Due to their potential to use light, flexible blades, downwind turbines are well suited for offshore floating platforms, for which there is a need to substantially lower the cost of wind-generated electricity. However, downwind rotors must operate in the presence of the tower's wakes with which are associated strong changes in flow incidence, and thus high fatigue loads. In order to guide the development of design rules for multimegawatt downwind turbines, a comprehensive experimental study has been conducted to better understand the characteristics of the unsteady rotor torque on downwind turbines. High-frequency measurements of the unsteady rotor torque on a model turbine that can be configured with rotors of different cone angles and operated either downwind or upwind in well-controlled flow conditions are conducted. The measurements show that in the case of the downwind turbine, the blade's passage through the tower's wake accounts for 56% to 61% of the variance of the rotor torque; the proportion of this unsteadiness is independent of the cone angle. For nonoptimum tip speed ratios (TSRs), the increase in unsteadiness is consistently less for downwind configurations than for upwind configurations. For the 5 deg-cone downwind configuration, the increase in rotor torque unsteadiness is 13–18% of the increase observed for the 5-deg-cone upwind configuration for nonoptimum TSRs. Thus from a design perspective, downwind rotor configurations offer above or below rated wind speed, a smaller increase in unsteadiness of the rotor torque compared to upwind turbine configurations. These characteristics differ from upwind turbines, on which broadband vortex shedding from the blade is the primary source of the unsteadiness, which may be reduced by increasing the rotor-tower clearance. It is suggested that given the strong periodic character of the blade's passage through the tower's wake, the turbine control system may be designed to reduce fatigue loads and there is a broader design space on downwind turbines that can be exploited for peak load mitigation by moderately adjusting the blade's stiffness.

References

1.
GWEC
,
2014
, “
Global Wind Report Annual Market Update 2014
,” Global Wind Energy Council, Brussels, Belgium.
2.
EWEA
,
2014
, “
The European Offshore Wind Industry–Key Trends and Statistics 1st Half 2014
,”
European Wind Energy Association
, Brussels, Belgium.
3.
Kress
,
C.
,
Chokani
,
N.
, and
Abhari
,
R. S.
,
2015
, “
Downwind Wind Turbine Yaw Stability and Performance
,”
Renewable Energy
,
83
, pp.
1157
1165
.
4.
Verelst
,
D. R. S.
,
Larsen
,
T. J.
, and
van Wingerden
,
J. W.
,
2014
, “
Wind Tunnel Tests of a Free Yawing Downwind Wind Turbine
,”
J. Phys. Conf. Ser.
,
555
, p. 012103.
5.
Manwell
,
J. F.
,
Rogers
,
A.
,
Ellis
,
A.
,
Abdulwahid
,
U.
, and
Solomon
,
M.
,
2001
, “
Experimental Investigation of Yaw Damping on a Downwind Turbine
,”
AIAA
Paper No. 2001-0042.
6.
Yoshida
,
K.
,
Xianwu
,
L.
,
Shuhong
,
L.
,
Eguchi
,
H.
, and
Nishi
,
M.
,
2011
, “
Development of Micro Downwind Turbine Generator Having Soft Blades
,”
AIJ J. Environ. Eng.
,
6
(
3
), pp.
313
321
.
7.
Yoshida
,
S.
,
2006
, “
Performance of Downwind Turbines in Complex Terrain
,”
Wind Eng.
,
30
(6), pp.
487
501
.
8.
Frau
,
E.
,
Kress
,
C.
,
Chokani
,
N.
, and
Abhari
,
R. S.
,
2015
, “
Comparison of Performance and Unsteady Loads of Multi-Megawatt Downwind and Upwind Turbines
,”
ASME J. Sol. Energy Eng.
,
137
(
4
), p.
041004
.
9.
Glasgow
,
J. C.
,
Miller
,
D. R.
, and
Corrigan
,
R. D.
,
1981
, “
Comparison of Upwind and Downwind Rotor Operations of the DOE/NASA 100-kW Mod-0 Wind Turbine
,”
2nd DOE/NASA Wind Turbine Dynamics Workshop
, Cleveland, OH, Feb. 24–26, Vol.
1
, pp.
24
26
.
10.
Janajreh
,
I.
,
Talab
,
I.
, and
Macpherson
,
J.
,
2010
, “
Numerical Simulation of Tower Rotor Interaction for Downwind Wind Turbine
,”
Modell. Simul. Eng.
,
2010
, p.
860814
.
11.
Zahle
,
F.
,
Sørensen
,
N. N.
, and
Johansen
,
J.
,
2009
, “
Wind Turbine Rotor-Tower Interaction Using an Incompressible Overset Grid Method
,”
Wind Energy
,
12
(
6
), pp.
594
619
.
12.
Yoshida
,
S.
, and
Kiyoki
,
S.
,
2007
, “
Load Equivalent Tower Shadow Modeling for Downwind Turbines
,”
Trans. Japan Soc. Mech. Eng., Ser. B
,
73
(730), pp. 1273–1279.
13.
Barber
,
S.
,
Wang
,
Y.
,
Jafari
,
S.
,
Chokani
,
N.
, and
Abhari
,
R. S.
,
2011
, “
The Impact of Ice Formation on Wind Turbine Performance and Aerodynamics
,”
ASME J. Sol. Energy Eng.
,
133
(
1
), p.
011007
.
14.
Hitachi,
2013
, “Wind Turbine: Specification,” Hitachi Ltd., Tokyo, accessed Sept. 2014, http://www.hitachi.com/products/power/wind-turbine/specification/index.html
15.
Matsunobu
,
T.
,
Hasegawa
,
T.
,
Isogawa
,
M.
,
Sato
,
K.
,
Futami
,
M.
, and
Kato
,
H.
,
2009
, “Development of 2-MW Downwind Turbine Tailored to Japanese Conditions,”
Hitachi Rev.
,
58
(5), pp. 213–218.
16.
Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (JCGM), 2008, “Evaluation of Measurement Data—Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement,” International Bureau of Weights and Measures, Sèvres, France, Report No.
JCGM
100:2008.
17.
Jonkman
,
J.
,
Butterfield
,
S.
,
Musial
,
W.
, and
Scott
,
G.
,
2009
, “
Definition of a 5-MW Reference Wind Turbine for Offshore System Development
,” Natiional Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, Technical Report No.
NREL
/TP-500-38060.
18.
Bossanyi
,
E. A.
,
2005
, “
Further Load Reductions With Individual Pitch Control
,”
Wind Energy
,
8
(
4
), pp.
481
485
.
19.
Pao
,
L. Y.
, and
Johnson
,
K. E.
,
2011
Control of Wind Turbines: Approaches, Challenges, and Recent Developments
,”
IEEE Control Syst. Mag.
,
31
(
2
), pp.
44
62
.
20.
Houtzager
,
I.
,
van Wingerden
,
J. W.
, and
Verhaegen
,
M.
,
2013
, “
Wind Turbine Load Reduction by Rejecting the Periodic Load Disturbances
,”
Wind Energy
,
16
(
2
), pp.
235
256
.
You do not currently have access to this content.