Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 24

1

Outline

Design and Analysis of Wind Turbine


Support Structures

Background
- Wind energy offshore and wind turbines
Wind technology development and research
- technology challenges
- design criteria
- concept development (spar, semi, TLP hulls, rotor, drivetrain)
- integrated dynamic analysis

- with emphasis on integrated dynamic analysis

Torgeir Moan
Centre of Ships and Ocean Structures (CeSOS)
Department of Marine Technology

Installation and Operation and Maintenance


Demonstration projects (field testing)
Utilization of the Ocean Space combined facilities

Concluding remarks

Norwegian Centre for Offshore Wind Technology (NOWITECH)


tormo@ntnu.no
http://www.cesos.ntnu.no/
http://www.marin.ntnu.no/~tormo
1

Background

Offshore versus onshore wind energy


Pros
Large areas available at a low price
No noise and visual impacts

Background

Wind energy conversion into mechanical


torque and finally into electrical power

- larger rotor velocity (better efficiency)

Higher wind velocities,


less turbulent wind
- Power proportional with v3 (v- wind velocity)

Air density
Wind velocity (cubed)
Swept area

Feasible transportation /
installation
Cons
Wet & corrosive environment
Difficult access for installation &
maintenance

Higher CapEx & OpEx

Kinetic energy in wind:


Power in the wind:
Electrical power:
P = CP Pmax
Power generation depends on:

Tower

SUPPORT STRUCTURE

Average annual produced power (kWh/h)


- aerodynamic versus electrical
power
Rated power (instantaneous peak power)
for design of power take off or
drive train system

Background

Background

Development trends

Control systems

Integrating
knowledge

Control system objectives:

Ensure efficient and safe


operation
- control torque at below
rated speed and the power
above rated, and limit
the structural loads.

Rotor condition

Maximize
power

Constant
power

One of a kind OG install.


versus mass produced
WTs.
No hydro carbons and
people on board wind
turbines
The wind energy sector
is a marginal business
Return are more
sensitive to IMMR (O&M)
costs (access)

- deeper water
from fixed to floating

Supervisory systems to control:


Yaw control
Rotor speed control (blade-pitch)
Power control (generator torque)

California 1980 : 55 kW
to
3.6 MW and upwards

Background

Costs of (bottom fixed) offshore wind turbines

Costs of offshore wind turbines

Contribution to total CapEx

Component Onshore

Offshore

Turbine

70-85 %

40-50 %

Support
structure

1-10 %

15-30 &

Grid
connection

2-10 %

15-20 %

Electrical
install.

1-10 %

5-10 %

Engineering

2-10 %

5-10 %

Offshore vs. Landbased:

Other

2-10 %

1-10 %

CapEx
- more expensive substructure/soil foundations
- more complex and expensive installation
OpEx (20 30 % of CapEx lifetime costs)
- bad weather can lead to downtime
- seabed preparation; e.g. to protect against scour

Reduce costs as done for


land based turbines:

Courtesy: Dong Energy


4

Onshore
turbines
2

- increased

5 MW

rotor size (capacity):

Background

Projej CapEx (US$M/MW)

Schematic illustration of power production


by a 5 MW bottom fixed wind turbine

OpEx (30 50 % of CapEx


lifetime costs)
- including downtime
due to bad weather

Cost reduction is needed!

1990
1995
2000
2005
(Source: Douglas Westwood, 2009; Dong Energy, 2010 etc)
Year

2010

2015

(main contract signed)

- Increase turbine size


- Improve manufacturing
- Improve infrastructure

10

Technology development
Support structure and drive train

Rotor to generator (drive train)

Life Cycle Planning of


Offshore Renewable
Energy Facilities

Minimize cost
while
complying with
safety and
durability
requirements.
Larger units
and reduced
failure rates

for

Power system:
Innovation in transmission, grid connection and system
integration while maximizing power availability, quality, and
stability

Marine operations:
Improve efficiency of installation (transportation, site surveying,
cable laying; etc ) and personnel access to facilities while
minimizing the risks and the cost of operation.

11

12

Technology Development

Design of wind turbines

Design criteria

Design for Servicability (use)


Platforms for drilling for and
Wind turbines for

Design criteria w.r.t. to functionality and safety

production of oil and gas

- Guidelines and standards:

Fixed wind turbines: IEC 61400-3, GL, 2005, DNV-OS-J101. 2010 ,


Floating turbines stability, station-keeping?

production of
electrical power

- Safety level: in view of


failure consequences
(fatalities, pollution, material loss)
- limit states
- Ultimate failure (ULS)
- Ultimate failure initiated by faults (ALS)
- Degradation (fatigue, corrosion, wear)

Concepts (a system of rotor, machinery, generator, support structure)


- charact. behaviour
- satisfy criteria
- costs

Methods of analysis

11

Platform for supporting


payload, and risers
Limited motions
Mobility of drilling vessels
Access for IMMR

Provide support
of payload
Limited motions
Access for IMMR

Feasible/economic
fabrication, transport and
Installation

12

13

14

Design criteria

Design for Safety


to avoid

Design criteria

Safety criteria
Load
effects

Fatalities or injury
Environmental damage
Property damage

Extreme
moment (M) ULS:
Collapse
and
resistance
axial
force (N)

Regulatory regime (depends on economy; accident potential):


Offshore oil and gas

Wind energy

- ISO/IMO
- National regulatory bodies;
- Industry: API, NORSOK,
- Classification/Certification
bodies

- IEC
- National regulatory bodies
- Certification or classification
bodies

Design criteria: Limit states


- Ultimate failure (ULS)
-- Ultimate
Ultimate failure
failure initiated
initiated by
by faults
faults (ALS)
(ALS)
-- Degradation
fatigue,
corrosion,
wear)
Degradation ((fatigue
fatigue, corrosion
corrosion, wear
wear)

Source: NREL/Wind power today, 2010.


13

structures supported on the seafloor


tension-leg platforms
articulated towers
floating platforms/ships

Structural integrity

structure
mooring
foundation

PF=P[RS]

Criteria based on explicit measure of

fR(r)

implied safety level


in terms of reliability or risk

ALS:
Ultimate
global
resistance

Design
check

Defined probability level

16

Design criteria: Limit states

ULS
- stability

The stabilizing (righting) moment,


MR is expressed by
GZ = GM sin( )

M R = GZ
GZ = GM sin( )

The metacentric height,

G
B

r,s

SN-curve/
fracture
mechanics

Damaged
structure

Stability

fS(s)

FLS:

Local
stress
range
history

Extreme
global
force

Regulatory principles
- Goal-setting vs. prescriptive
- Probabilistic vs. deterministic
- First principles vs. purely experiential

15

Design
criteria

GM =

1
IW iw + KB KG

Overturning moment due to wind

M O = Fwind a
a- distance from wind resultant,
Fwind to the centre of submerged
volume

17

18

Design criteria

Limit states

Design criteria

Limit states
-- Ultimate
Ultimate failure
failure (ULS)
(ULS)
-- Ultimate
Ultimate failure
failure initiated
initiated by
by faults
faults (ALS)
(ALS)
- Degradation (fatigue, corrosion, wear)

- Ultimate failure (ULS)


-- Ultimate
Ultimate failure
failure initiated
initiated by
by faults
faults (ALS)
(ALS)
-- Degradation
fatigue,
corrosion,
wear)
fatigue, corrosion
Degradation ((fatigue
corrosion, wear
wear)

ULS
- strength

FLS
- strength
Fatigue strength is described by SN-curves and
the Miner Palmgren approach.

Global collapse of members

D=

M0

M0
N

ni
all
Ni

e0

For stress cycles following a Weibull distribution the


Miner-Palmgren damage may be expressed e.g. by

Local collapse of members

D=

ni
N S0m
=
(m / + 1)
N i K (ln N 0 )

K, m - constants in the SN-curve: N = KS-m


N
- number of stress ranges in the service period

P[s > s o ] = 1 / N o

19

- shape parameter of the Weibull distribution

20

Technology Development

Concepts of bottom supported turbines

Analysis and Design of Bottom Fixed Wind Turbines


Fault conditions

Wind
-aerodynamics

Minimal platforms

- design for mass


production and
easy installation

Beatrice

Alpha Ventus

Machinery/electrical control

- tower design,
alternative structural
material, downwind
/upwind rotor)
- foundation technology

Thorntonbank

-systems analysis:
Risk and reliability analysis
Optimization

- transport and
installation (complete
installation in-shore
and then float-out)

Structural
engineering
Wave,
Current
-Oceanography
-Hydrodynamics

Steel and concrete structures

Structural
materials
technology

Geotechnical engineering
incl. soil materials technology

21

22

Environmental data

Extratropical regions joint distribution of significant wave


height Hs, spectral peak period Tp and mean wind speed Uw

Simplified:

f Uw, Hs ,Tp (u , h, t ) = f Uw (u ) f Hs Uw (h u ) f Tp Uw, Hs (t u , h )

Tropical regions

The Weibull probability density function of


the significant wave height ( Hs ) given the
mean wind speed at nacelle (Uw ) for the
Statfjord offshore site at 59.7oN and 4.0oE
and 70 km from the shore.

50year contour surface for Site 14 (top left:


threedimensional contour surface; top right: the
condition on the contour surface with the
maximum mean wind speed; and the following
two subfigures show contour lines of Hs and Tp
for different levels of Uw).

Location of 18 potential
European offshore sites.

(Source: Li Lin et al, OMAE 2013)

23

24

Design of bottom supported turbines

Design Load Cases Standards


Standards used for the definition of loads and load cases
offshore and onshore:

Important ULS Load Cases for Bottom fixed


Offshore Wind Turbines (IEC 61400-3 & Classification society rules)

Blades:
Flapwise: Extreme turbulence (DLC1.3)
Edgewise: Extreme wind (DLC6.1/6.2)

IEC 61400-3, Design Requirements for Offshore Wind


Turbines, edition 1.0, 2009

Tower top:
Tilt: Safety system fault (DLC2.2)
Yaw: Safety system fault (DLC2.2)

IEC 61400-1, Wind Turbines, Design Requirements,


edition 3, 2005

Tower bottom:
Along wind: Gust & lost grid (DLC2.3)
Across wind: Extreme wind (DLC6.1/6.2)

Seabed:
Along wind: NTM & Extreme wave (DLC1.6)
Across wind: Extr. wind & Wave (DLC6.X)

New amendment accepted and now used for Type Certification


Wake turbulence changed taken into account CT
New chapter on statistical extrapolation on loads

DNV, GL standards
Source: E.Jrgensen, DNV

25
Design of bottom supported turbines

26

Examples faults during power production

Modelling Bottom Fixed Wind Turbines


(to estimate the response of a given subsystem)

2)Power
production
and
occurence
of faults

27

DLC 2.1 Faults relating to control functions or loss of electrical network (N)
Overspeed caused by malfunction generator torque
Pitch set to 0 at high winds -> overspeed
Operation at large yaw error
DLC 2.2 Rare events, including faults relating to protection functions (A)
Blade pitching blocked on one blade -> stopping with to blades only
Controller independent overspeed guard triggered
DLC 2.3 Extreme operating gust and loss of electrical connection (A)

-Refined vs simplified methods

28

Effect of wakes

Aerodynamics
Hydrodynamics
..

Aerodynamic loads

Aerodynamics incl. wakes in farms


- BEM method (Simplified: Thrust; Refined:CFD)
Hydrodynamics
- Morison formula for slender bodies
- Potential theory (panel method) for large volume
bodies linear versus nonlinear effects
Structural model
Stochastic analysis
- blades (nonlinear geometry)
of the response to
irregualr waves and
- tower, structure,
turbulent wind,.. to
(quasi-static versus dynamic)
reduce statistical
Mooring model (for floating WTs)
uncertainty
- FE model vs nonlinear spring
- Damping
Soil foundation (for fixed WT, anchor in floating WTs)
(spring versus FE model, linear versus nonlinear)
Drive-train

Two or three turbines


on a single floater
BEM: blade element momentum theory based on
lift, drag, moment coefficients
(engineering methods)

Benchmarking exercise
from Offshore Wind Accelerator
Turbines are arranged in a regular grid

Measurements from Horns rev in Denmark

- relies on airfoil data

CFD

Pitch angle

CFD: Navier-Stokes (NS) equations for the global


compressible flow in addition to the flow
near the blades.

Multiple turbine concepts


require turret mooring system

Row number downstream

29

30

Aerodynamics on VAWT

Wave loads

Double multiple Streamtubes model

Momentum theory applied on


the double disk multiple streamtubes

Sandia 17-diameter wind turbine-50.6rpm 2blades


0.4

Cp-exp
Cp

0.35

Power coefficient

0.3

0.25

0.15
0.1

10

Sandia 17-diameter wind turbine-50.6rpm 2 blades


Experimental
Present model
Reference
Berg dystall

30

Rotor torque,T*1000(N.m)

25

The sea surface can be


represented as a
superposition of regular
waves with different
frequency and direction of
propagation

20

15

10

0
0

Wave kinematics
z

Airy theory

Nonlinear boundary
condition
t
g +

x x

y y

2 = 0

60

80
100
(deg)

= a sin t

120

140

160

29

180

i0

Kinematics
pressure
particle velocity acceleration
effect of large body diffraction,
( radiation, reflection )
Wave forces
large volume structures ( potential
theory ) numerical methods
slender bodies
tubular members: Morison Formula
ship hull
: Strip theory

32

2
x

Airy Wave profile


2

= a sint x

x
D
diameter

vx

40

/2

2
2
2
1
+ + =0
t 2 x y z

(x,t)

20

=0

-/2

Short-term vs. long-term variation

0.2

0.05

31

Waves
-wind generated waves
-swell
Surface elevation (Airy theory)
regular wave i = i 0 sin (i t ki x )
stochastic
= sin t k x +

Particle velocity, v

=0
-d

deep water

Particle acceleration, a

- velocity potential

The satisfaction of the surface


boundary condition is the major
challenge, because it is dependent
upon the wave elevation, (x,t) itself
If (x,t) = 0 linear (Airy) theory is
obtained.

v
a
p

- particle velocity
- particle acceleration
- pressure
as obtained from the velocity potential

vx = = vx(0) exp[ 2 z]

Note:
- Kinematics at a depth z:
i.e. in-phase for different z.
- Phase difference in two points with
different coordinate x

Airy theory is valid up to mean water level


(MWL). Since important contribution to wave
loads come from the fluid above MWL it
needs to be corrected or refined
One simple approach is the Wheeler
modification of the Airy theory

33

34

Hydrodynamic loading. Morisons formula

Higher order regular wave models

q
(pr.unit
length)

Nonlinear boundary condition


+
+

=0
t x x y y z

(x,t)

2 = 0

n = 0

A=

wave steepness k a=0.4

STOKES
IV
STOKES
III
STOKES
II

AIRY

-0.5

Phase

3
2

Wave profiles with increasing order of Stokes wave theory

35

D = diameter

CM, CD - coefficients
- density
a - fluid acceleration
v - fluid velocity
For slender structures v and a
are the values in the incident
(undisturbed) wave
For large volume structures
- diffraction theory
Effective inertia coefficient
for vertical cylinder

D/

36

Character of wave loading on slender members

CM 2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

0.5

-1

- velocity
potential

q= CM Aa+CD D v|v|
Cross-section area

wave p rofile /a

2
2
2
1
g +
+ + = 0
t 2 x y z

Second order Stokes wave


= a sin (t-kx) - (a
)a cos [2( t-kx)]

Steady state loading on


slender members

Hydrodynamic loading - general approach


The main force components on a cylinder are( Clauss et al., 1991, Faltinsen, 1990)

Wave force
q = qD + qI
z

Froude-Krylov force:

Drag force
qD = CD D vx |vx|
vertical member

qD (vx1 sin 1 + vx 2 sin 2 + vc )

=vc2 + 0.5 vx21 + vx22


D = diameter

0.5vx21 cos21
0.5vx22 cos22

- density of water
CD - drag coefficient

+ 2vc vX 1 sin 1 + vx 2 sin 2

+ vx1 vx 2 ( cos ( 1 + 2 ) cos ( 1 + 2 ) )


where

FFK = d

Pressure effects due to undisturbed incident waves

Drag force due two wave components and


current (when drag force is positive):

For a slender body


v

1 = 1t + 1 ; 2 = 2t + 2

Hydrostatic added mass and potential damping force: FA = C A d a


Pressure effects due to relative acceleration and velocity
between water particles and structural components in an ideal
fluid
Viscous drag force: pressure effect due to relative velocity:
between water particles and structural components
FD = 1/ 2CD d vn | vn |
Nomenclature: - density
- volume
- volume per unit length
d
- added mass coefficient
CA
- drag coefficient
CD

Damping (potential-, viscous-)

37

38

Modeling of the dynamic behaviour of bottomfixed offshore wind turbine foundations


- pile-soil models
Simple spring models

Structural modelling of jacket support structure

Finite Element Models

(Source: TDA, Oslo)

39

Software for Analysis of


Bottom Fixed Wind Turbines

Aerodynamics incl. wakes in farms


- BEM method (Simplified: Thrust; Refined:CFD)
Hydrodynamics
- Morison formula vs Potential theory (panel method)
- linear versus nonlinear effects
Stochastic analysis
Structural model
of the response to
irregualr waves and
- hull; blades (nonlinear geometry)
turbulent wind,.. to
- damping
reduce statistical
Soil foundation
uncertainty
(spring versus FE model, linear versus nonlinear)
Drive-train

40

Design of bottom supported turbines

Examples faults during power production

DLC 2.2 Rare events, including faults relating to protection


functions (A)
Blade pitching blocked on one blade after 252 seconds ->
stopping with to blades only

Tools
Wind-industry based
Bladed (Garrad Hassan)
Flex5(S.ye,DTU)
HAWC2(Ris),
FAST(NREL)

Offshore industry based; e.g.

Ansys/Aqua
Simo/Riflex/Nirvana (Marintek)
Orcaflex
Others (e.g.FEDEM,USFOS/VpOne

Source:
E.Jrgensen, DNV

41
Fatigue
analysis of an offshore wind turbine with a
jacket support structure at an exposed North Sea site

Water
Depth
70 m

Normal power production

- Turbulence in wind (wake operation)


- Misalignment of wind and waves
- Windrose
Fault, survival, start-up and shut down, standstill conditions

42

Design for efficient installation

Largest contribution
to fatigue due to
wind loads only:
v=20 m/s
and
wave only:
Hs = 5 m

(Sorce: WB Dong et al)

Contribution to cumulative fatigue damage of


wind loads and wave loads

43

Beatrice
Monopile turbine installed more or less complete

44

Time domain simulation of installation

Technology Development

Floating Wind Turbines


Design criteria w.r.t. to functionality and safety
- Guidelines and standards:

Floating turbines stability, station-keeping (IEC, DNV,GL)?

- Safety level: in view of


failure consequences
(fatalities, pollution, material loss)
- limit states
- Ultimate failure (ULS):
buoyancy,stability, strength
- Ultimate failure initiated by faults (ALS)
- Degradation (fatigue, corrosion, wear)

Concepts (a system of rotor, machinery, generator, support structure)


- charact. behaviour
- satisfy criteria
- costs
(Source: Li Lin et al. , OMAE 23013)

Time history of lowering and landing a monopile.


(Hs =2.5 m, Tp=6.0 s, Dir=45 deg, Case: V2G1L1-seed 1

Methods of analysis

44

45Technology Development

46

Concepts of floating wind turbines


vs offshore production systems for oil and gas

Rotors for floating systems

State-of-the-art
design practice for
oil and gas platforms
provides guidance
Floating turbines
especially for
deep water areas in
the North Sea, USA,
Medeterrainean sea,
Japan, Korea

Larger blades

- Design for mass


production and
easy installation; i.e..
cost reduction

Variation of concepts
Support structure

Number of blades

HA Upwind / downwind turbine,VAT

Tower construction
Number of units on a floater

Can active devices

(for a 5 MW
turbine the blade is
63 m long)

- reduce loads ?
- improve energy capture
in low wind conditions ?

Smart blades

- At which water depth


would floating wind
turbines be
competitive ? 45

- increase the area swept


with the same blade ?

47

48

Drive train from rotor to generator

N a tu ra l p e rio d s
R ig id b o d y
m odes

F le x ib le
m odes

J a c ke ts
(G ra v ity p la tfo rm )
(J a c k u p s )

10 to
1500 rpm

8 -1 s e la s tic b e n d in g m o d e s

- 30 s

G u y e d to w e r
(C o m p lia n t
to w e r)

8 -1 s e la s tic b e n d in g m o d e s

A rtic u la te d
to w e r

8 -1 s e la s tic b e n d in g m o d e s

- 30 s

Fixed or variable speed w/gear box

Hydraulic transfer

- 50 s

(Chapdrive concept)

s u rg e

6 -2 s a x ia l te th e r
m odes

T e n sio n -le g
p la tfo rm

- 40 s

5 0 -2 5 s
h e a v e /p itc h

S e m is u b m e rsib le
(m o o re d )

L e s s th a n 1 -2 s

W a v e lo a d p e rio d

Direct drive variable speed

A main question:
- Is the drive train, rotor.
used on bottom-fixed
turbines feasible for floating ones?

W a v e fre q u e n c y fo rc e s
L o w fre q u e n c y fo rc e s
100
47

60

40

H ig h fre q u e n c y fo rce s
30

20

10

2
seconds

Natural periods of marine structures and wave excitation periods

49

50

Technology Development

Design of Semi-submersible or Spar Concepts

Technology Development

Design of Semi-submersible or Spar Concepts


Criteria

Criteria
Stability
The tilt angle should be limited (e.g. to 7 degrees)

Dynamic performance (wave induced


motions)
Heave natural period (T33) should be above 20s

under design overturning moment (800KN*90m)


- implying pitch a minimum restoring stiffness
(C55)
Restoring by
- water plane - KB>>KG

GM =

Pitch natural period should (T55) be around 30s

1
IW iw + KB KG

Ti = 2

Minimum displacement,
or increase added mass

51

M ii + Aii
K ii

Structure response
ULS/ALS, FLS

Minimum displacement,
or increase added mass

52

Technology Development

Design of Semi-submersible wind turbines


Cost effectiveness
Steel weight
Displacement
Fabrication complexity
Displacement of semi - submersible
designs vary between 4500 14 000 t
Ref.: Spar: 7500 t

Design of Tension Leg Platform Wind Turbine


-excessive buoyancy creates pretension and limited heave and pitch

Constraints

Surge/Sway natural periods


> 25 s
Heave/Roll/Pitch natural periods < 3.5 s
Mean surge offset
< 5% water depth
No tendon slack:
Tendons may not yield for
2 times initial tendon tension
Minimum displacement
2 000 tonnes

Mooring system for single


turbine concepts:
- catenary, spread mooring

Mooring system for multiple


turbine concepts:
- turret mooring,
- single point mooring

Challenge:
-non-converging design spiral
(Bachynski and Moan, ISOPE Conf., 2012)

53

54

Analysis for design of offshore wind turbines

Source: NREL/Wind power today, 2010.

Different failure modes

Aerodynamic, hydrodynamics,.
Integrated (aero-, hydro-, elastic-,
servo-) analysis
- loads: irregular waves, turbulent
wind, rotor rotation in a
gravitational field and a nonuniform
wind field,
- conditions: operating, parked
intact or with faults
- response extremes and histories st.dev. (for fatigue, wear..) for
different failure modes,
- time versus frequency
domain simulation
- refined versus simplified
methods

Integrated dynamic analysis of floating wind turbines


Scope:Determination of load effects forthe designof
the supportstructure,tower,rotor,drivetrain
Thesystemmodelling includes:
modelingofexcitationmechanisms
(wind,wavesandcurrent)
rotoraerodynamics
hydrodynamics
structuraldynamics
automaticcontroltheory
powergeneration

Tools
Wind-industry based
Bladed (Garrad Hassan)
Flex5(S.ye,DTU)
HAWC2(Ris),
FAST(NREL)

Laboratory or field tests

55

Simplified aerodynamic load and response analysis


The resulting wind forces on the rotor consist of 3 force and 3 moment
components. A simplified model is achieved by only considering the thrust
force.
1

Offshore industry based


Simo/Riflex (Marintek)
Orcaflex

- Integrated analysis
tightly coupled system
- Time domain simulation
(time step, spectral repres.)
- Fault conditions
- Drivetrain
- Dynamic power cable

56

Integrated analysis of wind turbines

Hydrodynamic loads

2
T = a R 2 CTU REL
2

Further simplification is achieved by simulating


the effect of control in the over rated response
up to cut-out wind speed by a filter.

The simulation time


for 1 hour real time:
-15 min for SRT
-24 hours for
the full method

Load cases for


operational conditions

(Karimirad and Moan,

Tower bending moment

J. Marine Structures,
2012)

56

57

58

Integrated analysis of wind turbines

Hydrodynamic loading-general approach

Linear Wave-Induced Body Motions

The main force components on a cylinder are( Clauss et al., 1991, Faltinsen, 1990)
For a slender body

FFK = d

Froude-Krylov force:
Pressure effects due to undisturbed incident waves
Hydrodynamic added mass and potential damping force:

v
t

FA = C A d a

Pressure effects due to relative acceleration and velocity


between water particles and structural components in an ideal
fluid
Viscous drag force: pressure effect due to relative velocity:
Between water particles and structural components FD = 1/ 2CD d vn | vn |
Nomenclature:

CD - drag coefficient

(Source: O.Faltinsen/M.Greco)

59

- density

- volume
d - volume per unit length
C A - added mass coefficient

60

Formulation and Solution of Dynamic Eqs. of Motion


for Rigid Floating Structures
Frequency domain formulation for wave loading

Wave induced motions of floating wind


turbines
Dynamic equilibrium (SDOF; e.g. heave motion) under regular waves

mr + cr + kr = Ftot

2 [M+ A()] r() + i B()r() + Kr() = R(),


M - mass;
A - added mass
B - potential damping
K - restoring (stiffness)
X - excitation (load)

Rr () = [ 2A()r() + iB()r()]

(M + A )r + Br +

where:

k(t) =

RAO
Heave

Finertia = a + Ca ( a 
r)
= (1 + Ca ) Ca 
r

1
2
Fdrag = CD A ( v r )
2

= D2/4 , A = D per unit length;

Time domain formulation for wave loading

Ftot = Finertia + Fdrag

k(t )r( )d + Kr(t) = R(t)

2
(B() B )cos(t)d
0

For a circular cylinder:


where D is the diameter

61

62

Integrated analysis of wind turbines

Simplified hydrodynamics for semi-submersible


Can Morisons equation be applied to a semi-sub?
WT?

Integrated analysis of wind turbines

Regular wave analysis of a semi-submersible


Response amplitudes

Wave period

Courtesy of
Principal Power

(Kvittem and Moan, ISOPE 2012)

63

(Kvittem and Moan, ISOPE 2012)

64

Integrated dynamic analysis of wind turbines

Challenging hydrodynamics phenomena:

Dynamic Equations of Motions


The dynamic equilibrium of a spatial discretized FE model of a wind
turbine can be expressed as the following equation:
where the terms from left to right are:the inertia force vector; the damping force
vector; the internal structural reaction force vector; the external force vector;

qD (vx1 sin 1 + vx 2 sin 2 + vc )

= vc2 + 0.5 vx21 + vx22

0.5v cos21
2
x1

Shallow water kinematics

0.5vx22 cos2 2

+ 2vc v X 1 sin 1 + vx 2 sin 2

+ vx1 vx 2 ( cos ( 1 + 2 ) cos ( 1 + 2 ) )


Lighthouse in large waves Wave run up, deck

where

impact, ringing loads

Impulsive loading

1 = 1t + 1 ; 2 = 2t + 2

Dynamics excited by sum frequency


63
wave load components

The primary loads


for an offshore wind turbine are

Aerodynamic loads
Hydrodynamic loads
Gravitational loads
Inertial loads
Control loads
Mooring system loads
Current loads
Ice loads
Soil interaction loads.

Frequency
dependent
properties,
nonlinearities

65

Modelling of different subsystems

66

(to estimate the response of a given subsystem)

Aerodynamics incl. wakes in farms


- BEM method (Simplified: Thrust; Refined:CFD)
Hydrodynamics
- Morison formula for slender bodies
- Potential theory (panel method) for large volume
bodies linear versus nonlinear effects
Structural model
- hull
- blades (nonlinear geometry)
(quasi-static versus dynamic)
Mooring model
- FE model vs nonlinear spring
- Damping
Soil-anchor

Drive-train

Dynamic performance: Spar type turbine of size 5 MW

Stochastic analysis
of the response to
irregualr waves and
turbulent wind,.. to
reduce statistical
uncertainty

water depth:300 m

67

If resonance
can not be
avoided
damping
becomes
crucial 66

68

Example: Spar type wind turbines

Integrated dynamic analysis


Example: Spar type wind turbines

NREL 5-MW Wind Turbine


mounted on a 120-m spar platform
Load cases

Tension Leg
Catenary
Spar (TLS)
Moored
(similar to
Spar (CMS)
SWAY)
(similar to
HYWIND)
NREL 5-MW Wind Turbine
mounted on a 120-m spar platform
(M. Karimirad, T.Moan, various papers)

Catenary Moored Spar (CMS) (HYWIND type)

67

Tension Leg Spar (TLS) (similar to SWAY)

68

(M. Karimirad, T.Moan, various papers)

69

70

Time Domain Stochastic analysis


- Extreme values for ultimate strength assessment

Time Domain Stochastic analysis


- Extreme values for ultimate strength assessment

- Fatigue load effects


- Long-term environmental data, involving
many sea states and wind conditions

(Karimirad and Moan, J.Marine Structures, 2011

- Sampling time of irregular wave - and


turbulent wind loads to reduce statistical uncertainty

Surge motion spectra and their averages at the MWL


for different seed numbers. Each smoothed spectra is
based on 1-h simulations using the HAWC2 code (HS =
15 m and TP= 16 s).

Expected max in 3 hours


corresponds to about 10-4

Surge spectra at the MWL, smoothed spectra based


on 1-h time domain simulations for five different time
steps using the USFOS/vpOne code, identical wave
elevation (HS = 15 m and TP = 16 s).

71

Simulations of bending moment (BM)


- 20 2-hour samples
-1 40 hours sample
(M. Karimirad, T.Moan, JOMAE, 2011)

72

Response spectrum blade root moment

Blade root bending moment spectrum for the below-rated wind speed case based
on a 1 h analysis (V= 8 m/s, I=0.18, HS = 2.5 m and TP = 9.8 s), tower shadow
and turbulence effects on the wave-wind-induced dynamic response of a
downwind TLS.
(Karimirad and Moan, J.Wind Energy, 2012)

Statistics of blade root moment

The mean and standard deviation of the blade root bending moment (BM),
tower shadow and turbulence effects on the wave-wind-induced
dynamic response of a downwind TLS. The wind turbine is shut down at wind
speeds higher than 25 m/s. Significant wave heights refer to the load cases in
Table IV and the corresponding wind speeds.
(Karimirad and Moan, J.Wind Energy, 2012)

73

74

Example: Structural dynamic response of


Catenary Moored Spar

Fault scenarios
Transient wind loads may come from
-abnormal events such as shutdown, loss of electrical
network connection, faults in control system for blade pitch,
activation of the mechanical/aerodynamic/generator brake system,

faults in protection system and so forth


- critical environmental phenomena such as
gusts, turbulence and shift in wind direction
The aerodynamic load is altered due to these transient events.
Probability of fault, wind and wave condition ?

Blade pitch fault

73

(Karimirad and Moan, 2012)

75

76

Blade pitch and control system faults


1.5

x 10

Fault
occurs

Pitchsystem

Tower Top BMY, kNm

Continue
operating
B with
C
faulted blade

TLP, EC 5

Wilkinsonetal.,2011

Example: response analysis under faults during


power production of a spar wind turbine

IEC code requires checking of nearly 40 cases with


environmental loads for a system which is intact or fault.
One case is:

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5
-200

Shut down
turbine quickly
-150

-100

-50

0
time - TF, s

50

100

150

200

Blade seize: imbalance loads


Shutdown loads: impulse from aerodynamic braking can lead to pitch vibrations
What about sensor faults?
Does changing the shutdown pitch rate help?
Possible instability for TLPWTs (idling with one blade pitched Jonkman and
Matha, 2010)
(Jiang et al, to appear)

Time history of tower bottom bending moment of a spar-type


wind turbine under different fault conditions. Mean wind speed:
25m/s, Turbulence Intensity: 0.15, Hs=5.9m, Tp=11.3s

77

78

Dynamic Power Cable

Case Studies (Water Depth 100 m and Draught 20


m)
A. Configuration of Dynamic Power Cable (Static configuration)

MSL

Node 401

Draught = 20 m

Node 401

109

Fix point

85 m

Cable +
Buoyancy

Rad. of
curv. 3 m

mean
config.

Near field
config.

Simplified lazy wave


configuration

Far field
config.

d = 100 m

seabed

Node 1

Node 1
(Fix point)
(Nasution and Svik, Marina project 2012)

(Nasution and Svik, Marina project 2012)

79

80

Comparison of drivetrain responses in FWT and WT

Decoupled analysis

to determine

Tooth contact forces,


Bearing forces,
Gear deflections.
GRC Drive train config.

- Global aero-hydro-servo-elastic
simulation
- Drivetrain multi-body simulation
based on main shaft loading and
nacelle motions

(Xing and Moan,


J.Wind Energy, 2012;
Xing et al., submitted to
J.Wind Energy, 2012)

Input forces/moments and motions into drivetrain model


Dummy body (in
blue) where the
nacelle motions
are applied

Forces/moments

Both mean and st.dev. of the low speed


shaft BM (and hence bearing, tooth
contact forces) increases significantly
Xing et al., submitted to J.Wind Energy, 2012)

Comparison of the standard deviation

81

82

Design for easy installation of


floating wind turbines Boeing 747-400
- requires a weather window
- consideration of human factors
- analysis of operations

Operations and Maintenance

Hywind installation

Alternative access for inspectors and maintenance personnel

Offshore GE
3.6 MW 104 m
rotor diameter

Perspective on
marine operations
An alternative
inspection/
monitoring
approach

Semisubmersible
(is ready to install.
Only anchor line
deployment is required)

TLP
(requires extensive
Installation operations)

Human Inspectors
partly replaced
robots ?

An
alternative
spar
installation

83

84

Field tests or demonstration projects


Laboratory tests
- Rotor blades
- Drive train
- Support structure
- Model basins/wind tunnels.

Field tests to demonstrate


- functionality
- validate analysis tools

Floating wind turbines from idea to a


commercial product (technology qualification)
Technology
rating

El.-grid
connection
Medium park
Market focus
Demo

Beatrice, UK, 2 5-MW Alpha Ventus, Germany


Blue H (Dutch),
12 5-MW (during construction) in Italy

HyWind, Norway,
1 2.3-MW turbine

Other projects for floating wind turbines:


- Noweri (NOWITECH-NORCOWE); Norway
- Principle Power (American) at a site in Portugal
- Japan, Spain, USA

Model testing

Cost focus

Concept &
theory
Technology focus

Time

85

86

Utilization of the wind farm space

Combined wind turbine and wave energy converters

ID 100 TLP and 6 PAs linked


to the pontoons of the
structure

ID 2 Floating Spar Wind Turbine


Foundation with torus point absorber

WEC array

Aquaculture farm
Fishfarm
ID 85 Floating overtopping device
(like Wave Dragon) with two WTs on it

87

ID 48 TLP WT with 3 point


absorbers in the legs of the
structure

ID 29 Triangular Semisubmersible
Platform with 2WTand PAs between the
columns (similar to W2POWER)

88

Combined WT and WEC concepts

Concluding remarks

Wind turbine
with rated power:
5 MW

A huge untapped potential for offshore wind power exists.


Technology is still at an early stage, especially for floating wind turbines
- Various concepts need to be pursued
- possible influence on rotor and drive train design

6000

Rules and standards for design of floating wind turbine


is urgently needed.

Torus

Electrical Power Production (kW)

5000

4000
Mean Wind Power - Spar FWT alone
3000

Mean Wind Power - STC


Mean Wave Power - STC

2000

Significant efforts are required to


- increase robustness/reliability,
- reduce costs (utilise mass production potential)

1000

0
7

11

13

15

17

19

Vmean (m/s)

Spar

Power production
Semi-sub-Flap concept
(Luan, Michailides, et al, 2013)

Spar-Torus concept
(Muliawan et al., J. Renewable Energy, 2013)

Shared mooring system and cable


Synergy in maintenance

Concerted efforts in R & D are required by the


industry, research institutes and universities
integrated dynamic analysis
consideration of faults

Implement relevant
knowledge from
-Oil and gas industry
-Coastal engineering
-Aquaculture technology

89

90

General background information


Bianchi DF, Battista HD, and Mantz RJ (2007) Wind Turbine Control Systems. Germany: Springer.
Burton T, Sharpe D, Jenkins N, and Bossanyi E (2008) Wind Energy Handbook. Chichester, UK: John
Wiley and Sons Ltd.
Det Norske Veritas/Ris National Laboratory (2002) Guidelines for Design of Wind Turbines, 2nd edn.,
Denmark: Jydsk Centraltrykkeri.
DNV (2007) Design of offshore wind turbine structures. DNV-OS-J101. Oslo, Norway: Det Norske Veritas.
EC (2009), International Standard 61400-3, Wind Turbines, Part 3: Design Requirements for Offshore
Wind Turbines. Geneva, Switzerland: IEC.
Faltinsen OM (1995) Sea Loads on Ships and Offshore Structures. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Hansen MOL (2008) Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines. 2nd edn., London, UK: Earthscan.
Hansen MOL, Sorensen JN, Voutsinas S, et al. (2006) State of the art in wind turbine aerodynamics and
aeroelasticity. Progress in Aerospace Sciences Journal 42: 285330.
Henderson AR (2003) Hydrodynamic Loading on Offshore Wind Turbines. OWTES Task 4.2, The
Netherlands: TUDelft.
Lysen EH (1983) Introduction to Wind Energy. The Netherlands: SWD Publications, SWD 82-1.
Manwell JF, McGowan JG, and Rogers AL (2006) Wind Energy Explained, Theory, Design and
Application. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
Naess A and Moan T (2005) Probabilistic design of offshore structures. In: Chakrabarti S (ed.) Handbook
of Offshore Engineering, ch. 5, pp. 197277. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Ltd.
Roddier D, Cermelli C, and Weinstein A (2009) WINDFLOAT: A floating foundation for offshore wind
turbine, Part I: Design basis and qualification process. Paper No. OMAE2009-79229. Proc.OMAE
Conf., Hawaii, USA, May 31June 5.
Twidell J and Gaudiosi G (2008) Offshore Wind Power. Essex, UK: Multi-Science Publishing Co Ltd.

Thank you!

Acknowledgement
Thanks to researchers and PhD candidates
in CeSOS and Nowitech for excellent cooperation

Further references in the following

Copyright: Faulkner, EWEA

91

92

Wind turbine modelling and analysis


Karimirad M. and Moan T., Stochastic Dynamic Response Analysis of a Tension Leg Spar-Type Offshore
Wind Turbine, Journal of Wind Energy (Wiley), Wind Energ. (2012) 2012 John Wiley & Sons
Karimirad M. and Moan T., A simplified method for coupled analysis of floating offshore wind turbines,
Journal of Marine Structures 27 (2012), pp. 45-63 /
Moan, T. Z Gao, M Karimirad, E E Bachynski, M Etemaddar, Z Jiang, M I Kvittem, M. Muliawan, Y Xing,
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS OF THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF FLOATING WIND TURBINES, The
Royal Institution of Naval Architects (RINA), ICSOT 2012: International Conference Ship & Offshore
Technology 23-24 MAY 2012, Busan, South KOREA
Karimirad M. and Moan T., Comparative Study of Spar-Type Wind Turbines in Deep and Moderate Water
Depths, the 31st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, OMAE2012
conference, OMAE2012-83559, Published by ASME, 1-6 July, Brazil
Karimirad M. and Moan T., Feasibility of the Application of a Spar-type Wind Turbine at a Moderate Water
Depth, DeepWind conference, 19-20 January 2012, Trondheim, Norway, Journal of Energy Procedia,
Elsevier, Energy Procedia 24 (2012 ) 340 350
Gao, Z. et al., Comparative Study of Wind- and Wave-Induced Dynamic Responses of Three Floating
Wind Turbines Supported by Spar, Semi-Submersible and Tension-Leg Floaters, Proc.ICOWEOE
Conference, Beijing, 2011.

Combined WT and WEC


Muliawan, M.J., Karimirad, M., Moan, T. and Gao, Z. STC (SPAR-TORUS COMBINATION):
A COMBINED SPAR-TYPE FLOATING WIND TURBINE AND LARGE POINT ABSORBER
FLOATING WAVE ENERGY CONVERTER PROMISING AND CHALLENGING, the 31st
OMAE2012 conference, ASME, 1-6 July, Brazil
Muliawan, M.J., Karimirad, M. Moan, T.Dynamic Response and Power Performance of a
Combined Spar-type Floating Wind Turbine and Coaxial Floating Wave Energy Converter,
Journal of Renewable Energy; Volume 50, February 2013, Pages 47-57

93

Drive train modelling and analysis


Xing, Y.H., Moan, T., Multi-body modelling and analysis of a planet carrier in a wind turbine gearbox, J.
Wind Energy (accepted) (2012).
Xing, Y.H., Karimirad, M., Moan, T., Effect of spar-type floating wind turbine nacelle motion on drivetrain
dynamics, European Wind Energy Association annual event, Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2012.
LaCava, W., Xing, Y.H., Guo, Y., Moan, T., Determining wind turbine gearbox model complexity using
measurement validation and cost comparison, European Wind Energy Association annual event,
Copenhagen, Denmark, April 2012.
Link, H., LaCava, W., van Dam, J., McNiff, B., Sheng, S., Wallen, R., McDade, M., Lambert, S., Butterfield,
S., Oyague, F., Gearbox Reliability Collborative Project Report: Findings from Phase 1 and Phase 2
testing, Technical Report, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Colorado, USA, 2011.

Вам также может понравиться