<?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"><?xmltex \hack{\allowdisplaybreaks}?>
  <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-5-1-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>Implementation of the blade element momentum model on a polar grid and its aeroelastic load impact</article-title><alt-title>An implementation of the BEM model on a polar grid</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{An implementation of the BEM model on a polar grid}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{H.~A.~Madsen et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Madsen</surname><given-names>Helge Aagaard</given-names></name>
          <email>hama@dtu.dk</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4647-3706</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Larsen</surname><given-names>Torben Juul</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Pirrung</surname><given-names>Georg Raimund</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9260-1791</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Ang</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7313-8308</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Zahle</surname><given-names>Frederik</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Technical University of Denmark, Wind Energy Divison, Building 118, P.O. Box 49, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Vestas Wind Systems A/S, Hedeager 42, 8200 Aarhus, Denmark</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Helge Aagaard Madsen (hama@dtu.dk)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>2</day><month>January</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>5</volume>
      <issue>1</issue>
      <fpage>1</fpage><lpage>27</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>9</day><month>August</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>23</day><month>August</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>18</day><month>October</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>6</day><month>November</month><year>2019</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 Helge Aagaard Madsen et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</copyright-year>
      <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/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020.html">This article is available from https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e124">We show that the upscaling of wind turbines from rotor diameters of 15–20 m to presently large rotors of 150–200 m has changed the requirements for the aerodynamic blade element momentum (BEM) models in the aeroelastic codes. This is because the typical scales in the inflow turbulence are now comparable with the rotor diameter of the large turbines. Therefore, the spectrum of the incoming turbulence relative to the rotating blade has increased energy content on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, …, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the annular mean induction approach in a classical BEM implementation might no longer be a good approximation for large rotors. We present a complete BEM implementation on a polar grid that models the induction response to the considerable <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, …, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inflow variations, including models for yawed inflow, dynamic inflow and radial induction. At each time step, in an aeroelastic simulation, the induction derived from a local BEM approach is updated at all the stationary grid points covering the swept area so the model can be characterized as an engineering actuator disk (AD) solution. The induction at each grid point varies slowly in time due to the dynamic inflow filter but the rotating blade now samples the induction field; as a result, the induction seen from the blade is highly unsteady and has a spectrum with distinct <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, …, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> peaks. The load impact mechanism from this unsteady induction is analyzed and it is found that the load impact strongly depends on the turbine design and operating conditions. For operation at low to medium thrust coefficients (conventional turbines at above rated wind speed or low induction turbines in the whole operating range), it is found that the grid BEM gives typically 8 %–10 % lower 1 Hz blade root flapwise fatigue loads than the classical annular mean BEM approach. At high thrust coefficients that can occur at low wind speeds, the grid BEM can give slightly increased fatigue loads. In the paper, the implementation of the grid-based BEM is described in detail, and finally several validation cases are presented. Comparisons with blade loads from full rotor CFD, wind tunnel experiments and a field experiment show that the model can predict the aerodynamic forces in half-wake, yawed flow, dynamic inflow and turbulent inflow conditions.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e227">The blade element momentum (BEM) model <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.1"/> is used extensively within the wind energy research community as well as by the wind turbine
industry for simulating the aerodynamic rotor characteristics such as blade aerodynamic loads, rotor power and rotor thrust. For rotor design, the computations are commonly carried out for uniform, constant inflow over the rotor disk. However, the BEM model is also the aerodynamic engine in most aeroelastic models used today (FLEX5 (Flex4), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="altparen.2"/>; FAST, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="altparen.3"/>; BLADED, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="altparen.4"/>; GAST, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx41" id="altparen.5"/>; Cp-Lambda, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx4" id="altparen.6"/>; FOCUS, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx57" id="altparen.7"/>; HAWC2, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="altparen.8"/>) by the industry for the detailed aeroelastic simulations that are the basis for the certification of wind
turbines <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10 bib1.bibx13" id="paren.9"/>. This comprises a significant amount of simulations at normal operating conditions with turbulent inflow but also at fault modes of the turbines such as a large yaw error. It further includes
extreme inflow conditions such as strong<?pagebreak page2?> shear, gusts and more recently also wake situations, where the wake is modeled as a combination of a reduced, meandering wind speed deficit in the wake region and added wake turbulence <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16 bib1.bibx25" id="paren.10"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e261">When describing an aeroelastic code, it is often just mentioned that BEM is the model for computing the aerodynamic forces and that the model is further extended with submodels for tip loss, yawed conditions, dynamic inflow and dynamic stall. This is an incomplete description, as implementation details such as the way the models are coupled together can influence the computational results considerably. The most important aspect is how the BEM model is implemented to model the induction response due to the unsteady and non-uniform loading over the rotor caused by the atmospheric turbulent inflow, wind shear or control actions like pitch and flap control.</p>
      <p id="d1e264">The purpose of the present article is to present in detail a complete unsteady BEM induction model for non-uniform inflow and loading that can be readily implemented.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S1.SS1">
  <label>1.1</label><title>Upscaling has influenced the requirements for aerodynamic modeling</title>
      <p id="d1e274">The non-uniform unsteady loading over the rotor disk due to the atmospheric inflow increases with rotor size. Thus, the requirements to the BEM modeling capability have changed considerably from the 15–20 m diameter rotors in the 1980s to 100–200 m rotors today. This important effect of turbulence scales relative to rotor size was already described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.11"/>, noticing the difference in impact on aerodynamic loads of turbulence scales above and below the rotor size. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.12"/> also very briefly presented how to use the BEM method in sheared inflow. This approach has some resemblance to the BEM implementation that will be presented here.</p>
      <p id="d1e283">To illustrate how the upscaling of rotors leads to a more non-uniform inflow and thus non-uniform loading of the rotor when operating in turbulent inflow (no shear), we simulate two turbines with the aeroelastic code HAWC2 (Horizontal Axis Wind turbine simulation Code; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="altparen.13"/>): the AVATAR rotor with a diameter of 205 m <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx47" id="paren.14"/> and a downscaled version of the AVATAR rotor with a diameter of 51.4 m. Both turbines were simulated without tilt, with a stiff structure, and both operate at the same tip speed of 74.7 m 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> and in the same turbulent inflow with no shear. The turbulent inflow was generated with the Mann model <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.15"/> using a box with vertical and horizontal side lengths of 240 and 5600 m, the latter corresponding to the traveling length of the turbulence over the simulation time of 700 s and a mean wind speed of 8 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>.</p>
      <p id="d1e319">As the turbine blades rotate through the turbulent vortex structures, the spectrum of the free wind speed at the tip of the blades has energy concentrated on multiples of the rotational frequency <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>). Since the size of the turbulent vortex structures is absolute (given a certain turbulence length scale), the distribution of energy upon the individual frequency multiples is different for different turbine sizes. What can be noticed is that the small rotor has a significant amount of energy on the very low frequencies (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≪</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), whereas the larger turbine experiences a higher ratio of the total energy on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and multiples. In other words, for the increasing  size of turbines, a bigger and bigger part of the turbulent eddies have a size comparable to or below the rotor diameter.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e359">Rotational sampling of turbulence for different turbine sizes.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e368">The increasingly non-uniform rotor loading with turbine size is also caused by inflow with shear. The largest modern turbines with the blade tips at top positions around heights of 300 m now span most of atmospheric boundary layer containing the main part of the shear <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34" id="paren.16"/>. This is in particular seen for stable flow situations.</p>
      <p id="d1e374">Other challenging wind situations comprise non-stationary wind conditions containing trends, such as wind shear developing over time. For very large rotors, these situations are important for the extreme load levels during operation. Thus, they need attention in the modeling phase if turbine designers shall be able to counteract such events using either active or passive load alleviation techniques.</p>
      <p id="d1e377">Besides the upscaling trend, turbine design has changed in the same time span of years, which results in new requirements for the aerodynamic modeling in the aeroelastic codes. Pitch control is now the common power regulation method; therefore, situations like pitch fault have to be simulated for certification. Such a situation with, e.g., one blade pitch differing from the pitch of the other blades with, e.g., 20<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, results in a non-uniform rotor loading and expected azimuthal variation of induction. The pitch control for power regulation has been extended to include cyclic pitch to alleviate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> loads, and now full individual pitch is being implemented for even better load alleviation. An important question is thus how to handle individual pitch action in a BEM-type modeling.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page3?><sec id="Ch1.S1.SS2">
  <label>1.2</label><title>Research on the challenges in modeling sheared and turbulent inflow</title>
      <p id="d1e409">The subject of sheared and turbulent inflow was part of the work in the EU-funded UpWind project (2006–2011) with the main objective to study upscaling of turbines to 8–10 MW. The aerodynamic flow mechanisms at high shear in the inflow were investigated by simulating the sheared inflow on the 5 MW reference wind turbine <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx14" id="paren.17"/> with a range of models from high-fidelity CFD codes to vortex codes and to more BEM-type codes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26" id="paren.18"/>. One major finding was that all high-fidelity codes and vortex codes showed that the induction does vary within an annular element for sheared inflow. Different BEM implementations to cope with this were discussed.</p>
      <p id="d1e418">Similar work was continued in the EU-funded AVATAR project (2013–2017) with a focus on even bigger turbines (10 MW and higher) than in the UpWind project. A summary of the findings has been presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx44" id="text.19"/>. One major finding was that a comparison of aeroelastic simulations with a free vortex code and a BEM-based aeroelastic code showed an overprediction of fatigue loads in the range of 15 % by the BEM-based aeroelastic code. It is further mentioned and discussed that the results depend on the actual implementation of the BEM model.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S1.SS3">
  <label>1.3</label><title>The historical BEM development</title>
      <p id="d1e432">The basic BEM formulation originates from Glauert and was developed for airplane propellers <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.20"/>. Glauert points out that the two major components are the “momentum theory” and the “blade element theory” which for many years were developed separately and, e.g., the use of finite aspect blade data was considered in the blade element theories to fit experimental rotor data. However, the combination of the two theories finally led to the BEM approach where the induced velocities at the rotor disk are derived from the momentum theory and the blade sectional forces are found on the basis of infinite aspect ratio (2-D) airfoil characteristics. In the present paper, the focus is on the momentum part of the BEM approach, although many uncertainties in rotor computations are linked to the blade element analysis such as 3-D airfoil characteristics due to rotational effects.</p>
      <p id="d1e438">When the momentum part of the BEM theory is used in aeroelastic simulations,
the actual flow conditions violate most assumptions in the basic theory: (1) turbulent and sheared inflow compared with the assumption of uniform, steady inflow; (2) non-uniform load in contrast to the assumed uniform loading and (3) skewed inflow in contrast to assumed axial inflow, just to mention the most important violations. To compensate for this, a number of submodels are introduced like dynamic inflow and skewed wake models. However, there is no real consensus on how the different phenomena should be modeled and how the submodels should interact. Therefore, we often see considerable deviations for BEM simulations on complex inflow cases <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8 bib1.bibx45" id="paren.21"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e444">Many researchers have contributed  over time to the development of the BEM theory for wind turbines but only a few will be mentioned here. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx56" id="text.22"/> made an important contribution at an early stage to describe the theory. They also proposed a method based on a Taylor expansion to look into the effect of wind shear. Another important contribution at an early stage to the development of the BEM approach is made by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.23"/>, who envisioned the challenges in implementing the BEM theory for turbulent inflow.</p>
      <p id="d1e453">Later, a comprehensive description of the BEM modeling is presented in the handbook of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.24"/>  with a detailed discussion of inflow models to handle dynamic and skewed loading as will be discussed later. Also, the handbook of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="text.25"/> gives a fundamental introduction to the BEM modeling approach as well as the doctoral thesis by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="text.26"/>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S1.SS4">
  <label>1.4</label><title>The organization of the paper</title>
      <p id="d1e473">In Sect. 3, we present a detailed description of the implementation of the grid BEM approach. However, first, in that section, we give a short introduction to the origin of the CFD simulations of the actuator disk flow used heavily in developing and tuning the submodel for yawed flow, the dynamic induction model and a submodel for radial induction. The mechanism of induction in turbulent and sheared flow is explored in Sect. 4, and we present the load and power impact for two turbines for design load case (DLC) 1.2 load cases. In Sect. 5, a selection of validation cases is presented, followed by conclusions in Sect. 6.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>The grid BEM model implementation</title>
      <?pagebreak page4?><p id="d1e485">The overall idea with the present BEM implementation is to model the rotor as an actuator disk (AD) that is updated at each time step in stationary grid points covering the rotor disk. In an aeroelastic simulation, the loading will normally be non-uniform and unsteady as discussed above. The input to the computation of the induced velocities is thus the distributed normal and tangential loading on the AD, and it will be shown in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2.SS4"/> how the loading of the individual rotor blades is distributed over the disk. The flow field could be computed with a CFD model of the AD <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.27"/>, but we present here an engineering solution based on the BEM theory for the flow at the disk to reduce the computational efforts to a minimum. However, the close link between the engineering BEM-AD and the AD-CFD model means that we easily can tune submodels in the BEM-AD model. We use AD-CFD results  below  for tuning the yaw and dynamic inflow model and for correction of the momentum model at high loading. Another example of such submodel tuning is the correction for the influence of wake rotation and expansion <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx46" id="paren.28"/>, as presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.29"/>. However, these submodels are not incorporated in the BEM-AD model presented here. Before going to the description of the BEM model, we will briefly introduce the origin of the AD-CFD results used below.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>The basis of the AD-CFD results</title>
      <p id="d1e506">The general purpose CFD code FIDAP (Fluid Dynamics Analysis Program), based on the finite element method, is used for the AD computations. It was one of the first commercially available CFD codes and has an unstructured mesh capability which reduces the requirements to the total number of nodes.</p>
      <p id="d1e509">In the past, the code has been used for several studies of the flow through an actuator disk model. In a first setup from 1996, the computations show good correlation with the momentum theory with one-third induction at the rotor disk and two-thirds in the far field for a prescribed uniform loading corresponding to a thrust coefficient of 0.89 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.30"/>. It should be mentioned that FIDAP has an option of using a discrete pressure formulation from element to element which was found important for AD simulations of the pressure jump at the disk. Typically, two cells with a total axial distance of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are used to model the disk in axial direction.</p>
      <p id="d1e525">Later, in 1999, the AD model was coupled to the aeroelastic code HAWC <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx53" id="paren.31"/>, so that the computation of the induction could be shifted between BEM and the CFD-AD model <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.32"/>. Several yawed flow cases for a 100 kW turbine were investigated with that model setup and a good correlation with experimental data was found, e.g., for the electrical power and flapwise moment <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="paren.33"/>. A further comparison was made using the data set for 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yaw error from the NREL phase VI 10 m wind turbine tested in the NASA Ames 80 ft <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 120 ft wind tunnel <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="paren.34"/>. The computed angle of attack variation at a radial position of 83 % showed good correlation with the measured inflow angle when corrected for the influence of upwash.</p>
      <p id="d1e557">The CFD mesh and model from this setup is used for the present simulations with a prescribed uniform loading on the disk (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>). The mesh extends 10 rotor diameters (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> direction, which is the main flow direction for zero yaw, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> direction and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> direction. The inflow plane is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> upstream the actuator disk, and yawed flow is simulated by changing the inflow direction with an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>-velocity component. In total, about 25 000 nodes are used for the meshing.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e631">The CFD mesh used for the AD yaw computations. The velocity contours for computation of a 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yawed case are shown on top of the mesh plot.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>The basic BEM equations</title>
      <p id="d1e657">The fundamental part of the BEM model <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.35"/> is the relation between thrust on the rotor and the induced velocities. For a stream tube enclosing the AD, a 1-D momentum balance between axial forces on the turbine and the flow within a stream tube is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">˙</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Following classical literature like <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.36"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx56" id="text.37"/> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.38"/>, this leads to the relationship between the thrust coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the induction factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M32" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with the rotor thrust <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, the free-stream velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the air density <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and the rotor area <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e837">For thrust values causing higher induced velocities than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" 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>,
Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) breaks down, since the flow velocity in the wake far downstream according to the momentum theory is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which in these cases is equal to or smaller than zero. This results in an infinite expansion of the flow behind the rotor and the flow can no longer be approximated by simple momentum theory. More complex flow models are needed, such as CFD, or an empirically based relation can be used.</p>
      <p id="d1e868">For different reasons explained below, we use a BEM implementation where the induction in the whole operational range from negative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to a high positive <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is expressed through the following third-order polynomial shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M43" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where the coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> … <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are defined as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2460</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0586</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0883</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1016">The approximation of the basic momentum relation between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> with a polynomial extending into an empirical relation at high loading when <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is above 0.89.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1054">For <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.89</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the polynomial fits well the momentum equation. At high loading, the curve was determined to fall between the Glauert empirical relation fitted to experimental results for a model rotor (see, e.g., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="altparen.39"/>)<?pagebreak page5?> and results from actuator disk simulations at high loading <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.40"/>. At high values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the gradient of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curve is kept constant. Thus, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is determined as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1203">One important reason for using a polynomial fit to Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) is that we find that it is a more robust and fast method to compute the induction instead of solving Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) using a non-linear Newton–Raphson iteration solver combined with an empirical relation at high loading. Another reason is that it makes it easily possible to modify this <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> relation in order to simulate, e.g., a coned rotor as illustrated in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.41"/>, using AD-CFD simulations for the coned rotor. In this case, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> polynomials will be a function of radial position.</p>
      <p id="d1e1247">A next step in implementing the BEM model is to couple the momentum theory to the blade element theory where the forces on a blade section are derived by means of two-dimensional airfoil characteristics. We apply Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) on a ring element of the rotor with the radial extension d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, as illustrated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>a:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M60" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rel</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">B</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rel</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the relative velocity to the blade section, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the blade chord, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">B</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of blades, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the projection of the lift coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">l</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the drag coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on a line perpendicular to the rotor plane.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1412">Illustration of the BEM approach. <bold>(a)</bold> Classic approach using an annular element to which the load is assumed constant over the element (mean value of blade forces). <bold>(b)</bold> New induction grid with annular elements and further subdivided azimuthally.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1428">Besides the elemental thrust d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> on the ring element, there is also a torque d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and we can define a torque coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M70" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rel</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">B</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the projection of the lift coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">l</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the drag coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on a line tangential to the rotor plane.</p>
      <p id="d1e1578">Applying the angular momentum equation across the disk, we get
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M74" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          Combining Eqs. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>) and (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>), we find
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M75" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rel</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">B</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the tangential induction coefficient. To avoid division by zero, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> term is limited to a minimum of 0.1 for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Tip correction</title>
      <p id="d1e1763">The relation between thrust and induced velocities (Eqs. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>–<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>) is changed due to the presence of tip effects, caused by a finite number of blades. Within the wind turbine research community, the tip correction method has for a long time been the subject of numerous investigations and development. In a recent work, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="text.42"/> presents a comprehensive review of studies on the tip correction and contributes with full derivation of the commonly used Prandtl tip correction which, however, was further slightly modified by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.43"/> to be used in the BEM theory. The Prandtl tip correction factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.44"/>:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><label>7</label><mml:math id="M80" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msup><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">B</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">φ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          We insert it into the momentum equation (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><label>8</label><mml:math id="M81" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula> has to be inserted instead of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>). The term <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula> can reach very large values close to the tip where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> becomes very small. In the code, the term is limited to a maximum value of 4. How to incorporate the tip correction factor is also discussed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="text.45"/>, concluding that it can either be used to modify the circulation (loading) as done here or through a modification of the induced velocities.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page6?><sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Specific grid BEM implementation in HAWC2</title>
      <p id="d1e1947">Even though the BEM relationship is originally derived for a full rotor, it is generally implemented on an annular element form as proposed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.46"/>. In such an annular BEM implementation, it is assumed that the loading and induction within each annular element are constant and that the annular elements are independent of each other. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coefficient now represents the average axial loading of the blades on an annular ring element.</p>
      <p id="d1e1964">In order to model azimuthal variations of induction due to azimuthal variations of blade loading as discussed above, we propose to expand the annular BEM approach. Dividing the annular elements into azimuthal sub-elements leads to a polar grid BEM approach; see  Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>b.</p>
      <p id="d1e1969">The induced velocity is found in each grid point using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> relationship in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>). For a uniform inflow and loading, this leads to the exact same induction as the classic annular element approach, whereas differences are seen for non-uniform wind loading over the rotor. An important part of this azimuthal annular element approach is the definition of the local induction factor, where the local instantaneous induced velocity at a point in the grid is normalized with the local free wind speed (the wind speed without rotor induction) at the exact same point.
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E9" content-type="numbered"><label>9</label><mml:math id="M88" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>≡</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          As seen in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>, a question arises about how to find the local load in grid points that are not at the location of a blade. For the classic annular element, the blade loads are averaged and the resulting blade load is assumed to be constant over the annular element. The solution for the azimuthally divided annular element (grid point) is to compute two different thrust coefficients and torque coefficients. These coefficients use the pitch and velocities of  the two neighboring blades combined with the local wind speed and induction at the grid point. The coefficients will be weighted by the azimuthal distance of the respective blades. For the corresponding radial position on these two blades, the transformation matrix from sectional to global coordinates is rotated by the azimuthal distance between the blade and the grid point. This corresponds to virtually rotating the blade position to the position of the grid point. The blade velocities are rotated as well such that, for example, the velocity in the direction of rotation at the blade location is applied as a velocity in the direction of rotation at the grid point. Then, the flow at the grid point can be computed as the sum of the free wind speed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the induced velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the rotated velocity of the blade section <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">˙</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; the latter has a negative sign because the flow will be experienced in the opposite direction of the blade movement.
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E10" content-type="numbered"><label>10</label><mml:math id="M92" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">˙</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The superscripts “S” and “G” denote sectional and global coordinates, and the subscript <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 2 denotes the two closest blades. The angle of attack <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is computed by
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E11" content-type="numbered"><label>11</label><mml:math id="M95" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>arctan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          and the relative velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E12" content-type="numbered"><label>12</label><mml:math id="M97" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          and the local thrust in the grid points are calculated as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E13" content-type="numbered"><label>13</label><mml:math id="M98" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">l</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">B</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the lift and drag coefficient projected into the axial direction.</p>
      <p id="d1e2387">The computation of the local torque is done in the same manner.
Then, the two resulting thrust and torque coefficients are interpolated based on the azimuth angle <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of the two blades <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 2 and the azimuth angle of the grid point:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E14" content-type="numbered"><label>14</label><mml:math id="M102" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <label>2.5</label><title>Yaw modeling</title>
      <p id="d1e2518">It is evident that skewed inflow to the disk violates the conditions for the basic momentum equation (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>) so that the momentum considerations used for derivation of the model are no longer valid. When the rotor operates in yaw, there are two main effects on the induced velocities, as described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.47"/>. One effect is the change in the mean level of the induced velocities and the other effect is an azimuth variation of the induced velocities, as the wake vortex system is relatively closer to the rotor on one side compared to the other side.</p>
      <p id="d1e2526">A comprehensive investigation of yaw and dynamic inflow models for wind turbines and dynamic inflow modeling was carried out in the EU-funded project “Joint Investigation of Dynamic Inflow Effects and Implementation of an Engineering Method” <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="paren.48"/>. Here, also a short summary of yaw models for helicopters is presented, as these classical yaw models have been the basis for yaw models for wind turbines. The derivation and tuning of the present yaw model deviates slightly in the way that AD simulations of a uniformly loaded disk are used where cylindrical vortex models were a main source in the project <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="paren.49"/>. However, as the AD and vortex models should give almost the same results, we will see that the present yaw model is close to some of the models from the abovementioned dynamic inflow EU project.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><?pagebreak page7?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e2537"><bold>(a)</bold> Figure showing the reduction factor of the induction <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> as function of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for different yaw angles. The solid lines show the analytical value and the dashed lines show the polynomial fit (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E18"/>). <bold>(b)</bold> Relation between the thrust coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the induced wind speed factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in yawed inflow. The solid lines show the analytical value (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E16"/>), and the dashed lines show the polynomial fit (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E17"/>). The error of the polynomial fit in panel <bold>(b)</bold> is smaller than 3 % for all shown yaw angles up to a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.87. For higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the deviations increase, especially for yaw angles above 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5.SSS1">
  <label>2.5.1</label><title>Mean induction in yawed inflow</title>
      <p id="d1e2637">The general equation relating the thrust and induction at a rotor operating in yaw (see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>), as proposed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="text.50"/>, is
<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?><?xmltex \hack{\vspace*{-6mm}}?>
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E15" content-type="numbered"><label>15</label><mml:math id="M110" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="" close=""><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            The equation has not been proven but is generally accepted as a good assumption and commonly used in helicopter AD modeling <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx52" id="paren.51"/>.
Now, the following equation relating the thrust coefficient to the induction can be derived:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E16" content-type="numbered"><label>16</label><mml:math id="M111" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mstyle scriptlevel="+1"><mml:mfrac><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the yaw angle.</p>
      <p id="d1e2757">Based on these results, a reduction factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the induction <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> as function of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E2"/>) for different yaw angles can be derived:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E17" content-type="numbered"><label>17</label><mml:math id="M116" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            This reduction factor is approximated by a polynomial fit of the form

                  <disp-formula id="Ch1.E18" content-type="numbered"><label>18</label><mml:math id="M117" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mtable columnspacing="1em" class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

            as shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>a. The values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> used in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E18"/>) have to be limited to a maximum value of 0.9 to avoid a bending over of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curve. The resulting approximation of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curve is compared to Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E16"/>) in  Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>b. The agreement becomes very good for low loading (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) but becomes worse for higher loading. At higher loading, however, Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E16"/>) might no longer be valid, which justifies the limiter in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E18"/>).</p>
      <p id="d1e3067">The parameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E18"/>) are approximated as function of the yaw angle:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E19" content-type="numbered"><label>19</label><mml:math id="M123" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <?pagebreak page8?><p id="d1e3147"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>The values <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are collected in the matrix <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E20" content-type="numbered"><label>20</label><mml:math id="M126" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">k</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mtable class="array" columnalign="right right right"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5136</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4438</mml:mn></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1640</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.1735</mml:mn></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.6145</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8646</mml:mn></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0705</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.1667</mml:mn></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.6481</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e3233">The wake skew angle <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is found as the default  based on the average wake angle using vectors <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> representing the average local wind speed and induction over the whole rotor; see also Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>.
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E21" content-type="numbered"><label>21</label><mml:math id="M130" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>tan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3353">Top view of the velocity vectors and angles used for the skew wake expression. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> direction is the default wind direction without any skew inflow.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=170.716535pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e3369">The wake skew angle <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> depends on the thrust coefficient, which is illustrated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>. At low loading, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is close to the yaw angle, but for high loading, it is seen that the wake can be deflected more than 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> from the mean wind direction.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e3399">The wake skew deflection angle <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> against the thrust coefficient for different yaw angles. For zero loading, the angle is equal to the yaw angle, whereas the deflection angle increases in combination with an increased thrust level on the turbine.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=170.716535pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e3418">Comparison of axial velocity through a vertical line (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>) through the rotor disk. The rotor loading is prescribed to a constant loading of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f08.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e3453">Comparison of axial velocity through a horizontal line through the rotor disk. The rotor loading is prescribed to a constant loading of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5.SSS2">
  <label>2.5.2</label><title>Azimuthal variations of induction in yawed inflow</title>
      <p id="d1e3485">As the wake in the yawed conditions is skewed behind the rotor disk expressed by the skew angle <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>), the induction will be higher on the side of the rotor towards which the wake deflects. This is because the wake vortices are closer to the rotor on that side.</p>
      <p id="d1e3497">A very general equation for the azimuthal variation of the induction was presented by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.52"/>, containing a Fourier expansion in azimuth angle of the induced velocity at each radial position. Here, we use  a slightly simpler expression by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.53"/>:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E22" content-type="numbered"><label>22</label><mml:math id="M140" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the rotor azimuth, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the non-dimensional radius, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are constants.</p>
      <p id="d1e3618"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.54"/> has collected the values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from several of the classical yaw models for helicopter rotors, as shown in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>. It should be noted that these proposals are mainly thought for application on helicopter rotors in forward flight. As we will see below, we found by comparison with results from an actuator disk in yaw that the best correlation was achieved for

                  <disp-formula id="Ch1.E23" content-type="numbered"><label>23</label><mml:math id="M147" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>tan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e3690">Coefficients for different yaw models <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="paren.55"/> extended and adapted to our coordinate system.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.92}[.92]?><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Author(s)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Coleman et al. (1945)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>tan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Drees (1949)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Payne (1959)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.2</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">White and Blake (1979)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msqrt><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Pitt and Peters (1981)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">23</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>tan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Howlett (1981)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Present</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>tan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e3999">This is close to the model of Coleman, as seen in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5.SSS3">
  <label>2.5.3</label><title>Comparison of the yaw model with actuator disk results</title>
      <p id="d1e4012">In Figs. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>, the above-described yaw model is compared with actuator disk results for a uniform, prescribed loading with a thrust coefficient of 0.8. In the BEM simulations, the constant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was prescribed as well.</p>
      <p id="d1e4030">As seen in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>, the axial wind speed distribution at the rotor disk is seen to match very well in the vertical plane (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> plane), which clearly illustrates the good performance of Glauert's expression for the mean induction at different yaw angles. It should be noted the drop in velocity for the AD-CFD results close to the edge is probably caused by the strong vorticity shed at the edge due to the jump in loading at the edge of the AD.</p>
      <p id="d1e4049">Results for the horizontal plane are depicted in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>, and the slope of the velocity variation across the disk is seen to correlate well between the AD and the BEM yaw model. However, towards the rotor edge, the AD induction is higher on the side where the wake is deflected to.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e4057">The response of the axial velocity to a step change in loading at the actuator disk at different radial position. Panel <bold>(a)</bold> shows the response with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 0.0 to 0.89; panel <bold>(b)</bold> shows the response with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 0.89 to 0.0. The step change of loading is at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f10.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?pagebreak page9?><p id="d1e4106">In summary, it can be concluded that the present yaw model is in close alignment with some of the models derived and presented in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.56"/>. The Glauert correction for the mean induction seems to work very well, which was also the conclusion in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.57"/>. The azimuthal variation seems to be well represented by the Coleman model but we found the coefficient 0.4 on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> instead of 0.5; see Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>. However, one major difference by the present model is that, implemented together with the grid BEM induction model, we get a feedback on the induction from the yaw model which thus gives an additional azimuthal variation of the induction. This issue is addressed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.58"/>, mentioning that a lack of feedback is a contradiction in the derivation of, e.g., the Coleman model: constant loading (circulation) is assumed as a starting point but the solution is an azimuthal variation of induction and loading.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS6">
  <label>2.6</label><title>Dynamic inflow modeling</title>
      <p id="d1e4136">A time-varying loading of the AD will cause a time delay of the velocities at the disk as the whole wake flow has to adapt to the new loading. This phenomenon, the dynamic inflow effect, was also part of the abovementioned EU-funded project “Joint Investigation of Dynamic Inflow Effects and Implementation of an Engineering Method” <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="paren.59"/>, where details about different modeling approaches can be found.</p>
      <p id="d1e4142">As for the yaw modeling, we use the AD-CFD model results  again to develop and tune an engineering submodel for the dynamic inflow. The AD simulations are carried out with a uniform loading and a step change in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 0.0 to 0.89 and another case with opposite loading sequence from 0.89 to 0.0. The computed axial velocities <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mi>u</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> at the disk for different radial positions are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/> as function of non-dimensional time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (time divided by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). It should be mentioned that the step size response was normalized to the BEM result of 1 to 0.666 for a change in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 0.89 for the different radial positions. This is because the AD-CFD results even for a constant loading typically show a non-uniform flow profile with the lowest velocity of 0.655 at the tip and a higher velocity of 0.695 at the center. This non-uniform velocity profile for a constant loading has been found and discussed by several authors: <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.60"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.61"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx49" id="text.62"/> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx55" id="text.63"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e4211">Comparing the decay in velocity for the different radial positions in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>a, it can be seen that the decay is slightly faster towards the tip than at the center. Likewise, the increase in velocity for decreasing step loading is also slightly faster at the tip, as seen in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/>b. The physical mechanism for this small difference in flow response along the radius is that the change in the constant loading sheds a vortex at the edge of the AD with strongest and fastest induction response in the edge region.</p>
      <?pagebreak page10?><p id="d1e4218">Approximating the response with an engineering model led to the conclusion that two time constants are necessary to obtain an accurate fitting to the AD data. We use the following expression for the two first-order filters:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E24" content-type="numbered"><label>24</label><mml:math id="M170" display="block"><mml:mtable columnspacing="1em" class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="[" close=""><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close="]" open=""><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</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:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
          Here, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>`is the flow speed at time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> at radius <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">av</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the corresponding filtered flow speed, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" 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="M177" 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> are weighting constants of the two filters, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the two time constants, and finally <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</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:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are functions that adapt the time constants to the local flow speed depending on the induction factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. The functions take the form
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E25" content-type="numbered"><label>25</label><mml:math id="M183" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</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:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are constants.</p>
      <p id="d1e4606"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>We use a numerical optimization routine to find the set of parameters that minimizes the difference between the AD-CFD step response curves in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/> and the results of the model in
Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E24"/>). The variations of the two time constants along the radius are approximated with second-order polynomials in a non-dimensional radius.</p>
      <p id="d1e4614">The optimization gave the following polynomials for the  time constants:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E26" content-type="numbered"><label>26</label><mml:math id="M186" display="block"><mml:mtable columnspacing="1em" rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7048</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1819</mml:mn><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7329</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1667</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0881</mml:mn><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.0214</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e4702">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> functions are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/>a. It can be seen that while the highest time constant shows almost no variation along the radial distance, the lowest time constant decreases towards the tip, which corresponds to the faster flow response towards the tip as described above.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e4716"><bold>(a)</bold> Figure showing the derived time constants as a function of non-dimensional radius. <bold>(b)</bold> Comparison of the step response of the model using tuned constants with the AD-CFD simulations.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4730">A further result of the optimization is the weighting constants of the two filters which gave the following result:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E27" content-type="numbered"><label>27</label><mml:math id="M188" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5847</mml:mn><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4153</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e4763">Finally, the functions for the local flow speed to adjust the time constants were determined as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E28" content-type="numbered"><label>28</label><mml:math id="M189" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.50802</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</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:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.9266</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e4829">This result shows that the highest time constant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) has to be scaled with a velocity very close to the wake flow velocity of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, whereas <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is scaled with a flow velocity that is between the flow velocity at the rotor disk (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and the free-stream velocity.
The induction factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is limited to a maximum value of 0.4 in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E28"/>) to avoid unphysical behavior in the turbulent wake state.</p>
      <?pagebreak page11?><p id="d1e4890">As a test case of the implementation of the above-described dynamic inflow model implemented in the HAWC2 model, we run the same prescribed variation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as used above to derive the time constants. The comparison of the AD and HAWC2 model results in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/> shows a very good correlation, as should be expected. This is in good agreement with the work by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx58" id="text.64"/>, who derived a two-time-constant dynamic inflow model based on vortex models of an actuator disk.</p>
      <p id="d1e4909">In a time-marching formulation with non-dimensional time step <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (time step divided by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>),  the dynamic inflow filter at each grid point can be implemented as follows:

                <disp-formula specific-use="gather" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M198" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E29"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>29</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E30"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>30</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" columnspacing="1em" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">QS</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E31"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>31</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mtable class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" columnspacing="1em" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</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:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">QS</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</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:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where the superscripts <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denote the present and previous time steps, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">QS</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the quasi-steady-induced velocity including the yaw correction (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E22"/>).</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS6.SSS1">
  <label>2.6.1</label><title>Summary on dynamic inflow</title>
      <p id="d1e5381">Comparing the present dynamic inflow model with the models derived and presented in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.65"/>, we  again find close correlation as for the yaw models. Firstly, the AD results clearly indicate that two time constants are needed where the highest constant is almost independent of radial position but the low one decreases towards the tip. The need of two time constants was also found in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.66"/> using the cylindrical vortex models. Secondly, we find that the time constants need to be normalized with a local convection velocity, which we found to be quite different for the two time constants. This was also the case for some of the models in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx43" id="text.67"/>.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS7">
  <label>2.7</label><title>In-plane sweep and out-of-plane bending</title>
      <p id="d1e5402">For non-straight blades with sweep/prebend or in-plane and out-of-plane deflection, the radial distance between adjacent grid points is not equal to the distance along the curved blade. Therefore, both <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E3"/>) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>) have to be multiplied with d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, the derivative of the blade span with respect to the radius.</p>
      <p id="d1e5449">The calculation of d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is demonstrated in the rotor coordinate system; see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis is pointing downwind and the theoretical BEM rotor disk is in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> plane. The curved blade is represented by the half-chord line. The vector <inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is tangent to the half-chord line at this section point <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. The vector <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is pointing from the root point <inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mi>O</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to the section point <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. The projection of vector <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to the rotor plane (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> plane) is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. It is equivalent to setting the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> component of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to zero.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e5573">Sketch of a non-straight blade with in-plane and out-of-plane deflections.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=113.811024pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5583">The curved length <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is increasing in the direction of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the radius is increasing in the direction of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. Thus, d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> can be calculated as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E32" content-type="numbered"><label>32</label><mml:math id="M227" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">b</mml:mi><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">b</mml:mi><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page12?><sec id="Ch1.S2.SS8">
  <label>2.8</label><title>Radial induction model</title>
      <p id="d1e5678">The standard BEM theory does not give information about the radial induction component, and for plane rotors this induction component will only have minor influence on the loading. However, for rotors with out-of-plane bending blades or rotors with coning, the radial induction component will have an impact on the angle of attack (AOA) and thus also on the loading. An analytical expression for the lateral induction for a 2-D actuator disk is presented in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.68"/> and is adopted for an axis-symmetric AD in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="text.69"/>. The expression is
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E33" content-type="numbered"><label>33</label><mml:math id="M228" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.24</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Tav</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Tav</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the mean thrust coefficient as function of radial position defined as
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E34" content-type="numbered"><label>34</label><mml:math id="M230" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Tav</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where the local thrust coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is given in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E3"/>). The use of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Tav</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> instead of the total thrust coefficient is important only when <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> shows a strong variation as function of radial position.</p>
      <p id="d1e5933">We test the radial induction model by a comparison with the AD-CFD solution for a constant loading of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.89</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. As seen in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>, the radial induction computed with the engineering submodel correlates very well with the AD-CFD result.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e5955">The radial induction computed with an engineering submodel in comparison with the AD-CFD result for a constant loading with a thrust coefficient of 0.89.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f13.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS9">
  <label>2.9</label><title>Overview of the model</title>
      <p id="d1e5972">An overview of the complete aerodynamic model is shown in Algorithm 1. The algorithm includes references to the relevant equations in this article and can be used as a manual for implementation of the grid BEM algorithm. It is crucial that the dynamic inflow filter is applied at the very end of the algorithm to prevent nonphysical rapid induction changes due to any of the submodels. Otherwise, for example, a change in yaw angle at one time instant at the rotor disk in turbulent inflow would lead to an immediate change of the induced velocities, even though the wake did not have time to deflect.
<?xmltex \hack{\begin{figure*}[t]}?>
<?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><inline-graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-g01.png"/>
<?xmltex \hack{\end{figure*}}?>
For a typical setup, we use 16 azimuthal grid points. The number of radial grid points are somewhat dependent on the planform and tip shape but typically 30–50.</p>
      <p id="d1e5984">The aerodynamic model as described here is the aerodynamic model in HAWC2. However, it is also found in a stand-alone version HAWC2_Aero which can run the same type of simulations with turbulent inflow, pitch actions and rpm variations as HAWC2 but for a stiff structure. In this version, the simulation speed with all input/output operations is on the order of 7–10 times real time on a 2016 workstation laptop. This means that the computational time for the aerodynamic part is still small (10 %–20 %) relative to the total computational time for the aeroelastic simulations although we, in this BEM implementation, update the induction over the whole disk at each time step. One reason for this is that no sub-iterations in the induction modeling are necessary.</p>
      <p id="d1e5987">At very low rotor speeds below 0.1 rad s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" 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 induction model is deactivated. At these rotor speeds, the rotor can no longer be modeled as a disk and the BEM model is reduced to a blade element theory (BET) model that computes the velocity triangles without induced velocities. Another option in HAWC2 is to use a near-wake trailed vorticity model to model induction in stand still and idling cases <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="paren.70"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e6005">Unsteady airfoil aerodynamics effects (dynamic stall and Theodorsen effects in attached flow) are not included in the computation of the induced velocities. This is possible because unsteady airfoil aerodynamics occur at much faster timescales with time constants that depend on the half chord divided by the relative speed. For comparison, the dynamic inflow time constants scale with the rotor diameter divided by the free wind speed. After the induced velocities are<?pagebreak page13?> computed, the unsteady airfoil aerodynamics are determined using the Beddoes–Leishman-type model described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="text.71"/>, which was recently extended by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx35" id="text.72"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F14" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{14}?><label>Figure 14</label><caption><p id="d1e6017">Illustration of the dynamic induction mechanism in turbulent inflow showing the blade scanning through the field of slow-varying induction velocities but transferring to higher frequencies due to the rotational sampling of the turbulence.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f14.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Turbulent inflow computations</title>
      <?pagebreak page14?><p id="d1e6035">In this section, we demonstrate the impact of the present grid BEM implementation on the induction and load characteristics based on simulations of the AVATAR 10 MW reference wind turbine (RWT) <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx47" id="paren.73"/> and the DTU 10 MW RWT <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="paren.74"/> in turbulent and sheared inflow. The main data for these turbines are presented in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e6049">Data for the DTU and AVATAR 10 MW reference wind turbines <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx44" id="paren.75"/>.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">DTU</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">AVATAR</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Rated power</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10 MW</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">10 MW</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Rotor diameter</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">178.3 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">205.8 m</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Power density</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">400 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">300 W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Axial induction</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.24</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Rotor speed</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.8 rpm</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9.8 rpm</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Tip speed</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">90 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" 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></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">103.4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" 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></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Hub height</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">119 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">132.7 m</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e6228">The impact is evaluated by comparing with an “annular mean BEM” version computing the mean induced velocities in an annular element. This annular mean BEM version was incorporated in a test version of HAWC2 for the present investigation. Because the version is only a test version, the mean annular approach was implemented in a crude way by executing the loop two times. During the first loop, the local three wind speed components were summed in new variables for each grid point. At the end of the first loop, the mean of the velocity components for a constants radius (a ring element) was derived and then used in the second loop instead of the local wind speed components.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>The induction mechanism for turbulent inflow</title>
      <p id="d1e6239">The induction mechanism simulated with the grid BEM implementation for turbulent inflow is illustrated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>. The simulations were carried out on the AVATAR turbine <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx47" id="paren.76"/> with a 205 m diameter rotor at 10 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" 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> and a turbulence intensity of 15 %, no shear and constant rotor speed. In the left panel of Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>, we show the induced velocities at four grid points on the stationary rotor grid at a radius of 42.5 m with the monitoring points shown on the grid to the right. The induced velocities can be seen to vary slowly in time. They can be quite different in some periods due to the large turbulence scales causing different inflow velocities over the rotor. However, the induction seen from the rotating blade varies considerably faster, as it samples the induced velocities at the different azimuth grid positions. This rotational sampling of the induction field is thus basically the same mechanism as the rotational sampling of turbulence.</p>
      <p id="d1e6261">An important mechanism of the induction of the presented BEM implementation on a polar grid is that each grid point has a memory effect incorporated. Thus, past loading changes at a grid point (e.g., due to a pitch action in this region, a local gust, an instantaneous shear, a blade passing with another pitch angle offset) will influence the induction of the blade passing that grid point. The weighting of the impact of these past events is controlled by the dynamic inflow filter.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Characteristics of the induced velocities</title>
      <p id="d1e6272">To illustrate further the characteristics of the induced velocities from the AVATAR rotor case mentioned above, the time trace of the induced velocity at a radius of 43 m is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>a. Further is shown for comparison the induced velocity simulated with the annular mean BEM method. The dynamic characteristics are clearly completely different which is further explored by the power spectral density (PSD) spectra shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>b. The spectra of the induced velocity computed with the grid BEM model have distinct peaks at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, etc. and can be seen to have close resemblance with the spectrum of the axial free wind speed component relative to the blade at same radial position. As the rotational sampling of both the inflow and the induced velocity field has the same characteristics, it indicates that the induced velocity field over the rotor also has the same overall characteristics as the turbulent inflow, although considerably lower wind speeds.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F15" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{15}?><label>Figure 15</label><caption><p id="d1e6301"><bold>(a)</bold> Time traces of induced velocity at a radius of 43 m simulated with the annular mean and grid BEM method. Panel <bold>(b)</bold> shows the PSD of the same two traces. Additionally, in the same figure, the PSD of the free wind speed relative to the blade at the same radial position and of the hub wind speed is shown. Clearly, the induced velocity at the blade exhibits <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, …, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> peaks corresponding to the rotationally sampled turbulent inflow. These peaks can be observed on other radial positions on the blade as well.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f15.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page15?><p id="d1e6345">As expected, the PSD of the induced velocity computed with the annular mean method has no peaks and has some resemblance with the PSD of the hub wind speed.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F16" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{16}?><label>Figure 16</label><caption><p id="d1e6351"><bold>(a)</bold> The results for the mean annular BEM model; <bold>(b)</bold> the grid BEM model results. The solid lines in both panels are the computed induction at three radial positions for the AVATAR rotor for a wind speed ramp from 4 to 20 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" 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 uniform inflow and normal controller with variable speed and pitch regulation. The dashed lines are now the azimuthally varying induced velocities at the same radial positions for operation in sheared inflow with an exponent of 0.5 and at mean wind speeds of 8.0 and 14.5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" 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>, respectively. </p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f16.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Load impact mechanism of the grid BEM induction method</title>
      <p id="d1e6397">We will now illustrate the mechanism behind the load impact of using a mean annular BEM approach and a grid BEM model, respectively. Again, it is a simulation example for the AVATAR rotor.</p>
      <p id="d1e6400">A simulation was run with a ramp in wind speed from 4 to 20 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" 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 uniform inflow. The induced velocities at three radial positions on the blade are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F16"/>. As the inflow is uniform, both BEM implementations give the same result.</p>
      <p id="d1e6417">Now, a simulation is performed for sheared inflow with an exponent of 0.5 and at a wind speed of 8 and 14.5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" 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>, respectively. We show the induced velocity for the same radial positions on the blade as function of the local inflow velocity at that point.</p>
      <p id="d1e6432">For the mean annular BEM, the constant induced velocity as function of the local wind speed on the blade is obvious. The mean value might be slightly different from the value at the same wind speed for the turbine operating in uniform inflow due to non-linear effects from computation of the mean loading.</p>
      <p id="d1e6436">The picture is quite different for the grid BEM method, as shown in  Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F16"/>b. For all radial positions, at both wind speeds, we see that the induced velocity increases in magnitude but with the steepest slope at high wind. The mechanism behind this is that as soon as the inflow velocity is different from the hub wind speed the local blade section operates in conditions where either the rotational speed and/or the pitch does not correspond to the equilibrium conditions for that wind speed.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F17" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{17}?><label>Figure 17</label><caption><p id="d1e6443"><bold>(a)</bold> Results from the mean annular BEM; <bold>(b)</bold> results from the grid BEM. The solid lines in both panels are the computed induction at the radial position of 64 m for the AVATAR rotor for a wind speed ramp from 4 to 20 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" 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 uniform inflow and normal controller with variable speed and pitch regulation. The dots are the induced velocities for turbulent inflow without shear for a mean wind speed of 14.5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" 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>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f17.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e6481">At 8 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" 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>, it is mainly the rpm that influences the variation in the local induction around the mean operational wind speed of 8 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" 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>. When the local wind speed is lower than 8 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" 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 local tip speed ratio is above the mean value and the blade section operates at a higher thrust coefficient. The opposite holds when the local wind speed is above the mean wind speed. The result is that the relation of the induction versus wind speed deviates from the induction curve for the turbine in uniform inflow. It also appears that the slope of this local relationship between induced wind speed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and free local wind speed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreases from root to tip. For local wind speeds below the operational point, the increased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> will increase the induced wind speed, whereas the decreased local wind speed (being a factor on the induction) will decrease the induced wind speed. In most conditions, the impact of the local wind speed multiplied on the induction factor is strongest but at high thrust coefficient regions towards the tip and for bigger deviations from the mean wind speed, we can see that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> impact increases and the slope of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curve decreases. The slope can even be positive for very high thrust coefficients.</p>
      <p id="d1e6595">At 14.5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" 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>, it is mainly the pitch that influences the induction variation around the mean wind speed, as the rpm is constant for wind speeds above rated. So, when the blade section is in a region with a lower wind speed than the mean, the pitch is too high, which gives a lower thrust and a reduced induction. Opposite again when the local wind speed at the blade section is above the mean, the pitch is too low corresponding to that wind speed, which gives an increased induction. In this region, we can thus conclude that both the effect from the changes in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the variation in local wind speed when deviating from the mean operational point have the same sign, which means that we always will see a decreasing induction from a decreasing local wind speed and vice versa for a local wind speed above the mean operational point.</p>
      <p id="d1e6621">The important impact on the loads is that changes in the local wind speed will always be counteracted to some extent by the induced wind speed and thus reduce the variations in AOA and likewise variations of the aerodynamic loads.<?pagebreak page16?> This will be further explored below for turbulent inflow and quantified for a few test cases.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Induced velocities for turbulent inflow</title>
      <p id="d1e6632">The characteristics of the induced velocities for turbulent inflow are basically determined by the same mechanism as described above for sheared inflow. As discussed above, the turbulent inflow with dimension of structures less than one rotor diameter cause a non-uniform inflow over the rotor disk. It means as for sheared inflow that a point on the rotating blade will see a local wind speed different from the mean wind speed corresponding to the mean operational conditions of the turbine. In Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>, the induced velocity at radius 64 m is shown as function of wind speed for uniform inflow. The induced velocity as function of local wind speed from the same position on the blade for simulation with turbulent inflow at a mean wind speed at 14.5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" 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> and a turbulence intensity of 15 % with standard control is shown as dots. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>a shows the mean annular BEM, and Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F17"/>b shows the grid BEM results. As the mean wind speed changes continuously for turbulent inflow, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curves as discussed above are more difficult to see here. However, for the mean annular BEM, the horizontal patterns of the dots are visible. For the grid BEM, we have to imagine that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curves have the negative slope, as shown above for shear at 14.5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" 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>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS5">
  <label>3.5</label><title>Load and power impact for DLC 1.2 for the AVATAR and DTU reference wind turbine</title>
      <p id="d1e6724">The impact of the grid BEM model on fatigue loads and power production according to DLC 1.2 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13 bib1.bibx10" id="paren.77"/> has been investigated. Computations were performed for both the DTU 10 MW RWT <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="paren.78"/> and the AVATAR 10 MW turbine <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx47" id="paren.79"/>. To avoid seed dependency, 18 seeds at each wind speed were used: six seeds at 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yaw error and six seeds at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yaw error, respectively. The wind speeds range from 4 to 26 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" 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>, with a 2 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" 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> spacing.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F18" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{18}?><label>Figure 18</label><caption><p id="d1e6790">A comparison for the DTU 10 MW RWT of the difference in blade root flapwise fatigue loads <bold>(a–c)</bold> and mean power production <bold>(d–f)</bold> for DLC 1.2 between the annular mean BEM method with and without yaw correction and the grid BEM version with yaw correction.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f18.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page17?><p id="d1e6805">For brevity, this section focuses only on the 1 Hz equivalent load of the flapwise blade-root-bending moment and the mean power. All results are presented as percent relative difference compared to an annular BEM model that includes the yaw correction presented in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2.SS5"/>. Results from a mean annular BEM model without yaw correction are also included so that the influence of grid versus mean annular BEM can be compared to the impact of a more widely used type of BEM model. To isolate the reaction of the induction model to shear and turbulence, additional runs of DLC 1.2 without shear and turbulence are shown. The runs without shear use the same 18 seeds per wind speed at 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yaw error as the regular DLC 1.2 computations.</p>
      <p id="d1e6853">The results for the DTU 10 MW RWT are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F18"/>. It can be seen that the difference of grid compared to annular BEM has a much larger impact on the results than the yaw correction. The yaw correction has some influence at wind speeds below rated, but above rated wind speeds, the influence is close to zero.</p>
      <p id="d1e6858">Overall, the grid BEM results in significant lower fatigue loads, up to 8 %, except in a narrow wind speed interval between 7 and 10 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" 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> with an increase of 1 %, as seen in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F18"/>a. When splitting up in contributions from turbulent inflow and shear, we can see in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F18"/>b that the fatigue from turbulence is reduced for all wind speeds for the grid BEM with a reduction of roughly 6 % at 16 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" 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> and above. However, for the impact from shear, the fatigue is increased up to 6 % at low wind speeds, which is due to the high thrust coefficient for that rotor, causing a positive slope of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curve as discussed above.</p>
      <p id="d1e6914">The influence of the grid-based BEM for the power production of the DTU 10 MW is very small at roughly <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % below rated. In the pure shear case at 4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" 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>, a large power increase by 6.5 % can be seen, but that increase almost disappears for combined turbulent and sheared inflow.</p>
      <p id="d1e6939">The results for the AVATAR turbine (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F19"/>) show a much larger impact of the grid BEM approach, while the yaw correction only has very minor influence. Relative to the annular BEM, the fatigue loads predicted by the grid BEM in pure shear are reduced on average by roughly 12 %, the loads in pure turbulence by 7.5 % and in the combined case by roughly 10 %. At the same time, the power below rated is predicted to increase by roughly 0.5 %, which seems to be mainly due to better operation in turbulent inflow.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F19" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{19}?><label>Figure 19</label><caption><p id="d1e6946">A comparison for the AVATAR turbine of the difference in blade root flapwise fatigue loads <bold>(a–c)</bold> and mean power production <bold>(d–f)</bold> for DLC 1.2 between the annular mean BEM method with and without yaw correction and the grid BEM version with yaw correction.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f19.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e6962">Comparing the two cases, we can conclude that the impact of the grid BEM approach depends on the actual turbine design with an increasing reduction of fatigue loads for lower loaded (low-induction) rotors. For both turbine designs, the load reduction is considerable (8 % to 10 %) for wind speeds above rated power.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Validation results</title>
      <p id="d1e6974">We present in this section a selection of validation results in order to illustrate the performance of the grid BEM implementation for different challenging inflow cases. As mentioned above, the grid BEM method is the aerodynamic model in HAWC2 and the cases are simulated with this model. It also means that several validation cases can be found in different articles published in the past and only<?pagebreak page18?> two of them are explicitly summarized here. The first referenced validation paper contains not only a validation of the aerodynamic model of HAWC2 but of the full aeroelastic model. However, in the second validation reference, the aerodynamic model in HAWC2 is alternated between the grid BEM and full 3-D CFD, which enables a detailed validation of the grid BEM results.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Published validation cases</title>
      <p id="d1e6984">In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="text.80"/>, a validation study of both the HAWC2 model and the dynamic wake meandering (DWM) model <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16 bib1.bibx25" id="paren.81"/> was carried out on the basis of comparisons of model predictions with full-scale turbine measurements from the Dutch wind farm Egmond aan Zee consisting of 36 Vestas V90 turbines. In the paper, it is concluded that the measurements are of a remarkable high quality, enabling comparison of not only fatigue loads but also simple statistics in terms of maximum, minimum and mean values. It was found that when comparing the predicted power curves with measurements in both free and wake sectors, an excellent agreement is seen. Further, a very fine agreement was also seen between measured and simulated loads in both the free sector and a sector with wake effects from five turbines separated with seven diameters.</p>
      <p id="d1e6993">In the other validation publication by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="text.82"/>, the coupling of the HAWC2 structural model to EllipSys3D is presented. This provides an excellent basis for validation of the grid BEM aerodynamic model for simulations on the NREL 5 MW turbine <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx14" id="paren.83"/>, as a direct comparison with high-fidelity model results for the exact same input data and structural model is possible. Besides results for uniform inflow, a comparison of flapwise and edgewise tip deflection as function of azimuth is presented for 0, 30 and 60<inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yaw angles. In the paper, it is concluded that “both models still show a very good agreement”. Finally, a challenging case of an emergency shutdown is presented and also for that case it is concluded that the responses of the two models agree very well.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Half wake</title>
      <p id="d1e7019">The first validation case is to demonstrate the model response to a considerable shear in the inflow for the NREL 5 MW turbine <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx14" id="paren.84"/>. We have chosen a case with shear in the horizontal plane because a vertical shear representing atmospheric inflow with shear can be considerably influenced by the interaction of the flow with the ground surface and thus disturb the direct impact of the induction modeling <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="paren.85"/>. An artificial shear inflow was created by changing the inflow velocity from 10 to 5 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" 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> over a narrow region around the hub center, according to the following analytical expression:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E35" content-type="numbered"><label>35</label><mml:math id="M285" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.75</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">tanh</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.78044</mml:mn><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the horizontal distance from the rotor center, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the rotor radius. The resulting horizontal shear profile is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F21"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F20" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{20}?><label>Figure 20</label><caption><p id="d1e7106">Side view and front view of the CFD mesh around the NREL 5 MW reference turbine generated with a hub height of 90 m.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f20.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F21" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{21}?><label>Figure 21</label><caption><p id="d1e7117">The graph shows the contour plot for the velocity field for the sheared inflow case.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f21.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e7127">The CFD simulations were carried out with the 3-D incompressible Navier–Stokes solver EllipSys3D by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31 bib1.bibx32" id="text.86"/> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50" id="text.87"/>, with a surface-resolved representation of the rotor, omitting the nacelle and<?pagebreak page19?> tower. The flow on the no-slip surface of the rotor was assumed fully turbulent and modeled using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–SST model by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="text.88"/>. In the computations, we used an overset grid approach in which a curvilinear rotor resolved mesh rotated together with two successively coarsened cylindrical meshes resolving the near field around the rotor, which were embedded in a larger stationary coarse semi-cylindrical mesh resolving the far wake with the far-field boundaries placed eight rotor diameters away from the surface and a ground boundary modeled using a symmetry boundary condition placed 90 m below the rotor center. The surface of each blade was resolved with 256 cells in the chordwise direction and 128 cells in the spanwise direction, and grown into a volume mesh with 64 cells normal to the surface using the in-house hyperbolic mesh generator HypGrid <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50" id="paren.89"/>. The first cell height was set to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, resulting in a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> value below 2. The full grid assembly contained <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> cells. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F20"/> shows a front view and side view of the volume mesh.</p>
      <p id="d1e7200">To minimize the computational time, both grid sequencing and time step sequencing were used. To settle the overall induction field, the flow was simulated with a coarse time step of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.2765</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> corresponding to 300 time steps per revolution for 20 revolutions on a mesh coarsened by a factor of 2 in each coordinate direction (Gr3). With the same mesh refinement level, the time step was subsequently refined by a factor of 5 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.553</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, yielding 1500 time steps per revolution for another 15 revolutions (Gr2). Finally, the mesh was refined to the finest grid level and the time step refined by a factor of 2 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.2765</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Gr1). The resulting mean integral forces of the grid/time step sequence are shown in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T3"/>.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e7268">Grid/time step convergence of the ElliPSys3D simulation, showing mean integral forces computed for the velocity step case at each of the three grid/time step levels.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Grid</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Torque (kNm)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Thrust (kN)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Gr3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2079.95 (5.8 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">353.23 (2.1 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Gr2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2032.72 (3.4 %)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">344.95 (0.3 %)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Gr1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1966.78 (–)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">346.07 (–)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F22" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{22}?><label>Figure 22</label><caption><p id="d1e7338">The normal force <bold>(a)</bold> and tangential force <bold>(b)</bold> computed with HAWC2 at two azimuth positions in comparison with EllipSys3D results for half-wake inflow.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f22.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F23" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{23}?><label>Figure 23</label><caption><p id="d1e7356"><bold>(a)</bold> A comparison of the normal force <inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as function of azimuth computed with CFD and BEM, respectively. <bold>(b)</bold> Same comparison for the tangential force <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f23.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="Ch1.F24" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{24}?><label>Figure 24</label><caption><p id="d1e7394">A comparison of HAWC2 simulations on the NM80 turbine and experimental results from the DanAero project. Power spectra of the chordwise aerodynamic force component parallel to the chord in comparison with measured results. Wind speed is 6.1 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" 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>, negligible shear and rpm of 12.3. Figure reproduced from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="text.90"/>, with the addition of the annular mean BEM results.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f24.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page20?><p id="d1e7418"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>A user-defined shear flow can be input to a HAWC2 simulation so the case could be simulated by a default setup. When comparing the normal and tangential loading on the blade at azimuth positions of 90 and 270<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is vertical upwards), which are in the extreme low and high inflow regions, we find overall a good correlation as can be seen in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F22"/>. There are minor deviations in the tip region where the grid BEM overestimates the normal force loading. Also, the tangential loading is slightly underestimated on the central part of the blade for the 270<inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> azimuth position.</p>
      <?pagebreak page21?><p id="d1e7451">The case is further analyzed by comparing the integrated normal and tangential blade forces as function of azimuth as shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F23"/>. Again, an overall good correlation between the high-fidelity CFD results and the grid BEM results is found. However, there is a time delay for HAWC2 in the rising of the loads from low to high wind inflow (high to low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) around an azimuth of 180<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. However, the same is not seen at around 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, where the wind speed is changing from a high to low value.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <label>4.3</label><title>Turbulent inflow</title>
      <p id="d1e7493">Detailed aerodynamic measurements on full-scale turbines are very limited. However, in the DanAero project, such measurements were carried out in 2009 on a NM80 turbine with an 80 m diameter <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24 bib1.bibx54" id="paren.91"/>. The experimental setup comprised surface pressure measurements at four radial positions from which the aerodynamic forces normal and tangential to the local cord were derived. A validation exercise using these data was described and presented recently by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="text.92"/>, so we will only present a single set of results from that paper. The case is for a mean wind speed of 6.1 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" 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>, a turbulence intensity of 6.8 % and minimal shear. For details of the experimental and modeling setup, the reader should see <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="text.93"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e7517">The comparison of PSD spectra of the measured and simulated aerodynamic forces perpendicular to the chord is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F24"/>. Besides the grid BEM results, we have also added the mean annular results for comparison with the measurements. Overall, the correlation between simulations and measurements is good. In particular, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> peaks are captured well, and both simulation and experiment show the increasing size of the peaks towards the tip of the blade due to the rotation sampling effect of the turbulent inflow.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F25" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{25}?><label>Figure 25</label><caption><p id="d1e7554">Comparison of the differences in the azimuthal distribution of normal forces <bold>(a–c)</bold> and tangential forces <bold>(d–f)</bold> predicted by HAWC2 with the forces measured in the New Mexico experiment, at three different radial positions.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f25.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e7570">There is a clear tendency for the simulated spectra to fall below the measured one at higher frequencies, in particular for the outboard stations, which might be due to the resolution in the turbulence box which is 1.28 m in the vertical and horizontal directions. Finally, it can be seen that in this case the difference between the two BEM implementations is quite small. This can be explained by the above considerations in Sect. 4: if the local thrust coefficient is high, the slope of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curve in the grid BEM becomes almost horizontal and thus equal to the annular mean BEM. However, a light tendency of the annular mean BEM to overestimate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on the two inboard stations with a lower thrust coefficient confirms the expected trend.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <label>4.4</label><title>Yawed flow</title>
      <p id="d1e7627">In the New Mexico experiments <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.94"/>, the aerodynamic loading on a 4.5 m diameter model turbine in uniform inflow and yawed inflow was measured. These measurements have been compared to results from many aerodynamic codes of different fidelities in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45" id="text.95"/>. For a specific evaluation of the yaw modeling (Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2.SS5"/>), we look at the differences between the aerodynamic forces between the uniform and 30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> yawed flow cases at roughly 15 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" 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. In both cases, the turbine had a rotor speed of 425.1 rpm, the blades were pitched at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the tunnel speed was very similar at 15.06 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" 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> (axial flow) and 15.01 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" 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> (yawed flow). As such, these measurements provide an excellent opportunity to validate the effect of yaw on both the mean and azimuthally varying load levels. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F25"/> shows the differences in normal (perpendicular to local chord) and tangential (parallel to local chord) forces at three measured sections at 25 %, 60 % and 82 % radius. These differences are computed as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">yaw</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">axial</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Such a comparison involving both axial and yawed flow measurements and computations together was not included in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45" id="text.96"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F26" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{26}?><label>Figure 26</label><caption><p id="d1e7760">Comparison of differences in out-of-plane <bold>(a)</bold> and in-plane blade-root-bending moments <bold>(b)</bold> predicted by HAWC2 with the moments integrated from the measured forces in the New Mexico experiment.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f26.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e7775">It can be seen that there is a phase shift in the azimuthal force variation between the normal forces at the inboard section (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F25"/>a) and the section further outboard (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F25"/>c). This phase shift is due to the dominance of either the root vortex (at the inboard section) or the tip vortex (outboard section). The root vortex is not accounted for in the present model, and thus the HAWC2 computations do not agree well with the measured normal force at the inboard section. A recent engineering model that is based on high-fidelity simulations and includes a correction for the root vortex is described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx40" id="text.97"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e7786">For the sections further outboard, the influence of the tip vortex becomes more important and the phases of the azimuthal force variation agree well. There is a slight overprediction of the mean loading, especially in the tangential direction. Comparing the integrated out-of-plane and in-plane blade-root-bending moments in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F26"/> shows that the phase difference seen in the inboard loads is not significant for the blade root moments. HAWC2 predicts a smaller reduction of the mean out-of-plane and in-plane moments, but the phases compare well to the measurements.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F27" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{27}?><label>Figure 27</label><caption><p id="d1e7793">Comparison of HAWC2 results against measurements of the dynamic inflow case Q0500000 of the NREL/NASA Ames phase VI experiment. The plots show scaled normal <bold>(a, c)</bold> and tangential <bold>(b, d)</bold> forces for pitch steps towards high loading <bold>(a, b)</bold> and low loading <bold>(c, d)</bold>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://wes.copernicus.org/articles/5/1/2020/wes-5-1-2020-f27.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS5">
  <label>4.5</label><title>Dynamic inflow</title>
      <p id="d1e7822">The NREL/NASA Ames phase VI experiments <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8" id="paren.98"/>, performed in the NASA Ames open-loop wind tunnel, include runs targeting dynamic inflow effects at 5.1 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" 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 (denoted as case Q0500000). The rotor speed was constant at 71.62 rpm and the pitch was varied 20 times at a rate of roughly 66<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> per second between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" 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="M321" 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="M322" 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="M323" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> pitch (unloaded rotor, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" 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>). Averaging the responses of these 20 pitch steps shows pronounced dynamic inflow effects at all the instrumented blade sections at 30 %, 47 %, 63 %, 80 % and 95 % radius.</p>
      <p id="d1e7901">The measured data have been analyzed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx42" id="text.99"/> using a BEM code and a free wake code and by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx51" id="text.100"/> using a BEM code, a computational fluid<?pagebreak page22?> dynamics code and a near-wake model. More recently, this case was also used for comparison of various research codes in IEA Task 29, phase III <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45" id="paren.101"/>. An investigation of the radial dependency of the time constants in the force response, which seemed to reverse when the pitching direction was reversed, was conducted by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx36" id="text.102"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e7916">A comparison of measurements with the dynamic inflow model described in Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2.SS6"/> is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F27"/>. All the forces are scaled such that the pitch steps are between 0 and 1. This approach makes it possible to compare the dynamic response at different sections on the blade easily and was also used by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45" id="text.103"/>. The computations assume a stiff turbine. It can be seen that the force overshoots at the<?pagebreak page23?> 30 % section are generally larger than at the 80 % section. This is due to the slower response inboard due to the larger distance from the tip vortex. The dynamic inflow model takes this radial dependency of the time constants into account and the predicted overshoots of the forces are generally in good agreement with the measurements. An exception is that the overshoot of the tangential force at the inboard section (solid lines in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F27"/>b) is underestimated by HAWC2. The behavior of the tangential force for the pitching down case (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F27"/>d) can be explained by a zero crossing of the angle of attack at roughly 0.4 s. For both positive and negative AOAs close to 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, the lift force has a component that is pointing towards the leading edge. Therefore, the forces when pitching to lower loading are decreasing until the AOA reaches roughly zero. Then, the tangential forces increase as the AOA undershoots and then decrease again as the induced velocities decrease (causing AOA to increase and move closer to zero) towards the equilibrium state at low loading.</p>
      <p id="d1e7940">The comparison shows good agreement; however, some disagreement is to be expected due to inherent limitations of the actuator-disk-based model. Specifically, the root vortex dynamics are missing and the disk model also assumes an infinite number of blades. Therefore, differences are expected close to the root and the tip of the blade, where the induction from a helical wake deviates most from the induction due to a cylindrical wake. An option to address these limitations is to couple a vortex-based near-wake model to the BEM code <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37 bib1.bibx39" id="paren.104"/>. However, the work in IEA Task 29 has shown that care has to be taken when coupling the induction dynamics <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45" id="paren.105"/>.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e7959">We have presented an implementation of the BEM method on a polar grid in order to simulate more accurately the considerable inflow and load variations over the rotor disk found for large turbines. The model can also be characterized as an engineering actuator disk model where the induced velocities on the stationary polar grid are updated at each time step in an aeroelastic simulation. Further, the detailed integration of submodels for tip correction, yaw and dynamic inflow has been described. Also, a submodel for radial induction important for computations with out-of-plane blades due to elastic effects or coning has been presented.</p>
      <p id="d1e7962">The load impact mechanism on the flapwise blade root moment from this unsteady induction by the grid BEM is analyzed. It is found that the load impact strongly depends on the turbine design and operating conditions. For operation at low to medium thrust coefficients (conventional turbines at above rated wind speed or low-induction turbines in the whole operating range), it is found that the grid BEM gives typically 8 %–10 % lower 1 Hz blade root flapwise fatigue loads than the classical annular mean BEM approach. At high thrust coefficients, the grid BEM can give slightly increased fatigue loads, in particular for pure shear cases.</p>
      <p id="d1e7965">Different validation cases have been presented by comparing with experimental data and data from the high-fidelity EllipSys3D code. A challenging half wake in the vertical plane with the double inflow velocity on one side of the rotor relative to the other side is simulated. A good correlation is found with EllipSys3D results for blade loads as function of azimuth.</p>
      <?pagebreak page24?><p id="d1e7968"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>Results on yawed inflow for the Mexico rotor and dynamic inflow results from the NREL/NASA Ames experiment confirm a satisfactory performance of the submodels for yawed flow conditions and dynamic inflow. Finally, comparing PSD spectra of the simulated local aerodynamic forces at four radial positions on the full-scale NM80 turbine shows excellent agreement with spectra of measured forces originating from the DanAero experiment.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e7976">The data for most figures are openly available at: <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3588359" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.3588359</ext-link> <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="paren.106"/>. Other data are available upon request.</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><app-group>

<?pagebreak page25?><app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{A}?><label>Appendix A</label><title>Nomenclature</title>
      <p id="d1e7996"><table-wrap id="Taba" position="anchor"><oasis:table><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">axial induction factor</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">tangential induction factor</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rotor area</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">chord</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">sectional drag coefficient</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">l</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">sectional lift coefficient</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rotor torque coefficient</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rotor thrust coefficient</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">projection of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">l</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> tangential to the rotor plane</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">projection of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">l</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> perpendicular to the rotor plane</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rotor thrust on a ring element</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rotor torque on a ring element</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Prandtl tip correction factor</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">polynomial coefficients in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> curve fit</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">reduction factor of induction for yawed flow</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">parameters for azimuth variation of induction in yaw model</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">B</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">the number of blades</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">radial position</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rotor radius</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rotor thrust</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold">T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">transformation matrix from global to sectional coordinates</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">induced velocity vector in axial direction</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mi>u</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">non-dimensional axial velocity (velocity divided with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">free-stream velocity</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">free-stream velocity vector</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">local free-stream velocity vector</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">free wind speed vector at grid point (global coordinates)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">induced wind speed vector at grid point (global coordinates)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grid</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">resultant relative flow speed at grid point (section coordinates)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">rel</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">relative velocity at blade section</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">x</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">˙</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">blade</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">blade velocity vector at grid point (global coordinates)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>Greek letters</italic></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">angle of attack</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">air density</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">φ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">inflow angle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">yaw angle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">wake skew angle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">time constant</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ψ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">azimuth angle</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">rotor speed</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap></p><?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?>
</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e8803">HAM and TJL developed and implemented the overall grid BEM modeling approach. TJL tested the grid BEM model and increased the robustness of the implementation with contributions from GRP. HAM investigated the load mechanism of the grid BEM method. HAM performed the actuator disk simulations and extracted the data for tuning the yaw and dynamic inflow model. HAM, TJL and GRP wrote the article with contributions from FZ and AL. AL determined the time constants of the dynamic inflow model by means of numerical optimization. TJL and AL derived and implemented the correction for blade in-plane and out-of-plane bending. GRP executed and discussed the validation cases with major contributions from HAM. FZ derived the EllipSys3D setup for the half-wake simulations, conducted the simulations and extracted the data for the validation. All authors jointly finalized the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e8809">HAWC2 is developed by DTU Wind Energy. The software can be licensed for research and commercial use.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e8815">We thank our colleagues in the AER and LAC section that in one  way  or another have contributed to this work and the modeling presented. In particular, we acknowledge the setup for automatic preprocessing and post-processing the DLC1.2 simulations presented in Sect. 4.5 developed by David Robert Verelst and Mads M. Pedersen. Also, the valuable contribution from Anders Melchior Hansen, one of the main developers of HAWC2, is acknowledged. We thank the two anonymous reviewers for the feedback. We also thank Frédéric Blondel from Ifpen and David Marten from TU Berlin for pointing out errors in the discussion article.</p><p id="d1e8817">We also acknowledge the access to the New Mexico NREL/NASA Ames data in the IEA Task 29 database.</p></ack><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e8822">This paper was edited by Gerard J. W. van Bussel and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Bak and Zahle(2013)</label><?label DTURWT?><mixed-citation>
Bak, C. and Zahle, F.: Description of the DTU 10 MW Reference Wind Turbine,
Tech. Rep., Report-I-0092, DTU Wind Energy, Roskilde, Denmark, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Boorsma and Schepers(2018)</label><?label NewMexico_description?><mixed-citation>
Boorsma, K. and Schepers, J.: New Mexico Experiment, Description of
experimental setup, Tech. Rep. ECN-X–15-093 (v3), ECN, Petten, the Netherlands, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><label>Bossanyi(2003)</label><?label BLADED?><mixed-citation>
Bossanyi, E.: GH Bladed Theory Manual. Technical Report, GH &amp; Partners Ltd,
Bristol, UK, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><label>Botasso and Croce(2006–2013)</label><?label Cplambda?><mixed-citation>
Botasso, C. and Croce, A.: Cp-Lambda: Users Manual. Milano: Dipartimento di
Ingegneria Aerospaziale, Polytecnico di Milano, Milano, 2006–2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Burton et al.(2011)</label><?label burton2011a?><mixed-citation>
Burton, T., Jenkins, N., Sharpe, D., and Bossanyi, E.: Wind energy handbook, John Wiley &amp; Sons, Chichester, UK, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>de Vries(1979)</label><?label vries1979a?><mixed-citation>
de Vries, O.: Fluid Dynamic Aspects of Wind Energy Conversion, Agardograph, Brussels, Belgium, 1979.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Glauert(1935)</label><?label Glauert?><mixed-citation>Glauert, H.: Airplane Propellers, in: Division <inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in Aerodynamic Theory, vol. IV, edited by: Durand, W. F., Springer, Berlin, Germany, 169–360, 1935.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Hand et al.(2001)Hand, Simms, Fingersh, Jager, Cotrell, Schreck, and Larwood</label><?label NASA_Ames_report?><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.bibx9"><label>Hansen et al.(2004)Hansen, Gaunaa, and Madsen</label><?label dynstall?><mixed-citation>
Hansen, M. H., Gaunaa, M., and Madsen, H. A.: A Beddoes-Leishman type dynamic
stall model in state-space and indicial formulations, Risø-R-1354,
Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Hansen et al.(2015)Hansen, Thomsen, Natarajan, and Barlas</label><?label DLC_DTU?><mixed-citation>
Hansen, M. H., Thomsen, K., Natarajan, A., and Barlas, A.: Design Load Basis
for Onshore Turbines, No. 0174, DTU Wind Energy, Roskilde, Denmark, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Hansen(2015)</label><?label hansen2015a?><mixed-citation>Hansen, M. O. L.: Aerodynamics of wind turbines, Earthscan, London, UK, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315769981" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4324/9781315769981</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>Heinz et al.(2016)Heinz, Srensen, and Zahle</label><?label heinz2016a?><mixed-citation>Heinz, J. C., Sørensen, N. N., and Zahle, F.: Fluid-structure interaction
computations for geometrically resolved rotor simulations using CFD, Wind
Energy, 19, 2205–2221, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1976" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.1976</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>IEC(2005)</label><?label IEC_61400?><mixed-citation>
IEC: IEC 61400-1 3rd edition Wind turbines – Part 1: Design requirements,
International Electrotechnical Commission – IEC, Geneva, Switzerland, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>Jonkman et al.(2009)Jonkman, Butterfield, Musial, and
Scott</label><?label NREL5MW?><mixed-citation>
Jonkman, J., Butterfield, S., Musial, W., and Scott, G.: Definition of a 5-MW
Reference Wind Turbine for Offshore System Development, Tech. rep., National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, USA, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Jonkman et al.(2016)Jonkman, Hayman, Jonkman, and
Damiani</label><?label aerodynmanual?><mixed-citation>
Jonkman, J., Hayman, G., Jonkman, B., and Damiani, R.: AeroDyn v15 User's
Guide and Theory Manual, NREL, Golden, Colorado, USA, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>Larsen et al.(2008)Larsen, Madsen, Thomsen, and Larsen</label><?label larsen2008a?><mixed-citation>Larsen, G. C., Madsen, H. A., Thomsen, K., and Larsen, T. J.: Wake
meandering, Wind Energy, 11, 377–395, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.267" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.267</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><label>Larsen and Hansen(2007)</label><?label hawc2manual?><mixed-citation>
Larsen, T. J. and Hansen, A. M.: How 2 HAWC2, the user's manual, Risoe-R-1597, Forskningscenter Risoe, Risoe, Denmark, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><label>Larsen et al.(2011)Larsen, gaard Madsen, Larsen, and
Hansen</label><?label larsen2011a?><mixed-citation>Larsen, T. J., Madsen, H. A., Larsen, G. C., and Hansen, K. S.: Validation of the dynamic wake meander model for loads and power production in the Egmond aan Zee wind farm, Wind Energy, 16, 605–624, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1563" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.1563</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><label>Leishman(2005)</label><?label leishman2005a?><mixed-citation>
Leishman, J. G.: Principles of helicopter aerodynamics, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><label>Madsen(1997)</label><?label madsen1996?><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A.: A CFD analysis of the actuator disc flow compared
with momentum theory results, in: Proceedings of the 10th IEA meeting on aerodynamics, Edinburgh, UK, 109–124, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Madsen(1999)</label><?label aagaard1999a?><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A.: Kobling af HawC til 3D actuator disc model, in: Chapter 5 in “Forskning i aeroelasticitet – EFP-98”, Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark, p. 81, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><label>Madsen(2000)</label><?label aagaard2000a?><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A.: Yaw simulation using a 3D actuator disc model coupled to the aeroelastic code HawC, in: IEA Joint Action, Aerodynamics of Wind
Turbines, 13. Symposium, 29–30 November 1999, Stockholm, 133–145, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Madsen et~al.(2010a)Madsen, Bak, D{\o}ssing, Mikkelsen,
and {\O}ye}}?><label>Madsen et al.(2010a)Madsen, Bak, Døssing, Mikkelsen,
and Øye</label><?label madsen2010?><mixed-citation>Madsen, H. A., Bak, C., Døssing, M., Mikkelsen, R. F., and Øye, S.: Validation and modification of the Blade Element Momentum theory based on comparisons with actuator disc simulations, Wind Energy, 13, 373–389, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.359" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.359</ext-link>, 2010a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Madsen et al.(2010b)Madsen, Bak, Schmidt Paulsen,
Gaunaa, Fuglsang, Romblad, Olesen, Enevoldsen, Laursen, and
Jensen</label><?label aagaard2010b?><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A., Bak, C., Schmidt Paulsen, U., Gaunaa, M., Fuglsang, P., Romblad, J., Olesen, N. A., Ene<?pagebreak page27?>voldsen, P., Laursen, J., and Jensen, L.:
The DAN-AERO MW Experiments, Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark, 2010b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><label>Madsen et al.(2010c)Madsen, Larsen, Larsen, Troldborg,
and Mikkelsen</label><?label aagaard2010a?><mixed-citation>Madsen, H. A., Larsen, G. C., Larsen, T. J., Troldborg, N., and Mikkelsen, R. F.: Calibration and Validation of the Dynamic Wake Meandering
Model for Implementation in an Aeroelastic Code, J. Sol. Energy Eng., 132, 041014, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4002555" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1115/1.4002555</ext-link>, 2010c.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Madsen et al.(2012)Madsen, Riziotis, Zahle, Hansen, Grasso, Larsen,
POolitis, and Rasmussen</label><?label madsen2012?><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A., Riziotis, V., Zahle, F., Hansen, M., Grasso, F., Larsen, T., POolitis, E., and Rasmussen, F.: Blade element momentum modeling of inflow with shear in comparison with advanced model results, Wind Energy,
15, 63–81, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Madsen et al.(2018)Madsen, Srensen, Bak, Troldborg, and
Pirrung</label><?label madsen2018a?><mixed-citation>Madsen, H. A., Sørensen, N. N., Bak, C., Troldborg, N., and Pirrung, G.: Measured aerodynamic forces on a full scale 2 MW turbine in comparison with EllipSys3D and HAWC2 simulations, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1037, 022011, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1037/2/022011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1742-6596/1037/2/022011</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><label>Madsen et al.(2019)</label><?label Madsen2019?><mixed-citation>Madsen, H. A., Larsen, T. J., Pirrung, G. R., Li, A., and Zahle, F.: Data supplement for Wind Energy Science Paper `Implementation of the blade element momentum model on a polar grid and its aeroelastic load impact' [Data set], Zenodo, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3588360" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.3588360</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><label>Mann(1994)</label><?label Mann_1994?><mixed-citation>
Mann, J.: The spatial structure of neutral atmospheric surface-layer turbulence, J. Fluid Mech., 273, 141–168, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>Menter(1993)</label><?label menter93?><mixed-citation>Menter, F. R.: Zonal two-equation <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> models for aerodynamic flows, AIAA paper 93-2906, AIAA, Orlando, Florida, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>Michelsen(1992)</label><?label michelsen92?><mixed-citation>
Michelsen, J. A.: Basis3D – a platform for development of multiblock PDE
solvers, Tech. Rep. AFM 92-05, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><label>Michelsen(1994)</label><?label michelsen94?><mixed-citation>
Michelsen, J. A.: Block structured multigrid solution of 2D and 3D elliptic
PDEs, Tech. Rep. AFM 94-06, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{{\O}ye(1996)}}?><label>Øye(1996)</label><?label maribo1996a?><mixed-citation>
Øye, S.: FLEX4 simulation of wind turbine dynamics, in: Proceedings of the 28th IEA Meeting of Experts Concerning State of the Art of Aeroelastic Codes for Wind Turbine Calculations, Lyngby, Denmark, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx34"><label>Pena Diaz et al.(2009)Pena Diaz, Gryning, Hasager, and
Courtney</label><?label pena2009a?><mixed-citation>Pena Diaz, A., Gryning, S.-E., Hasager, C. B., and Courtney, M.: Extending the wind profile much higher than the surface layer, in: Ewec 2009 Proceedings Online, Marseille, France, available at: <uri>https://orbit.dtu.dk/en/publications/extending-the-wind-profile-much-higher-than-the-surface-layer</uri> (last access: 5 December 2019), 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx35"><label>Pirrung and Gaunaa(2018)</label><?label dynstall_VAWT?><mixed-citation>
Pirrung, G. R. and Gaunaa, M.: Dynamic stall model modifications to improve the modeling of vertical axis wind turbines, DTU Wind Energy E-0171, DTU Wind Energy, Roskilde, Denmark, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx36"><label>Pirrung and Madsen(2018)</label><?label Pirrung2018?><mixed-citation>Pirrung, G. R. and Madsen, H. A.: Dynamic inflow effects in measurements and
high-fidelity computations, Wind Energ. Sci., 3, 545–551,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-3-545-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/wes-3-545-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx37"><label>Pirrung et al.(2016)Pirrung, Madsen, Taesong, and
Heinz</label><?label pirrung2016?><mixed-citation>
Pirrung, G. R., Madsen, H. A., Taesong, K., and Heinz, J.: A coupled
near and far wake model for wind turbine aerodynamics, Wind Energy, 19,
2053–2069, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx38"><label>Pirrung et al.(2017a)Pirrung, Madsen, and
Schreck</label><?label wes-2-521-2017?><mixed-citation>Pirrung, G. R., Madsen, H. A., and Schreck, S.: Trailed vorticity
modeling for aeroelastic wind turbine simulations in standstill, Wind Energ.
Sci., 2, 521–532, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-521-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/wes-2-521-2017</ext-link>, 2017a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx39"><label>Pirrung et al.(2017b)Pirrung, Riziotis, Madsen, Hansen,
and Kim</label><?label wes-2-15-2017?><mixed-citation>Pirrung, G. R., Riziotis, V., Madsen, H., Hansen, M., and Kim, T.: Comparison
of a coupled near- and far-wake model with a free-wake vortex code, Wind
Energ. Sci., 2, 15–33, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-15-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/wes-2-15-2017</ext-link>, 2017b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx40"><label>Rahimi et al.(2018)Rahimi, Martinez Garcia, Stoevesandt, Peinke, and Schepers</label><?label hamid_yaw?><mixed-citation>Rahimi, H., Martinez Garcia, A., Stoevesandt, B., Peinke, J., and Schepers, G.: An engineering model for wind turbines under yawed conditions derived from high fidelity models, Wind Energy, 21, 618–633, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2182" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.2182</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx41"><label>Riziotis and Voustinas(1997)</label><?label GAST?><mixed-citation>
Riziotis, V. and Voustinas, S.: Gast: A General Aerodynamic and Structural
Prediction Tool for Wind Turbines, in: Proceedings of the EWEC'97, Dublin,
Ireland, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx42"><label>Schepers(2007)</label><?label Schepers2007?><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,
ECN, Petten, the Netherlands, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx43"><label>Schepers and Snel(1995)</label><?label schepers1995-joint?><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G. and Snel, H.: Joint investigation of dynamic inflow effects and implementation of an engineering method, ECN-C-94-107, Petten, the
Netherlands, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx44"><label>Schepers et al.(2018a)Schepers, Boorsma, Sorensen,
Voutsinas, Sieros, Rahimi, Heisselmann, Jost, Lutz, Maeder, Gonzalez,
Ferreira, Stoevesandt, Barakos, Lampropoulos, Croce, and
Madsen</label><?label schepers2018a?><mixed-citation>Schepers, J. G., Boorsma, K., Sorensen, N., Voutsinas, S., Sieros, G., Rahimi, H., Heisselmann, H., Jost, E., Lutz, T., Maeder, T., Gonzalez, A., Ferreira, C., Stoevesandt, B., Barakos, G., Lampropoulos, N., Croce, A., and Madsen, J.: Final results from the EU project AVATAR: aerodynamic modelling of 10 MW wind turbines, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1037, 022013,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1037/2/022013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1742-6596/1037/2/022013</ext-link>, 2018a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx45"><label>Schepers et al.(2018b)Schepers, Lutz, Boorsma,
Gomez-Iradi, Herraez, Oggiano, Rahimi, Schaffarczyk, Pirrung, Madsen, Shen,
and Weihing</label><?label task29_phase3?><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G., Lutz, T., Boorsma, K., Gomez-Iradi, S., Herraez, I., Oggiano, L., Rahimi, H., Schaffarczyk, P., Pirrung, G. R., Madsen, H. A.,
Shen, W. Z., and Weihing, P.: Final Report of IEA Wind Task 29 Mexnext (Phase 3), ECN-E–18-003, ECN, Petten, the Netherlands, 2018b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx46"><label>Sharpe(2004)</label><?label sharpe2004a?><mixed-citation>Sharpe, D. J.: A general momentum theory applied to an energy-extracting
actuator disc, Wind Energy, 7, 177–188, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.118" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.118</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx47"><label>Sieros et al.(2015)Sieros, Lekou, and D.</label><?label AVATARROTOR1?><mixed-citation>
Sieros, G.,Lekou, D., Chortis, D., Chaviaropoulos, P., Munduate, X., Irisarri, A., Madsen, H. A., Yde, K., Thomsen, K., Stettner, M., Reijerkerk,  M., Grasso, F., Savenije, R., Schepers, G., and Andersen, C. F.: AVATAR Deliverable D1.2 – Reference Blade Design, Tech. rep., ECN, Petten, the Netherlands, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx48"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{S{\o}rensen(2016)}}?><label>Sørensen(2016)</label><?label s2016a?><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, J. N.: General Momentum Theory for Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx49"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{S{\o}rensen et~al.(1998)Soerensen, Shen, and Munduate}}?><label>Sørensen et al.(1998)Soerensen, Shen, and Munduate</label><?label jens1998a?><mixed-citation>Sørensen, J. N., Shen, W. Z., and Munduate, X.: Analysis of wake states by a full-field Actuator disc model, Wind Energy, 1, 73–88,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1824(199812)1:2&lt;73::AID-WE12&gt;3.0.CO;2-L" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/(SICI)1099-1824(199812)1:2&lt;73::AID-WE12&gt;3.0.CO;2-L</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx50"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{S{\o}rensen(1995)}}?><label>Sørensen(1995)</label><?label sorensen95?><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, N. N.: General purpose flow solver applied to flow over hills,
Tech. Rep. Risø-R-827(EN), Risoe National Laboratory, Risoe, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx51"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{S{\o}rensen and Madsen(2006)}}?><label>Sørensen and Madsen(2006)</label><?label transientloads?><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, N. N. and Madsen, H. A.: Modelling of transient wind turbine loads during pitch motion, European Wind Energy Association (EWEA), Athens, Greece, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx52"><label>Stepniewski and Keys(1984)</label><?label ste1984a?><mixed-citation>
Stepniewski, W. Z. and Keys, C. N.: Rotary-wing aerodynamics, in: Volumes 1 and 2, Genral Publishing Company, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1984.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx53"><label>Thirstrup Petersen(1996)</label><?label thirstrup1996a?><mixed-citation>
Thirstrup Petersen, J.: The aeroelastic code HawC – model and comparisons,
in: State of the Art of Aeroelastic Codes for Wind Turbine Calculations, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 129–135, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx54"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Troldborg et~al.(2014)Troldborg, S{\o}rensen, Mikkelsen, and
S{\o}rensen}}?><label>Troldborg et al.(2014)Troldborg, Sørensen, Mikkelsen, and
Sørensen</label><?label Troldborg_2014?><mixed-citation>Troldborg, N., Sørensen, J. N., Mikkelsen, R., and Sørensen, N.: A
simple atmospheric boundary layer model applied to large eddy simulations of
wind turbine wakes, Wind Energy, 17, 657–669, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1608" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/we.1608</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx55"><label>Van Kuik(2018)</label><?label kuik2018a?><mixed-citation>Van Kuik, G.: The fluid dynamic basis for actuator disc and rotor theories, IOS press BV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-866-2-i" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3233/978-1-61499-866-2-i</ext-link>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx56"><label>Wilson and Lissaman(1974)Wilson, Lissaman, and state
university</label><?label wilson1974a?><mixed-citation>
Wilson, R. and Lissaman, P.: Applied aerodynamics of wind power machines, Oregon State University, Oregon, 1974.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx57"><label>WMC(2019)</label><?label Focus?><mixed-citation>WMC: FOCUS6 – The integrated wind turbine design suite, Knowledge Centre WMC, Wieringerwerf, the Netherlands, 2019.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx58"><label>Yu(2018)</label><?label Yu_thesis?><mixed-citation>Yu, W.: The wake of an unsteady actuator disc, PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, <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-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Implementation of the blade element momentum model on a polar grid and its aeroelastic load impact</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>We show that the upscaling of wind turbines from rotor diameters of 15–20&thinsp;m to presently large rotors of 150–200&thinsp;m has changed the requirements for the aerodynamic blade element momentum (BEM) models in the aeroelastic codes. This is because the typical scales in the inflow turbulence are now comparable with the rotor diameter of the large turbines. Therefore, the spectrum of the incoming turbulence relative to the rotating blade has increased energy content on 1<i>P</i>, 2<i>P</i>,&thinsp;…,&thinsp;<i>n</i><i>P</i>, and the annular mean induction approach in a classical BEM implementation might no longer be a good approximation for large rotors. We present a complete BEM implementation on a polar grid that models the induction response to the considerable 1<i>P</i>, 2<i>P</i>,&thinsp;…,&thinsp;<i>n</i><i>P</i> inflow variations, including models for yawed inflow, dynamic inflow and radial induction. At each time step, in an aeroelastic simulation, the induction derived from a local BEM approach is updated at all the stationary grid points covering the swept area so the model can be characterized as an engineering actuator disk (AD) solution. The induction at each grid point varies slowly in time due to the dynamic inflow filter but the rotating blade now samples the induction field; as a result, the induction seen from the blade is highly unsteady and has a spectrum with distinct 1<i>P</i>, 2<i>P</i>,&thinsp;…,&thinsp;<i>n</i><i>P</i> peaks. The load impact mechanism from this unsteady induction is analyzed and it is found that the load impact strongly depends on the turbine design and operating conditions. For operation at low to medium thrust coefficients (conventional turbines at above rated wind speed or low induction turbines in the whole operating range), it is found that the grid BEM gives typically 8&thinsp;%–10&thinsp;% lower 1&thinsp;Hz blade root flapwise fatigue loads than the classical annular mean BEM approach. At high thrust coefficients that can occur at low wind speeds, the grid BEM can give slightly increased fatigue loads. In the paper, the implementation of the grid-based BEM is described in detail, and finally several validation cases are presented. Comparisons with blade loads from full rotor CFD, wind tunnel experiments and a field experiment show that the model can predict the aerodynamic forces in half-wake, yawed flow, dynamic inflow and turbulent inflow conditions.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Bak and Zahle(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Bak, C. and Zahle, F.: Description of the DTU 10&thinsp;MW Reference Wind Turbine,
Tech. Rep., Report-I-0092, DTU Wind Energy, Roskilde, Denmark, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Boorsma and Schepers(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Boorsma, K. and Schepers, J.: New Mexico Experiment, Description of
experimental setup, Tech. Rep. ECN-X–15-093 (v3), ECN, Petten, the Netherlands, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>Bossanyi(2003)</label><mixed-citation>
Bossanyi, E.: GH Bladed Theory Manual. Technical Report, GH &amp; Partners Ltd,
Bristol, UK, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Botasso and Croce(2006–2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Botasso, C. and Croce, A.: Cp-Lambda: Users Manual. Milano: Dipartimento di
Ingegneria Aerospaziale, Polytecnico di Milano, Milano, 2006–2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Burton et al.(2011)</label><mixed-citation>
Burton, T., Jenkins, N., Sharpe, D., and Bossanyi, E.: Wind energy handbook, John Wiley &amp; Sons, Chichester, UK, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>de Vries(1979)</label><mixed-citation>
de Vries, O.: Fluid Dynamic Aspects of Wind Energy Conversion, Agardograph, Brussels, Belgium, 1979.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Glauert(1935)</label><mixed-citation>
Glauert, H.: Airplane Propellers, in: Division <i>L</i> in Aerodynamic Theory, vol. IV, edited by: Durand, W. F., Springer, Berlin, Germany, 169–360, 1935.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><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.bib9"><label>Hansen et al.(2004)Hansen, Gaunaa, and Madsen</label><mixed-citation>
Hansen, M. H., Gaunaa, M., and Madsen, H. A.: A Beddoes-Leishman type dynamic
stall model in state-space and indicial formulations, Risø-R-1354,
Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Hansen et al.(2015)Hansen, Thomsen, Natarajan, and Barlas</label><mixed-citation>
Hansen, M. H., Thomsen, K., Natarajan, A., and Barlas, A.: Design Load Basis
for Onshore Turbines, No. 0174, DTU Wind Energy, Roskilde, Denmark, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Hansen(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Hansen, M. O. L.: Aerodynamics of wind turbines, Earthscan, London, UK, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315769981" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315769981</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Heinz et al.(2016)Heinz, Srensen, and Zahle</label><mixed-citation>
Heinz, J. C., Sørensen, N. N., and Zahle, F.: Fluid-structure interaction
computations for geometrically resolved rotor simulations using CFD, Wind
Energy, 19, 2205–2221, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1976" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1976</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>IEC(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
IEC: IEC 61400-1 3rd edition Wind turbines – Part 1: Design requirements,
International Electrotechnical Commission – IEC, Geneva, Switzerland, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Jonkman et al.(2009)Jonkman, Butterfield, Musial, and
Scott</label><mixed-citation>
Jonkman, J., Butterfield, S., Musial, W., and Scott, G.: Definition of a 5-MW
Reference Wind Turbine for Offshore System Development, Tech. rep., National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, USA, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Jonkman et al.(2016)Jonkman, Hayman, Jonkman, and
Damiani</label><mixed-citation>
Jonkman, J., Hayman, G., Jonkman, B., and Damiani, R.: AeroDyn v15 User's
Guide and Theory Manual, NREL, Golden, Colorado, USA, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Larsen et al.(2008)Larsen, Madsen, Thomsen, and Larsen</label><mixed-citation>
