Articles | Volume 4, issue 4
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-4-619-2019
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-4-619-2019
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Adjoint-based calibration of inlet boundary condition for atmospheric computational fluid dynamics solvers
Siamak Akbarzadeh
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
ForWind, Center for Wind Energy Research, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Küpkersweg 70, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany
Hassan Kassem
Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy Systems – Fraunhofer IWES, Küpkersweg 70, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany
Renko Buhr
ForWind, Center for Wind Energy Research, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Küpkersweg 70, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany
Gerald Steinfeld
ForWind, Center for Wind Energy Research, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Küpkersweg 70, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany
Bernhard Stoevesandt
Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy Systems – Fraunhofer IWES, Küpkersweg 70, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany
Related authors
No articles found.
Johannes Paulsen, Jörge Schneemann, Gerald Steinfeld, Frauke Theuer, and Martin Kühn
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-118, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-118, 2025
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
While Low-Level Jets (LLJs) have been well-characterized, their impact on offshore wind farms is not well understood. This study uses multi-elevation lidar scans to derive vertical wind profiles up to 350 m and detect LLJs in up to 22.6 % of available measurements. Further, we analyze their effect on power production using operational wind farm data, observing a slightly negative influence and increased power fluctuations during LLJ events.
Sonja Steinbrück, Thorben Eilers, Lukas Vollmer, Kerstin Avila, and Gerald Steinfeld
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-146, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-146, 2024
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
This paper introduces an enhanced coupling between the LES code PALM and the aeroelastic code FAST, enabling detailed turbine output in temporally and spatially heterogeneous atmospheric flows while maintaining computational efficiency. A wind speed correction is added to reduce errors from force smearing on the numerical grid. Results were evaluated through comparisons between different model setups and turbine measurements, including assessments in a two-turbine wake situation.
Leo Höning, Laura J. Lukassen, Bernhard Stoevesandt, and Iván Herráez
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 203–218, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-203-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-203-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study analyzes the impact of wind turbine rotor blade flexibility on the aerodynamic loading of the blades and the consequential wind characteristics in the near wake of the turbine. It is shown that gravitation leads to rotational periodic fluctuations of blade loading, which directly impacts the trajectory of the blade tip vortex at different rotor blade positions while also resulting in a non-uniform wind velocity deficit in the wake of the wind turbine.
Balthazar Arnoldus Maria Sengers, Andreas Rott, Eric Simley, Michael Sinner, Gerald Steinfeld, and Martin Kühn
Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 1693–1710, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1693-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1693-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Unexpected wind direction changes are undesirable, especially when performing wake steering. This study explores whether the yaw controller can benefit from accessing wind direction information before a change reaches the turbine. Results from two models with different fidelities demonstrate that wake steering can indeed benefit from preview information.
Khaled Yassin, Arne Helms, Daniela Moreno, Hassan Kassem, Leo Höning, and Laura J. Lukassen
Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 1133–1152, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1133-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1133-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The current turbulent wind field models stated in the IEC 61400-1 standard underestimate the probability of extreme changes in wind velocity. This underestimation can lead to the false calculation of extreme and fatigue loads on the turbine. In this work, we are trying to apply a random time-mapping technique to one of the standard turbulence models to adapt to such extreme changes. The turbulent fields generated are compared with a standard wind field to show the effects of this new mapping.
Balthazar Arnoldus Maria Sengers, Gerald Steinfeld, Paul Hulsman, and Martin Kühn
Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 747–770, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-747-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-747-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The optimal misalignment angles for wake steering are determined using wake models. Although mostly analytical, data-driven models have recently shown promising results. This study validates a previously proposed data-driven model with results from a field experiment using lidar measurements. In a comparison with a state-of-the-art analytical model, it shows systematically more accurate estimates of the available power. Also when using only commonly available input data, it gives good results.
Balthazar Arnoldus Maria Sengers, Matthias Zech, Pim Jacobs, Gerald Steinfeld, and Martin Kühn
Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 1455–1470, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-1455-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-1455-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Wake steering aims to redirect the wake away from a downstream turbine. This study explores the potential of a data-driven surrogate model whose equations can be interpreted physically. It estimates wake characteristics from measurable input variables by utilizing a simple linear model. The model shows encouraging results in estimating available power in the far wake, with significant improvements over currently used analytical models in conditions where wake steering is deemed most effective.
Sonja Krüger, Gerald Steinfeld, Martin Kraft, and Laura J. Lukassen
Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 323–344, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-323-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-323-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Detailed numerical simulations of turbines in atmospheric conditions are challenging with regard to their computational demand. We coupled an atmospheric flow model and a turbine model in order to deliver extensive details about the flow and the turbine response within reasonable computational time. A comparison to measurement data was performed and showed a very good agreement. The efficiency of the tool enables applications such as load calculation in wind farms or during low-level-jet events.
Khaled Yassin, Hassan Kassem, Bernhard Stoevesandt, Thomas Klemme, and Joachim Peinke
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2021-3, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2021-3, 2021
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
When ice forms on wind turbine blades, the smooth surface of the blade becomes rough which changes its aerodynamic performance. So, it is very important to know how to simulate this rough surface since most CFD simulations depend on assuming a smooth surface. This article compares different mathematical models specialized in simulating rough surfaces with results of real ice profiles. The study presents the most accurate model and recommends using it in future airflow simulation of iced blades.
Cited articles
Adams, B. M., Ebeida, M. S., Eldred, M. S., Geraci, G., Jakeman, J. D., Maupin, K. A., Monschke, J. A., Swiler, L. P., Stephens, J. A., Vigil, D. M., and Wildey, T. M.: DAKOTA, a multilevel parallel object-oriented framework for design optimization, parameter estimation, uncertainty quantification, and sensitivity analysis, Tech. rep., Sandia Technical Report SAND2014-4633,
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 2017. a
Bauweraerts, P. and Meyers, J.: Towards an adjoint based 4D-Var state
estimation for turbulent flow, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1037, 072055, https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1037/7/072055, 2018. a
Chang, C.-Y., Schmidt, J., Dörenkämper, M., and Stoevesandt, B.: A
consistent steady state CFD simulation method for stratified atmospheric
boundary layer flows, J. Wind Eng. Indust. Aerodynam., 172, 55–67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2017.10.003, 2018. a, b, c
Chen, H., Miao, C., and Lv, X.: Estimation of open boundary conditions for an
internal tidal model with adjoint method: a comparative study on optimization
methods, Math. Probl. Eng., https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/802136, 2013. a
Davis, L.: Handbook of genetic algorithms, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY, 1991. a
Dhert, T., Ashuri, T., and Martins, J. R.: Aerodynamic shape optimization of
wind turbine blades using a Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes model and an
adjoint method, Wind Energy, 20, 909–926, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2070, 2017. a
Dörenkämper, M.: NEWA-Rödeser Berg 2017-Blind Test, Data Source (ALS data): Hessische Verwaltung für Bodenmanagement und Geoinformation,
availabl e at: https://windbench.net/newa-r-deser-berg-2017-blind-test/, last access:
9 September 2018. a
EU-ERA-NET: The New European Wind Atlas (NEWA) project, available at:
http://www.neweuropeanwindatlas.eu/, last access: 9 September 2018. a
Foken, T.: 50 years of the Monin–Obukhov similarity theory, Bound.-Lay.
Meteorol., 119, 431–447, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-006-9048-6, 2006. a
Giles, M. B. and Pierce, N. A.: An introduction to the adjoint approach to
design, Flow Turbul. Combust., 65, 393–415, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011430410075, 2000. a, b
Giles, M. B., Duta, M. C., Müller, J.-D., and Pierce, N. A.: Algorithm
developments for discrete adjoint methods, AIAA J., 41, 198–205, https://doi.org/10.2514/2.1961, 2003. a
Glover, N., Guillas, S., and Malki-Epshtein, L.: Statistical calibration of CFD modelling for street canyon flows, in: Proceedings of Building Simulation 2011: 12th Conference of International Building Performance Simulation Association, 14–16 November 2011, Sydney, Australia, 1513–1520, 2011. a
Goit, J., Munters, W., and Meyers, J.: Optimal coordinated control of power
extraction in LES of a wind farm with entrance effects, Energies, 9, 29, https://doi.org/10.3390/en9010029, 2016. a
Griewank, A. and Walther, A.: Evaluating derivatives: principles and techniques of algorithmic differentiation, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 2008. a
Hager, W. W. and Zhang, H.: A survey of nonlinear conjugate gradient methods,
Pacif. J. Optimiz., 2, 35–58, 2006. a
He, P., Mader, C. A., Martins, J. R., and Maki, K. J.: An aerodynamic design
optimization framework using a discrete adjoint approach with OpenFOAM, Comput. Fluids, 168, 285–303, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2018.04.012, 2018. a
Hinterberger, C. and Olesen, M.: Industrial application of continuous adjoint
flow solvers for the optimization of automotive exhaust systems, CFD & Optimization, Antalya, Turkey, 2011. a
Hinze, M., Pinnau, R., Ulbrich, M., and Ulbrich, S.: Optimization with PDE
constraints, in: vol. 23, Springer Science & Business Media, New York, NY, 2008. a
Ishihara, T., Hibi, K., and Oikawa, S.: A wind tunnel study of turbulent flow
over a three-dimensional steep hill, J. Wind Eng. Indust. Aerodynam., 83, 95–107, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(99)00064-1, 1999. a, b
Jameson, A.: Aerodynamic Design via Control Theory, J. Scient. Comput., 3, 233–260, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01061285, 1988. a
Jameson, A., Martinelli, L., and Pierce, N.: Optimum Aerodynamic Design using
the Navier–Stokes equations, Theor. Comput. Fluid Dynam., 10, 213–237, https://doi.org/10.1007/s001620050060, 1998. a
Kämmerer, S., Mayer, J., Paffrath, M., Wever, U., and Jung, A.:
Three-dimensional optimization of turbomachinery bladings using sensitivity
analysis, ASME Turbo Expo: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, 6, 1093–1101, https://doi.org/10.1115/GT2003-38037, 2003. a
King, R. N., Dykes, K., Graf, P., and Hamlington, P. E.: Optimization of wind plant layouts using an adjoint approach, Wind Energ. Sci., 2, 115–131, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-115-2017, 2017. a
Li, H.-D., He, L., Li, Y., and Wells, R.: Blading aerodynamics design
optimization with mechanical and aeromechanical constraints, ASME Turbo Expo: Power for Land, Sea, and Air, 6, 1319–1328, https://doi.org/10.1115/GT2006-90503, 2006. a
Liu, J., Chen, J., Black, T., and Novak, M.: E−ε modelling of
turbulent air flow downwind of a model forest edge, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 77, 21–44, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00121857, 1996. a
Lopes da Costa, J.: Atmospheric Flow Over Forested and Non-Forested Complex
Terrain, PhD thesis, University of Porto, Porto, 2007. a
Mavriplis, D. J.: Discrete adjoint-based approach for optimization problems on three-dimensional unstructured meshes, AIAA J., 45, 741–750, https://doi.org/10.2514/1.22743, 2007. a
Michalewicz, Z.: Evolution strategies and other methods, in: Genetic
algorithms + data structures = evolution programs, 159–177, Springer, Berlin, 1996. a
Munters, W. and Meyers, J.: An optimal control framework for dynamic induction control of wind farms and their interaction with the atmospheric boundary layer, Philos. T. Roy. Soc. A, 375, 20160100, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016.0100, 2017. a
Nadarajah, S. and Jameson, A.: A Comparison of the Continuous and Discrete
AIAA CP-00-0667, Adjoint Approach to Automatic Aerodynamic Optimization,
Reno, NV, 2000. a
Nadarajah, S. and Jameson, A.: Studies Of The Continuous And Discrete Adjoint
Approaches To Viscous Automatic Aerodynamic Shape Optimization, in: 15th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, AIAA, Anaheim, CA, p. 2530, 2001. a
Nielsen, E. J., Diskin, B., and Yamaleev, N. K.: Discrete adjoint-based design optimization of unsteady turbulent flows on dynamic unstructured grids, AIAA J., 48, 1195, https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J050035, 2010. a
Nilsson, U., Lindblad, D., and Petit, O.: Description of
adjointShapeOptimizationFoam and how to implement new objective functions, in: course at Chalmers University of Technology, Enero, 2014. a
Othmer, C.: A continuous adjoint formulation for the computation of topological and surface sensitivities of ducted flows, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 58, 861–877, https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.1770, 2008. a
Othmer, C. and Grahs, T.: Approaches to fluid dynamic optimization in the car
development process, in: Eurogen, FLM, Munich, 2005. a
Othmer, C., Kaminski, T., and Giering, R.: Computation of topological
sensitivities in fluid dynamics: cost function versatility, in: Eccomas CFD 2006, edited by: Wesseling, P., Oñate, E., and Périaux, J.,
Citeseer, Delft, 2006. a
Pironneau, O.: On Optimum Design in Fluid Mechanics, J. Fluid Mech., 64, 97–110, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112074002023, 1974. a
Rebollo, T. C. and Lewandowski, R.: Mathematical and numerical foundations of
turbulence models and applications, Springer, New York, NY, 2014. a
Reeves, C. M. and Fletcher, R.: Function minimization by conjugate gradients,
Comput. J., 7, 149–154, https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/7.2.149, 1964. a
Ruder, S.: An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms, arXiv
preprint arXiv:1609.04747, 2016. a
Schneiderbauer, S. and Pirker, S.: Determination of open boundary conditions
for computational fluid dynamics (CFD) from interior observations, Appl. Math. Model., 35, 763–780, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2010.07.032, 2011. a
Seiler, U.: Estimation of open boundary conditions with the adjoint method,
J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 98, 22855–22870, https://doi.org/10.1029/93JC02376, 1993. a
Stevens, R. J. and Meneveau, C.: Flow structure and turbulence in wind farms,
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 49, 311–339, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-010816-060206, 2017. a
Towara, M. and Naumann, U.: A Discrete Adjoint Model for OpenFOAM, Procedia
Comput. Sci., 18, 429–438, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.05.206, 2013.
a
Towara, M., Schanen, M., and Naumann, U.: Mpi-parallel discrete adjoint
openfoam, Procedia Comput. Sci., 51, 19–28, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.05.181, 2015. a
Vali, M., Petrović, V., Boersma, S., van Wingerden, J.-W., Pao, L. Y., and Kühn, M.: Adjoint-based model predictive control for optimal energy
extraction in waked wind farms, Control Eng. Pract., 84, 48–62, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2018.11.005, 2019. a
Wu, X.: Inflow turbulence generation methods, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 49, 23–49, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-010816-060322, 2017. a
Short summary
The numerical flow simulation solvers are extensively used for site assessment in the wind energy industry. However, due to the complexity of flow regimes, it is essential to calibrate the important parameters of such algorithms with measurement data. In this paper, we present a computationally cheap (adjoint) solver that can be coupled with any standard gradient-based optimizer to calibrate the inflow boundary of a CFD solver using the wind speed measurements from the interior of a domain.
The numerical flow simulation solvers are extensively used for site assessment in the wind...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint