Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence: Pierre-Elouan Réthoré

AAU
Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
Pierre-Elouan Réthoré
Wind Energy Division · Risø DTU

Civil Engineering Department · Aalborg University
PhD Defence
Monday the 7th December 2009
Introduction AAU
The Wake “Crisis”
The wake models used by the industry fail to estimate modern wind
farms production and fatigue loads
Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

2 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU
Models not designed for

Larger wind turbines

2 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Larger wind farms

2 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Larger wind farms
Offshore wind farms

2 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Larger wind farms
Offshore wind farms
Multiple wind farms

2 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU
Complex Wind Farm Measurements
In order to redesign and recalibrate the models an extensive data

analysis of offshore wind farm measurements has been carried out
at Risø.

3 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU

at Risø.
It is difficult to extract information

from the measurements:
Power ratio P/ P1 [-]
1.0
Large number of inflow

0.8
conditions
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance x/ D [-]

3 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU

at Risø.

1.0

0.8
conditions
0.6
Large distances between the

0.4
0.2
measurement devices
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance x/ D [-]

3 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU

at Risø.

1.0

0.8
conditions
0.6

0.4
0.2
measurement devices
0

Rapid wind condition
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance x/ D [-] variations

3 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU

at Risø.

1.0

0.8
conditions
0.6

0.4
0.2
measurement devices
0

Rapid wind condition
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Distance x/ D [-] variations
Large measurement combined

uncertainty

3 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU
Goal of the Project
Problem
The engineering models used
by the industry can only be as
good as their calibration.

4 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU
Goal of the Project
Problem Proposed solution

The engineering models used ⇒ We need a tool to
by the industry can only be as understand the measurements
good as their calibration. and bridge the gap between
the measurements and the
engineering models.

4 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU
Goal of the Project

engineering models.
Design restrictions
The tool has to retain all the important physics of the problem


4 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU
Goal of the Project

engineering models.
Design restrictions

The tool has to be fast enough to carry out full wind farm
wake(s) computations

4 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU
Goal of the Project

engineering models.
Design restrictions

The tool has to be fast enough to carry out full wind farm
wake(s) computations

4 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU
Design Choices Based on EllipSys
Types of Wind Turbine Model

Full Rotor Computation

Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model

5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Types of Turbulence Model

Direct Navier-Stokes (DNS)

Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)

5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model


Figure: DNS by de Leeuw (RUG) 2-equation RANS (k-ε, k-ω)

5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model


Figure: LES Full rotor by T. Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
Hahm (wake2e)

5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model


Figure: k-ωSST Full rotor by F. Large Eddy Simulation (LES)
Zahle (Risø DTU)

5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model
Figure: LES Actuator Line by N.
Troldborg (DTU MEK & Risø
DTU) Types of Turbulence Model


5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model


Figure: Laminar Actuator Line

by R. Mikkelsen (DTU MEK)

5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model


Figure: LES Actuator Disc by S.

Ivanell (DTU MEK & KTH)

5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Introduction AAU


Actuator Line Model
Actuator Disc Model


Figure: k-ε Actuator Disc by I.
Ammara (ETS)

5 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Outlines AAU
Part I: Wind Turbine Model
1 Forces Treatment
Problem Description
Proposed Solution
2 Forces Distribution
3 Actuator Disc Validation

Lightly Loaded
Heavily Loaded
Full Rotor

6 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Outlines AAU
Part II: Turbulence Model
4 Modelling Issues
5 Invalid Assumptions
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
6 k-ϵ Modifications
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy
7 Beyond the Eddy-viscosity

7 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Forces Treatment AAU
1 Forces Treatment
Problem Description
Proposed Solution

Lightly Loaded
Heavily Loaded
Full Rotor

8 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Forces Treatment Problem Description AAU
Axial Force Distribution
Including discret forces terms into discretized Navier Stokes

equations is a little bit tricky: possibility of a pressure / velocity

decoupling .

∂ρU ∂ρUU
1D Navier Stokes equation: ∂t + ∂x = − ∂P ∂ ∂U
∂x + ∂x μ ∂x + F.

P ∆y
After discretization: AP UP = P Anb Unb + (PW − PE ) 2 + FP ∆x∆y.

