Investigation of load prediction on the Mexico rotor using the technique of determination of the angle of attack
Abstract
Blade element moment (BEM) is a widely used technique for prediction of wind turbine aerodynamics performance, the reliability of airfoil data is an important factor to improve the prediction accuracy of aerodynamic loads and power using a BEM code. The method of determination of angle of attack on rotor blades developed by SHEN, et al is successfully used to extract airfoil data from experimental characteristics on the MEXICO (Model experiments in controlled conditions) rotor. Detailed surface pressure and particle image velocimetry (PIV) flow fields at different rotor azimuth positions are examined to determine the sectional airfoil data. The present technique uses simultaneously both PIV data and blade pressure data that include the actual flow conditions (for example, tunnel effects), therefore it is more advantageous than other techniques which only use the blade loading (pressure data). The extracted airfoil data are put into a BEM code, and the calculated axial and tangential forces are compared to both computations using BEM with Glauert’s and SHEN’s tip loss correction models and experimental data. The comparisons show that the present method of determination of angle of attack is correct, and the re-calculated forces have good agreements with the experiment.
Key words
wind turbine rotor aerodynamics airfoil dataNotations
- a, a′
Axial and tangential induction factor
- B
Number of blades
- c
Chord
- L, D
Lift and drag force
- c1, cd
Lift and drag force coefficients
- cn, ct
Normal and tangential force coefficients
- Fn, Ft
Normal and tangential force
- F
Prandtl’s tip loss function
- F1
SHEN’s tip loss function on aerofoil data
- R
Radius of blade
- r
Radial distance from the rotor centre
- vtun
Wind tunnel speed
- vrel
Relative velocity
- vrel,z
Axial relative velocity
- vrel,θ
Tangential relative velocity
- u
Induced velocity of bound circulation
- Ω
Angular velocity of rotor
- φ
Flow angle
- λ
Tip speed ratio
- ψ
The azimuth position of the blade one
- α
Angle of attack
- ρ
Air density
- σ
Solidity of rotor in annular element
- n
Rotational speed
- θ
Pitch angle
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- [1]HANSEN M O L, SØRENSEN J N, VOUTSINAS S, et al. State of the art in wind turbine aerodynamics and aeroelasticity[J]. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2006, 42(4): 285–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [2]JIANG Haibo, CAO Shuliang, YANG Ping. Power limit of horizontal axis wind turbine[J]. Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2011, 47(10): 113–118. (in Chinese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [3]CHEN Jin, WANG Xudong, SHEN Wenzhong, et al. Optimization design of blade shapes for wind turbines[J]. Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2010, 46(3): 131–134. (in Chinese)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [4]SNEL H, HOUWINK R, PIERS W J, et al. Sectional prediction of 3-D effects for stalled flow on rotating blades and comparison with measurements[C]//Proceeding of the European Community Wind Energy Conference, 8–12 March, 1993, Lübeck-Travemünde, Germany, 1993: 395–399.Google Scholar
- [5]DU Z, SELIG M. A 3-D stall-delay model for horizontal axis wind turbine performance predictions[C]//36th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 12–15, 1988: 9–19.Google Scholar
- [6]CHAVIAROPOULOS P K, HANSEN M O L. Investigating three-dimensional and rotational effects on wind turbine blades by means of a quasi-3D Navier-Stokes solver[J]. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 2000, 122(2): 330–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [7]BAK C, JOHANSEN J, ANDERSEN P B. Three-dimensional corrections of airfoil characteristics based on pressure distributions[C]//Proceeding of the European Community Wind Energy Conference, 27 Feb–2 Mar, Athens, Greece, 2006: 1–10.Google Scholar
- [8]JOHANSEN J, SØRENSEN N N. Aerofoil characteristics from 3D CFD rotor computations[J]. Wind Energy, 2004, 7(4): 283–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [9]BAK C, FUGLSANG P, SØRENSEN N N, et al. Airfoil characteristics for wind turbine[R]. Copenhagen: Risø, 1999.Google Scholar
- [10]TANGLER J L. The nebulous art of using wind tunnel aerofoil data for predicting rotor performance[J]. Wind Energy, 2002, 5(2–3): 245–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [11]SANT T, VAN KUIK G, VAN BUSSEL G J W. Estimating the angle of attack from blade pressure measurements on the NREL phase VI rotor using a free-wake vortex model: axial conditions[J]. Wind Energy, 2006, 9(6): 549–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [12]SANT T, VAN KUIK G, VAN BUSSEL G J W. Estimating the angle of attack from blade pressure measurements on the national renewable energy laboratory phase VI rotor using a free-wake vortex model: Yawed conditions[J]. Wind Energy, 2009, 12(1): 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [13]SHEN W Z, HANSEN M O L, SØRENSEN J N. Determination of the angle of attack on rotor blades[J]. Wind Energy, 2009, 12(1): 91–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- [14]SCHEPERS J G, SNEL H. Model experiments in controlled conditions[R]. Mexico: The Energy Research Center of the Netherlands, 2007.Google Scholar
- [15]GLAUERT H. Aerodynamic theory[M]. New York: Dover Publication Inc., 1963.Google Scholar
- [16]HANSEN M O L. Aerodynamics of wind turbines[M]. London: James & James Science Publisher Ltd, 2000.Google Scholar
- [17]SHEN W Z, MIKKELSEN R, SØRENSEN J N, et al. Tip loss corrections for wind turbine computations[J]. Wind Energy, 2005, 8(4): 457–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar