Search

Within an international collaboration framework, the accuracy of rotor aerodynamic models used for design load calculations of wind turbines is being assessed. Where the use of high-fidelity computation fluid dynamics (CFD) and mid-fidelity free-vortex wake (FVW) models has become commonplace within the wind energy community, these still fail to meet the requirements in terms of execution time and computational cost needed for design load calculations. The fast but engineering fidelity blade-element/momentum (BEM) method can therefore still be considered the industry workhorse for design load simulations. At the same time, upscaling of wind turbine rotors makes inflow non-uniformities (e.g. shear, veer, turbulence) more important. The objective of this work is to assess model accuracy in non-uniform inflow conditions, which violate several BEM assumptions. Thereto a comparison in turbulent inflow has been executed including a wide variety of codes, focusing on the DanAero field measurements, where a 2.3-MW turbine was equipped with, among other sensors, a pressure measurement apparatus. The results indicate that, although average load patterns are in good agreement, this does not hold for the unsteady loads that drive fatigue damage and aero-elastic stability. A simplified comparison round in vertical shear was initiated to investigate the observed differences in a more controlled manner. A consistent offset in load amplitude was observed between CFD and free-vortex codes on the one hand and BEM-type codes on the other hand. To shed more light on the observations, dedicated efforts are ongoing to pinpoint the cause for these differences, in the end leading to guidelines for an improved BEM implementation.

Veel vleermuissoorten hebben het zwaar in Nederland, onder andere door het verlies van hun natuurlijke habitat. En met de vele tuinen in Nederland – zo’n 5,5 miljoen – kunnen we vleermuizen een handje helpen door onze tuinen vleermuisvriendelijk in te richten. Maar hoe doe je dat dan?

The offshore wind market is growing, resulting in larger wind turbines being installed farther away from the coast and into deeper waters. This trend brings challenges to an industry strongly depending on the use of jack-up vessels. A floating vessel equipped with a Dynamic Positioning (DP) system and a Motion Compensated Gripper Frame (MCGF) provides a more efficient solution to guide XXL monopoles during the installation phase. According to strict regulations, the offset angle of monopiles shall not be over 0.25°. To ensure this, a robust control method is required to deal with gradual change in soil stifness, wave induced motions and sensor delays. The control force exerted by the gripper frame can significantly affect the floating vessel dynamics, hence, this should be optimized. Therefore, the research goal is to analyse the system and design a robustly stable control for the MCGF. In the context of this research, cascade PID control with gain-scheduling is chosen, which is able to control the Gripper Frame during all installation steps for different soil stiffness and to reject wave disturbances. With the use of the lumped multiplicative uncertainty structure, the changing and uncertain soil-characteristics are modelled. The sensor delay to measure the monopile inclination, has a significant impact on system stability. Robust stability criteria are validated using the Nyquist criterion and by analysing the system's closed-loop poles. With the use of gain-scheduling it is possible to switch control settings during the installation. Time-domain results show that with this design approach the installation criteria are met such as the maximum monopile angle and the applied control force. Ultimately, it is shown that robust PID control with gain-scheduling for a MCGF can ensure safe, efficient and cost-effective installation of the next generation wind turbines. Future research should focus into the definition and implementation of the gain-scheduling switching, Team Jan-Willem van Wingerden

Contains fulltext : 204059.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)

In a recent issue of this journal, Holgersson etal. [Dummy variables vs. category-wise models, J. Appl. Stat. 41(2) (2014), pp. 233-241, doi:10.1080/02664763.2013.838665] compared the use of dummy coding in regression analysis to the use of category-wise models (i.e. estimating separate regression models for each group) with respect to estimating and testing group differences in intercept and in slope. They presented three objections against the use of dummy variables in a single regression equation, which could be overcome by the category-wise approach. In this note, I first comment on each of these three objections and next draw attention to some other issues in comparing these two approaches. This commentary further clarifies the differences and similarities between dummy variable and category-wise approaches.