mass for their enough stroke space supplying.

e) From Figs. 17 and 18, the average output power of wind turbine running below the rated wind speed (i.e. load case 1 and

2) is far less than the rated output power 5 MW, and it will reach the rated output power when wind turbine run above the

rated wind speed (i.e. load case 3, 4 and 5). So wind turbine should be run above the rated wind speed as much as possible for

capturing maximum output power. We also can see the active HMD control power consumptions in each load case in Fig. 17.

There only need a small portion of output power (less than 10%) used for active control consumption, which implies the other

pre-set active control power constraint of the ratio of active control power to output power within 10% is effective, and also

demonstrating that the designed active HMD controller is an economical and possibly practical design.

f) From Fig. 18, it is seen that the use of passive TMD and active HMD structural control does improve the structural

response of the wind turbine, and active HMD could achieve more load and vibration reduction than passive TMD, and this is

most apparent in the platform pitch angle. This shows that the designed active HMD controller has some reliability. Fig. 19

shows some large peaks are concentrated between 0.05 and 0.15 Hz in the baseline case. The frequencies of these peaks

are close to 0.08 Hz, which is the peak spectral frequency. The passive TMD and active HMD clearly reduce these peaks, and

active HMD could also achieve more peaks reduction than passive TMD.

6. Conclusions

This paper presents an investigation into the use of active structural HMD control for a barge type oating wind turbine

with two critical constraints in practical application: one is stroke limitations and the other is active control power con-

sumption. The major contributions and conclusions of this study are:

1) A contact nonlinear modelling method for the oating wind turbine with clearances between the HMD and the stroke

limiters is presented based on Euler-Lagrange's equations, and the established nonlinear model includes the constraint of

HMD stroke. The identied passive structural parameters of the wind turbine and TMD by previous researches based on

nonlinear LM algorithm are validated for the established active controlled model of oating wind turbine.

2) An equivalent load coefcient method is presented for identifying the wind and wave disturbances. The identied load

coefcients of all ve typical wind and wave load cases are also obtained by the nonlinear LM algorithm. The different load

cases have more inuence on the identication values, but different random seeds have less inuence on them.

3) The active control subroutine in Fortran language is developed for implementing a simulation for HMD structural control

of wind turbines directly in the famous high delity nonlinear simulator FAST-SC, rather than using the traditional FAST-

Simulink interface for its complicated compilation process not easy to get succeed.

4) A state-feedback LQR structural controller is designed for load reduction of the wind turbine, and two optimization

methods: surface response plots and parallel genetic algorithm with constrains are adopted to optimize the weighting

coefcients. The optimal weighting coefcients are obtained for all of the ve load cases by the fully coupled DOFs wind

turbine model from the modied FAST-SC code, whereas the reduced 3-DOF model is not suitable for optimizing the

weighting coefcients for it can't include the interaction between the control force and some other important DOFs, such

as the blades' pitch DOFs.

5) Compared with the baseline system, the optimized passive TMD results in tower fore-aft load reductions of 48.5%, 39.8%,

32.6%, 39.3% and 47.9% from case 1 to case 5, respectively, while for the active HMD control, load reductions of 57.5%, 60.7%,

470 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

50.4%, 53.1% and 54.6% are achievable, satisfying the pre-set stroke constraints of 8 m and the control power constraint of

the consumption-to-output ratio of the power within 10%. V-shaped distribution of the TMD suppression effect is

inconsistent with the Weibull distribution in practical offshore wind farms, and the active HMD control could make up for

this shortcoming of the passive TMD. Active HMD control is shown to be achievable under the constraints of stroke and

active power.

6) The designed HMD-LQR controllers could increase the velocity of the HMD mass but couldn't increase its stroke due to the

pre-set stroke constraints, which implies more structural vibration energy could be dissipated by the damping from the

higher HMD mass velocity, and also explain the mechanism of why active HMD could be more effective for vibration

reduction than passive TMD. The HMD stroke constraint is a new characteristic of offshore oating wind turbines, which is

different from the active HMD control used in civil engineering structures where they don't need to consider the constraint

of the HMD mass for their enough stroke space supplying.

Starting from this work, future work possibly includes extending the presented active HMD control with the two critical

constraints to the barge platform or other types of offshore oating wind turbines such as TLP, spar-buoy. Also future work

needs to be considered the observer-based LQR control design approach, which is easier to be implemented in practice.

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China with grant number 51675426 and the

Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China with grant number 20116102110002.

The authors also want to thank Dr. Lackner in University of Massachusetts Amherst for his open source code FAST-SC and

Dr. Jonkman from National Renewable Energy Laboratory for his generous help and support with the specications of Barge

model. Besides, the authors wish to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions.

