Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-79
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-79
15 Jul 2024
 | 15 Jul 2024
Status: a revised version of this preprint is currently under review for the journal WES.

Turbine- and farm-scale power losses in wind farms: an alternative to wake and farm blockage losses

Andrew Kirby, Takafumi Nishino, Luca Lanzilao, Thomas D. Dunstan, and Johan Meyers

Abstract. Turbine-wake and farm-atmosphere interactions can reduce wind farm power production. To model farm performance, it is important to understand the impact of different flow effects on the farm efficiency (i.e., farm power normalised by the power of the same number of isolated turbines). In this study we analyse the results of 43 large-eddy simulations (LES) of wind farms in a range of conventionally neutral boundary layers (CNBLs). First, we show that the farm efficiency ηf is not well correlated with the wake efficiency ηw (i.e., farm power normalised by the power of front row turbines). This suggests that existing metrics, classifying the loss of farm power into wake loss and farm blockage loss, are not best suited for understanding large wind farm performance. We then validate the assumption of scale separation in the two-scale momentum theory (Nishino & Dunstan, J. Fluid Mech., vol. 894, 2020, p. A2) using the LES results. Building upon this theory, we propose two new metrics for wind farm performance, a turbine-scale efficiency ηTS, reflecting the losses due to turbine-wake interactions, and a farm-scale efficiency ηFS, indicating the losses due to farm-atmosphere interactions. The LES results show that ηTS is insensitive to the atmospheric condition, whereas ηFS is insensitive to the turbine layout. Finally, we show that a recently developed analytical wind farm model predicts ηFS with an average error of 5.7 % from the LES results.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Andrew Kirby, Takafumi Nishino, Luca Lanzilao, Thomas D. Dunstan, and Johan Meyers

Status: final response (author comments only)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on wes-2024-79', Anonymous Referee #1, 11 Aug 2024
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Andrew Kirby, 10 Sep 2024
  • RC2: 'Comment on wes-2024-79', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Aug 2024
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Andrew Kirby, 10 Sep 2024
Andrew Kirby, Takafumi Nishino, Luca Lanzilao, Thomas D. Dunstan, and Johan Meyers
Andrew Kirby, Takafumi Nishino, Luca Lanzilao, Thomas D. Dunstan, and Johan Meyers

Viewed

Total article views: 636 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
454 129 53 636 24 23
  • HTML: 454
  • PDF: 129
  • XML: 53
  • Total: 636
  • BibTeX: 24
  • EndNote: 23
Views and downloads (calculated since 15 Jul 2024)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 15 Jul 2024)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 620 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 620 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 20 Nov 2024
Download
Short summary
Traditionally, the aerodynamic loss of wind farm efficiency is classified into ‘wake loss’ and ‘farm blockage loss’. This study, using high-fidelity simulations, shows neither of these two losses is well correlated with the overall farm efficiency. We propose new measures called ’turbine-scale efficiency’ and ‘farm-scale efficiency’ to better describe turbine-wake effects and farm-atmosphere interactions. This study suggests the importance of better modelling ‘farm-scale loss’ in future studies.
Altmetrics