Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: This paper presents an aeroelastic coupling analysis of the flexible blade of a large scale HAWT (hori-
Received 31 January 2015 zontal axis wind turbine). To model the flexibility of the blade more accurately, ‘SE’ (super-element) is
Received in revised form introduced to the blade dynamics model. The flexible blade is discretized into a MBS (multi-body system)
22 April 2015
using a limited number of SEs. The blade bending vibration and torsional deflection are both considered
Accepted 15 June 2015
when calculating the aerodynamic loads; thus, the BEM (blade element momentum) theory used in this
Available online 21 July 2015
study is modified. In addition, the BeL (BeddoeseLeishman) dynamic stall model is integrated into the
BEM-modified model to investigate the airfoil dynamic stall characteristics. The nonlinear governing
Keywords:
Wind turbine
equations of the constrained blade MBS are derived based on the theory of MBS dynamics coupling with
Flexible blade the blade aerodynamics model. The time domain aeroelastic responses of the United States NREL (Na-
Super-element tional Renewable Energy Laboratory) offshore 5-MW wind turbine blade are obtained. The simulation
Multi-body system results indicate that blade vibration and deformation have significant effects on the aerodynamic loads,
Dynamic stall and the dynamic stall can cause more violent fluctuation for the blade aerodynamic loads compared with
Aeroelastic coupling the steady aerodynamic model, which can considerably affect the blade fatigue load spectrum analysis
and the fatigue life design.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.06.046
0360-5442/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1002 W. Mo et al. / Energy 89 (2015) 1001e1009
aeroelastic coupling analysis of wind turbines does not seem The blade is discretized into a series of rigid bodies along the
possible in the near future because of its extensive cost of calcu- span, and it is assumed that the profile of each rigid body consists of
lation and complicated solving process [13]. At present, applying the same airfoil. According to the blade element theory, when the
semi-empirical models to calculate the unsteady aerodynamic spanwise length of the blade element is small enough, the spanwise
loads are still the dominant method, among which the BeL model flow of the airstream can be neglected, and aerodynamic loads (lift
receives much attention and recognition [14]. Liu et al. [3,4,7] and and drag) are uniformly distributed along the span; they act on the
Dai et al. [13] adopted the BeL model to analyze the dynamic quarter chord point or the AC (aerodynamic center). When the
aerodynamic loads of blades and investigated the unsteady angle of attack is obtained, the airfoil steady lift CL(a), drag CD(a)
characteristics. and moment coefficients CM(a) can be computed by interpolating
Wind turbine blades have complicated time-varying MBS the steady aerodynamic data. Then, the lift Li, drag Di and moment
(multi-body system) coupling nonlinear airflow flow and blade Mi loads per unit length on each blade rigid body can be calculated
elastic deformation. In addition, the interactive effects between according to the blade element theory. Thus, the lift FL, drag FD and
blade vibration and aerodynamic loads involve the simultaneous moment Maero exerted on the AC of the rigid body Bi can be ob-
solution for the blade dynamics equations, which are a set of time- tained as
varying DAEs (differential and algebraic equations). Hence the
blade mechanics model needs to be analyzed with fewer DOFs FL ¼ Li li ; F D ¼ D i li ; Maero ¼ Mi li (1)
(degrees of freedom). To discretize the components, which undergo
spatial motion and elastic deformation, Molenaar [15], Zhao [16] where li is the spanwise length of rigid body Bi.
and Holierhoek [17] introduced a ‘super-element;’ thus, it is suit- When the infinitesimal span dr, an infinitesimal span of the
able for the mechanical modeling of MBS with flexible components spanwise length of a rigid body, rotates in a circle about the rotor
[18]. Li et al. [19] discretized flexible components such as wind axis, the thrust dT and the torque dQ on this annular element are
turbine blades and towers into a series of rigid bodies connected obtained by the equations below:
with joints, springs and dampers by applying the super-element
mentioned above. They then established the aeroelastic coupling dT ¼ 0:5BrcW 2 ðCL ðaÞcos f þ CD ðaÞsin fÞdr (2)
equations of the rigid-flexible MBS of wind turbines using the
theory of MBS dynamics, the Roberson-Wittenburg modeling dQ ¼ 0:5BrcW 2 ðCL ðaÞsin f CD ðaÞcos fÞrdr (3)
methodology, and the BEM (blade element momentum) theory.
Eventually, the time domain aeroelastic coupling response was where B is the number of blades, c is the sectional chord length, r is
obtained for a wind turbine via numerical simulation. the density, W is the sectional relative velocity of airflow, r is the
Taking account the aeroelastic coupling, the present studies radial distance from the rotational axis to the infinitesimal span dr,
introduce the airfoil vibrational velocity and the torsional deflec- and f is the inflow angle.
tion of a flexible blade in the calculation of the inflow angle and the The momentum theory further introduces the 3-D airstream
angle of attack. Thus, the BEM model is correspondingly modified. flow, the tangential induction factor a0 and the axial induction
To investigate the unsteady aerodynamic characteristics, the BEM- factor a. Furthermore, the tip loss and hub loss models by Prandtl
modified model incorporates with the BeL dynamic stall model. are introduced to correct the aerodynamic load calculation when
Based on the blade MBS model and the aerodynamics model, an considering the airstream vortex characteristics on the blade tip
analysis on the time domain aeroelastic coupling responses of the and hub. Thus, the thrust dT and the torque dQ on this annular
blade is completed. The effects of blade torsional deflection and element are given as:
bending vibration on the aerodynamic loads are quantifiably
analyzed. The comparison and analysis on the simulation results 2
dT ¼ 4prrU∞ ð1 aÞaFdr (4)
clearly indicate the significance and necessity of considering the
blade flexibility and the unsteady aerodynamic characteristics in 0
the blade aerodynamic load calculation during the blade design dQ ¼ 4pr 3 rU∞ Uð1 aÞa Fdr (5)
stage.
where F denotes the combined factor which includes the blade tip
2. BEM modified model and BeL model loss and hub loss, whose value can be found in Ref. [20]. The
aerodynamic parameters involved in this BEM theory are shown in
Wind speed changes with time and altitude during blade Fig. 1.
operation. The airstream flows along the spanwise and chordwise In this article, the effects of blade torsional deformation and
directions and flow separation and vortex shedding may occur. If bending vibration on the aerodynamic forces embody in the effects
the blade motion combines with the blade bending vibrations (i.e., of out-of-plane and in-plane velocities on the inflow angle f and
in-plane vibration and out-of-plane vibration) and the torsional the angle of attack a, yielding:
vibration, a blade unsteady aerodynamic effect will occur. The un-
steady aerodynamic loads can be numerically calculated via the
BEM modified model integrating the BeL dynamic stall model.
where aEn is the effective angle of attack at time step n, an1 is the where f is the dynamic separation point position. Tf is the semi-
angle of attack at the time step n1, Da ¼ anan1, and fCa ðtÞ is the empirical time constant in s space, and Tf ¼ 3.0 in the present pa-
circulatory indicial function as: per [4].
1004 W. Mo et al. / Energy 89 (2015) 1001e1009
To obtain the dynamic f, the effective angle of attack needs to be 2.2.4. Numerical calculation process of the BeL model
computed first. Hence, the offset of angle of attack due to the lag in At the initial moment of calculation, CL and CD use the static
the leading edge pressure response is taken into account. A first values. The computed results of the previous loop are the initial
order lag equation is used to represent the lag effect on the normal values for the next loop. The converged, unsteady values CL and CD
force coefficient of the attached flow. can be obtained after a period of iteration. Fig. 2 displays the flow
chart of the numerical calculation of the BeddoeseLeishman
dCN0 ðtÞ CN ðtÞ C 0 N ðtÞ model [4].
¼ (20)
ds Tp
3. Multi-body dynamics model of a flexible blade
where Tp is an empirical time constant set to 1.7 [4].
Then, the effective angle of attack af can be obtained by the Large-scale wind turbine blades have a long, thin and twisted
equation below: profile with a sectional shape and size that varies along the span.
The blade is discretized into a MBS using the ‘super-element,’ and
CN0 ðtÞ
af ¼ þ a0 (21) the adjacent rigid bodies of the system are connected with cardan
CNa or revolute joints with springs and dampers [15e18]. Thus, the
Once af is obtained from Eq. (21), the value of the static effective lateral and torsional deformation can be described by a limited
separation point fs can be calculated by interpolating the steady number of DOFs. In this article, the multi-body dynamics model of a
separation points. Then, the dynamic separation point f can be blade is established by applying the Roberson-Wittenburg stylized
obtained from Eq. (19). The normal and tangential force coefficients modeling methodology of multi-body dynamics.
CNf and CTf including the unsteady separation effect can be obtained
by solving Eqs. (17) and (18), respectively, when the steady real- 3.1. Discretization of a flexible blade
time angle of attack a is substituted by the effective angle of
attack aE. For NREL 5-MW HAWT (horizontal axis wind turbine) blade, 4
super-elements are used to build the blade topological configura-
tion, as shown in Fig. 3. Since the last rigid body in a super-element
is rigidly connected to the first rigid body of the next adjacent
2.2.3. Vortex effect of the unsteady separated flow
super-element, these two rigid bodies can be merged into one rigid
When flow separation occurs, the effects of vortex build-up and
body (the merged bodies are shown in Fig. 3 as B4, B7 and B10).
shedding should be considered. The magnitude of the vortex
Consequently, a blade is divided into 13 rigid bodies with 21 total
normal force coefficient cv(t) is defined as the difference between
DOFs. The expressions of spring stiffness coefficients including the
the unsteady circulatory normal force coefficient CNC and the un-
bending and torsional springs are introduced in Ref. [16], while the
steady normal force coefficient CNf .
values of these coefficients can be found in Ref. [19].
The unsteady lift and drag coefficients CLd and CDd are then
calculated from resolving CNd and CTd into components perpendic-
ular and parallel to the direction of the sectional relative velocity of
airflow, and adding the minimum steady drag coefficient CD0.
CDd ðtÞ ¼ CNd ðtÞsin a CTd ðtÞcos a þ CD0 (28) Fig. 2. Flow chart of the numerical calculation of the BeddoeseLeishman model.
W. Mo et al. / Energy 89 (2015) 1001e1009 1005
€z¼0
Zq (30)
Ref. [21] introduced the detailed expression and derivation
method for the generalized mass matrix Z and the generalized force
vector z. Hence, they are not introduced in this paper.
During operation, the blade rotational speed is subject to a
driving constraint, so the constraint equations are introduced into
the dynamics equations. The number of independent constraint
equations of the system s is:
F ¼ ðF1 ; …; Fs ÞT ¼ 0 (31)
The number of independent variables of the system-generalized
coordinates is d, d ¼ 21s. Coupling Eqs. (30) and (31), the
dynamical equations of the blade MBS with Lagrange multipliers
can be given as:
€ ¼ z FTq l
Zq (32)
Fðq; tÞ ¼ 0
where Fq is the system constraint Jacobian matrix, l is the Lagrange Fig. 4. Flow chart of the aeroelastic coupling analysis.
4. Aeroelastic code development 5.1. Feedback of torsional deformation and vibration of flexible
blades on the aerodynamic loads
The blade aeroelastic coupling equation must be solved by nu-
merical integration due to its high nonlinear property. Fig. 4 dis- For the conventional analysis of blade aerodynamic loads, the
plays the coupling process between the blade MBS model and the feedback of torsional deformation and the vibration of flexible
aerodynamics model. During the simulation, unsteady aero- blades on the aerodynamic loads are generally neglected. However,
dynamic forces are calculated at each time step. These forces are during the operation of flexible blades of large-scale wind turbines,
treated as external forces and applied to the MBS model to compute the random aerodynamic and mechanical loads will cause consid-
the values of the generalized coordinate and the generalized erably large torsional deformation and vibration, which will couple
with the blade aerodynamic loads. Thus, the aeroelastic-coupling
phenomenon of flexible blades will be more obvious. Two
different blade models are built in the present article: the first blade
model (the 1st model) includes the aeroelastic coupling (i.e., taking
into account the feedback), whereas the second blade model (the
2nd model) neglects the aeroelastic coupling. The blade of a NREL
5-MW wind turbine is chosen as the research subject. The aero-
dynamic load differences under rated operating conditions be-
tween these two models are quantifiably analyzed to investigate
the feedback degree of blade vibration and the deformation on the
aerodynamic loads. The post-process module of the simulation
Fig. 3. Regular mark numbers of each rigid body, the inertial coordinate system XYZ code can analyze the internal forces and the deformation of
and the blade coordinate system X0 Y0 Z0 . dangerous cross sections. The blade structural and aerodynamic
1006 W. Mo et al. / Energy 89 (2015) 1001e1009
properties can be found in Ref. [1]. It is assumed that the mean wind
speed at the height of the hub is the rated wind speed (11.4 m/s),
and the impulsive variation of random wind is also taken into
account.
The feedback of the blade torsional deformation and the bending
vibration on the aerodynamic loads are analyzed in terms of the
blade root bending moments, the displacements of the blade tip and
the variation of the angle of attack of each rigid body within the
blade MBS. For the second blade model, the simulation code intro-
duced in Section 2 in this paper must be partly modified as follows:
(a) All values of the spring stiffness coefficients of the revolute
joint in each super-element must be set to extremely large values in
the simulation code (i.e., neglecting the torsional deformation). In
this case, the expression of the angle of attack, Eq. (7), is written as:
where ai(t) is the real-time angle of attack of rigid body Bi, and qi0 is
the twist of the airfoil section within the rigid body.
(b) The blade bending vibrational velocities are not considered
when computing the inflow angle fðtÞ of the second blade model.
Eq. (6) is written as:
U∞ ð1 aÞ
tan f ¼ 0 (36)
Urð1 þ a Þ
The dynamic simulations of the random aeroelastic responses of
the two blade models are carried out based on the BEM modified
theory. Fig. 5a and b shows the time domain responses of in-plane
and out-of-plane deflections of the blade tip, respectively. From
these two figures it is clear that the bending deflections and vi-
bration amplitudes of the blade model, neglecting the aeroelastic
coupling, are considerately larger than those of the other blade
model.
Fig. 6 shows the curves of the time-varying angle of attacks of a
cross section of these two blade models. The mean of the calcula-
tion result of the blade model neglecting the aeroelastic coupling
Fig. 5. The time domain responses of the blade tip: (a) in-plane deflection; (b) out-of-
increases by 0.53 compared with the first blade model.
plane deflection.
Fig. 7a and b displays the time domain responses of the edge-
wise and flapwise blade root bending moments, respectively.
Table 1 shows the analysis results on the aeroelastic coupling effect. coefficients will deviate from their static values. Therefore, it is
From Table 1, the blade root flapwise bending moment of the sec- necessary to establish an accurate unsteady aerodynamic model to
ond blade model increases by 18.81% compared with the first blade compute the dynamic aerodynamic loads of wind turbines. In this
model, while the displacement of the blade tip increases by 25.63% article, the numerical simulation of the airfoil dynamic stall char-
with more violent fluctuation. The considerable differences mainly acteristics of a HAWT is realized based on the BeddoeseLesihman
occur because the blade vibration and torsional deformation have model. By combining the blade MBS model and the BEM modified
significant effects on the angle of attack. Thus, the aerodynamic
forces computed by these two blade models are different, resulting
in the considerable differences of the blade bending deflections and
the blade root bending moments.
For the large-scale wind turbines, the coupling between the
flexible blade torsional deformation and vibration and the aero-
dynamic loads should be considered to more accurately predict the
aerodynamic loads. This is essential for the optimum design of
wind turbines.
Fig. 8. The curves of the airfoil lift coefficients versus angle of attack: (a) rigid body B6;
(b) rigid body B9.
optimum lift over drag ratio during operation. The variation range
of angle of attack of each airfoil is also different.
As shown in Fig. 8, the lift coefficients of two typical blade cross
sections are respectively compared with steady data provided by
NREL to illustrate the dynamic stall characteristics of an airfoil. For
the rigid body B6, its cross section is the DU25_A17 airfoil, whose
static stall angle of attack is approximately 10 . In the unsteady
aerodynamic load simulation, the variation range of the angle of
attack of the airfoil operating at the rated wind speed (11.4 m/s) is
9.30 e9.77, which is near the airfoil stall region. When a dynamic
stall occurs, the lift coefficient increases considerably due to the
flow separation; however, when the angle of attack decreases, the
airfoil dynamic flow field does not quickly revert to the initial state.
There is a time lag in the lift coefficient response against the step
change of the angle of attack; hence, the hysteresis loop appears in
the unsteady lift coefficient curve, as shown in Fig. 8a. For the rigid
body B9, its cross section is the DU21_A17 airfoil, whose static stall
angle of attack is approximately 9 . The variation range of the angle
of attack of the airfoil in the unsteady aerodynamic load simulation
is 5.31 e6.37, which is near the linear region. In this region, there
is no obvious flow separation, and the lift coefficient is dominantly
affected by the attached flow. Hence, the unsteady value of lift
coefficient basically matches its static value, as shown in Fig. 8b.
Table 1
The aeroelastic coupling effect on the blade aerodynamic loads.
Contrast data The 1st model The 2nd model Percentagea (%)
6 6
Blade root edgewise bending moment (N m) Mean 2.46 10 2.34 10 4.94
Variance 4.99 1012 6.94 1012 39.21
Blade root flapwise bending moment (N m) Mean 8.17 106 9.70 106 18.81
Variance 1.05 1012 1.27 1012 21.81
Edgewise displacement of blade tip (m) Mean 1.221 1.145 6.23
Variance 0.103 0.152 48.26
Flapwise displacement of blade tip (m) Mean 4.593 5.770 25.63
Variance 0.359 0.455 26.54
a
In the “Percentage” column, the minus denotes that the value of the second blade model is smaller than that of the first blade model.
1008 W. Mo et al. / Energy 89 (2015) 1001e1009
6
x 10
5
-5
-15
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time [s]
x 10
7 (a)
1.5
steady data
1.3
1.2
1.1
0.9
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time [s]
(b)
Fig. 10. The curves of the blade root bending moments at 20 m/s mean wind speed: (a)
edgewise direction; (b) flapwise direction.
region because its mean is larger than the static stall angle of attack
(9 ). As seen in Fig. 9b, the unsteady lift coefficient deviates 6. Conclusions
considerably from the steady data, and the maximum deviation of
the two coefficients is up to 40.53%. This means that the dynamic In this article, the aeroelastic coupling equations of a large-scale
stall phenomenon can have significant effects on the unsteady wind turbine blade were derived by the computational dynamics of
aerodynamic load calculation, and the same conclusion was also multi-body systems theory and the aerodynamics theory. The
drawn in literature [4] and [7]. aeroelastic code was developed, and then the aeroelastic coupling
Fig. 10 shows that the variation amplitude of the flapwise and simulation analysis of flexible blades was carried out based on the
edgewise bending moments of the blade root computed by the simulation code. The feedback of the blade torsional deformation
unsteady aerodynamic model are larger than those by the steady and vibration on the aerodynamic loads were quantifiably
aerodynamic model. analyzed. The BeddoeseLeishman dynamic stall model was inte-
Table 2 shows the analysis on the means and variances of the grated into the BEM-modified model in the present study to
flapwise and edgewise blade root moments. As the mean wind investigate the unsteady blade airfoil aerodynamic characteristics.
speed increases, the variation percentage of the means obtained by The simulation results between the steady and unsteady aero-
applying the two aerodynamic models changes little, but the dynamic models were compared and analyzed. It can be concluded
variation percentage of the variances increases dramatically. When that:
the wind speed is low, the blade airfoils mainly work in the linear
region; therefore, there is little difference between the calculation a. The out-of-plane vibration and torsional deformation of a flex-
results of the steady and unsteady models. Nevertheless, when the ible blade have significant effect on the aerodynamic loads. The
mean wind speed approaches to 20 m/s, most of the blade airfoils analysis on the time-domain responses of a 5-MW wind turbine
work in stall conditions, so the dynamic stall makes the values of blade working under rated wind speed indicates that the ob-
the lift and drag coefficients fluctuate more violently. Consequently, tained means and variances of the flapwise blade root bending
both the fluctuation amplitude and the frequency of the unsteady moment and the blade tip out-of-plane deflection from the
aerodynamic loads increase considerably. model that neglects the aeroelastic coupling are approximately
When wind turbines operate under random loads, most of the 20% greater than those from the model that includes the aero-
failure is caused by the fatigue failure of the components, and the elastic coupling, respectively. This shows that the blade design
W. Mo et al. / Energy 89 (2015) 1001e1009 1009
Table 2
The dynamic stall effect on the blade aerodynamic loads.
Wind speed Comparative data Edgewise bending moment at the blade Flapwise bending moment at the blade
root (N m) root (N m)
not based on the aeroelastic coupling analysis tends to be [3] Liu X, Liang S, Chen Y, Zhang SQ, Chen C. Dynamic stall simulation of wind
turbine airfoils. Eng Mech 2015;32(3):203e11.
conservative.
[4] Liu X, Zhang XM, Chen Y, Ye ZQ. Transient aerodynamic load prediction of
b. The BeL dynamic stall model can reflect the effect of dynamic horizontal axis wind turbine based on the BEDDOES- LEISHMAN model. J Acta
stall characteristics of blade airfoils on blade aerodynamic loads. Energiae Solaris Sinica 2008;19(12):1449e55.
When a dynamic stall occurs, the circulatory hysteresis char- [5] Du ZH, Selig MS. A 3-D stall-delay model for horizontal axis wind turbine
performance prediction. In: 36th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and
acteristics in the lift and drag coefficients will cause more vio- Exhibit. Reno, Nevada: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; 1998.
lent blade vibration. The simulation results show that there is [6] Shipley DE, Miller MS, Robinson MC. Dynamic stall occurrence on a horizontal
little difference in the mean values of blade root bending mo- axis wind turbine blade. Technical report, No TP-442e6912. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory; 1995. Available from: http://www.osti.gov/
ments between the unsteady and steady models, but the fluc- scitech/biblio/111926.
tuation amplitude and vibrational frequency considerably [7] Liu X, Zhang XM, Li DY, Chen Y, Ye ZQ. Unsteady aerodynamic force analysis of
increase in the unsteady model. Particularly when the mean wind turbine airfoil. J Basic Sci Eng 2010;18(3):503e16.
[8] Larsen JW, Nielsen SRK, Krenk S. Dynamic stall model for wind turbine airfoils.
wind speed approaches 20 m/s, the variance values of the blade J Fluids Struct 2007;23:959e82.
root bending moments of the unsteady model exceeds the [9] Holierhoek JG, Vaal JB, Zuijlen AH, Bijl H. Comparing different dynamic stall
steady model by 100%. Therefore, the effect of dynamic aero- models. Wind Energy 2013;16(1):139e58.
[10] Theodorsen T. General theory of aerodynamic instability and the mechanism
dynamic loads must be taken into account when carrying out
of flutter. In: Jones RT, editor. Classical aerodynamic theory. Washington D.C.:
blade fatigue load spectrum analysis. National Aeronautics and Space Administration; 1979. p. 291e311.
c. An analysis conducted by Hansen demonstrates that airfoil dy- [11] Dat R, Tran CT. Investigation of the stall flutter of an airfoil with a semi-
empirical model of 2-D flow. Vertica 1983;7(2):73e86.
namic stall characteristics and out-of-plane vibration have
[12] Leishman JG, Beddoes TS. A semi-empirical model for dynamic stall. J Am
considerable effects on aerodynamic damping. The established Helicopter Soc 1989;34(3):3e17.
aeroelastic model in this article can be used to predict the un- [13] Dai JC, Hu YP, Liu DS, Long X. Aerodynamic loads calculation and analysis for
steady aerodynamic force as well as the work done by the force large scale wind turbine based on combining BEM modified theory with dy-
namic stall model. Renew Energy 2011;36:1095e104.
in one oscillating period, which provides a basis for further [14] Hansen MH, Gaunaa M, Madsen HA. A Beddoes-Leishman type dynamic stall
analysis on the aeroelastic damping and stability of flexible model in state-space and indicial formulations. Denmark: Risø National Lab-
blades. oratory; 2004.
[15] Molenaar DP. Cost-effective design and operation of variable speed wind
turbines. Delft: Delft University of Technology; 2003.
Acknowledgments [16] Zhao XY, Peter M, Wu JY. A new multibody modeling methodology for wind
turbine structures using a cardanic joint beam element. Renew Energy
2007;32:532e46.
The work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation [17] Holierhoek JG. Aeroelasticity of large wind turbines. Delft: Delft University of
of China (Grant No. 51276043). Technology; 2008.
[18] Rauh J, Schiehlen W. Various approaches for the modeling of flexible robot
arms. In: Proceedings of the Euromech-Colloquium 219 on Refined Dynamical
References
Theories of Beams, Plates, and Shells and their Applications, Kassel. Berlin
Heidelberg: Springer- Verlag; 1986e87. p. 420e9.
[1] Jonkman J, Butterfield S, Musial W, Scott G. Definition of a 5-MW reference [19] Li DY, Mo WW, Yan XH, Zhang XW. Aeroelastic analysis of horizontal axis
wind turbine for offshore system development. NREL Technical report, No TP- wind turbine based on multi-body model. J Mech Eng 2014;50(12):140e50.
500e38060. National Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2009. Available from: [20] Li C, Ye Z, Gao W, Jiang Z. Modern land-sea wind turbine calculation and
http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/947422. simulation. Shanghai: Shanghai Science and Technology Press; 2012.
[2] Lin W, Liu XW, Nathalie R, Matthew S, George MH. Nonlinear aeroelastic [21] Hong JZ. Computational dynamics of multibody systems. Beijing: Higher Ed-
modelling for wind turbine blades based on blade element momentum theory ucation Press; 1999.
and geometrically exact beam theory. Energy 2014;76:487e501.