P
1D Continuity equation: ∆y (ρUe − ρUw ) = 0

To find the pressure, we inject the Momemtum velocity inside

the Continuity and solve the system iteratively.
WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x

9 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
First Guess Approach
hP i
1 nb ∆y
Momentum: UP = P AP Unb + (PW − PE ) + FP ∆x∆y .

AP 2
Continuity: ∆y (ρUe − ρUw ) = 0

WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x
The main issue is how to estimate the face velocities.

1
First guess: Ue = 2
(UP + UE )
If we take a special case to illustrate the issue (F = 0,
U =constant), the combined Momentum+Continuity equation
gives: PP = 21 (PWW + PEE ).
The pressure in P is not dependent of it’s direct neighbors W

and E. Therefore a decoupling solution can exist.

10 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Rhie-Chow Algorithm
hP i
Ý 1 nb ∆y
Momentum: U P= P AP Unb + (PW − PE ) + FP ∆x∆y .

AP 2

WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x
The main issue is how to estimate the face velocities.

∆y
Rhie-Chow algorithm: Ue = 1 U Ý Ý
P + UE +
2
(PP − PE ) Ae
If we take a special case to illustrate the issue (F = 0,

U =constant), the combined Momentum+Continuity equation

gives: PP = 21 (PW + PE ).
The pressure in P is not dependent of it’s direct neighbors W

and E. Therefore a decoupling solution cannot exist.

11 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Rhie-Chow + Discret Force
Rhie-Chow was never ment to work with discret forces.

We take the special case (U =constant), but this time with a

discret force located at P. From the Momentum equation there
is already a problem:
P ∆y

Momentum: UP = A1 nb
P AP Unb + (PW − PE ) 2 + FP ∆x∆y .

P
PE − PW = 2FP ∆x
PP − PWW = 2FW ∆x = 0
PEE − PP = 2FE ∆x = 0
Pressure
2F
WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x

12 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Forces Treatment Proposed Solution AAU
Rhie-Chow + Pressure Jump
1
P
Momentum: UP = nb
P AP Unb + FP ∆x∆y .

AP

∆y Pje
Face velocity: Ue = 21 UP + UE + (PP − PE ) + Ae ∆y

Ae
We take the special case (U =constant), but this time with a

discret force located at P.

PE − PW = Pjw + Pje

PP − PW = Pjw and PE − PP = Pje

Pressure
2F
WW W P E EE
∆y
w e
∆x

13 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Forces Treatment Proposed Solution AAU
Application in Ellipsys:
1.02
[-]
0.98
U∞
u
0.96
3D − with correction
0.94 3D − without correction
Analytical solution
0.92
−0.5 −0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Normalized pressure [-]

1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
−0.2
−0.5 −0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 x 0[-] 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
D

14 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Forces Distribution AAU
1 Forces Treatment
Problem Description
Proposed Solution

Lightly Loaded
Heavily Loaded
Full Rotor

15 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Forces Distribution AAU
Radial Force Distribution
The forces can be obtained from

different sources
Measurements

Blade Element Method (BEM)

Basic actuator disc theory
Full rotor computation in CFD
The force history of a rotor revolution is

smeared over a polar grid

The contribution of each polar grid

elements is added proportionally to the

intersectional area with the
computational mesh
The final force can be used directly or

scaled using the local velocity:

F = − 12 ρACD (U · n)2

16 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Actuator Disc Validation AAU
1 Forces Treatment
Problem Description
Proposed Solution

Lightly Loaded
Heavily Loaded
Full Rotor

17 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Actuator Disc Validation Lightly Loaded AAU
Koning’s Linearized Actuator Disc Model
Koning (1976) has derived an analytical solution for an axis

symmetric lightly and uniformly loaded actuator disc:
∆p R RR 2π r′x ′
p(x, r, θ, ∆p, R) = 4π 0 0 3/ 2 dr dθ

′2 2 2 ′ ′ [r +r +x −2r r cos(θ −θ)]

p(x,r,θ,∆p,R) ∆p
vx (x, r, θ, ∆p, R) = u∞ − −

ρu∞ ρu∞
x-direction, r = 0.0D r-direction, x = 1.0D

1.001 1.001
3D − without correction
1 3D − with correction 1
0.999 Analytical axisymmetric solution 0.999

[-]
0.998 0.998
U∞
0.997 0.997
u
0.996 0.996
0.995 0.995
0.994 0.994
−1 −0.5 0 0.5 1 −1 −0.5 0 0.5 1
0.6 −0.02
0.4 −0.025
[-]
−0.03
0.2
∞)
−0.035
(cT ρU2
0
p
−0.04
−0.2
−0.045
−0.4 −0.05
−0.055
−1 −0.5 x0 0.5 1 −1 −0.5 r0 0.5 1
[-] [-]
D D
18 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Actuator Disc Validation Heavily Loaded AAU
Conway’s Exact Actuator Disc Model
Conway (1998) has derived an analytical solution for an axis

symmetric non-uniform and heavily loaded actuator disc, including
the slipstream contraction.
The vorticity in the slipstream of a turbine is equivalent of a

volume distribution of ring vortices.

The flow induced by a ring vortex can be expressed with Bessel

functions.
By superposition, the flow fields induced by the vorticity

distribution can be derived. ?

19 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Actuator Disc Validation Heavily Loaded AAU
Comparison Between Conway and EllipSys
The simplest expression for the vorticity distribution gives a

parabolic wake.
Axial velocity at various axial coordinate z (CT=−0.4484) Radial velocity at various axial coordinate z (CT=−0.4484)
1.1 0.16
Conway: z=−0.5D
Normalized axial velocity V /U [−]
1 0.14 EllipSys: z=−0.5D
Normalized axial radial V /U [−]

∞
Conway: z=0D
∞
0.12
z
0.9 EllipSys: z=0D
r
0.1 Conway: z=0.5D
0.8 EllipSys: z=0.5D
0.08 Conway: z=2.5D
0.06
0.6
0.04
0.5 0.02
0.4 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Normalized distance from center [−] Normalized distance from center [−]

20 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Actuator Disc Validation Full Rotor AAU
Comparison with a Full Rotor Computation
A Full Rotor Computation of the

Nortank 500 kW was performed
by F. Zahle using EllipSys.
The force distribution on the

blades during a revolution is used
as an input to the actuator disc
model.
The same inflow condition is used
in both models.
Figure: Nortank 500 kW

21 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Actuator Disc Validation Full Rotor AAU
Comparison with a Full Rotor Computation
Axial velocity (Left) and Tangential velocity (Right) at Z=3D.

Full Rotor (—), and Actuator Disc with 10 cells/D (—), 20 cells/D (—).
Z=3D Z=3D
1.1 0.12
∞
Normalized tangential velocity U /U
Normalized axial velocity Uz/U∞
t
0.1
0.9
0.08
0.8
0.06
0.7
0.04
0.6
0.5 0.02
0.4 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Normalized radial direction r/D [−] Radial direction r/D [−]

22 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
4 Modelling Issues
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy

23 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Modelling Issues AAU
4 Modelling Issues
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy

24 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Comparison with Measurements
Nibe B Turbine
1.1
1.0
Axial velocity U/ U∞ [-]
0.9
0.8
0.7 k-ϵ 2.5D

Data 2.5D
0.6 k-ϵ 4D
Data 4D
0.5 k-ϵ 7.5D
Data 7.5D
0.4
−30 −20 −10 0 10 20 30
Relative wind direction [o ]
The standard k-ϵ model performs
Sexbierum badly in comparison with
1.1
1.0 measurementsa b c .
0.9 a El Kasmi & Masson, Wind Energy 2008

0.8 b Cabezon et al. EWEC 2009
c Rados et al. EWEC 2009
0.7 k-ϵ 2.5D
Data 2.5D
0.6 k-ϵ 5.5D
Data 5.5D
0.5 k-ϵ 8D
Data 8D
0.4
−30 −20 −10 0 10 20 30
Relative wind direction [o ]

25 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Comparison with LES
LES, Variable forces: U−velocity U/UH,∞ [−]
y−direction y/D [−]

2 1
0.8
0
0.6
−2 0.4
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x−direction x/D [−]
LES, Constant forces: U−velocity U/UH,∞ [−]
2 1
0.8
0
0.6
−2 0.4
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
x−direction x/D [−]
k−ε: U−velocity U/UH,∞ [−]
2 1
0.8
0
0.6
−2 0.4
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Réthoré, P.-E. x−direction x/D [−] Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
26 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Invalid Assumptions AAU
4 Modelling Issues
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy

27 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Invalid Assumptions Eddy-viscosity AAU
Eddy-viscosity: Original Idea
Turbulent momentum transport with 3 assumptions

A1 Velocity conservation during time τ:
U(xp ) = U(x)
xp1
A2 Particles mix during time τ:
xp2
u′ (xp )u′ (x) = 0
x
A3 Mean velocity field is linear over
xp3
turbulent length-scale L:
∂U
U(xp ) − U(x) = Lj ∂x xp4
j

28 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Turbulent momentum transport with 3 assumptions

A1 Velocity conservation during time τ:
U(xp ) = U(x)
xp1
A2 Particles mix during time τ:
xp2
u′ (xp )u′ (x) = 0
x
A3 Mean velocity field is linear over
xp3
turbulent length-scale L:
∂U
U(xp ) − U(x) = Lj ∂x xp4
j
Derivation of the Reynolds-stresses with the 3 assumptions

∂Uj
Eddy-viscosity concept: ui′ uj′ = 23 kδij − νt ∂U
∂x
i
+ ∂x
?
j i

28 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Velocity Conservation (A1)
The velocity is not conserved in the region of adverse pressure

gradient surrounding the wind turbine
x
p x
U( x p)
Error
U( x )
xp x x-direction x/ D [-]

29 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Velocity Conservation (A1)
LES shows that the eddy-viscosity concept generates a too high

Normal Reynolds-stress R11 in the area surrounding the turbine
LES: R11
60
LES: u′ u′
50
k-ϵ: R11
R11 / u∗2 [-]
40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10
x-direction x/ D [-]
2
2
where R11 = 3k − 2Cμ kϵ ∂U
∂x
30 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Velocity Linearity (A3)
A3 velocity linearity over the turbulent length-scale:

U(yp ) − U(y) = L ∂U
∂y
The assumption (A3) is only valid when the velocity changes occur
over a larger distance than the turbulent length-scale L
L
L ∂U
∂y U(yp ) − U(y)
yp y y-direction y/ D [-]

31 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Velocity Linearity (A3)
However, in the wake boundary region, the velocity is highly

non-linear over the turbulent length-scale.
Axial velocity U/ U∞ [-] L
Error
L ∂U
∂y
U(yp ) − U(y)
yp y y-direction y/ D [-]

32 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
LES Eddy-viscosity Factor Cμ
The eddy-viscosity factor illustrates where the eddy-viscosity

concept is invalid.
LES Eddy-viscosity factor Cμ [-]

3 0.1
y-direction y/ D [-]
2 0.08
1
0.06
0
0.04
−1
−2 0.02
−3 0
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
?
33 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
LES Eddy-viscosity Factor Cμ
The eddy-viscosity factor illustrates where the eddy-viscosity

concept is invalid.

3 0.1
2 0.08
1
0.06
0
0.04
−1
−2 0.02
−3 0
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Even if k and ϵ were correct, the Eddy-viscosity concept would still

give the wrong Reynolds-stresses!
?
33 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Invalid Assumptions k-ϵ AAU
Wind Turbines Extract Large-scale TKE
The forces on the blades can adapt to large-scale velocity

fluctuations.
TKE Comparison of 2 LES with unsteady and steady forces

LES - Unsteady Forces

LES - Steady Forces
30
k-ϵ - Steady Forces
TKE k/ u∗2 [-]
20
10
0
0 4 8 12
There is a small but visible decrease of TKE at the turbine with the
unsteady forces
34 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications AAU
4 Modelling Issues
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy

35 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications El Kasmi-Masson AAU
Compared to LES
Added term in ϵ-equation: Sϵ = Cϵ4 P2t / ρk

EKM can have the same velocity deficit as LES, but not the
same recovery rate.
The TKE has a different trend compared with LES.

The dissipation ϵ is in clear contrast with LES.

EKM: Cϵ4 = 0.001
1
EKM: Cϵ4 = 0.005
U/ U∞,H [-]
0.8 EKM: Cϵ4 = 0.01

Std k-ϵ
0.6
LES
0.4
40
k/ u∗2 [-]
30
20
10
0
50
ϵ/ ϵ ∞,H [-]
40
30
20
10
0
2
22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
36 of 50
Réthoré, P.-E. x-direction x/ D [-]
Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications El Kasmi-Masson AAU
Compared to Sexbierum Measurements
Not enough turbulence

Cannot satisfy all the met.masts measurements

[−]
x=2.5D x=5.5D x=8D

H,∞
Normalized axial velocity U/U
1 C =0.005
ε4
C =0.01
ε4
0.8
C =0.03
ε4
0.6 C =0.37
ε4
0.4 Std−k−ε
−20 0 20 −20 0 20 −20 0 20 data
o
Relative wind direction [ ]
x=2.5D x=5.5D x=8D

Turbulence Intensity k/U [−]
2
0.1
0.05
0
−20 0 20 −20 0 20 −20 0 20
o
37 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications Realizability AAU
Compared to LES
2
Realizability criteria (hacked): ui′ uj′ ≤ CSwz ui′ ui′ · uj′ uj′

Only physical for CSwz = 1.0.

It can have the same velocity deficit as LES, and the same
recovery rate.
Similar TKE and dissipation trends.

RM: CSwz = 1.0

1
RM: CSwz = 0.5
U/ U∞,H [-]
0.8 RM: CSwz = 0.4

Std k-ϵ
0.6
LES
0.4
40
k/ u∗2 [-]
30
20
10
0
30
ϵ/ ϵ ∞,H [-]
20
10
0
Réthoré, P.-E. 2
22 0 2 4 6 8 Wind10Turbine
12 Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
38 of 50 Risø DTU x-direction x/ D [-] 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications Realizability AAU
Compared to Sexbierum Measurements
Not enough wake spreading on the side

Too much turbulence in the far wake region

Cannot satisfy all the met.masts measurements
[−]
x=2.5D x=5.5D x=8D

H,∞
Normalized axial velocity U/U
1 C =1.0
Swz
CSwz=0.5
0.8
CSwz=0.3
0.6 CSwz=0.2
0.4 Std−k−ε
−20 0 20 −20 0 20 −20 0 20 data
o
x=2.5D x=5.5D x=8D

Turbulence Intensity k/U [−]
2
0.1
0.05
0
−20 0 20 −20 0 20 −20 0 20
Réthoré, P.-E. o
Relative wind direction [ ] Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence
39 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
k-ϵ Modifications Wind Turbine Canopy AAU
Compared to LES
Added terms in k and ϵ-equation: Sk = −CF βd Uk and

Sϵ = −CF Cϵd βd Uϵ
It is not enough to correct the k-ϵ model

WTCM: βd = 1, Cϵd = 1
1
WTCM: βd = 1, Cϵd = 0
U/ U∞,H [-]
0.8 WTCM: βd = 2, Cϵd = 0

Std k-ϵ
0.6
LES
0.4
40
k/ u∗2 [-]
30
20
10
0
50
ϵ/ ϵ ∞,H [-]
40
30
20
10
0
2
22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
40 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
Beyond the Eddy-viscosity AAU
4 Modelling Issues
Eddy-viscosity
k-ϵ
El Kasmi-Masson
Realizability
Wind Turbine Canopy

41 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
How to model turbulence, then?
Design constraints
The Reynolds-stresses should be transported.

The pressure gradient has to be taken into account.

42 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
How to model turbulence, then?
Design constraints
The Reynolds-stresses should be transported.

The pressure gradient has to be taken into account.
Reynolds-stresses Transport Model (RSM)?

Are the pressure gradient and body forces accounted for?

How are modelled the transport of higher order terms? Do they

rely on the linearity over length scale assumption?

42 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Summary
The force allocation algorithm is effective and inexpensive.

The Actuator Disc model has been validated in laminar flows.

43 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Summary


Turbulence modelling:
The eddy-viscosity concept does not work for modelling wind

turbine wake in atmospheric turbulence.

It is not possible to fix the invalid assumptions of the eddy-viscosity

concept by only acting on k and/or ϵ.

The extraction of large-scale turbulence or “turbulent cascade

short-circuit” concept is not enough to explain the errors of the

standard k-ϵ.
We need another way to model the Reynolds-stresses for the wind


It is the same types of issues when trying to model full rotors in

atmospheric turbulence with RANS and LES.

Forest modelling has probably some trouble with the eddy-viscosity

concept.

43 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Summary








standard k-ϵ.





concept.
The wake crisis?

We have a better insight of the problems.

We have the tools to test the validity of the turbulence models.

We are not quite there yet, but. . .

43 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Summary








standard k-ϵ.





concept.
The wake crisis?

We have a better insight of the problems.

We have the tools to test the validity of the turbulence models.

We are not quite there yet, but. . . one step closer?

43 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Thank you for your attention!

44 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Based on turbulent momentum transport with 3 assumptions:

A1 Velocity conservation during time τ: xp1

U(xp ) = U(x)
xp2
A2 Particles mix during time τ: x
u′ (xp )u′ (x) = 0
xp3
A3 Mean velocity field is linear over turbulent
∂U
length-scale L: U(xp ) − U(x) = Lj ∂x xp4
j
Derivation of the Reynolds-stresses based on the 3 assumptions

A1
:
A1 u′ (x) = u′ (xp ) + U(xp ) − U(x) + U(x) − U(xp )
: A2
A2 u′ (x)v′ (x) = v′ (x)u′ (xp ) + v′ (x) U(xp ) − U(x)
∂U
A3 u′ (x)v′ (x) = v′ (x)Lj ∂x
j

∂Uj
Eddy-viscosity concept: ui′ uj′ = 23 kδij − νt ∂Ui
+

∂xj ∂xi
Back

45 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Conway’s exact actuator disc model
Conway (1998) has derived an analytical solution for an axis

symmetric non-uniform and heavily loaded actuator disc,

including the slipstream contraction.
The vorticity in the slipstream of a turbine is equivalent of a

volume distribution of ring vortices

The flow induced by a ring vortex or radius r ′ and strength Γ

can be derived Ras:

Γrr ′ ∞ ′
Ψ(r, z) = J (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds

2 0 1
−Γsign(z−z ′ )r ′ R ∞ ′
Vr (r, z) = sJ1 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds

2 0
′ R ∞ ′
Vz (r, z) = Γr2 0 sJ0 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds

By superposition, the flow fields induced by the vorticity

distribution ω ϕ (r, z) can be derived

R R
r ∞ R(z) ∞
R ′
Ψ(r, z) = ω ϕ (r ′ , z ′ )r ′ J1 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds dr ′ dz ′

2 0 0 0
R R R
∞ R(z) ∞ ′
Vr (r, z) = 12 0 0 ±ω ϕ (r ′ , z ′ )r ′ sJ1 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds dr ′ dz ′

0
R ∞R R
R(z) ∞ ′
Vz (r, z) = 12 0 0 ω ϕ (r ′ , z ′ )r ′ sJ0 (sr ′ )J1 (sr)e−s|z−z | ds dr ′ dz ′


46 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Conway’s exact actuator disc model for heavily
loaded turbines
Simplest expression for the vorticity: ω ϕ (r, z) = ar. This

corresponds to a parabolic wake profile: Vz (r, ∞) = 2a R2w − r 2 .
After integration with respect to z’ and including the additional

stream function due to the free stream U∞

U∞ r 2
R∞
Ψ(r, z) = + ar R2 (z ′ )I(−1,2,1) (R(z ′ ), r, z − z ′ ) dz ′

2R 2 0
a ∞
Vr (r, z) = 2 0 ±R2 (z ′ )I(0,2,1) (R(z ′ ), r, z − z ′ ) dz ′

R∞
Vz (r, z) = U∞ + ar R2 (z ′ )I(0,2,0) (R(z ′ ), r, z − z ′ ) dz ′

2 0
The wake width R(z) can be determined recursively by noticing

that the stream function is constant on the slipstream boundary

Ψ(RT , 0) = Ψ(R(z), z)

The Bessel-Laplace integrals

R∞
I(λ,μ,ν)(R, r, z) = 0 sλ Jμ (sR)Jν (sr)e−s|z| ds are related to one
another using recursive rules, and can be evaluated in terms of
complete elliptic integrals.
The load distribution is directly related to the stream function:

L(r) = aρ (Ψ(RT , 0) − Ψ(r, 0))

47 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Solving Bessel-Laplace integrals
It is possible to derive recursive relations between

Bessel-Laplace integrals:
I(λ,μ,ν)(R, r, |z|) = I(λ,ν,μ)(r, R, |z|)

4(ν−1)ω
I(0,ν,ν) = I
2ν−1 (0,ν−1,ν−1)
− 2ν−3 I
2ν−1 (0,ν−2,ν−2)
,
(2ν−1)|z|k 4
I(1,ν,ν) = 8Rr(1−k 2) I(0,ν−1,ν−1) − ωI(0,ν,ν) ,

I(0,ν+1,ν) = Rr I(0,ν,ν−1) + 2ν
r
I(1,ν+1,ν+1) − I(1,ν−1,ν−1) for ν 6= 0,

2(ν+1)|z| 2(ν+1)R (ν+1+μ)

I(0,μ,ν) = r(ν+1−μ) I(0,μ,ν+1) − r(ν+1−μ) I(0,μ−1,ν+1) + (ν+1−μ) I(0,μ,ν+2),

R

I(λ,μ,ν) = 2μ I(λ+1,μ+1,ν) − I(λ+1,μ−1,ν) for λ < 0,

It is possible to express some basic Bessel-Laplace integrals in

terms of complete elliptic functions:

kK(k)
I(0,0,0)(R, r, |z|) = p .

π hrR i
1 |z|kK(k) Λ (|β|,k)
I(0,1,0)(R, r, |z|) = R 1 − p − 0 2 (r < R)

h 2π irR
|z|kK(k) Λ (|β|,k)
= R1 − p + 0 2 (r > R)
2π rR
[(2−k 2 )K(k)−2E(k)]
I(0,1,1)(R, r, |z|) = p

πk rR

48 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
Comparison between Conway’s and EllipSys’
actuator disc models
The load distribution L(r) found with Conway’s model for a factor
a = − UR∞2 is used as an input in the actuator disc model of EllipSys.
T
Axial velocity at various axial coordinate z (CT=−0.4484) Radial velocity at various axial coordinate z (CT=−0.4484)
1.1 0.16
Conway: z=−0.5D
Normalized axial velocity V /U [−]
1 0.14 EllipSys: z=−0.5D
Normalized axial radial V /U [−]

∞
Conway: z=0D
∞
0.12
z
0.9 EllipSys: z=0D
r
0.1 Conway: z=0.5D
0.08 Conway: z=2.5D
0.06
0.6
0.04
0.5 0.02
0.4 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Normalized distance from center [−] Normalized distance from center [−]
Back

49 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009
AAU
LES Eddy-viscosity factor Cμ
3 0.1
2 0.08
1
0.06
0
0.04
−1
−2 0.02
−3 0
−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
||R||
where Cμ = ||S|| kϵ2 is here defined as the ratio between:
Reynolds-stress tensor norm

q
2 ′ ′ 2 ′ ′
||R|| = 3 kδ ij − u u
i j 3 kδ ij − u u
i j
Ç
∂Ui ∂Uj ∂Ui ∂Uj
Strain-rate tensor norm ||S|| = ∂x + ∂x ∂x + ∂x

j i j i
back

50 of 50 Risø DTU 07/12/2009

Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence: Pierre-Elouan Réthoré

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence: Pierre-Elouan Réthoré

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AAU

Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Wind Energy Division · Risø DTU

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Models not designed for

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Models not designed for

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Models not designed for

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Models not designed for

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

In order to redesign and recalibrate the models an extensive data

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

In order to redesign and recalibrate the models an extensive data

It is difficult to extract information

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

In order to redesign and recalibrate the models an extensive data

It is difficult to extract information

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

In order to redesign and recalibrate the models an extensive data

It is difficult to extract information

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

In order to redesign and recalibrate the models an extensive data

It is difficult to extract information

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Problem Proposed solution

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Problem Proposed solution

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Problem Proposed solution

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Problem Proposed solution

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Types of Turbulence Model

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Types of Turbulence Model

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Types of Turbulence Model

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Types of Turbulence Model

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Types of Turbulence Model

Figure: Laminar Actuator Line

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Types of Turbulence Model

Figure: LES Actuator Disc by S.

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence

Types of Wind Turbine Model

Types of Turbulence Model

Réthoré, P.-E. Wind Turbine Wake in Atmospheric Turbulence