Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 146, Issue 2, pp 181–205 | Cite as

Simulation of Turbulent Flow Inside and Above Wind Farms: Model Validation and Layout Effects

Article

Abstract

A recently-developed large-eddy simulation framework is validated and used to investigate turbulent flow within and above wind farms under neutral conditions. Two different layouts are considered, consisting of thirty wind turbines occupying the same total area and arranged in aligned and staggered configurations, respectively. The subgrid-scale (SGS) turbulent stress is parametrized using a tuning-free Lagrangian scale-dependent dynamic SGS model. The turbine-induced forces are modelled using two types of actuator-disk models: (a) the ‘standard’ actuator-disk model (ADM-NR), which calculates only the thrust force based on one-dimensional momentum theory and distributes it uniformly over the rotor area; and (b) the actuator-disk model with rotation (ADM-R), which uses blade-element momentum theory to calculate the lift and drag forces (that produce both thrust and rotation), and distributes them over the rotor disk based on the local blade and flow characteristics. Validation is performed by comparing simulation results with turbulence measurements collected with hot-wire anemometry inside and above an aligned model wind farm placed in a boundary-layer wind tunnel. In general, the ADM-R model yields improved predictions compared with the ADM-NR in the wakes of all the wind turbines, where including turbine-induced flow rotation and accounting for the non-uniformity of the turbine-induced forces in the ADM-R appear to be important. Another advantage of the ADM-R model is that, unlike the ADM-NR, it does not require a priori specification of the thrust coefficient (which varies within a wind farm). Finally, comparison of simulations of flow through both aligned and staggered wind farms shows important effects of farm layout on the flow structure and wind-turbine performance. For the limited-size wind farms considered in this study, the lateral interaction between cumulated wakes is stronger in the staggered case, which results in a farm wake that is more homogeneous in the spanwise direction, thus resembling more an internal boundary layer. Inside the staggered farm, the relatively longer separation between consecutive downwind turbines allows the wakes to recover more, exposing the turbines to higher local wind speeds (leading to higher turbine efficiency) and lower turbulence intensity levels (leading to lower fatigue loads), compared with the aligned farm. Above the wind farms, the area-averaged velocity profile is found to be logarithmic, with an effective wind-farm aerodynamic roughness that is larger for the staggered case.

Keywords

Actuator-disk model Blade-element momentum theory Effective roughness Large-eddy simulation Wind-farm wakes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albertson JD, Parlange MB (1999) Surfaces length scales and shear stress: implications for land-atmosphere interactions over complex terrain. Water Resour Res 35: 2121–2132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alinot C, Masson C (2002) Aerodynamic simulations of wind turbines operating in atmospheric boundary layer with various thermal stratifications. A collection of the 2002 ASME wind energy symposium technical papers, pp 206–215Google Scholar
  3. Ammara I, Leclerc C, Masson C (2002) A viscous three-dimensional differential/actuator-disk method for the aerodynamic analysis of wind farms. J Sol Energy Eng 124: 345–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barthelmie RJ, Rathmann O, Frandsen ST, Hansen K, Politis E, Prospathopoulos J, Chaviaropoulos PK, Rados K, Cabezón D, Schlez W, Phillips J, Neubert A, Schepers J, van der Pijl S (2007) Modelling and measurements of wakes in large wind farms. J Phys Conf Ser 75: 012049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barthelmie RJ, Hansen K, Frandsen ST, Rathmann O, Schepers JG, Schlez W, Phillips J, Rados K, Zervos A, Politis ES, Chaviaropoulos PK (2009) Modelling and measuring flow and wind turbine wakes in large wind farms offshore. Wind Energy 12: 431–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Betz A (1926) Windenergie und Ihre Ausnutzung durch WindmüllenGoogle Scholar
  7. Calaf M, Meneveau C, Meyers J (2010) Large eddy simulation study of fully developed wind-turbine array boundary layers. Phys Fluids 22: 015110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chamorro L, Porté-Agel F (2009) A wind-tunnel investigation of wind-turbine wakes: boundary-layer turbulence effects. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 132: 129–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chamorro LP, Porté-Agel F (2011) Turbulent flow inside and above a wind farm: a wind-tunnel study. Energies 4: 1916–1936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frandsen S (1992) On the wind-speed reduction in the center of large clusters of wind turbines. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 39: 251–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gómez-Elvira R, Crespo A, Migoya E, Manuel F, Hernández J (2005) Anisotropy of turbulence in wind turbine wakes. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 93: 797–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hansen M, Sørensen JN, Voutsinas S, Sørensen N, Madsen HA (2006) State of the art in wind turbine aerodynamics and aeroelasticity. Prog Aerosp Sci 42: 285–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hansen KS, Barthelmie RJ, Jensen LE, Sommer A (2012) The impact of turbulence intensity and atmospheric stability on power deficits due to wind turbine wakes at horns rev wind farm. Wind Energy 15: 183–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. International Standard IEC 61400-1 (2005) Wind turbines—part 1: design requirements, appendix D: wake and wind farm turbulence, 3rd edn. International Electrotechnical CommissionGoogle Scholar
  15. Jimenez A, Crespo A, Migoya E, Garcia J (2007) Advances in large-eddy simulation of a wind turbine wake. J Phys Conf Ser 75: 012041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jimenez A, Crespo A, Migoya E, Garcia J (2008) Large-eddy simulation of spectral coherence in a wind turbine wake. Environ Res Lett 3: 015004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jimenez A, Crespo A, Migoya E, Garcia J (2010) Application of a les technique to characterize the wake deflection of a wind turbine in yaw. Wind Energy 13: 559–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kasmi AE, Masson C (2008) An extended \({\kappa - \varepsilon}\) model for turbulent flow through horizontal-axis wind turbines. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 96: 103–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kleissl J, Meneveau C, Parlange MB (2003) On the magnitude and variability of subgrid-scale eddy-diffusion coefficients in the atmospheric surface layer. J Atmos Sci 60: 2372–2388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lettau H (1969) Note on aerodynamic roughness-parameter estimation on the basis of roughness-element description. J Appl Meteorol 8: 828–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lu H, Porté-Agel F (2011) Large-eddy simulation of a very large wind farm in a stable atmospheric boundary layer. Phys Fluids 23: 065101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Markfort CD, Zhang W, Porté-Agel F (2012) Turbulent flow and scalar transport through and over aligned and staggered wind farms. J Turbul. doi: 10.1080/14685248.2012.709635
  23. Masson C, Ammara I, Paraschivoiu I (1997) An aerodynamic method for the analysis of isolated horizontal-axis wind turbines. Int J Rotating Mach 3: 21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Phillips AB, Turnock SR, Furlong M (2009) Evaluation of manoeuvring coefficients of a self-propelled ship using a blade element momentum propeller model coupled to a Reynolds averaged Navier Stokes flow solver. Ocean Eng 36: 1217–1225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Porté-Agel F (2004) A scale-dependent dynamic model for scalar transport in large-eddy simulations of the atmospheric boundary layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 112: 81–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Porté-Agel F, Meneveau C, Parlange MB (2000) A scale-dependent dynamic model for large-eddy simulations: application to a neutral atmospheric boundary layer. J Fluid Mech 415: 261–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Porté-Agel F, Meneveau C, Parlange MB, Eichinger WE (2001) A priori field study of the subgrid-scale heat fluxes and dissipation in the atmospheric surface layer. J Atmos Sci 58: 2673–2698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Porté-Agel F, Pahlow M, Meneveau C, Parlange MB (2001) Atmospheric stability effect on subgrid-scale physics for large-eddy simulation. Adv Water Resour 24: 1085–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Porté-Agel F, Wu YT, Lu H, Conzemius RJ (2011) Large-eddy simulation of atmospheric boundary layer flow through wind turbines and wind farms. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 99: 154–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schetz JA, Fuhs AE (1996) Handbook of fluid dynamics and fluid machinery. Wiley, New York, 2776 ppGoogle Scholar
  31. Smagorinsky J (1963) General circulation experiments with the primitive equations: I. The basic experiment. Mon Weather Rev 91: 99–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sørensen JN (2011) Aerodynamic aspects of wind energy conversion. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 43: 427–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sørensen JN, Kock CW (1995) A model for unsteady rotor aerodynamics. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 58: 259–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sørensen JN, Myken A (1992) Unsteady actuator disc model for horizontal axis wind turbines. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 39: 139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sørensen JN, Shen WZ (2002) Numerical modeling of wind turbine wakes. J Fluids Eng 124: 393–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stoll R, Porté-Agel F (2006) Dynamic subgrid-scale models for momentum and scalar fluxes in large-eddy simulations of neutrally stratified atmospheric boundary layers over heterogeneous terrain. Water Resour Res 42: W01409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stoll R, Porté-Agel F (2008) Large-eddy simulation of the stable atmospheric boundary layer using dynamic models with different averaging schemes. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 126: 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sunada S, Sakaguchi A, Kawachi K (1997) Airfoil section characteristics at a low Reynolds number. J Fluids Eng 119: 129–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tseng YH, Meneveau C, Parlange MB (2006) Modeling flow around bluff bodies and predicting urban dispersion using large eddy simulation. Environ Sci Technol 40: 2653–2662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vermeer LJ, Sørensen JN, Crespo A (2003) Wind turbine wake aerodynamics. Prog Aerosp Sci 39: 467–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wan F, Porté-Agel F (2011) Large-eddy simulation of stably-stratified flow over a steep hill. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 138: 367–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wan F, Porté-Agel F, Stoll R (2007) Evaluation of dynamic subgrid-scale models in large-eddy simulations of neutral turbulent flow over a two-dimensional sinusoidal hill. Atmos Environ 41: 2719–2728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wu YT, Porté-Agel F (2011) Large-eddy simulation of wind-turbine wakes: evaluation of turbine parametrisations. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 138: 345–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zhang W, Markfort CD, Porté-Agel F (2012) Near-wake flow structure downwind of a wind turbine in a turbulent boundary layer. Exp Fluids 52: 1219–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wind Engineering and Renewable Energy Laboratory (WIRE), École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), EPFL-ENAC-IIE-WIRELausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations