Wake development in floating wind turbines: new insights and an open dataset from wind tunnel experiments

Fontanella, Alessandro; Fusetti, Alberto; Cioni, Stefano; Papi, Francesco; Muggiasca, Sara; Persico, Giacomo; Dossena, Vincenzo; Bianchini, Alessandro; Belloli, Marco

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1369-2025

Articles | Volume 10, issue 7

https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1369-2025

© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1369-2025

© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 10, issue 7

Research article

|

17 Jul 2025

Research article |

| 17 Jul 2025

Wake development in floating wind turbines: new insights and an open dataset from wind tunnel experiments

Alessandro Fontanella, Alberto Fusetti, Stefano Cioni, Francesco Papi, Sara Muggiasca, Giacomo Persico, Vincenzo Dossena, Alessandro Bianchini, and Marco Belloli

Download

Final revised paper (published on 17 Jul 2025)
Preprint (discussion started on 15 Nov 2024)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on wes-2024-140', Anonymous Referee #1, 03 Dec 2024

See attached.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-140-RC1
- AC1:
  'Reply on RC1', Alessandro Fontanella, 07 Dec 2024
  Dear Referee,
  Thank you for taking the time to review our manuscript. We greatly appreciate your comments, as they are precise and highly valuable in improving our work! We have a few questions about your comments to help us improve the article.
  The loads presented in Fig. 4 are derived by averaging the aerodynamic load measurements over 40 cycles of platform motion. The phrase “over one cycle of pitch motion” in the caption may be misleading. However, we seek clarification on the term “nominal curve” and the comparison you propose.
  
  The comment "A linear regression ... behavior for all cases" seems to consist of two disconnected items. We can provide more details about the asymmetry of the velocity profile. However, this is not connected to the linear regression shown in Fig. 5a and Fig. 5b. Could you clarify your point?
  
  It would be helpful if you could provide more details on these two comments.
  On behalf of all Co-Authors,
  
  Alessandro Fontanella
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-140-AC1
  - RC2: 'Reply on AC1', Anonymous Referee #1, 11 Dec 2024
    
    To clarify:
    
    1. By asking whether the traces in figure 4 represent "nominal curves," I mean to ask whether they are the measured responses of the platform or they represent a modeled or idealized response to the imposed motion.
    
    2. My apologies, there are in fact two separate comments listed together. They should be:
    
    A) "A linear regression is fitted to the measurements and is included in Figure 5a and Figure 5b. This method of representation demonstrates that the loads change linearly with respect to the platform motion amplitude, as evidenced by the normalized points aligning with the regression line.: --- The loads response indicated by the markers in FIgure 5 do not appear to follow a linear trend. For the 2 Hz case, both the thrust and the Torque seem to deviate from a linear trend established by the other cases.
    
    B) "The velocity profile has a double-gaussian shape, and it is mostly unaffected by platform motion" --- Can the authors elaborate why the velocity profile is asymmetric with y? There appears to be a lateral shift in the mean profile of approximately 0.15 m and the peak deficit in the right side of the plot shows complex behavior for all cases.
    
    Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-140-RC2
RC3:
'Comment on wes-2024-140', Anonymous Referee #2, 20 Dec 2024

See attached pdf

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-140-RC3
- AC2: 'Reply on RC3', Alessandro Fontanella, 20 Dec 2024
  
  Dear Referee,
  Thank you for reviewing our manuscript. We appreciate your clear and insightful comments, and we will work to incorporate them into the revised version of the manuscript.
  On behalf of all Co-Authors,
  
  Alessandro Fontanella
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-140-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

AR by Alessandro Fontanella on behalf of the Authors (27 Feb 2025) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (13 Mar 2025) by Paul Veers

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (17 Mar 2025)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (14 Apr 2025)

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (19 Apr 2025) by Paul Veers

AR by Alessandro Fontanella on behalf of the Authors (22 Apr 2025) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (25 Apr 2025) by Paul Veers

ED: Publish as is (26 Apr 2025) by Carlo L. Bottasso (Chief editor)

AR by Alessandro Fontanella on behalf of the Authors (02 May 2025)

Short summary

This paper investigates the impact of large movements allowed by floating wind turbine foundations on their aerodynamics and wake behavior. Wind tunnel tests with a model turbine reveal that platform motions affect wake patterns and turbulence levels. Insights from these experiments are crucial for optimizing large-scale floating wind farms. The dataset obtained from the experiment is published and can aid in developing simulation tools for floating wind turbines.

Wake development in floating wind turbines: new insights and an open dataset from wind tunnel experiments

Download

Interactive discussion

Peer review completion

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection