A framework for the superposition of wind turbines wake properties
Abstract. Wind turbines extract kinetic energy from the wind flow and convert it to electric power, while leaving downstream complex, non-stationary, and meandering plumes of reduced wind speed and increased turbulence, called wakes. Several analytical models have been proposed in the literature to describe the structure of wake properties, such as wind speed deficit (∆U), turbulence intensity (TI), or turbulence kinetic energy (TKE), all of which have been expressed as a function of the upstream, or undisturbed, value of said properties. While this dependency on undisturbed values is natural and practical for a single wind turbine, it becomes less so in the presence of multiple turbines, to the point of being meaningless in large wind farms, where the distance between front- and last-row turbines may exceed tens of kilometers and therefore the very concept of undisturbed flow is moot for the majority of turbines. As such, superposition methods, which aim at obtaining the final distribution of wake properties in overlapping wakes from multiple wind turbines, struggle to provide consistent results, especially for turbulence properties. In addition, the literature is lacking coherent definitions of the superposition methods, with each study introducing its own naming convention and often slightly different formulations. Here we propose a framework to standardize wake superposition for use with any analytical model of wake properties, including ∆U, TI, or TKE (but not temperature or pressure). The framework is based on the concept of “inflow”, as opposed to undisturbed, values, which are in general affected by upstream turbines and are truly undisturbed only for front-row turbines. Within this framework, we propose that the inflow property should not be a constant, but rather a function of z, taken at a fixed distance upstream of each turbine, for example one diameter. Furthermore, the superposition methods are grouped into two main categories (i.e., simple or normalized summation), with the value of an exponent m controlling the linearity or non-linearity of the summed terms. The performance of the superposition methods within the framework is assessed for three analytical wake models (one for each of the three wake properties ∆U, TI, and TKE) against LES results from independent studies under various wind farm layouts, turbine models, and atmospheric stabilities. General findings are that the value of m controls the magnitude of the resulting wake property, with higher values for smaller m, and that, for the same value of m, the simple summation methods tend to create stronger overlapping wakes than the normalized ones in terms of turbulence properties, but the opposite is found for wind speed deficit. We conclude that the selection of the superposition method depends in part on the bias of the analytical wake model itself.
Competing interests: Prof. Crisitina Archer is a member of the editorial board of Wind Energy Science
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 paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
The article titled “A framework for the superposition of wind turbines wake properties” discusses the development of engineering wake models capable of representing both streamwise velocity and turbulence in three dimensions. In the abstract, the authors state that they “propose a framework to standardize wake superposition for use with any analytical model of wake properties”. In the concluding section, they further note that, relative to normalized summation (NS), simple summation (SS) might be a more suitable option for additive quantities such as turbulence within a wind farm. They also conclude that SS generally exhibits better numerical stability than NS, particularly when the exponent m is smaller than 1.
The topic of the study fits well within the scope of Wind Energy Science, as the wind energy industry has long relied on analytical and engineering models to efficiently predict flow fields within wind farms. For example, developers depend heavily on such models when optimizing wind-farm layouts.
In general, I found the manuscript difficult to follow overall, requiring a significant amount of effort to keep track of the authors’ reasoning. Moreover, I am not convinced that the authors have clearly established the “framework to standardize wake superposition” that they claim to propose. Even if such a framework is presented, it is not clear what is the concrete contribution of this work to the wind energy community or to the broader knowledge base. Several issues resulting in these concerns, along with additional comments, are outlined below.
With regard to the scientific methods and findings presented in the manuscript, I have several additional concerns, which are outlined below:
There are additional points highlighted in the attached PDF files that I encountered while reading the manuscript. Several of these are also important from my perspective, and I strongly encourage the authors to address them as part of a comprehensive revision. These comments are not exhaustive, and I believe it is reasonable to expect the authors to identify and resolve further issues beyond those explicitly noted. Please also note that some highlighted passages in the PDF are simply anchors for my own reference and should not be interpreted as specific concerns.
Overall, I can only reconsider on recommending this manuscript for publication after a substantial and thorough revision.