3 Berg Mann Joergensen

The experiment The upstream conditions Flow around the hill Mast2 Downstream Conclusions
The Bolund Experiment
Andreas Bechmann, Jacob Berg, Mike Courtney, Hans E.

Jørgensen, Jakob Mann, Niels N. Sørensen
in cooperation with Vestas
Risø DTU, Roskilde, Denmark
December 3-4, 2009 – Bolund Workshop, Risø DTU, Denmark
Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Approvals needed for the Bolund experiment
• Landowners’ approval (Karen, Christian and Benny)

• Fredningsnævnet
• Building approval (Byggesagsgodkendelse, Roskilde
Kommune)
• Environmental Center Roskilde
• Neighbor hearing (two complaints filed)
• Meeting with the neighbors (a very peaceful meeting with
some understanding)
• Danish Maritime Safety Administration (Farvandsdirektoratet
in Thisted)

Approvals needed for the Bolund experiment
• Landowners’ approval (Karen, Christian and Benny)

• Fredningsnævnet
• Building approval (Byggesagsgodkendelse, Roskilde
Kommune)
• Environmental Center Roskilde
• Neighbor hearing (two complaints filed)
• Meeting with the neighbors (a very peaceful meeting with
some understanding)
• Danish Maritime Safety Administration (Farvandsdirektoratet
in Thisted)
Normal processing time 1/2 year - Bolund ∼ 3 months

Previous experiments

Previous experiments

Bolund vs. Askervein
Askervein Experiment 1983

• Well-defined inflow
conditions.
• Uniform Roughness.
• Low hill / simple terrain.
• “Linear”.

Bolund vs. Askervein
Askervein Experiment 1983 Bolund Experiment 2008

• Well-defined inflow • Well-defined inflow
conditions. conditions.
• Uniform Roughness. • Roughness change.
• Low hill / simple terrain. • Steep Escarpment.
• “Linear”. • “Complex”.

The Bolund peninsula

Map width: 50 km


Map width: 20 km


Map width: 7 km


Map width: 3.5 km


Map width: 1 km

Height scanning with laser

Optech Airborne Laser Terrain Mapper: ≈ 2 m resolution


Cliff to steep: additional < 0.1 m resolution scanning applied





Masts
100
50
M4
Line B H270°L M7 M6 M3 M8
0
Northing @mD
M2
M1
M9
M5
9°L
-50
H23
e A
Lin
M0
-100
-150
-200 -100 0 100 200 300
Easting @mD

Erection of masts

Instrumentation
• 23 Metek USA-1 Basic sonics – off-line flow correction
• 12 Risø cup anemometers (WindSensor P2546)
• 2 ZephIR lidars + one scanning lidar
• Temperature and temperature difference
• No pressure and no humidity
• ...

Sonic Configuration

Technical Diagram

Database and Rodeo
• Central Acquisition of all

Meteorological Data (20
Hz)
• Direct Data Transfer to
Risø via RadioLink
• Database Storage
MySQL (20 Hz and 10
min averages)
• Online Data Display

Water level in Roskilde Fjord
200
0 150
Readings water level

100
-50
Risø Havn
50
-100 0
-50
-150
-100
Jan 07 Jan 14 Jan 21 Jan 28
-100 -50 0 50 Date
Roskilde Havn

The upstream mast M0: Atmospheric stability

u∗3 Θv
L=
κg hw θv i

g ∆Θv
Ri =
Θv ∆U 2
u∗3 Θv
L=
κg hw θv i

Fetch

Fetch
≈ 0.8 km

Fetch
≈ 4 km
≈ 0.8 km

Fetch
≈ 7 km
≈ 4 km
≈ 0.8 km

Measurement period and stability
20
very unstable unstable neutral stable very stable
speed @msD
15
10
5
0
01 Jan 10 Jan 20 Jan 01 Feb 10 Feb 20 Feb

Stability in terms of the Monin-Obukhov stability

parameter z/L
150 very unstable

unstable
30 min. runs
100 neutral
stable
very stable
50
0
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
zL
Atmospheric stability: z/L versus Ri

180◦ < θ < 360◦ and U5 > 0 m/s
0.4
0.2
Ri
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

zL


180◦ < θ < 360◦ and U5 > 2 m/s
0.4
0.2
Ri
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

zL


180◦ < θ < 360◦ and U5 > 4 m/s
0.4
0.2
Ri
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

zL


180◦ < θ < 360◦ and U5 > 6 m/s
0.4
0.2
Ri
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

zL


180◦ < θ < 360◦ and U5 > 8 m/s
0.4
0.2
Ri
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

zL


180◦ < θ < 360◦ and U5 > 10 m/s
0.4
0.2
Ri
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

zL


180◦ < θ < 360◦ and U5 > 12 m/s
0.4
0.2
Ri
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

zL


180◦ < θ < 360◦ and U5 > 14 m/s
0.4
0.2
Ri
0.0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

zL

Neutral upwind profile

−0.02 < z/L < 0.02 and 260◦ < θ < 300◦ (long fetch)
20.0
15.0
10.0
7.0 log-profile with
z @mD
5.0 Κ = 0.46
3.0 z0 =1.3´10-4 m
2.0
1.5 4 U 18
1.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
UHzLu*

The upstream conditions

Is the flow “undisturbed”? (−0.02 < z/L < 0.02)
20.
15.
0.8 km fetch
10.
4 km fetch
7.
z @mD
5.
3.
2.
7 km fetch
1.5
1.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
UHzLu*

The upstream conditions

Stability changes the wind gradient ∂U/∂z slightly
20.0
15.0 very unstable
10.0 unstable
7.0 neutral
z @mD
5.0 stable
3.0 very stable
2.0
1.5
1.0
0 10 20 30 40
UHzLu*

Upstream turbulence
8 m/s < U5 < 10 m/s
0.20
0.15
Turb. int.
0.10
uu
0.05 vv
ww
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.00
200 250 300
dir @°D

Upstream covariances
8 m/s < U5 < 10 m/s
0.002
0.000
covarianceU 2
-0.002
uv
uw
-0.004
vw
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
-0.006
200 250 300
dir @°D

Upstream spectra
Along wind, u, transverse v , vertical w, co-spectrum uw
0.25
0.20
@m2 s-2 D
0.15
0.10
k1 FHk1 L
0.05
0.00
-0.05
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
k1 @m-1 D

Upstream spectra
0.25
0.20
@m2 s-2 D
0.15
0.10
k1 FHk1 L
0.05
0.00
-0.05
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
k1 @m-1 D

Upstream spectra
0.25
0.20
@m2 s-2 D
0.15
0.10
k1 FHk1 L
0.05
0.00
-0.05
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
k1 @m-1 D

Speed at line A (5 m above terrain)
1.5
5m
1.0
UUref
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M1

1.5
1.0
UUref
5m
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

1.5
1.0 5m
UUref
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M3

1.5
1.0
5m
UUref
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M4

Tilt at line A (5 m above terrain)
20 very unstable unstable neutral stable very stable
10 5m
tilt HdegreeL
-10
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M1

10
tilt HdegreeL
0
5m
-10
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

10
5m
tilt HdegreeL
-10
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M3

10
tilt HdegreeL
5m
0
-10
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M4

Deflection at line A (5 m above terrain)

50
5m
deflection HdegreeL
-50
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M1


50
deflection HdegreeL
0
5m
-50
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2


50
deflection HdegreeL
5m
0
-50
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M3


50
deflection HdegreeL
5m
0
-50
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M4

Turbulence intensity at line A (5 m above terrain)
3.0
2.5
2.0
5m
ΣU ΣUref
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M1

3.0
2.5
2.0
ΣU ΣUref
1.5
5m
1.0
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

3.0
2.5
2.0
5m
ΣU ΣUref
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M3

3.0
2.5
2.0
5m
ΣU ΣUref
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M4

Turbulence spectra at line A (5 m above terrain)
0.50
u v w 5m
@m2 s-2 D
0.20
0.10
0.05
k1 FHk1 L
0.02
0.01
0.001 0.01 0.1 1

k1 @m-1 D
M1

0.50
u v w
@m2 s-2 D
0.20
0.10
0.05 5m
k1 FHk1 L
0.02
0.01
0.001 0.01 0.1 1

k1 @m-1 D
M2

0.50
u v w
@m2 s-2 D
0.20 5m
0.10
0.05
k1 FHk1 L
0.02
0.01
0.001 0.01 0.1 1

k1 @m-1 D
M3

0.50
u v w
@m2 s-2 D
0.20 5m
0.10
0.05
k1 FHk1 L
0.02
0.01
0.001 0.01 0.1 1

k1 @m-1 D
M4

Speed at M2
1.5
9m
1.0
UUref
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Speed at M2
1.5
9m
1.0
UUref
5m
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Speed at M2
1.5
9m
1.0
UUref
5m
0.5
3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Speed at M2
1.5
9m
1.0
UUref
5m
0.5
3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km 2m
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Speed at M2
1.5
9m
1.0
UUref
5m
0.5
3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km 2m
0.0
200 250 300 350 1m
wind dir
M2

Time Series at M2
6.0
5.5
5.0
SpeedsD
4.5
4.0 9m
3.5
3.0
1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400
samples
0.06
0.05
0.04
Probability
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Speed @msD
M2

Time Series at M2
6
6.0
5.5
5
@msD
5.0
SpeedsD
4
4.5
Speed
4.0
3
9m
3.5
2
3.0
1400
1400 1600
1600 1800
1800 2000
2000 2200
2200 2400
2400
samples
samples
0.06
0.10
5m
0.05
0.08
0.04
Probability
0.06
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.00
3.02 3.5 3 4.0 4.54 5.0 5 5.5 6.0
6
Speed @msD
M2

Time Series at M2
66
6.0
5.5
54
@msD
@msD
5.0
SpeedsD
2
4
4.5
Speed
Speed
0
4.0
3
9m
3.5
-2
2
3.0
1400
1400 1600
1600 1800
1800 2000
2000 2200
2200 2400
2400
samples
samples
0.06
0.10
5m
0.05
0.06
0.08
0.04 3m
Probability
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.00
3.02 -23.5 3 4.0
0 4.542 5.0 45 5.5 66.0
6
Speed @msD
M2

Time Series at M2
6
6.0
6
5.5
54
@msD
@msD
5.0
SpeedsD
2
2
4
4.5
Speed
Speed
0
0
4.0
3
9m
-2
3.5
-2
-4
2
3.0
1400
1400 1600
1600 1800
1800 2000
2000 2200
2200 2400
2400
samples
samples
0.06
0.06
0.10
5m
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.08
0.04 3m
Probability
0.04
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02
2m
0.02
0.01
0.00
3.02-4 -23.5 -23 4.0
0 0 4.542 2 5.0 454 5.5 666.0
6
Speed @msD
M2

Time Series at M2
64
6.0
6
@msD @msD
5.52
54
Speed
@msD
5.0
SpeedsD
20
2
4
4.5
Speed
Speed
-2
0
0
4.0
3
9m
-2
-4
3.5
-2
-4 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400
2
3.0
1400
1400 1600
1600 1800
1800 2000
2000
samples 2200
2200 2400
2400
samples
samples
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.10
5m
0.05
0.04
0.06
0.05
Probability
0.08
0.04 3m
Probability
0.03
0.04
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02
2m
0.01
0.02
0.01 1m
0.00
0.00
-4 -23 4.0
0 0 04.542 2 5.0
2 454 5.5 4 666.0 6
@msD
3.02-4 -23.5 -2 6
@msD
Speed
Speed
M2

Tilt at M2

9m
10
tilt HdegreeL
-10
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Tilt at M2

9m
10
tilt HdegreeL
0
5m
-10
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Tilt at M2

9m
10
tilt HdegreeL
0
5m
-10
3m
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Tilt at M2

9m
10
tilt HdegreeL
0
5m
-10
3m
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km 2m
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Tilt at M2

9m
10
tilt HdegreeL
0
5m
-10
3m
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km 2m
200 250 300 350 1m
wind dir
M2

Deflection at M2

50
9m
deflection HdegreeL
-50
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Deflection at M2

50
9m
deflection HdegreeL
0
5m
-50
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Deflection at M2

50
9m
deflection HdegreeL
0
5m
-50
3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Deflection at M2

50
9m
deflection HdegreeL
0
5m
-50
3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km 2m
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

Deflection at M2

50
9m
deflection HdegreeL
0
5m
-50
3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km 2m
200 250 300 350 1m
wind dir
M2