Appendix

The detailed expanded terms of these matrices in Eq. (8) are as follows:

2 3

Ip

M4 It 5

mT

2 3

dp dt dt 0

D 4 dt dt dT clim Rtmd dT clim RT 5

2

2 3

kp mp gRp kt kt 0

K 4 kt mt gRt kt kT klim Rtmd mT gRT kT klim RT mT g 5

2

8 9 2 3 8 9

< 0 = 0 1 < 0 =

4 5 Mwind

Fa RT ; Fd 1 0 ; ud ; Const Klim xlim RT

: ; Mwave : ;

0 0 0 Klim xlim

The detailed expanded terms of these matrices in Eq. (11) are as follows:

0 I

A

M1 K M1 D

2 3

kp mp gRp kt kt

6 0 7

6 Ip Ip 7

6 7

6 7

1 6 kt mt gRt kt kT klim R2T mT gRT kT klim RT mT g 7

M K 6 7

6 It It It 7

6 7

6 7

4 kT klim RT mT g kT klim 5

0

mT mT

Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472 471

2 3

dp dt dt

6 I 0 7

6 p Ip 7

6 7

6 7

6 dt dt dT clim R2T dT clim RT 7

M1 D 6 7

6 It It It 7

6 7

6 7

4 dT clim RT dT clim 5

0

mT mT

T

0

B 0 0 0 0 RItT 1

M1 Fa mT

2 3T

60 0 0 0 1 07

0 6 Itw 7

Bd 1 6 7

M Fd 40 0 0 1 0 05

Ip

T

klim xlim RT klim xlim

StaConst 0 0 0 0

It mT

2 3

Rtop Rtop 0 0 0 0

C DspC VelC 4 1 0 0 0 0 05

0 Rtmd 1 0 0 0

References

[1] D.Y.C. Leung, Y. Yang, Wind energy development and its environmental impact: a review, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 16 (1) (2012) 1031e1039.

[2] A. Chehouri, R. Younes, et al., Review of performance optimization techniques applied to wind turbines, Appl. Energy 142 (2015) 361e388.

[3] B. Snyder, M.J. Kaiser, Ecological and economic cost-benet analysis of offshore wind energy, Renew. Energ 34 (6) (2009) 1567e1578.

[4] J.K. Kaldellis, M. Kapsali, Shifting towards offshore wind energy-recent activity and future development, Energ Policy 53 (2013) 136e148.

[5] C. Perez-Collazo, D. Greaves, G. Iglesias, A review of combined wave and offshore wind energy, Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 42 (2015) 141e153.

[6] X.W. Li, H.J. Gao, Load mitigation for a oating wind turbine via generalized H structural control, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron

63 (1) (2016) 332e342.

[7] J.M. Jonkman, Dynamics Modeling and Loads Analysis of an Offshore Floating Wind Turbine (PhD thesis), University of Colorado, Boulder, USA, 2007.

[8] J.M. Jonkman, D. Matha, Dynamics of offshore oating wind turbinesddanalysis of three concepts, Wind Energy 14 (4) (2011) 557e569.

[9] S. Buttereld, W. Musial, et al., Engineering Challenges for Floating Offshore Wind Turbines (Report number: NREL/CP-500-38776), National

Renewable Energy Laboratory, Springeld, USA, 2007.

[10] J. Jonkman, D. Matha, A Quantitative Comparison of the Responses of Three Floating Platform Concepts (Report number: NREL/CP-500e46726),

National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, USA, 2010.

[11] T.J. Larsen, T.D. Hanson, A method to avoid negative damped low frequent tower vibrations for a oating, pitch controlled wind turbine, J. Phys. Conf.

Ser. 75 (1) (2007) 012073.

[12] J.M. Jonkman, Inuence of control on the pitch damping of a oating wind turbine, 6th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit 7-10 January

2008, (Reno, Nevada).

[13] D. Matha, Modelling and Loads & Stability Analysis of a Floating Offshore Tension Leg Platform Wind Turbine, M.S. thesis, National Renewable Energy

Labs National Wind Turbine Center, Stuttgart, Germany, 2009.

[14] F.G. Nielsen, B. Skaare, et al., Method for damping tower vibrations in a wind turbine installation. United States Patent: 8186949-5-29, 2012.

[15] S. Christiansen, T. Bak, T. Knudsen, Damping wind and wave loads on a oating wind turbine, Energies 6 (8) (2013) 4097e4116.

