the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
SANDWake3D: A 3D parabolic RANS solver for atmospheric boundary layers and turbine wakes
Abstract. Despite many recent advances, modeling wind turbine wakes using semi-empirical and analytical models still face challenges when dealing with more complicated situations involving wind shear, veer, atmospheric stratification, and wake superposition. To address these limitations, this study introduces a three-dimensional, parabolic Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) k-epsilon formulation which includes an atmospheric boundary layer model and an actuator disk model for turbine wakes. The full three-dimensional solution for the velocity, temperature, and turbulence variables are efficiently solved through an alternating direction implicit scheme that requires orders of magnitude less computational resources than traditional high fidelity approaches. The results of the parabolic RANS model are compared to the equivalent large-eddy simulations (LES) and semi-empirical wake models at different wind speeds under stable atmospheric conditions with veer and shear. For the single turbine wake the RANS model was able to capture the wake deficit behavior, including the wake stretching and skewing that was observed in the LES. The distribution of the wake turbulence in the RANS model also agreed with results from the higher fidelity simulations. In simulations of a two-turbine, directly waked configuration, the new RANS model was able to handle the wake superposition behavior without difficulty, and also correctly modeled the corresponding increase in wake turbulence when compared to LES. Lastly, a demonstration of the RANS model on a 9-turbine, 3 row wind farm is shown and compared to LES.
- Preprint
(3030 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 22 Dec 2025)
-
CC1: 'Comment on wes-2025-249', Blondel Frédéric, 27 Nov 2025
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Lawrence Cheung, 27 Nov 2025
reply
Dear Frédéric,
That is correct, for the parabolic approach we studied, the induction zone upstream of the turbine is not included. We briefly considered including an induction model similar to the one in https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/we.2956, but that is something to be done in a separate study.  In our formulation, we are modeling the effects of the turbine rotor through an actuator disk model, where the disk forces are applied at exactly where the turbine rotor is placed (i.e., at x/D=0). That avoids having to prescribe an explicit momentum deficit in the velocity profile themselves, and should be general enough to handle partially waked or fully waked scenarios. The details of this are described in section 2.4 of the manuscript.
Regarding the Monin-Obukhov length L, there are two limits that should be considered when using the similiarty theory for the ABL profiles. The first case is when L approaches ∞ (either positive or negative infinity), which corresponds to when the ABL is neutrally stratified. In that situation, the relations given in section 2.2 are well defined, as the non-dimensional profiles collapse to unity. The second limit to consider is when L approaches zero, which corresponds to when the ABL is unstably or stably stratified to a inifinite degree, possibly to due to the surface heat flux approaching very large, unreasonable values.  In that case, I suspect the Monin-Obukhov similarity theory would break down and the profiles would not really be classified as atmospheric boundary layers anymore, so the equations in section 2.2 shouldn't be used.
Hopefully this helps clarify things, but let us know if you have any other questions.
Cheers,
Lawrence
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-249-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Lawrence Cheung, 27 Nov 2025
reply
-
RC1: 'Comment on wes-2025-249', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Dec 2025
reply
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://wes.copernicus.org/preprints/wes-2025-249/wes-2025-249-RC1-supplement.pdf
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 155 | 32 | 12 | 199 | 8 | 8 |
- HTML: 155
- PDF: 32
- XML: 12
- Total: 199
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 8
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Dear Authors,
I have a question regarding your use of a forward-in-space numerical algorithm in your preprint. Since such algorithms only allow downstream information propagation, I assume there is no induction zone upstream of the actuator disk. In the absence of an induction zone, it is standard to inject the momentum deficit at the end of the near wake (as in Bradstock and Schlez, WES, 2020), or at the rotor plane if pressure is being solved for. Could you clarify whether this is the approach you have taken, or if I have misunderstood your method?
Additionally, I noticed that Equations (9) and (10)—and possibly others—are ill-posed when L equals zero, as this would result in division by zero.
Thank you for your time and clarification.