Turbulence intensity at M2
5
4
9m
3
ΣU ΣUref
1
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

5
4
9m
3
ΣU ΣUref
2 5m
1
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

5
4
9m
3
ΣU ΣUref
2 5m
1 3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

5
4
9m
3
ΣU ΣUref
2 5m
1 3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
2m
0
200 250 300 350
wind dir
M2

5
4
9m
3
ΣU ΣUref
2 5m
1 3m
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
2m
0
200 250 300 350 1m
wind dir
M2

Turbulence spectra at Mast 2 (239 degrees)

1.000
0.500
9m
@m2 s-2 D
0.100
0.050
k1 FHk1 L
0.010
0.005
u v w
0.001
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
k1 @m D
-1

1.000
0.500
9m
@m2 s-2 D
0.100
0.050
k1 FHk1 L
0.010
5m
0.005
u v w
0.001
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
k1 @m D
-1

1.000
0.500
9m
@m2 s-2 D
0.100
0.050
k1 FHk1 L
0.010
5m
0.005
3m
u v w
0.001
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
k1 @m D
-1

1.000
0.500
9m
@m2 s-2 D
0.100
0.050
k1 FHk1 L
0.010
5m
0.005
3m
u v w
0.001 2m
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
k1 @m D
-1

1.000
0.500
9m
@m2 s-2 D
0.100
0.050
k1 FHk1 L
0.010
5m
0.005
3m
u v w
0.001 2m
0.001 0.01 0.1 1
k1 @m D
-1
1m

The downstream direction at Mast 9
1.5
1.0 5m
UUref
0.5
0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir

1.5
10
1.0 5m
HdegreeL
tiltUU ref
0.5
-10
-20 0.8 km 4 km 7 km
0.0
200 250 300 350
wind dir

5
1.5 very unstable
20 very unstable unstable
unstable neutral
neutral stable
stable very
very stable
stable
4
10
1.0
3 5m
HdegreeL
Uref
U Σref
tiltΣUU
0
2
0.5
-10
1
-20 0.8
0.8km
km 44km
km 77 km
km
0
0.0
200
200 250
250 300
300 350
wind
wind dir
dir

Conclusions

Conclusions
• Instrumentation and data acquisition worked well. Proximity

to Risø very convenient.

Conclusions

• We have successfully captured the gross features of flow over
a steep hill.

Conclusions

a steep hill.
• No significant stability effects

Conclusions

a steep hill.
• Very turbulent recirculation zones behind hill and at “leading
edge”.

Conclusions

a steep hill.
edge”.
• At the downstream mast M9 the flow relaxed to normal.

Conclusions

a steep hill.
edge”.
• At the downstream mast M9 the flow relaxed to normal.
• Should we do it over again: Only measurements along one
line, but more heavily instrumented

3 Berg Mann Joergensen

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

3 Berg Mann Joergensen

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The experiment The upstream conditions Flow around the hill Mast2 Downstream Conclusions

The Bolund Experiment

Andreas Bechmann, Jacob Berg, Mike Courtney, Hans E.

Risø DTU, Roskilde, Denmark

December 3-4, 2009 – Bolund Workshop, Risø DTU, Denmark

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Approvals needed for the Bolund experiment

• Landowners’ approval (Karen, Christian and Benny)

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Approvals needed for the Bolund experiment

• Landowners’ approval (Karen, Christian and Benny)

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bolund vs. Askervein

Askervein Experiment 1983

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bolund vs. Askervein

Askervein Experiment 1983 Bolund Experiment 2008

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

The Bolund peninsula

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

The Bolund peninsula

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

The Bolund peninsula

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

The Bolund peninsula

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

The Bolund peninsula

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Height scanning with laser

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Height scanning with laser

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Height scanning with laser

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Height scanning with laser

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Database and Rodeo

• Central Acquisition of all

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Water level in Roskilde Fjord

Readings water level

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

The upstream mast M0: Atmospheric stability

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

The upstream mast M0: Atmospheric stability

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

The upstream mast M0: Atmospheric stability

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Measurement period and stability

Bechmann et al. The Bolund Experiment

Stability in terms of the Monin-Obukhov stability

150 very unstable

Atmospheric stability: z/L versus Ri