A multi-objective design optimization approach for floating offshore wind turbine support structures

  • Meysam KarimiEmail author
  • Matthew Hall
  • Brad Buckham
  • Curran Crawford
Research Article


This paper presents a multi-objective design optimization approach for floating wind turbines with a design space that spans three stability classes of floating wind turbine support structures. A single design parameterization scheme was used to define the geometries of tension-leg, spar buoy, and semi-submersible candidate designs in terms of nine design variables. The seakeeping analysis of any particular platform configuration was completed using a simplified frequency-domain dynamic model applying linearized dynamics for the floating platform, mooring system, and a reference 5 MW wind turbine that were derived using existing functionality in FAST and WAMIT. Evaluation and comparison of different platforms was performed using a Pareto front pursuing multi-objective Genetic Algorithm (GA) optimization method to find the locus of platform cost minima and wind turbine performance maxima for a given environmental condition and sea state spectrum. Optimization results for the single-body platforms indicated a dominance of tension-leg platforms in this subset of the design space. Results for multi-body platforms showed that semi-submersible platforms with four floats demonstrated better stability and were more cost effective than other semi-submersible designs. In general, the full exploration of the design space demonstrated that four float semi-submersible platforms with angled taut mooring systems are a promising concept that can be used as a foundation for a detailed design and costing study. The results generated here are subject to the specifics of the targeted environmental conditions, cost model, linearized dynamics and choice of performance metric. As these elements evolve, the optimization framework presented here should be reapplied to track how the Pareto fronts for the different classes of platforms respond.


Wind turbine Offshore Floating platform Optimization Frequency-domain analysis 



The authors would like to acknowledge the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions (PICS) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for their support of this research project.


  1. Arora J (2004) Introduction to optimum design. Academic Press, IowaGoogle Scholar
  2. Bachynski EE, Moan T (2012) Design considerations for tension leg platform wind turbines. Mar Struct 29(1):89–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bachynski EE, Etemaddar M, Kvittem MI, Luan C, Moan T (2013) Dynamic analysis of floating wind turbines during pitch actuator fault, grid loss, and shutdown. Energy Proc 35:210–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benassai G, Campanile A, Piscopo V, Scamardella A (2014) Mooring control of semi-submersible structures for wind turbines. Proc Eng 70:132–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borgman LE (1967) Spectral analysis of ocean wave forces on piling (coastal engineering conference in santa barbara, california, october 1965). J Waterw Harb Div 93(2):129–156Google Scholar
  6. Breton SP, Moe G (2009) Status, plans and technologies for offshore wind turbines in europe and north america. Renew Energy 34(3):646–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brommundt M, Krause L, Merz K, Muskulus M (2012) Mooring system optimization for floating wind turbines using frequency domain analysis. Energy Proc 24:289–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bulder B, Van Hees MT, Henderson A, Huijsmans R, Pierik J, Snijders E, Wijnants G, Wolf M (2002) Study to feasibility of and boundary conditions for floating offshore wind turbines. Tech. rep, ECN, MARIN, Lagerway the Windmaster, TNO, TUDGoogle Scholar
  9. Butterfield CP, Musial W, Jonkman J, Sclavounos P, Wayman L (2007) Engineering challenges for floating offshore wind turbines. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  10. Clauss G, Birk L (1996) Hydrodynamic shape optimization of large offshore structures. Appl Ocean Res 18(4):157–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clauss G, Lehmann E, Östergaard C (2014) Offshore structures: volume I: conceptual design and hydromechanics. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Fylling I, Berthelsen PA (2011) Windopt: an optimization tool for floating support structures for deep water wind turbines. ASME 2011 30th International Conference on Ocean. Offshore and Arctic Engineering. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, pp 767–776Google Scholar
  13. Hall M, Buckham B, Crawford C (2013) Evolving offshore wind: A genetic algorithm-based support structure optimization framework for floating wind turbines. OCEANS-Bergen, MTS/IEEE. IEEE, Bergen, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  14. Hall M, Buckham B, Crawford C (2014a) Evaluating the importance of mooring line model fidelity in floating offshore wind turbine simulations. Wind Energy 17(12):1835–1853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hall M, Buckham B, Crawford C (2014b) Hydrodynamics-based floating wind turbine support platform optimization: a basis function approach. Renew Energy 66:559–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall MTJ (2013) Mooring line modelling and design optimization of floating offshore wind turbines. Master’s thesis, University Of VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  17. Jonkman J, Matha D (2011) Dynamics of offshore floating wind turbines-analysis of three concepts. Wind Energy 14(4):557–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jonkman J, Musial W (2010) Offshore code comparison collaboration (oc3) for iea task 23 offshore wind technology and deployment. Tech. rep, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden COGoogle Scholar
  19. Jonkman J, Butterfield S, Musial W, Scott G (2009) Definition of a 5-mw reference wind turbine for offshore system development. Tech. rep, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden COGoogle Scholar
  20. Jonkman JM (2007) Dynamics modeling and loads analysis of an offshore floating wind turbine. Ph.D. thesis, University Of Colorado At BoulderGoogle Scholar
  21. Jonkman JM (2010) Definition of the floating system for Phase IV of OC3. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  22. Karimirad M (2014) Aerodynamic and hydrodynamic loads. In: Offshore energy structures. Springer, Switzerland, pp 187–221Google Scholar
  23. Karimirad M, Michailides C (2015) V-shaped semisubmersible offshore wind turbine: an alternative concept for offshore wind technology. Renew Energy 83:126–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lefebvre S, Collu M (2012) Preliminary design of a floating support structure for a 5 mw offshore wind turbine. Ocean Eng 40:15–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leung DY, Yang Y (2012) Wind energy development and its environmental impact: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16(1):1031–1039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Matha D (2010) Model development and loads analysis of an offshore wind turbine on a tension leg platform with a comparison to other floating turbine concepts. Tech. rep, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  27. MATLAB (2014) version (R2014b). The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  28. Muskulus M, Schafhirt S (2014) Design optimization of wind turbine support structures-a review. J Ocean Wind Energy 1(1):12–22Google Scholar
  29. Myhr A, Nygaard TA, et al. (2012) Load reductions and optimizations on tension-leg-buoy offshore wind turbine platforms. In: The Twenty-second International Offshore and Polar Engineering ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  30. Pareto V (1906) Manuale di economica politica, societa editrice libraria. milan. Translated to English by Schwier AS as Manual of Political Economy. Kelley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Parker NW (2007) Extended tension leg platform design for offshore wind turbine systems. Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  32. Robertson A, Jonkman J (2011) Loads analysis of several offshore floating wind turbine concepts. Tech. rep, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  33. Robertson A, Jonkman J, Masciola M, Song H, Goupee A, Coulling A, Luan C (2012) Definition of the semisubmersible floating system for phase ii of oc4. Tech. rep, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  34. Savenije F, Peeringa J (2009) Aero-elastic simulation of offshore wind turbines in the frequency domain. Tech. rep., Energy Research Center of the Netherlands, Tech. RepGoogle Scholar
  35. Schwartz M, Heimiller D, Haymes S, Musial W (2010) Assessment of offshore wind energy resources for the united states. Tech. rep, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  36. Sclavounos P, Tracy C, Lee S (2008) Floating offshore wind turbines: responses in a seastate pareto optimal designs and economic assessment. In: ASME 2008 27th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Estoril, Greece, pp 31–41Google Scholar
  37. Tao L, Dray D (2008) Hydrodynamic performance of solid and porous heave plates. Ocean Eng 35(10):1006–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tracy CCH (2007) Parametric design of floating wind turbines. Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  39. Wayman E, Sclavounos P, Butterfield S, Jonkman J, Musial W (2006) Coupled dynamic modeling of floating wind turbine systems: Tech. rep, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO (preprint)Google Scholar
  40. Wayman EN (2006) Coupled dynamics and economic analysis of floating wind turbine systems. Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meysam Karimi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Matthew Hall
    • 2
  • Brad Buckham
    • 1
  • Curran Crawford
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  2. 2.School of Sustainable Design EngineeringUniversity of Prince Edward IslandCharlottetownCanada

Personalised recommendations