Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Pierre-Elouan Réthoré
PhD Defence
Monday the 7th December 2009
Introduction AAU
The Wake “Crisis”
The wake models used by the industry fail to estimate modern wind
farms production and fatigue loads
The wake models used by the industry fail to estimate modern wind
farms production and fatigue loads
The wake models used by the industry fail to estimate modern wind
farms production and fatigue loads
Larger wind farms
The wake models used by the industry fail to estimate modern wind
farms production and fatigue loads
Larger wind farms
Offshore wind farms
The wake models used by the industry fail to estimate modern wind
farms production and fatigue loads
Larger wind farms
Offshore wind farms
Multiple wind farms
1.0
Large number of inflow
0.8
conditions
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance x/ D [-]
1.0
Large number of inflow
0.8
conditions
0.6
Large distances between the
0.4
0.2
measurement devices
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance x/ D [-]
1.0
Large number of inflow
0.8
conditions
0.6
Large distances between the
0.4
0.2
measurement devices
0
Rapid wind condition
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance x/ D [-] variations
1.0
Large number of inflow
0.8
conditions
0.6
Large distances between the
0.4
0.2
measurement devices
0
Rapid wind condition
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance x/ D [-] variations
Large measurement combined
uncertainty
Problem
The engineering models used
by the industry can only be as
good as their calibration.
Design restrictions
The tool has to retain all the important physics of the problem
Design restrictions
The tool has to retain all the important physics of the problem
The tool has to be fast enough to carry out full wind farm
wake(s) computations
Design restrictions
The tool has to retain all the important physics of the problem
The tool has to be fast enough to carry out full wind farm
wake(s) computations
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
Figure: DNS by de Leeuw (RUG) 2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Figure: LES Full rotor by T. Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
Hahm (wake2e)
2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Figure: k-ωSST Full rotor by F. Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
Zahle (Risø DTU)
2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Figure: LES Actuator Line by N.
Troldborg (DTU MEK & Risø
DTU) Types of Turbulence Model
Direct Navier-Stokes (DNS)
Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)
Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)
Figure: k-ε Actuator Disc by I.
Ammara (ETS)
1 Forces Treatment
Problem Description
Proposed Solution
2 Forces Distribution
4 Modelling Issues
5 Invalid Assumptions
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
6 k-ϵ Modifications
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy
1 Forces Treatment
Problem Description
Proposed Solution
2 Forces Distribution
P ∆y
After discretization: AP UP = P Anb Unb + (PW − PE ) 2 + FP ∆x∆y.
P
1D Continuity equation: ∆y (ρUe − ρUw ) = 0
WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x
AP 2
Continuity: ∆y (ρUe − ρUw ) = 0
WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x
1
First guess: Ue = 2
(UP + UE )
If we take a special case to illustrate the issue (F = 0,
U =constant), the combined Momentum+Continuity equation
gives: PP = 21 (PWW + PEE ).
The pressure in P is not dependent of it’s direct neighbors W
AP 2
Continuity: ∆y (ρUe − ρUw ) = 0
WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x
∆y
Rhie-Chow algorithm: Ue = 1 U Ý Ý
P + UE +
2
(PP − PE ) Ae
If we take a special case to illustrate the issue (F = 0,
P
PE − PW = 2FP ∆x
PP − PWW = 2FW ∆x = 0
PEE − PP = 2FE ∆x = 0
Pressure
2F
WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x
AP
Continuity: ∆y (ρUe − ρUw ) = 0
∆y Pje
Face velocity: Ue = 21 UP + UE + (PP − PE ) + Ae ∆y
Ae
2F
WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x
[-]
0.98
U∞
u
0.96
3D − with correction
0.94 3D − without correction
Analytical solution
0.92
−0.5 −0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
−0.2
−0.5 −0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 x 0[-] 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
D
1 Forces Treatment
Problem Description
Proposed Solution
2 Forces Distribution
different sources
Measurements
1 Forces Treatment
Problem Description
Proposed Solution
2 Forces Distribution
ρu∞ ρu∞
0.998 0.998
U∞
0.997 0.997
u
0.996 0.996
0.995 0.995
0.994 0.994
−1 −0.5 0 0.5 1 −1 −0.5 0 0.5 1
0.6 −0.02
0.4 −0.025
[-]
−0.03
0.2
∞)
−0.035
(cT ρU2
0
p
−0.04
−0.2
−0.045
−0.4 −0.05
−0.055
−1 −0.5 x0 0.5 1 −1 −0.5 r0 0.5 1
[-] [-]
D D
Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
18 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Actuator Disc Validation Heavily Loaded AAU
Conway’s Exact Actuator Disc Model
functions.
By superposition, the flow fields induced by the vorticity
Axial velocity at various axial coordinate z (CT=−0.4484) Radial velocity at various axial coordinate z (CT=−0.4484)
1.1 0.16
Conway: z=−0.5D
Normalized axial velocity V /U [−]
Conway: z=0D
∞
0.12
z
r
0.1 Conway: z=0.5D
0.8 EllipSys: z=0.5D
0.08 Conway: z=2.5D
0.7 EllipSys: z=2.5D
0.06
0.6
0.04
0.5 0.02
0.4 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Normalized distance from center [−] Normalized distance from center [−]
Nortank 500 kW was performed
by F. Zahle using EllipSys.
The force distribution on the
blades during a revolution is used
as an input to the actuator disc
model.
The same inflow condition is used
in both models.
Z=3D Z=3D
1.1 0.12
∞
Normalized tangential velocity U /U
Normalized axial velocity Uz/U∞
t
0.1
0.9
0.08
0.8
0.06
0.7
0.04
0.6
0.5 0.02
0.4 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Normalized radial direction r/D [−] Radial direction r/D [−]
4 Modelling Issues
5 Invalid Assumptions
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
6 k-ϵ Modifications
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy
4 Modelling Issues
5 Invalid Assumptions
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
6 k-ϵ Modifications
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy
1.0
Axial velocity U/ U∞ [-]
0.9
0.8
1.0 measurementsa b c .
Axial velocity U/ U∞ [-]
0.8
0
0.6
−2 0.4
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x−direction x/D [−]
LES, Constant forces: U−velocity U/UH,∞ [−]
y−direction y/D [−]
2 1
0.8
0
0.6
−2 0.4
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x−direction x/D [−]
k−ε: U−velocity U/UH,∞ [−]
y−direction y/D [−]
2 1
0.8
0
0.6
−2 0.4
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Réthoré, P.-E. x−direction x/D [−] Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
26 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Invalid Assumptions AAU
Part II: Turbulence Model
4 Modelling Issues
5 Invalid Assumptions
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
6 k-ϵ Modifications
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy
x
p x
Axial velocity U/ U∞ [-]
U( x p)
Error
U( x )
xp x x-direction x/ D [-]
LES: R11
60
LES: u′ u′
50
k-ϵ: R11
R11 / u∗2 [-]
40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10
x-direction x/ D [-]
2
2
where R11 = 3k − 2Cμ kϵ ∂U
∂x
Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
30 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Invalid Assumptions Eddy-viscosity AAU
Velocity Linearity (A3)
L ∂U
∂y U(yp ) − U(y)
yp y y-direction y/ D [-]
Error
L ∂U
∂y
U(yp ) − U(y)
yp y y-direction y/ D [-]
2 0.08
1
0.06
0
0.04
−1
−2 0.02
−3 0
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x-direction x/ D [-]
?
Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
33 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Invalid Assumptions Eddy-viscosity AAU
LES Eddy-viscosity Factor Cμ
2 0.08
1
0.06
0
0.04
−1
−2 0.02
−3 0
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x-direction x/ D [-]
fluctuations.
TKE Comparison of 2 LES with unsteady and steady forces
20
10
0
0 4 8 12
x-direction x/ D [-]
There is a small but visible decrease of TKE at the turbine with the
unsteady forces
Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
34 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications AAU
Part II: Turbulence Model
4 Modelling Issues
5 Invalid Assumptions
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
6 k-ϵ Modifications
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy
EKM can have the same velocity deficit as LES, but not the
same recovery rate.
The TKE has a different trend compared with LES.
30
20
10
0
50
ϵ/ ϵ ∞,H [-]
40
30
20
10
0
2
22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
36 of 50
Réthoré, P.-E. x-direction x/ D [-]
Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications El Kasmi-Masson AAU
Compared to Sexbierum Measurements
Not enough turbulence
1 C =0.005
ε4
C =0.01
ε4
0.8
C =0.03
ε4
0.6 C =0.37
ε4
0.4 Std−k−ε
−20 0 20 −20 0 20 −20 0 20 data
o
Relative wind direction [ ]
0.1
0.05
0
−20 0 20 −20 0 20 −20 0 20
o
Relative wind direction [ ]
Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
37 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications Realizability AAU
Compared to LES
2
Realizability criteria (hacked): ui′ uj′ ≤ CSwz ui′ ui′ · uj′ uj′
30
20
10
0
30
ϵ/ ϵ ∞,H [-]
20
10
0
Réthoré, P.-E. 2
22 0 2 4 6 8 Wind10Turbine
12 Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
38 of 50 Risø DTU x-direction x/ D [-] 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications Realizability AAU
Compared to Sexbierum Measurements
Not enough wake spreading on the side
1 C =1.0
Swz
CSwz=0.5
0.8
CSwz=0.3
0.6 CSwz=0.2
0.4 Std−k−ε
−20 0 20 −20 0 20 −20 0 20 data
o
Relative wind direction [ ]
0.1
0.05
0
−20 0 20 −20 0 20 −20 0 20
Réthoré, P.-E. o
Relative wind direction [ ] Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
39 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications Wind Turbine Canopy AAU
Compared to LES
Added terms in k and ϵ-equation: Sk = −CF βd Uk and
Sϵ = −CF Cϵd βd Uϵ
It is not enough to correct the k-ϵ model
WTCM: βd = 1, Cϵd = 1
1
WTCM: βd = 1, Cϵd = 0
U/ U∞,H [-]
30
20
10
0
50
ϵ/ ϵ ∞,H [-]
40
30
20
10
0
2
22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
x-direction x/ D [-]
Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
40 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Beyond the Eddy-viscosity AAU
Part II: Turbulence Model
4 Modelling Issues
5 Invalid Assumptions
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
6 k-ϵ Modifications
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy
Design constraints
The Reynolds-stresses should be transported.
Design constraints
The Reynolds-stresses should be transported.
concept.
concept.
The wake crisis?
concept.
The wake crisis?
A1
:
A1 u′ (x) = u′ (xp ) + U(xp ) − U(x) + U(x) − U(xp )
: A2
A2 u′ (x)v′ (x) = v′ (x)u′ (xp ) + v′ (x) U(xp ) − U(x)
∂U
A3 u′ (x)v′ (x) = v′ (x)Lj ∂x
j
∂Uj
Eddy-viscosity concept: ui′ uj′ = 23 kδij − νt ∂Ui
+
∂xj ∂xi
Back
2 0 1
−Γsign(z−z ′ )r ′ R ∞ ′
Vr (r, z) = sJ1 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds
2 0
′ R ∞ ′
Vz (r, z) = Γr2 0 sJ0 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds
2 0 0 0
R R R
∞ R(z) ∞ ′
Vr (r, z) = 12 0 0 ±ω ϕ (r ′ , z ′ )r ′ sJ1 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds dr ′ dz ′
0
R ∞R R
R(z) ∞ ′
Vz (r, z) = 12 0 0 ω ϕ (r ′ , z ′ )r ′ sJ0 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds dr ′ dz ′
corresponds to a parabolic wake profile: Vz (r, ∞) = 2a R2w − r 2 .
After integration with respect to z’ and including the additional
2R 2 0
a ∞
Vr (r, z) = 2 0 ±R2 (z ′ )I(0,2,1) (R(z ′ ), r, z − z ′ ) dz ′
R∞
Vz (r, z) = U∞ + ar R2 (z ′ )I(0,2,0) (R(z ′ ), r, z − z ′ ) dz ′
2 0
The wake width R(z) can be determined recursively by noticing
R∞
I(λ,μ,ν)(R, r, z) = 0 sλ Jμ (sR)Jν (sr)e−s|z| ds are related to one
another using recursive rules, and can be evaluated in terms of
complete elliptic integrals.
The load distribution is directly related to the stream function:
Bessel-Laplace integrals:
I(λ,μ,ν)(R, r, |z|) = I(λ,ν,μ)(r, R, |z|)
4(ν−1)ω
I(0,ν,ν) = I
2ν−1 (0,ν−1,ν−1)
− 2ν−3 I
2ν−1 (0,ν−2,ν−2)
,
(2ν−1)|z|k 4
I(1,ν,ν) = 8Rr(1−k 2) I(0,ν−1,ν−1) − ωI(0,ν,ν) ,
I(0,ν+1,ν) = Rr I(0,ν,ν−1) + 2ν
r
I(1,ν+1,ν+1) − I(1,ν−1,ν−1) for ν 6= 0,
R
I(λ,μ,ν) = 2μ I(λ+1,μ+1,ν) − I(λ+1,μ−1,ν) for λ < 0,
π hrR i
1 |z|kK(k) Λ (|β|,k)
I(0,1,0)(R, r, |z|) = R 1 − p − 0 2 (r < R)
h 2π irR
|z|kK(k) Λ (|β|,k)
= R1 − p + 0 2 (r > R)
2π rR
[(2−k 2 )K(k)−2E(k)]
I(0,1,1)(R, r, |z|) = p
πk rR
Axial velocity at various axial coordinate z (CT=−0.4484) Radial velocity at various axial coordinate z (CT=−0.4484)
1.1 0.16
Conway: z=−0.5D
Normalized axial velocity V /U [−]
Conway: z=0D
∞
0.12
z
r
0.1 Conway: z=0.5D
0.8 EllipSys: z=0.5D
0.08 Conway: z=2.5D
0.7 EllipSys: z=2.5D
0.06
0.6
0.04
0.5 0.02
0.4 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Normalized distance from center [−] Normalized distance from center [−]
Back
2 0.08
1
0.06
0
0.04
−1
−2 0.02
−3 0
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x-direction x/ D [-]
||R||
where Cμ = ||S|| kϵ2 is here defined as the ratio between:
Reynolds-stress tensor norm
q
2 ′ ′ 2 ′ ′
||R|| = 3 kδ ij − u u
i j 3 kδ ij − u u
i j
Ç
∂Ui ∂Uj ∂Ui ∂Uj
Strain-rate tensor norm ||S|| = ∂x + ∂x ∂x + ∂x
j i j i
back