the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Introduction of the Virtual Center of Wind Pressure for correlating large-scale turbulent structures and wind turbine loads
Abstract. For modern wind turbines, the effects of inflow wind fluctuations on the loads are becoming increasingly critical. Using field measurements of a full-scale operating wind turbine and simulated loads calculated with reconstructed wind fields from wind measurements from the GROWIAN campaign, we identify particular load events that lead to high values of the so-called damage equivalent loads. Remarkably, the simulations do not reproduce such load occurrences when standard synthetic turbulent wind fields are used as inflow. These standard wind fields are typically parameterized by statistics at a single measurement location (e.g., mean wind speed and turbulence intensity). In this article, we introduce a new characteristic of a wind field: the virtual center of wind pressure. The new feature is calculated from averages of the thrust force acting on a defined area, i.e., the rotor area of the turbine. We correlate these characteristics to the unusual load events observed in the operational measured data. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the introduced concept is an efficient tool to characterize large-scale structures within wind fields. We propose using the virtual center of wind pressure in conjunction with the well-defined single-location properties to consolidate improved descriptions of atmospheric wind and more accurate wind fields for turbine simulations.
Competing interests: Joachim Peinke 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 preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.- Preprint
(2271 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 01 May 2025)
-
CC1: 'Comment on wes-2025-28', Alex Rybchuk, 28 Mar 2025
reply
Hi Carsten, I stumbled across your pre-print today. I'm not a reviewer so I won't give detailed feedback, but I wanted to chime in and say I really enjoyed this paper!
Disclaimer: this community comment is written by an individual and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of their employer.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-28-CC1 -
RC1: 'Comment on wes-2025-28', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Apr 2025
reply
The present work proposes an additional parameter for describing wind fields in order to better understand differences between measured and simulated loads. The concept of the virtual center of pressure - which in some ways complements the rotor-averaged wind speed by providing spatial information - could be a useful tool for comparing i.e. measured wind fields, LES wind fields, and synthetic wind fields (as exemplified here). The inclusion of LES wind fields would have been a very useful addition to the work, as this would also provide insight into whether such wind fields could be used to improve design analysis.
The argumentation for the virtual center of pressure is based on assuming a constant thrust coefficient over the rotor, which is not a very convincing argument. I don't see any real reason for introducing the thrust at all, as the formulation is really just a spatial averaging of the longitudinal wind speed squared.
The use of DEL10 to identify large load cycles also seems a bit contrived to me. The components of interest are generally made of steel, and damage would typically be calculated with a much lower exponent. For the bearings, different damage formulations are typically used (i.e. load distribution duration). The argument for using DEL10 is that this metric emphasizes large load ranges. Why not simply examine the distribution of load ranges? If using DEL, there should also be more discussion of the counting algorithm that is used, particularly how unclosed cycles are addressed (since large load cycles can remain unclosed at the end of the time series). Why is it not possible to show a distribution based on simulations in Figure 2? This would be better to compare against measurements.
For rotor-level bending moments, it seems rather obvious that these should be dependent on the spatial variation of the wind field rather than the magnitude of the thrust itself. Other authors have proposed an asymmetry index (i.e. Lavely's PhD thesis) that could also be a useful metric for comparison to the proposed metric.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-28-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
85 | 33 | 5 | 123 | 9 | 8 |
- HTML: 85
- PDF: 33
- XML: 5
- Total: 123
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 8
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1