<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">WES</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Wind Energy Science</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">WES</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Wind Energ. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2366-7451</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/wes-3-545-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>Dynamic inflow effects in measurements <?xmltex \hack{\break}?> and high-fidelity computations</article-title><alt-title>Dynamic inflow effects</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Dynamic inflow effects}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{G. R. Pirrung and H. A. Madsen}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Pirrung</surname><given-names>Georg Raimund</given-names></name>
          <email>gepir@dtu.dk</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9260-1791</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Madsen</surname><given-names>Helge Aagaard</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4647-3706</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><institution>Wind Energy Department, Technical University of Denmark, Frederiksborgvej 399, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Georg Raimund Pirrung (gepir@dtu.dk)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>22</day><month>August</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>3</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>545</fpage><lpage>551</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>10</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>18</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>26</day><month>July</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>6</day><month>August</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018.html">This article is available from https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e88">A wind turbine experiences an overshoot in loading after, for
example, a collective step change in pitch angle. This overshoot occurs
because the wind turbine wake does not immediately reach its new equilibrium,
an effect usually referred to as dynamic inflow. Vortex cylinder models and
actuator disc simulations predict that the time constants of this dynamic
inflow effect should decrease significantly towards the blade tip. As part of
the NASA Ames Phase VI experiment, pitch steps have been performed on a
turbine in controlled conditions in the wind tunnel. The measured aerodynamic
forces from these experiments seemed to show much less radial dependency of
the dynamic inflow time constants than expected when pitching towards low
loading. Moreover the dynamic inflow effect seemed fundamentally different
when pitching from low to high loading, and the reason for this behavior
remained unclear in previous analyses of the experiment. High-fidelity
computational fluid dynamics and free-wake vortex code computations yielded
the same behavior as the experiments. In the present work these observations
from the experiments and high-fidelity computations are explained based on a
simple vortex cylinder wake model.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e98">Models based on blade element momentum (BEM) theory are commonly used in
aeroelastic wind turbine codes. Blade element momentum theory describes how
the forces acting on the wind slow down its velocity at the rotor disc by
superimposing a so-called induced velocity on the free wind speed. The
induced velocity depends on the loading of the wind turbine rotor. When the
rotor loading changes, for example due to a change in pitch angle, the
induced velocity does not immediately reach a new equilibrium value but instead slowly approaches it. Because BEM theory only predicts the steady-state induction, dynamic inflow submodels are added to account for the delays
in the induction response. The time constants of these models can be based on
analytic derivations, results of higher-fidelity models or measurements.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.1"/> compared analytically derived time constants for
dynamic inflow with time constants derived from experimental data from the
NASA Ames Phase VI measurements <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="paren.2"/> and numerical
results from the free-wake vortex code AWSM <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="paren.3"/>. This comparison
showed that the free-wake code could predict the dynamic variations in the
turbine loading measured in the wind tunnel with high accuracy. The
analytical vortex cylinder model, on the other hand, predicted a strong
dependency of the time constants on the radial position on the blade. Neither
the experiment nor the free-wake code results confirmed this predicted radial
dependency. Investigating this disagreement was suggested as future research
by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="text.4"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e113"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="text.5"/> also investigated the dynamic inflow runs from the
Phase VI experiment. They performed computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
simulations using the EllipSys code <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="paren.6"/>. Similar to Schepers,
they found that the observed dynamic inflow effects could be predicted by
high-fidelity codes, but the radial dependency of the time constants seemed
much less pronounced than expected when deloading the rotor. Moreover the
effect changed drastically when pitching from low to high loading, which is
also in agreement with observations by Schepers.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="text.7"/> suggested using a
dynamic inflow model with two time constants and scaling the time<?pagebreak page546?> constants
with the wake velocity. The time constants have been obtained from actuator
disc simulations.</p>
      <p id="d1e124">More recently, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="text.8"/> compared results from the AWSM code
with dynamic inflow measurements from the New Mexico experiment
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="paren.9"/>. While the comparison is promising, the force
overshoots are not as pronounced as in the Phase VI experiments due to the
lower pitching rate relative to the rotor speed. A recent PhD thesis by
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13" id="text.10"/> contains both experimental and numerical investigations of
dynamic inflow effects. The experimental investigations use discs with
varying porosity <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="paren.11"/>, and the numerical model consists of
unsteady vortex rings for the near wake and a vortex cylinder model for the
far wake <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx14" id="paren.12"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e142">In the following section, the NASA Ames experiment and the previous analyses
by Schepers and Sørensen and Madsen are presented in more detail. Then, a
simple vortex cylinder model is introduced in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3"/>. In
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4"/> results from that model are used to explain the
seemingly conflicting findings in previous work.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Previous analysis of NASA Ames experiments</title>
      <p id="d1e155">In the NREL/NASA Ames Phase VI Experiments by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="text.13"/>, a
two-bladed wind turbine with 10 m diameter was placed in the NASA Ames
open-loop wind tunnel. One of the turbine blades was instrumented at 30 %,
47 %, 63 %, 80 % and 95 % (corresponding to radii of 1.510, 2.343,
3.185, 4.023 and 4.780 m) with 22 pressure taps at each location. A large
number of experiments in both parked and rotating conditions have been
performed. The basis for the dynamic inflow investigations in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.14"/> are pitch step experiments at 5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> wind
tunnel speed and at a rotor speed of 72 rpm. In the relevant run, denoted as
<italic>Q0500000</italic> in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="text.15"/>, 20 pitch steps between
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> pitch (heavily loaded rotor, induction factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
and 10.02<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> pitch (unloaded rotor, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) have been performed.
The maximum pitch rate was roughly 66<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. This pitch rate
corresponds to 6.6<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for a turbine with 100 m diameter
because the dynamic inflow time constants are inversely proportional to the
rotor radius <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="paren.16"/>. After each pitch step, a 15 s waiting
time ensured that the flow conditions can reach an equilibrium. The previous
analyses, as well as the present work, are based on the force response
obtained by averaging the responses to the 20 pitch steps.</p>
      <p id="d1e280">The measurement at 5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> exhibits prominent aerodynamic force
overshoots that are characteristic for dynamic inflow. The dynamic response
of the axial force after the upward and downward pitch steps is shown in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>a and b, respectively.
Note that upward pitching refers to the deloading of the rotor and downward
pitching to the loading of the rotor. This is based on the convention that the
pitch angle is positive towards lower angles of attack. The force is scaled
such that the overshoot after the pitch step is 1 and that the steady-state
force some time after the pitch step is 0:

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M12" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">scaled</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the axial force, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the equilibrium value of the force some
time after the pitch step, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the maximum or minimum force
overshoot reached during the pitch step, depending on the pitching direction.</p>
      <p id="d1e375">Some dynamics in the downward pitching step at the 80 % radial station and
to a much smaller extent at the 63 % radial station appeared before the
pitching was finished at roughly 0.35 s. The maximum value at the
80 % section has been increased to 1.2; see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>b. This was not necessary for the 63 %
station because the maximum force overshoot at that station coincided with
the remaining stations on the blade. The force response has been previously
analyzed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.17"/> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="text.18"/>. This
previous work will be introduced in the following.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e388">Scaled axial force measurements from the Phase VI experiment at
5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The pitch steps are deloading the rotor (induction factor
from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>a</bold>) and loading the rotor (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>b</bold>).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018-f01.pdf"/>

      </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Single time constant analysis by Schepers</title>
      <p id="d1e470">In the work by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.19"/> it was assumed that the behavior of
the induction factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in time can be modeled using one first-order low-pass filter. For a step change in pitch, the induction factor as a function of
time is assumed to be:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M22" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the induction factor at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, before the pitch step, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the equilibrium value of the induction some time after the pitch
step. The time constant is defined as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. It is then assumed that the
forces are driven only by the change in axial induction factor, neglecting
the faster 2-D unsteady airfoil aerodynamics effects. This leads to an
expression for the blade loads <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M28" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the forces corresponding to the induction factors
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> defined above. The time constant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> can be determined as

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M34" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          To avoid the initial overshoot and structural transients, this time constant
was averaged between 0.7 and 3.7 s after the pitch step in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.20"/> for measurements (see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>) and free-wake code computations using the
code AWSM <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="paren.21"/>. The computed time constants were then compared to the
time constants obtained from a cylindrical wake model; see
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3"/>. This comparison is shown in
Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>. Comparing the time constants in the table leads to
several observations:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e806">For both the upward and downward pitching case, the time constants based on measurements and on free-wake
code computations vary much less with radial position than the analytically derived time constants predicted by the cylindrical wake model.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e810">While the analytically derived time constants predict that the induction develops the fastest at the
95 % section, this cannot be seen in the measurements or AWSM computations. In the downward pitching case, the
tip time constants are even found to be largest at the blade tip.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e814">The analytic time constants, which are based on the undisturbed inflow speed, are independent of the
pitching direction, but there is considerable influence of the pitching direction on the dynamics seen in
the measurements (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>) and free-wake computations.</p></list-item></list></p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><caption><p id="d1e822">Time constants (in seconds) from measurements, AWSM calculations and
a cylindrical wake model from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.22"/>. The forces predicted
by AWSM at the 63 % radial station for the downward pitching step did not
exhibit clear exponential behavior, and therefore no time constant could be
estimated.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.88}[.88]?><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">analytic</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">up</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">meas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">up</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AWSM</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">down</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">meas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">down</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AWSM</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.98</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.61</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">–</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1.14</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.53</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">2.36</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<?pagebreak page547?><sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Analysis of two time constants by S{\o}rensen and Madsen}?><title>Analysis of two time constants by Sørensen and Madsen</title>
      <p id="d1e1066">The NASA Ames Phase VI dynamic inflow measurements were also analyzed by
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="text.23"/>. In their work the results were compared to full rotor
CFD computations obtained from the EllipSys code <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="paren.24"/> and BEM
computations with a dynamic inflow model. The dynamic inflow model consists
of two time constants, where the fast time constant is radially varying and
the slow time constant has much slower radial variation. These time constants
were obtained from actuator disc simulations, and they are scaled with the
wake velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M42" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">̃</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mtext>, where</mml:mtext><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="1em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          In the above equation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the undisturbed inflow speed and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is
the wind turbine radius. The same scaling is applied to both the fast and the
slow time constant.</p>
      <p id="d1e1161">The CFD computations agree well with the measurements showing a small radial
variation in the time constants in general. In the CFD computations of the
downward pitch step, loading the rotor, it was found that the tip forces seem
to develop the slowest.</p>
      <p id="d1e1164">In a range of additional pitch step cases with a much smaller pitch angle
variation computed by the CFD code, the radial variation in the dynamic inflow
time constants also appeared to be much less pronounced than in the actuator
disc simulations.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Induction due to cylindrical wake</title>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><caption><p id="d1e1176">Sketch of cylindrical wake with radius <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and a step change in
vortex strength at a distance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> from the rotor.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1199">The engineering model that predicts the strong radial dependency of the time
constants in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.25"/> is based on an analytical cylindrical
vortex wake model. In this model, which has been presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="text.26"/>,
a semi-infinite cylindrical vortex is trailed from the tip radius at the
rotor disc. Thus it is assumed that the rotor has an infinite number of
blades with a radially constant bound circulation, and the root vortex is
neglected. The induction from the trailed vortex cylinder is azimuth
independent in the rotor plane but can vary radially. A sketch of the
cylindrical wake is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>.</p>
      <?pagebreak page548?><p id="d1e1210">The axial
induced velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at a radius <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> on the disc due to such a
cylindrical wake is <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="paren.27"/><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M49" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">end</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the stream-wise coordinate, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">end</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denoting the
length of the wake behind the rotor plane, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ϕ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the azimuthal
coordinate. The rotor radius is denoted as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">γ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
tangential component of the wake vorticity, which induces an axial velocity
in the rotor plane.</p>
      <p id="d1e1414">Previously this model was used to analytically derive the time constant for a
step change in circulation at the rotor disc, which is transported downstream
with the free-stream velocity. In the present work, the position of the step
change is varied and the wake velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>), is chosen as the downstream convection velocity.
Equation (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E6"/>) is integrated numerically.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Assumptions</title>
      <p id="d1e1438">The aim of the vortex cylinder computations presented here is to demonstrate
that some of the fundamental questions from the NASA Ames Phase VI experiment
and regarding dynamic inflow in general can be answered based on a very
simple model. Therefore the following assumptions are made, neglecting some
aerodynamic effects:
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1443">The vortex strength of the cylindrical vortex wake changes from zero to a constant value at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1460">Two-dimensional unsteady airfoil aerodynamics and dynamic stall are neglected. To justify this, the force response to a step
change in angle of attack has been computed using Jones' equations for a flat
plate and the relative speeds at the disc. After 0.35 s (corresponding
roughly to the pitch step duration), the force response reaches between
90 % (most-inboard section) and 99 % (tip section) of its quasi-steady
value, showing that this effect is much faster than the dynamic inflow
effect.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1464">Pitching speed is neglected.</p></list-item></list></p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1468">The downwind convection velocity of the trailed vortices is constant and equal to the wake
velocity before the pitch step as given in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>). Therefore, the
results at a time soon after the pitch step will be accurate, but the error
grows over time.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e1474">Wake expansion is neglected, which introduces an error in the heavily loaded
case.</p></list-item></list>
Further, in all plots the induced velocities <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at each radial
station are scaled by the value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> they reach if the wake
is 10 diameters long.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Results from cylindrical wake model</title>
      <p id="d1e1512">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> shows the induction as function of the dimensionless
length of the cylindrical vortex wake behind the rotor. As written above, a
constant downwind convection velocity is assumed in the computations. In the
unloaded case (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), this velocity is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Therefore the dimensionless length of the wake in the unloaded case
corresponds directly to the time, since the wake length after 1 s is 1
radius (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). In the loaded case (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) the wake velocity is 4 times
smaller (see Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>); thus, the nondimensional wake length has to
be multiplied by a factor of 4 to obtain the time.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><caption><p id="d1e1605">Normalized induced velocity at different radial stations depending
on the length of the vortex wake behind the rotor plane. The dashed lines
correspond to a time instant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.35</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> s when the wake velocity is
1.25 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (left vertical line, corresponding to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (right vertical line, corresponding to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). </p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018-f03.pdf"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1674">The induced velocity buildup clearly shows a large radial dependency at the
beginning, but for a larger distance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the vorticity step change
from the rotor disc, the radial<?pagebreak page549?> dependency disappears. Then the dynamic
induction buildup is similar on the whole disc.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title>Single time constant estimation</title>
      <p id="d1e1698">Based on Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>)–(<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>), the estimated
time constant of a one-term exponential function can be found as

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M71" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          Because the predicted time histories are not equal to one-term exponential
functions, the predicted time constants vary with time.</p>
      <p id="d1e1781">Applying Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E7"/>) to the induced velocities shown in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/> leads to the estimated time constants as a function of the
dimensionless length of the vortex wakes, which are shown in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>. At <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the time constants
predicted by the cylindrical wake model are equal to the analytically derived
time constants provided by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.28"/>; cf. Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>. As the values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> increase, the estimated
time constants become less radially dependent because the parts of the wake
that are further away from the rotor have a more even influence on the whole
rotor plane than the parts close to the rotor. In agreement with the actuator
disc computations presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="text.29"/>, these findings
indicate that a dynamic inflow model should employ two exponential terms.
Then a small time constant can capture the radial dependency, and a larger
time constant captures the radially independent behavior on a longer
timescale.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><caption><p id="d1e1835">Estimated dynamic inflow time constants at different radial stations
depending on the length of the vortex wake behind the rotor plane.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018-f04.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1847">Scaled induced velocities predicted by the cylindrical wake model
for the deloading <bold>(a)</bold> and loading <bold>(b)</bold> of the rotor. The
scaling is such that the velocities range from 0 at the time instant just
after the maximum force overshoot (indicated by dashed vertical lines in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>) to 1.
The scaled induced velocities show the same qualitative trends as observed in
the force measurements; see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/3/545/2018/wes-3-545-2018-f05.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1866">In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.30"/>, the time constants obtained from the
aerodynamic forces from measurements and free-wake code results had to be
averaged between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> s after the pitching step to avoid the
initial force overshoot. The time constant estimation in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/> shows how this method leads to moderate radial
dependency, which explains some of the disagreements between analytical time
constants and time constants estimated from measurements in
Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Influence of pitching direction</title>
      <p id="d1e1907">Due to the assumption of a constant wake velocity and trailed vortex
strength, the different pitching directions only differ in how the wake
length translates to the time after the pitch step, as explained at the
beginning of Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4"/>. The force response decay in the Phase VI
measurements can only be evaluated after the maximum of the force overshoot
is reached, which is at roughly 0.35 s; see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>.
This 0.35 s corresponds to a nondimensional wake length <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of either 0.35
(pitching from unloaded to loaded conditions) or 0.0875 (pitching from
loaded to unloaded conditions), as indicated by the dashed lines in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>. To see what influence this delayed evaluation has, the
induced velocity has been rescaled such that the value at 0.35 s corresponds
to 0 and the value at steady state to 1. These rescaled induced velocities
are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>. For the pitch step starting in loaded
conditions (panel a) a clear radial dependency of the induced velocities is
seen, which develops slowly inboard and faster outboard. In panel b, where
the rotor is not loaded before the pitch step, the induced velocity seems to
develop similarly fast for all sections except the tip sections, where the
development is slowest. A comparison with the scaled measured force response
in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/> shows the same influence of the pitching
direction. This indicates that the dynamic inflow effect is mainly governed
by the downstream convection speed of the tip vortices. Further, the
decreased or reversed radial dependency in the force measurements from the
NASA Ames Phase VI experiment does not contradict the radial dependency in
the induced velocity time constants that is expected from previous
investigations using vortex cylinder models and actuator discs. Instead, the
apparent reversal of the radial time constant dependency with pitching
direction is observed because the decay of the dynamic forces can only be
analyzed some time after the pitch step is completed. At this time, the
induced velocity has already developed considerably, which has a large
influence on the size of the overshoot. This initial induced velocity
development is missed when estimating time constants on the scaled time
history of the forces.</p>
      <p id="d1e1933">This conclusion holds also if the force time series are obtained from CFD
simulations. Another option is to use dynamic inductions from the CFD
solution to estimate the time constants. However, a recent comparison has
shown that there is still considerable uncertainty in induced velocities from
CFD towards the root and tip of the blade <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.31"/>. This uncertainty
complicates the estimation of the radially varying dynamic inflow time
constants. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx4" id="text.32"/> state the following on the comparison between BEM
based models and CFD:<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><disp-quote>
  <p id="d1e1944">While the approach for
loads with respect to the rotor-plane coordinate system such as distributed
driving force or thrust is straightforward, a comparison of aerodynamic
characteristics is more challenging.</p>
</disp-quote>They present a promising
methodology for extracting the unsteady induced velocities that can capture
the increasing induction towards the blade tip.</p>
      <p id="d1e1949">The induced velocities at the blades or at an actuator disc are directly
available in vortex codes. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13" id="text.33"/> has developed an engineering
dynamic inflow model based on results from a combined unsteady vortex ring
and vortex cylinder model. The behavior of the unsteady cases investigated in
Yu's thesis was such that the increasing load case reacted slower than the
decreasing load case. This appears to contradict the results from the Phase
VI measurements at first glance, but the cases were fundamentally different:
the increasing load case is defined as moving from middle to high loading and the decreasing load case from middle to low loading. Thus, the average wake
velocity is lower in the increasing load case, leading to a slower dynamic
inflow response. In the Phase VI experiments, the pitch steps change the load
from low to high and high to low. Then the wake velocity before
the pitching step governs the immediate dynamic inflow response and the case
with increasing load responds faster. Also, Yu was able to study the effects
of a rollup of the vortex rings, which would not be possible with the simple
model used in the present work. This shows the importance of using higher-fidelity models for more detailed investigations.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page550?><sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e1963">A simple vortex wake model has been used to investigate the
question why neither the unsteady NASA Ames Phase VI experiments nor the
corresponding high-fidelity simulations showed the expected radial dependency
of the dynamic inflow time constants. Results from the model show that the
dynamic inflow response initially exhibits a strong radial dependency, but a
short time after the step change in loading, the time constants for the
different stations become similar, suggesting that two time constants are
necessary for accurate modeling of dynamic inflow effects. When using the
force response as a basis for time constant investigations, time constants
can only be analyzed shortly after the pitch step when the forces start
decaying from the maximum overshoot. This delayed analysis obscures some of
the fast induction development and can lead to an apparent decreased or even
reversed radial dependency.</p>
      <p id="d1e1966">This indicates that it is difficult to obtain time constants for dynamic
inflow models based only on the force time series from measurements, CFD or
free-wake vortex code simulations of a wind turbine. These force measurements
and computations, though, have a large value in validating the aerodynamic
force predictions from engineering models. Computing unsteady induced
velocities from CFD simulations is an active field of research, and there is
still some uncertainty, especially towards the blade root and tip. Free-wake
vortex codes, on the other hand, could be used more easily to investigate
dynamic inflow effects and to tune engineering models because the induced
velocity is directly available from the computations.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e1973">Data from the NASA Ames Phase VI measurements are available
from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) upon request. A
repository <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="paren.34"/> contains the code used
for the vortex cylinder computations in this article.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <?pagebreak page551?><p id="d1e1982">GP wrote the numerical code. GP and HM interpreted the results. GP wrote the manuscript with support from HM. GP and HM collaborated on the
revisions.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e1988">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e1994">The work has been carried out within the project “Dansk deltagelse i IEA
Wind Task 29 Mexnext III” granted by the Danish funding agency EUDP, grant
journal no. 64014-0543.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>Edited by: Raúl Bayoán Cal
<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Reviewed by: two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Boorsma and Schepers(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Boorsma, K. and Schepers, J. G.: New Mexico Experiment, Description of
experimental setup, Tech. Rep. ECN-X–15-093 (v3), ECN, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Boorsma et al.(2016)Boorsma, Hartvelt, and Orsi</label><mixed-citation>Boorsma, K., Hartvelt, M., and Orsi, L.: Application of the lifting line
vortex
wake method to dynamic load case simulations, J. Phys. Conf.
Ser., 753, 2, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/753/2/022030" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1742-6596/753/2/022030</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><label>Hand et al.(2001)Hand, Simms, Fingersh, Jager, Cotrell, Schreck, and
Larwood</label><mixed-citation>
Hand, M., Simms, D., Fingersh, L., Jager, D., Cotrell, J., Schreck, S., and
Larwood, S.: Unsteady aerodynamics experiment phase VI: wind tunnel test
configurations and available data campaigns, NREL/TP-500-29955, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Colorado, USA, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><label>Jost et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Jost, E., Klein, L., Leipprand, H., Lutz, T., and Krämer, E.: Extracting
the
angle of attack on rotor blades from CFD simulations, Wind Energy,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2196" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.2196</ext-link>, online first,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Pirrung(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Pirrung, G. R.: Aerodynamics code used in Wind Energy Science
paper “Dynamic inflow effects in measurements and
high-fidelity computations”,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1346717" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.1346717</ext-link>, 2018. </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Rahimi et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Rahimi, H., Schepers, J. G., Shen, W. Z., Ramos García, N., Schneider, M.,
Micallef, D., Ferreira, C., Jost, E., Klein, L., and Herréz, I.: Evaluation
of different methods for determining the angle of attack on wind turbine
blades with CFD results under axial inflow conditions, Renew. Energ., 125,
866–876,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.018</ext-link>,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Schepers(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G.: IEA Wind Task XX: Dynamic Inflow effects at fast pitching
steps on a wind turbine placed in the NASA-Ames wind tunnel, ECN-E-07-085,
2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Schepers(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G.: Engineering models in wind energy aerodynamics: Development,
implementation and analysis using dedicated aerodynamic measurements, TU
Delft, Delft University of Technology, PhD thesis
ISBN 9789461915078, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>Snel and Schepers(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Snel, H. and Schepers, J. G.: Joint investigation of dynamic inflow effects
and implementation of an engineering method, Tech. Rep. ECN-C–94-107,
ECN, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Sørensen(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, N.: General purpose flow solver applied to flow over hills, PhD
thesis, published 2003, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Sørensen and Madsen(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, N. N. and Madsen, H. A.: Modelling of transient wind turbine
loads
during pitch motion, European Wind Energy Association (EWEA), 2006 European Wind Energy Conference and Exhibition, Athens, Greece, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>van Garrel(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
van Garrel, A.: Development of a wind turbine aerodynamics simulation
module,
Tech. Rep. ECN report ECN-C–03-079, ECN, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>Yu(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Yu, W.: The wake of an unsteady actuator disc, PhD thesis, Delft University
of
Technology, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4233/uuid:0e3a2402-585c-41b1-81cf-a35753076dfc" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4233/uuid:0e3a2402-585c-41b1-81cf-a35753076dfc</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>Yu et al.(2016)Yu, Ferreira, Kuik, and Baldacchino</label><mixed-citation>Yu, W., Ferreira, C. S., Kuik, G., and Baldacchino, D.: Verifying the Blade
Element Momentum Method in unsteady, radially varied, axisymmetric loading
using a vortex ring model, Wind Energy, 20, 269–288, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.2005</ext-link>,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Yu et al.(2017)Yu, Hong, Ferreira, and van Kuik</label><mixed-citation>Yu, W., Hong, V. W., Ferreira, C., and van Kuik, G. A. M.: Experimental
analysis on the dynamic wake of an actuator disc undergoing transient loads,
Exp. Fluids, 58,  149, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-017-2432-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00348-017-2432-9</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Dynamic inflow effects in measurements  and high-fidelity computations</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>A wind turbine experiences an overshoot in loading after, for
example, a collective step change in pitch angle. This overshoot occurs
because the wind turbine wake does not immediately reach its new equilibrium,
an effect usually referred to as dynamic inflow. Vortex cylinder models and
actuator disc simulations predict that the time constants of this dynamic
inflow effect should decrease significantly towards the blade tip. As part of
the NASA Ames Phase VI experiment, pitch steps have been performed on a
turbine in controlled conditions in the wind tunnel. The measured aerodynamic
forces from these experiments seemed to show much less radial dependency of
the dynamic inflow time constants than expected when pitching towards low
loading. Moreover the dynamic inflow effect seemed fundamentally different
when pitching from low to high loading, and the reason for this behavior
remained unclear in previous analyses of the experiment. High-fidelity
computational fluid dynamics and free-wake vortex code computations yielded
the same behavior as the experiments. In the present work these observations
from the experiments and high-fidelity computations are explained based on a
simple vortex cylinder wake model.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Boorsma and Schepers(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Boorsma, K. and Schepers, J. G.: New Mexico Experiment, Description of
experimental setup, Tech. Rep. ECN-X–15-093 (v3), ECN, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Boorsma et al.(2016)Boorsma, Hartvelt, and Orsi</label><mixed-citation>
Boorsma, K., Hartvelt, M., and Orsi, L.: Application of the lifting line
vortex
wake method to dynamic load case simulations, J. Phys. Conf.
Ser., 753, 2, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/753/2/022030" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/753/2/022030</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>Hand et al.(2001)Hand, Simms, Fingersh, Jager, Cotrell, Schreck, and
Larwood</label><mixed-citation>
Hand, M., Simms, D., Fingersh, L., Jager, D., Cotrell, J., Schreck, S., and
Larwood, S.: Unsteady aerodynamics experiment phase VI: wind tunnel test
configurations and available data campaigns, NREL/TP-500-29955, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Colorado, USA, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Jost et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Jost, E., Klein, L., Leipprand, H., Lutz, T., and Krämer, E.: Extracting
the
angle of attack on rotor blades from CFD simulations, Wind Energy,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2196" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2196</a>, online first,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Pirrung(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Pirrung, G. R.: Aerodynamics code used in Wind Energy Science
paper “Dynamic inflow effects in measurements and
high-fidelity computations”,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1346717" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1346717</a>, 2018. 
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Rahimi et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Rahimi, H., Schepers, J. G., Shen, W. Z., Ramos García, N., Schneider, M.,
Micallef, D., Ferreira, C., Jost, E., Klein, L., and Herréz, I.: Evaluation
of different methods for determining the angle of attack on wind turbine
blades with CFD results under axial inflow conditions, Renew. Energ., 125,
866–876,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.018</a>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Schepers(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G.: IEA Wind Task XX: Dynamic Inflow effects at fast pitching
steps on a wind turbine placed in the NASA-Ames wind tunnel, ECN-E-07-085,
2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Schepers(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G.: Engineering models in wind energy aerodynamics: Development,
implementation and analysis using dedicated aerodynamic measurements, TU
Delft, Delft University of Technology, PhD thesis
ISBN 9789461915078, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>Snel and Schepers(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Snel, H. and Schepers, J. G.: Joint investigation of dynamic inflow effects
and implementation of an engineering method, Tech. Rep. ECN-C–94-107,
ECN, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Sørensen(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, N.: General purpose flow solver applied to flow over hills, PhD
thesis, published 2003, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Sørensen and Madsen(2006)</label><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, N. N. and Madsen, H. A.: Modelling of transient wind turbine
loads
during pitch motion, European Wind Energy Association (EWEA), 2006 European Wind Energy Conference and Exhibition, Athens, Greece, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>van Garrel(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
van Garrel, A.: Development of a wind turbine aerodynamics simulation
module,
Tech. Rep. ECN report ECN-C–03-079, ECN, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Yu(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, W.: The wake of an unsteady actuator disc, PhD thesis, Delft University
of
Technology, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4233/uuid:0e3a2402-585c-41b1-81cf-a35753076dfc" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4233/uuid:0e3a2402-585c-41b1-81cf-a35753076dfc</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Yu et al.(2016)Yu, Ferreira, Kuik, and Baldacchino</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, W., Ferreira, C. S., Kuik, G., and Baldacchino, D.: Verifying the Blade
Element Momentum Method in unsteady, radially varied, axisymmetric loading
using a vortex ring model, Wind Energy, 20, 269–288, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2005</a>,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Yu et al.(2017)Yu, Hong, Ferreira, and van Kuik</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, W., Hong, V. W., Ferreira, C., and van Kuik, G. A. M.: Experimental
analysis on the dynamic wake of an actuator disc undergoing transient loads,
Exp. Fluids, 58,  149, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-017-2432-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-017-2432-9</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
