the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Realistic turbulent inflow conditions for estimating the performances of a floating wind turbine
Cedric Raibaudo
Jean-Christophe Gilloteaux
Laurent Perret
Abstract. A novel method for generating turbulent inflow boundary conditions for aeroelastic computations is proposed, based on interfacing hybrid hot-wire and particle image velocimetry measurements performed in a wind tunnel to a full-scale load simulation conducted with FAST. This approach is based on the use of the proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) to interpolate and extrapolate the experimental data onto the numerical grid. The temporal dynamics of the temporal POD coefficients is driven by the high-frequency hot-wire measurements used as inputs of lower-order model built using a multi time-delay linear stochastic estimation (LSE) approach. Being directly extracted from the data, the generated 3-component velocity fields later used as inlet conditions present correct one- and two-point spatial statistics and realistic temporal dynamics. Wind tunnel measurements are performed at a scale of 1:750, using a properly scaled porous disc as a wind turbine model. The POD analysis of the flow, with or without taking into account the presence of the surge motion of the model, shows that a few modes are able to capture the characteristics of the most energetic flow structures and the main features of the wind turbine wake such as its meandering and the influence of the surge motion. The interfacing method is first tested to estimate the performance of a wind turbine in an offshore boundary layer and then those of a wind turbine immersed in the wake of an upstream wind turbine subjected to a sinusoidal surge motion. Results are also compared to those obtained using the standard inflow generation method provided by TurbSim available in FAST.
- Preprint
(3958 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Cedric Raibaudo et al.
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on wes-2023-60', Anonymous Referee #1, 10 Jul 2023
Dear authors, please find attached my comments/suggestions to your manuscript.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Cedric Raibaudo, 27 Jul 2023
Dear reviewer,
We thank you very much for your time reviewing our work, and your valuable comments and suggestions that help us improving the manuscript.
Please find attached the detailed response to your review.
We hope it will adress all the questions and concerns you raised.Best regards
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Cedric Raibaudo, 27 Jul 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on wes-2023-60', Anonymous Referee #2, 10 Jul 2023
The authors present a compelling methodology for generating turbulent inflow conditions for floating offshore wind farms, with a particular focus on performance under waked conditions. The study translates results obtained from wind tunnel experiments to offshore wind simulations using the FAST model. The manuscript is concise and the figures are high quality and helpful for interpreting the findings. The paper aligns well with the topics included in Wind Energy Science. Addressing the following questions and comments would improve the quality and clarity of the manuscript.
A grammatical review would improve the clarity of the paper, with particular emphasis on consistency (RMS and rms are employed variously throughout the manuscript, for example) and employment of past versus present tense.
Line 189: The sentence beginning “Compared with typical bluff-body flows, the eigenvalues convergence is slow…” would benefit from the inclusion of numbers to support the comparison.
The paragraph beginning on Line 214 is interesting and could benefit from additional reasoning and speculation from the authors about the correlations for various modes. The authors provide speculation for the correlations noted for modes 1 and 2 for the spanwise coordinates, but it would be helpful to provide some discussion of the correlations for the wall-normal coordinates.
Line 223: The word “velocities” appears to be missing from the sentence beginning “RMS profiles of the reconstructed along z…”
Line 230: “loses” instead of “looses”
Line 270: Why was 6.6 selected as the tip-speed ratio?
Figure 10: To improve comparison, it would be helpful to have the same y-axis range for a-2 and b-2.
In the Conclusions section, it would be helpful to include a discussion on the authors’ speculation on the applicability, potential challenges, and uncertainty of this technique, which is based upon wind tunnel measurements, to a real world operating floating offshore wind farm.
Line 333: “allow” instead of “allows”
Given that the appendix is quite short, it could easily be incorporated into the main body of the manuscript.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2023-60-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Cedric Raibaudo, 27 Jul 2023
Dear reviewer,
We thank you very much for your time reviewing our work, and your valuable comments and suggestions that help us improving the manuscript.
Please find attached the detailed response to your review.
We hope it will adress all the questions and concerns you raised.Best regards
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Cedric Raibaudo, 27 Jul 2023
-
AC3: 'Tracked changes of the manuscript from the first review', Cedric Raibaudo, 28 Jul 2023
Dear reviewers, dear editioral board,
Please find attached the tracked changes of the manuscript based on the reviews and the proposed modifications in the responses to the reviewers.
We hope it will helped for the comprehension of the changes proprosed for the manuscript.Best regards,
Cedric Raibaudo et al.
Cedric Raibaudo et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
439 | 96 | 18 | 553 | 6 | 7 |
- HTML: 439
- PDF: 96
- XML: 18
- Total: 553
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 7
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1