Larsen, G. C., Madsen, H. A., Thomsen, K., and Larsen, T. J.: Wake
meandering, Wind Energy, 11, 377–395, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.267" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.267</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Larsen and Hansen(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Larsen, T. J. and Hansen, A. M.: How 2 HAWC2, the user's manual, Risoe-R-1597, Forskningscenter Risoe, Risoe, Denmark, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Larsen et al.(2011)Larsen, gaard Madsen, Larsen, and
Hansen</label><mixed-citation>
Larsen, T. J., Madsen, H. A., Larsen, G. C., and Hansen, K. S.: Validation of the dynamic wake meander model for loads and power production in the Egmond aan Zee wind farm, Wind Energy, 16, 605–624, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1563" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1563</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Leishman(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Leishman, J. G.: Principles of helicopter aerodynamics, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Madsen(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A.: A CFD analysis of the actuator disc flow compared
with momentum theory results, in: Proceedings of the 10th IEA meeting on aerodynamics, Edinburgh, UK, 109–124, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Madsen(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A.: Kobling af HawC til 3D actuator disc model, in: Chapter 5 in “Forskning i aeroelasticitet – EFP-98”, Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark, p. 81, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>Madsen(2000)</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A.: Yaw simulation using a 3D actuator disc model coupled to the aeroelastic code HawC, in: IEA Joint Action, Aerodynamics of Wind
Turbines, 13. Symposium, 29–30 November 1999, Stockholm, 133–145, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>Madsen et al.(2010a)Madsen, Bak, Døssing, Mikkelsen,
and Øye</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A., Bak, C., Døssing, M., Mikkelsen, R. F., and Øye, S.: Validation and modification of the Blade Element Momentum theory based on comparisons with actuator disc simulations, Wind Energy, 13, 373–389, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.359" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.359</a>, 2010a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>Madsen et al.(2010b)Madsen, Bak, Schmidt Paulsen,
Gaunaa, Fuglsang, Romblad, Olesen, Enevoldsen, Laursen, and
Jensen</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A., Bak, C., Schmidt Paulsen, U., Gaunaa, M., Fuglsang, P., Romblad, J., Olesen, N. A., Enevoldsen, P., Laursen, J., and Jensen, L.:
The DAN-AERO MW Experiments, Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark, 2010b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Madsen et al.(2010c)Madsen, Larsen, Larsen, Troldborg,
and Mikkelsen</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A., Larsen, G. C., Larsen, T. J., Troldborg, N., and Mikkelsen, R. F.: Calibration and Validation of the Dynamic Wake Meandering
Model for Implementation in an Aeroelastic Code, J. Sol. Energy Eng., 132, 041014, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4002555" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4002555</a>, 2010c.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>Madsen et al.(2012)Madsen, Riziotis, Zahle, Hansen, Grasso, Larsen,
POolitis, and Rasmussen</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A., Riziotis, V., Zahle, F., Hansen, M., Grasso, F., Larsen, T., POolitis, E., and Rasmussen, F.: Blade element momentum modeling of inflow with shear in comparison with advanced model results, Wind Energy,
15, 63–81, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Madsen et al.(2018)Madsen, Srensen, Bak, Troldborg, and
Pirrung</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A., Sørensen, N. N., Bak, C., Troldborg, N., and Pirrung, G.: Measured aerodynamic forces on a full scale 2&thinsp;MW turbine in comparison with EllipSys3D and HAWC2 simulations, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1037, 022011, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1037/2/022011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1037/2/022011</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Madsen et al.(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
Madsen, H. A., Larsen, T. J., Pirrung, G. R., Li, A., and Zahle, F.: Data supplement for Wind Energy Science Paper `Implementation of the blade element momentum model on a polar grid and its aeroelastic load impact' [Data set], Zenodo, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3588360" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3588360</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Mann(1994)</label><mixed-citation>
Mann, J.: The spatial structure of neutral atmospheric surface-layer turbulence, J. Fluid Mech., 273, 141–168, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>Menter(1993)</label><mixed-citation>
Menter, F. R.: Zonal two-equation <i>k</i> − <i>ω</i> models for aerodynamic flows, AIAA paper 93-2906, AIAA, Orlando, Florida, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>Michelsen(1992)</label><mixed-citation>
Michelsen, J. A.: Basis3D – a platform for development of multiblock PDE
solvers, Tech. Rep. AFM 92-05, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>Michelsen(1994)</label><mixed-citation>
Michelsen, J. A.: Block structured multigrid solution of 2D and 3D elliptic
PDEs, Tech. Rep. AFM 94-06, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>Øye(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Øye, S.: FLEX4 simulation of wind turbine dynamics, in: Proceedings of the 28th IEA Meeting of Experts Concerning State of the Art of Aeroelastic Codes for Wind Turbine Calculations, Lyngby, Denmark, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>Pena Diaz et al.(2009)Pena Diaz, Gryning, Hasager, and
Courtney</label><mixed-citation>
Pena Diaz, A., Gryning, S.-E., Hasager, C. B., and Courtney, M.: Extending the wind profile much higher than the surface layer, in: Ewec 2009 Proceedings Online, Marseille, France, available at: <a href="https://orbit.dtu.dk/en/publications/extending-the-wind-profile-much-higher-than-the-surface-layer" target="_blank"/> (last access: 5 December 2019), 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>Pirrung and Gaunaa(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Pirrung, G. R. and Gaunaa, M.: Dynamic stall model modifications to improve the modeling of vertical axis wind turbines, DTU Wind Energy E-0171, DTU Wind Energy, Roskilde, Denmark, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>Pirrung and Madsen(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Pirrung, G. R. and Madsen, H. A.: Dynamic inflow effects in measurements and
high-fidelity computations, Wind Energ. Sci., 3, 545–551,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-3-545-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-3-545-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>Pirrung et al.(2016)Pirrung, Madsen, Taesong, and
Heinz</label><mixed-citation>
Pirrung, G. R., Madsen, H. A., Taesong, K., and Heinz, J.: A coupled
near and far wake model for wind turbine aerodynamics, Wind Energy, 19,
2053–2069, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>Pirrung et al.(2017a)Pirrung, Madsen, and
Schreck</label><mixed-citation>
Pirrung, G. R., Madsen, H. A., and Schreck, S.: Trailed vorticity
modeling for aeroelastic wind turbine simulations in standstill, Wind Energ.
Sci., 2, 521–532, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-521-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-521-2017</a>, 2017a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>Pirrung et al.(2017b)Pirrung, Riziotis, Madsen, Hansen,
and Kim</label><mixed-citation>
Pirrung, G. R., Riziotis, V., Madsen, H., Hansen, M., and Kim, T.: Comparison
of a coupled near- and far-wake model with a free-wake vortex code, Wind
Energ. Sci., 2, 15–33, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-15-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-15-2017</a>, 2017b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>Rahimi et al.(2018)Rahimi, Martinez Garcia, Stoevesandt, Peinke, and Schepers</label><mixed-citation>
Rahimi, H., Martinez Garcia, A., Stoevesandt, B., Peinke, J., and Schepers, G.: An engineering model for wind turbines under yawed conditions derived from high fidelity models, Wind Energy, 21, 618–633, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2182" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2182</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>Riziotis and Voustinas(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Riziotis, V. and Voustinas, S.: Gast: A General Aerodynamic and Structural
Prediction Tool for Wind Turbines, in: Proceedings of the EWEC'97, Dublin,
Ireland, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><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,
ECN, Petten, the Netherlands, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>Schepers and Snel(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G. and Snel, H.: Joint investigation of dynamic inflow effects and implementation of an engineering method, ECN-C-94-107, Petten, the
Netherlands, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>Schepers et al.(2018a)Schepers, Boorsma, Sorensen,
Voutsinas, Sieros, Rahimi, Heisselmann, Jost, Lutz, Maeder, Gonzalez,
Ferreira, Stoevesandt, Barakos, Lampropoulos, Croce, and
Madsen</label><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G., Boorsma, K., Sorensen, N., Voutsinas, S., Sieros, G., Rahimi, H., Heisselmann, H., Jost, E., Lutz, T., Maeder, T., Gonzalez, A., Ferreira, C., Stoevesandt, B., Barakos, G., Lampropoulos, N., Croce, A., and Madsen, J.: Final results from the EU project AVATAR: aerodynamic modelling of 10&thinsp;MW wind turbines, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1037, 022013,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1037/2/022013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1037/2/022013</a>, 2018a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>Schepers et al.(2018b)Schepers, Lutz, Boorsma,
Gomez-Iradi, Herraez, Oggiano, Rahimi, Schaffarczyk, Pirrung, Madsen, Shen,
and Weihing</label><mixed-citation>
Schepers, J. G., Lutz, T., Boorsma, K., Gomez-Iradi, S., Herraez, I., Oggiano, L., Rahimi, H., Schaffarczyk, P., Pirrung, G. R., Madsen, H. A.,
Shen, W. Z., and Weihing, P.: Final Report of IEA Wind Task 29 Mexnext (Phase 3), ECN-E–18-003, ECN, Petten, the Netherlands, 2018b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>Sharpe(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
Sharpe, D. J.: A general momentum theory applied to an energy-extracting
actuator disc, Wind Energy, 7, 177–188, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.118" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.118</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>Sieros et al.(2015)Sieros, Lekou, and D.</label><mixed-citation>
Sieros, G.,Lekou, D., Chortis, D., Chaviaropoulos, P., Munduate, X., Irisarri, A., Madsen, H. A., Yde, K., Thomsen, K., Stettner, M., Reijerkerk,  M., Grasso, F., Savenije, R., Schepers, G., and Andersen, C. F.: AVATAR Deliverable D1.2 – Reference Blade Design, Tech. rep., ECN, Petten, the Netherlands, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>Sørensen(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, J. N.: General Momentum Theory for Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>Sørensen et al.(1998)Soerensen, Shen, and Munduate</label><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, J. N., Shen, W. Z., and Munduate, X.: Analysis of wake states by a full-field Actuator disc model, Wind Energy, 1, 73–88,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1824(199812)1:2&lt;73::AID-WE12&gt;3.0.CO;2-L" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1824(199812)1:2&lt;73::AID-WE12&gt;3.0.CO;2-L</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>Sørensen(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Sørensen, N. N.: General purpose flow solver applied to flow over hills,
Tech. Rep. Risø-R-827(EN), Risoe National Laboratory, Risoe, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><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), Athens, Greece, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>Stepniewski and Keys(1984)</label><mixed-citation>
Stepniewski, W. Z. and Keys, C. N.: Rotary-wing aerodynamics, in: Volumes 1 and 2, Genral Publishing Company, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1984.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>Thirstrup Petersen(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Thirstrup Petersen, J.: The aeroelastic code HawC – model and comparisons,
in: State of the Art of Aeroelastic Codes for Wind Turbine Calculations, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 129–135, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>Troldborg et al.(2014)Troldborg, Sørensen, Mikkelsen, and
Sørensen</label><mixed-citation>
Troldborg, N., Sørensen, J. N., Mikkelsen, R., and Sørensen, N.: A
simple atmospheric boundary layer model applied to large eddy simulations of
wind turbine wakes, Wind Energy, 17, 657–669, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1608" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1608</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>Van Kuik(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Van Kuik, G.: The fluid dynamic basis for actuator disc and rotor theories, IOS press BV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-866-2-i" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-866-2-i</a>, 2018.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>Wilson and Lissaman(1974)Wilson, Lissaman, and state
university</label><mixed-citation>
Wilson, R. and Lissaman, P.: Applied aerodynamics of wind power machines, Oregon State University, Oregon, 1974.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>WMC(2019)</label><mixed-citation>
WMC: FOCUS6 – The integrated wind turbine design suite, Knowledge Centre WMC, Wieringerwerf, the Netherlands, 2019.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>Yu(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Yu, W.: The wake of an unsteady actuator disc, PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, <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>--></article>
