Search

Control co-design is a promising approach for wind turbine design due to the importance of the controller in power production, stability, load alleviation, and the resulting coupled effects on the sizing of the turbine components. However, the high computational effort required to solve optimization problems with added control design variables is a major obstacle to quantifying the benefit of this approach. In this work, we propose a methodology to identify if a design problem can benefit from control co-design. The estimation method, based on post-optimum sensitivity analysis, quantifies how the optimal objective value varies with a change in control tuning. The performance of the method is evaluated on a tower design optimization problem, where fatigue load constraints are a major driver, and using a linear quadratic regulator targeting fatigue load alleviation. We use the gradient-based multi-disciplinary optimization framework Cp-max. Fatigue damage is evaluated with time-domain simulations corresponding to the certification standards. The estimation method applied to the optimal tower mass and optimal cost of energy show good agreement with the results of the control co-design optimization while using only a fraction of the computational effort. Our results additionally show that there may be little benefit to using control co-design in the presence of an active frequency constraint. However, for a soft–soft tower configuration where the resonance can be avoided with active control, using control co-design results in a taller tower with reduced mass.

Abstract In wind turbine optimization, the standard power regulation strategy follows a constrained trajectory based on the maximum power coefficient. It can be updated automatically during the optimization process by solving a nested maximization problem at each iteration. We argue that this model does not take advantage of the load alleviation potential of the regulation strategy and additionally requires significant computational effort. An alternative approach is proposed, where the rotational speed and pitch angle control points for the entire operation range are set as design variables, changing the problem formulation from nested to one‐level. The nested and one‐level formulations are theoretically and numerically compared on different aerodynamic blade design optimization problems for AEP maximization. The aerodynamics are calculated with a steady‐state blade element momentum method. The one‐level approach increases the design freedom of the problem and allows introducing a secondary objective in the design of the regulation strategy. Numerical results indicate that a standard regulation strategy can still emerge from a one‐level optimization. Second, we illustrate that novel optimal regulation strategies can emerge from the one‐level optimization approach. This is demonstrated by adding a thrust penalty term and a constraint on the maximum thrust. A region of minimal thrust tracking and a peak‐shaving strategy appear automatically in the optimal design.