the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
A new base of wind turbine noise measurement data and its application for a systematic validation of sound propagation models
Susanne Könecke
Jasmin Hörmeyer
Tobias Bohne
Raimund Rolfes
Abstract. Extensive measurements in the area of wind turbines were performed in order to validate a sound propagation model which is based on the Crank-Nicolson Parabolic Equations method. The measurements were carried out over a flat grass-covered landscape and under various environmental conditions. During the measurements, meteorological and wind turbine performance data were acquired and acoustical data sets were recorded in distances of 178, 535, and 845 m to the wind turbine. By processing and analyzing the measurement data, validation cases and input parameters for the propagation model were derived. The validation includes five groups that are characterized by different propagation directions, i.e. down-, cross- and upwind conditions in varying strength. Comparing measured and modeled propagation losses, a general good agreement is observed for all groups. Considering all groups and distances, the absolute averaged difference of the measured and modeled losses in total sound pressure level is 0.9 dB. At large distances, the propagation losses are slightly underestimated by the model. The model represents the measured propagation losses in the 1/3 octave spectra well. As in the measurements, frequency-dependent maxima and minima are identified and losses generally increase with increasing distance and frequency. For good results in upwind situations, turbulence has been considered in the model. The data sets used in the validation are available for further research.
Susanne Könecke et al.
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on wes-2021-145', Anonymous Referee #1, 23 Feb 2022
This is a very well written paper. It clearly shows that the numerical predictions work well against experimental data. The authors did a very thorough study on the validation and parameter study. I recommend the publicaiton of this paper.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2021-145-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on wes-2021-145', Anonymous Referee #2, 23 Mar 2022
This research article aims at providing wind turbine noise measurement data that can be used for the validation of sound propagation models. It is indeed of great importance to be able to predict the impact of wind turbine noise at relative long ranges, and there not many detailed datasets available to perform systematic model validation. I think the 10 validation cases that have been selected and analyzed by the authors will be of interest for the community. However, as explained in my specific comments, I don't think that atmospheric turbulence can be characterized with the sensors available in this experimental campaign.
The part of the article devoted to the model description and the comparison with measurements is less convincing, and suffers from several shortcomings. In particular, the choice of a source model with 3 point sources need to be discussed, and may be the cause of the discrepancy between the modeled and measured 1/3 octave band spectra. The ground effect is not well characterized, and the modeling of atmospheric turbulence is not convincing. Finally, the use of the total SPL to judge the accuracy of the model is misleading because very small differences between model predictions and measurements can be obtained while the corresponding spectra differ significantly.
I thus recommend major corrections to be done according to the detailed comments described in the attached document.
-
RC3: 'Comment on wes-2021-145', Anonymous Referee #3, 28 Mar 2022
The overall impression about this paper is positive. The paper represents an important step in the search for suitable data and procedures to compare measurements and model results. The main problem, however, is the selection of suitable measurement data together with all the conditions that are decisive for the generation and propagation of the sound.
The short term variability of meteorological parameters (e.g. wind speed, wind direction, that are part of low frequency turbulent motion) and heterogeneous ground properties is difficult to handle. This may lead to high variance in measured sound data and is difficult to compare to ‘regular’ model data. This variability is not discussed in detail. E.G. how it was determined the absence of a low level jet by mast measurements to 100m height? How the averaging of meteo and accoustic data affect the comparison of data? Which time range would be recommended (1min,, 5 min, 10 min) ?
Here, the surprisingly good agreement between the model and the measurement gives rise to doubts about the selection of the cases examined. Normally, comparisons of measurement results with very similar conditions often show higher differences. Nevertheless, the results of this paper should be regarded as a first step how to proceed, about input parameters and comparison between measurements and model results.
It is still unclear how a wind turbine should be represented in a sound propagation model. The method chosen here with three alternative sources is one of many possibilities, but there is no evidence that this is the best possible.
The wide range of literature is presented, what may help any reader to advance how to proceed with measurements and comparison to model efforts.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2021-145-RC3 -
AC1: 'Comment on wes-2021-145', Susanne Könecke, 31 Jan 2023
We apologize for the late response. Due to parental leave and health issues, earlier editing was not possible.
We would like to thank the reviewers for this detailed review and valuable comments. They have greatly improved the quality of the paper. We agree that data publication is very important. We are happy that the data is already used in the IEA Wind Task 39 WP3 to validate further models. Because of this, misunderstandings in the data and its publication could have been corrected. As a result, the modelling results changed which is only noticeable in strong upwind direction. The general outcome of the paper did not change.The supplement provides the answers to the reviewers’ comments. The lines and equations used in the answers refer to the new version. The modified paragraphs are marked in the manuscript. Purple markers in the manuscript indicate author changes that were made independently of the review. Only subject-related changes are marked here. Linguistic improvements, for example, are not highlighted.
Susanne Könecke et al.
Data sets
Wind Turbine Sound Propagation Data for the Validation of Models Susanne Könecke, Jasmin Hörmeyer, Tobias Bohne, Raimund Rolfes https://data.uni-hannover.de/dataset/wtn-propagation
Susanne Könecke et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
387 | 194 | 17 | 598 | 9 | 5 |
- HTML: 387
- PDF: 194
- XML: 17
- Total: 598
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 5
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1