[16] T. Bakka, H.R. Karimi, S. Christiansen, Linear parameter-varying modelling and control of an offshore wind turbine with constrained information, IET

Control Theory A 8 (1) (2014) 22e29.

[17] M.A. Lackner, An investigation of variable power collective pitch control for load mitigation of oating offshore wind turbines, Wind Energy 16 (4)

(2013) 519e528.

[18] H. Namik, K. Stol, Individual blade pitch control of oating offshore wind turbines, Wind Energy 13 (1) (2010) 74e85.

[19] H. Namik, K. Stol, Individual blade pitch control of a spar-buoy oating wind turbine, IEEE T Contr Syst. T 22 (1) (2014) 214e223.

[20] S. Li, F. Yang, Load optimization control of large deep-water oating wind turbines, J. Mech. 2 (3) (2014) 169e175.

[21] K.T. Magar, M.J. Balas, S. Frost, Direct adaptive control for individual blade pitch control of wind turbines for load reduction, J. Intel. Mat. Syst. Str. 26

(12) (2015) 1564e1572.

[22] A. Staino, B. Basu, Emerging trends in vibration control of wind turbines: a focus on a dual control strategy, Philos. T R. Soc. A 373 (2035) (2015)

20140069.

[23] M.A. Lackner, M. Rotea, Passive structural control of offshore wind turbines, Wind Energy 14 (3) (2011) 373e388.

[24] V.N. Dinh, B. Basu, S. Nagarajaiah, Semi-active control of vibrations of spar type oating offshore wind turbines, Smart Struct. Syst. 18 (4) (2016)

683e705.

[25] P.J. Murtagh, A. Ghosh, et al., Passive control of wind turbine vibrations including blade/tower interaction and rotationally sampled turbulence, Wind

Energy 11 (4) (2014) 305e317.

[26] S. Colwell, B. Basu, Tuned liquid column dampers in offshore wind turbines for structural control, Eng. Struct. 31 (2) (2009) 358e368.

[27] A. Mensah, L. Duen ~ as-Osorio, Reliability analysis of wind turbines equipped with tuned liquid column dampers (TLCD), in: Structures Congress,

Chicago, IL, ASCE, Reston, VA, 29e31 March 2012, pp. 1190e1200.

[28] T. Ikeda, Y. Harata, et al., Vibration suppression of wind turbine blades using tuned mass dampers, in: ASME 2014 International Design Engineering

Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Buffalo, NY, ASME, New York, 17e20 August 2014.

[29] J. Li, Z. Zhang, J. Chen, Experimental study on vibration control of offshore wind turbines using a ball vibration absorber, Energy Power Eng. 4 (3)

(2012) 153e157.

472 Y. Hu, E. He / Journal of Sound and Vibration 410 (2017) 447e472

[30] J. Jonkman, M.L. Buhl Jr., Fast User's Guide (Report number: NREL/EL-500e38230), National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, USA, 2005.

[31] N. Luo, L. Pacheco, et al., Smart structural control strategies for offshore wind power generation with oating wind turbines, in: International con-

ference on renewable energies and power quality, Santiago de Compostela, European Association for the Development of Renewable Energy, Envi-

ronment and Power Quality (EA4EPQ), Santiago de Compostela, 28e30 March 2012.

[32] G.M. Stewart, Load Reduction of Floating Wind Turbines Using Tuned Mass Dampers, MSc Thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 2012.

[33] G.M. Stewart, M.A. Lackner, Offshore wind turbine load reduction employing optimal passive tuned mass damping systems, IEEE T Contr Syst. T 21 (4)

(2013) 1090e1104.

[34] G.M. Stewart, M.A. Lackner, Determining optimal tuned mass damper parameters for offshore wind turbines using a genetic algorithm, in: 50th AIAA

Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Nashville, TN, AIAA, Reston, VA, 9e12 January 2012. AIAA

2012-0376.

[35] Y.L. Si, H.R. Karimi, H.J. Gao, Modeling and parameter analysis of the OC3-Hywind oating wind turbine with a tuned mass damper in nacelle, J. Appl.

Math. 2013 (2013) 10. Article ID 679071.

[36] Y.L. Si, H.R. Karimi, H.J. Gao, Modeling and optimization of a passive structural control design for a spar-type oating wind turbine, Eng. Struct. 69

(2014) 168e182.

[37] E.M. He, Y.Q. Hu, Y. Zhang, Structural vibration control of offshore oating wind turbine based on TMD, J. Northwest Polytech Univ. 32 (1) (2014)

55e61.

[38] E.M. He, Y.Q. Hu, et al., Vibration and load suppression of offshore oating wind turbine, in: The 1st International Conference on Advanced Materials,

Structures and Mechanical Engineering, Incheon, South Korea, TTP, Pfafkon, 3e4 May 2014, pp. 891e896.

[39] E.M. He, Y.Q. Hu, Y. Zhang, Optimization design of tuned mass damper for vibration suppression of a barge-type offshore oating wind turbine, Proc.

Inst. Mech. Eng. M. J. Eng. Marit. Environ. 231 (1) (2016), 1475090216642466.

[40] F. Ricciardelli, A.D. Pizzimenti, M. Mattei, Passive and active mass damper control of the response of tall buildings to wind gustiness, Eng. Struct. 25

(2003) 1199e1209.

[41] M.A. Lackner, M.A. Rotea, Structural control of oating wind turbines, Mechatronics 21 (4) (2011) 704e719.

[42] G.M. Stewart, M.A. Lackner, The effect of actuator dynamics on active structural control of offshore wind turbines, Eng. Struct. 33 (5) (2011) 1807e1816.

[43] H. Namik, M. Rotea, M. Lackner, Active structural control with actuator dynamics on a oating wind turbine, in: 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting

Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 7e10 January 2013 (Grapevine, Texas).

[44] Y.L. Si, H.R. Karimi, Gain scheduling H2/H structural control of a oating wind turbine, in: Proc. 2014 IFAC World Congress, 2014.

[45] X.W. Li, H.J. Gao, Load mitigation for a oating wind turbine via generalized H structural control, IEEE T Ind. Electron 63 (1) (2016) 332e343.

[46] B.J. Jonkman, Turbsim User's Guide: Version 1.50 (Report number: NREL/TP-500e46198), National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, USA, 2009.

[47] H. Namik, Individual Blade Pitch and Disturbance Accommodating Control of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines, Ph.D dissertation, Univ. Auckland, New

Zealand, 2012.

- The Power of Wind: Alternate source of EnergyÎncărcat deAbhay Kumar Nayak
- Doosan Wind TurbineÎncărcat deUhrinImre
- Bj 34385389Încărcat deAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- 2MW BrochureÎncărcat deifmehere
- 2001-MAREC-RAMS_2Încărcat deWahyu Priyo Kustamanto
- IJAEST12-02-02-36Încărcat dekusumchitika
- 12 0160 Gamesa G9x BrochureÎncărcat demibbl
- Wind Models for Simulation of Power FluctuationsonwindfarmsÎncărcat degoutham473
- Energysystems M434 - 2012 Extra Notes - Renewable Energies 1Încărcat deDiablofireZA
- Curran Crawford PhDÎncărcat dengar024
- (3)Modelling and ControlÎncărcat deChandra Sekhar
- 23_1400_jancoelingh_01Încărcat dehassanain_100
- Ielts Academic Reading Download 2 Wind PowerÎncărcat deAminul Haque
- 12 41 Rapport ScreenÎncărcat deVladimir Pîrvan
- 1Încărcat deMona Valikhani
- IEC Standard for Related to SWTÎncărcat denguyenductuyen
- Wind Turbine6Încărcat desuraj
- ieee seriesÎncărcat deKevin Nickname
- lesson plan template for sustainabiltyÎncărcat deapi-242081485
- DNV opportunityÎncărcat deRagunath Babu
- 2Încărcat deCarlos Muñoz
- Suspended windmillÎncărcat deShri Patil
- Techno-Economic Feasibility Study of Ammonia Plants Powered by Of.pdfÎncărcat deMohammed Al Breiki
- Doc Whisper 500 Grid Connect Manual 20070103173930Încărcat deVuldai
- presentation on power grid inertiaÎncărcat dejorjijon
- Grundfosliterature pumpÎncărcat deJose Orlando Salmeron
- An Aerodynamic Method for the Analysis of Isolated HAWT'sÎncărcat deMr Void
- 1-s2.0-S0141029605003433-main.pdfÎncărcat deStefanstane Stankovski
- back to back converterÎncărcat deMayis Papatyasi
- 29708Încărcat dem_azhagar

- Accelerated Internationalization and Resource Leverage Str 2015 Journal of WÎncărcat declaralisie
- A Cost and Performance Comparison of LRTM and VI for the Manu 2011 RenewableÎncărcat declaralisie
- Adaptive Robust Control of a Class of Non Affine Variable Spee 2016 ISA TranÎncărcat declaralisie
- CFD Analysis of Flow Fields for Shrouded Wind Turbine 2017 Alexandria EnginÎncărcat declaralisie
- modelagem em CFDÎncărcat declaralisie
- Aero Acoustics Noise Evaluation of H Rotor Darrieus Wind Turbines 2014 EnergÎncărcat declaralisie
- Advanced Control Algorithms for Reduction of Wind Turbine 2015 Renewable EnÎncărcat declaralisie
- A Direct Approach of Design Optimization for Small Horizontal 2015 ProcediaÎncărcat declaralisie
- Adaptive-pitch-control-of-wind-turbine-for-load-mitigation-u_2017_Renewable-.pdfÎncărcat declaralisie
- Adaptive-neuro-fuzzy-generalization-of-wind-tur_2014_Renewable-and-Sustainab.pdfÎncărcat declaralisie
- Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Estimation of Diffuser Effects on Wind Turbin 2015 EnerÎncărcat declaralisie
- A Boundary Integral Equation Over the Thin Ro 2016 Engineering Analysis WithÎncărcat declaralisie
- Advanced-brake-state-model-and-aerodynamic-post-stall-model-_2013_Renewable-.pdfÎncărcat declaralisie
- 3D URANS Analysis of a Vertical Axis w 2015 Journal of Wind Engineering andÎncărcat declaralisie
- Ferric Oxide Mediated Formation of PCDD_Fs From 2-MonochlorophenolÎncărcat declaralisie
- Effects of Energy Conservation in Major Energy-Intensive Industrial Sectors on Emissions of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans in ChinaÎncărcat declaralisie
- Dioxins and furans releases in Iranian mineral industries.pdfÎncărcat declaralisie
- Lube Oil Consumption Simulation Validation and Parametric InvestigationÎncărcat declaralisie
- Effect of ethanol–gasoline blends on engine performance.pdfÎncărcat declaralisie
- Dioxin Furan Formation and Release in the Cement IndustryÎncărcat deThales Gomes
- NOx Control Through ReburningÎncărcat declaralisie
- Open Access Alkaline Electrolysis With Skeletal Ni CatalystsÎncărcat declaralisie
- Effect of Ethanol–Gasoline Blends on Engine PerformanceÎncărcat declaralisie
- An Overview of Hydrogen as a Vehicle FuelÎncărcat declaralisie
- A CFD Analysis of the operating conditions of a multitube Pd membrane prification H2Încărcat declaralisie
- Example 8Încărcat declaralisie

- Subaru Pumps Pkv101 Pkx201h Pkx201 Pkx301 Pkx201st Pkx301st Pkx201t Pkx301t ServiceÎncărcat deEdgardo M. Diolola
- JM AT_20040129Încărcat dewreckedweasel
- 7Control Electronico Sist OperÎncărcat degabriel
- 199r11159revÎncărcat deAlfonso Jauregui
- Refrigeration and Air Conditioning.pdfÎncărcat deshiv
- DesignÎncărcat deHemantha Balasuriya
- Vol1SDG bridgeÎncărcat deM Refaat Fath
- 246499607-AAR-M-101.pdfÎncărcat deRafael Schelbauer
- Cervelo S5 White Paper 2011Încărcat dePaul Hodgson
- AQA-8403-ES-JUN13Încărcat dedadajee420
- WPS - 014 AÎncărcat deMohamed Ali
- IJAIEM-2013-09-12-013.pdfÎncărcat deAnonymous vQrJlEN
- rotork_FCV_F13W.pdfÎncărcat deNicholas Gawan
- AyuÎncărcat deAqram Muhammad
- Paper3Încărcat derex valencia
- W01-M58-6122Încărcat deMROstop.com
- Drive UnitÎncărcat deAnonymous PIqdeNp8
- compendium_2016.pdfÎncărcat deFresly Jaya
- conceptual qsÎncărcat deapi-368883407
- Structural Steel Angle BarÎncărcat deOjit Quizon
- Summary for MethododlogyÎncărcat deKurdistan Neyaz
- 36_talas_rc2_1Încărcat deJuan Manuel Acebedo
- ReferencesÎncărcat deJael Dungca
- Mechanical Shear Strength Model for Reinforced Concrete Beams Strengthened With FRP MaterialÎncărcat deOmar
- Strength of Materials Lab EquipmentsÎncărcat delabtekindia
- About Heater ControlÎncărcat deriteshrishabh
- 13.pdfÎncărcat deRubi Hartanto
- A3_Hima_1Încărcat dehima012
- Circular Slabs.pdfÎncărcat deRajanji Srivastava
- Bajaj Self Parts Vendor List-1Încărcat deAkhil Mandava

## Mult mai mult decât documente.

Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.

Anulați oricând.