ELSEVIER

J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287-302

The average output power of a wind turbine in a turbulent wind

A. Rosen*, Y. Sheinman
Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Technion,Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel
(Received April 4, 1992; accepted in revised form June 28, 1993)

Abstract
Turbulence has an important influence on the average output power of a wind turbine taken over a certain period of time. The wind dynamics is coupled to the turbine dynamic characteristics and results in a fairly complicated behavior. Thus, the common "static" model of calculating the average power, which is based on the turbine power curve and the average wind speed, may result in increasing errors. This paper presents three different models for calculating the average output power, taking into account the dynamic characteristics of the phenomenon. These models include direct time integration using accurate wind data and a detailed dynamic model of the turbine, a quasi-steady approach which is much simpler to apply and takes into account the wind dynamics, and an improved efficient model that also includes the influence of the dynamic characteristics of the turbine. The last improved model is based on a study of the turbine response to a sinusoidal gust. All models are compared with field measurements in order to study their accuracy. The comparison exhibits the importance of including all the dynamic effects in the calculations.

Key words: Output power; Wind turbine; Turbulent wind; Time integration; Dynamic model;
Quasi-steady approach; Improved efficiency model

1. Introduction
The power which is p r o d u c e d by a horizontal axis wind turbine in the case of a constant wind speed V, Ps(V), is given by the following equation: es(V) = KCpV 3, K = p Ar, (la) (lb)

where p is the air mass density and A, the disc area. Cp is the power coefficient of the turbine and is in general a function of V. The subscript s indicates that the "static" *Corresponding author. 0167-6105/94/$07.00 1994 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved SSDI 0167-6105 (93) E0043-X

288

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287 3(/2

value of the power is considered, namely the power for a case where the wind speed is constant for the entire period of time. Actually, the wind is turbulent and its velocity is a function of the time t. Thus, it is customary to describe the momentary value of the wind speed, during a period of time
]Ca, a s

~,(t) = V + u,

(2)

where Vis the average value of v(t) (taken over the same period of time) and u is the gust speed, u is a function of time and its average over T, is equal to zero. Eq. (2) is based on the assumption that a single wind speed can be used to specify the wind "felt" by the machine. Investigations that will be presented in what follows, justified this assumption for turbines having a rotor diameter up to 25 m. Justification for larger machines is desirable. Christensen et al. [1] calculated the average output power which is produced by the turbine over the time period Ta. It was assumed that the momentary value of the power is given by Ps(V), where V is replaced by v(t), as given by Eq. (2). After assuming that u is small compared to _Vand neglecting higher order terms of u, they obtained the following expression for the average output power over T,:

t'qs(_V,o-,~) = Ps(_V)

2 P;' (_V)~ 1 + o-,~ Ps(_v)]'

(3)

where an upper prime indicates differentiation with respect to V. a~ is the standard deviation of the wind speed, which is defined as
Ta Ta

o.v=I~af(U(t)-V)2d~ll/2~[~a;U2dl]
0 0

1/2.

(4)

The intensity of turbulence I,,, is defined as

1~, udV_.
=

(5)

If Eq. (la) is substituted into Eq. (3), then the following expression for _Pqs is
obtained: /)qs (_V, /v) = P~(_V)[I + 3 12 6(_V)], where
.

(6)

6(_V)= I + _ v @

c;(v)

_v 2

+ 6 Cp(_V)"

c~(_v)

(7)

Christensen et al. [1] investigated the use of Eq. (6) in order to calculate the average output power of a typical wind turbine, and showed the influence of.the turbulence on this average. The method described above, where the dynamic characteristics of the wind turbine are not taken into account, is known as the "quasi-steady" approach. Yet, it is clear that the wind turbine is a system that, like other engineering systems, exhibits a complicated dynamic response, which is the result of its dynamic characteristics.

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287- 302

289

Various dynamic models of wind turbines were derived in the past and used in order to calculate the output power of wind turbines operating in "real" turbulent winds. The interested reader may find a limited literature survey in a recent paper I-2] that described the derivation of another new model (by the authors of the present paper). The validation of this model I-3] exhibited its accuracy in predicting the output power of a certain turbine, and the important influence that the dynamic characteristics of the entire system (wind turbine and grid) may have on the output power. The purpose of the present paper is to study the coupled influence of the wind turbulence and dynamic characteristics of the wind turbine system, on the average output power. For the purpose of this study, the numerical model of [2] will be used. At first the average output power for the use of a sinusoidal gust, will be calculated. This study will lead to the definition of a new function that describes the influence of the dynamic characteristics of the turbine system on its average output power. This function depends on the magnitude of the average wind speed and the frequency of the sinusoidal gust. Clearly, this function depends on the detailed design of the turbine. The third Section will show how the results of the second Section are used in order to derive a new efficient improved model in order to calculate the average power of a turbine operating in a "real" wind, taking into account the important coupling between the turbulent nature of the wind and the dynamic characteristics of the wind turbine. In the fourth Section the various methods of calculating the average power will be compared between themselves and with measured data. The accuracy of the various methods will be estimated and discussed. It will be shown that in order to obtain accurate results it is important to take into account all the dynamic effects.

2. A sinusoidai gust The wind velocity at any moment is described by Eq. (2). According to the quasi-steady approach the output power at any moment is obtained by expanding Eq. (la) about a steady operation at a constant wind speed of magnitude ft."
Pqs(_V + u) ----K_V 3 Cpo -4- KV_2uCpp + KV_u 2 CpM "4- "'"

(8)

Cpo is in fact identical to Cp in Eq. (la). According to the quasi-steady approach Cpo, CpM and Cpp are functions of _V. The analysis of the present Section will be confined to the pure theoretical case of a sinusoidal gust, namely u = A sin 2~ft, (9)

where A and f a r e the gust amplitude and frequency, respectively. It will be assumed that A is small with respect to V.

290

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287 302

In order to obtain the expression for Pqs in the case of a sinusoidal gust, Eq. (9) is substituted into Eq. (8). For convenience the result is nondimensionalized after dividing it by Ps(_V). In what follows a nondimensional output power will be marked by an upper tilde. If powers of (A/V_) greater than the second are neglected, then the following expression for the nondimensional average quasi-steady power (in the case of a sinusoidal gust), Pq~(_V, A), is obtained (simple trignometric relations are also used during the derivation): 1 A2 CpM Pqs(V, A) = 1 -~ 2 V 2 Cpo'

(10)

As long as the frequency f is small it is expected that a quasi-steady approach will give a fairly accurate description of the system behavior. But as f is increased then the dynamic characteristics of the wind turbine will start to influence its response. It is reasonable to assume that in this case CpM and Cpe will depend on the fequencyf In order to investigate the influence of the dynamic characteristics of the turbine on its response, the dynamic model of the Vestas V25 that was described in [2,3] is used. The output power in the case of a sinusoidal gust (as given by Eqs. (2) and (9)) is calculated. The numerical simulation is continued for a relatively long time in order to arrive at a pure steady-state response, after the transient response to the initial conditions has disappeared. During this steady state response the wind turbine output also exhibits a periodic behavior with a basic frequency f, namely a basic time period 1If From this steady-state response a time interval Tsi m is chosen such that Tsi m = /'//f~ where n is a certain integer number that indicates the number of complete basic periods within Tsi m. In order to calculate the average output power along this period of time the output power, Psim(f, _V,A, t), is integrated over the time period Tsi m and then the result is divided by Tsi m. The nondimensional value of this average power is denoted _Pslm(f, _V, A) and is defined mathematically as

Tsim
a~sim( f, V, A) -- _Psim(J~ V, A) 1 _ ps(_V) -- TsimPs(_V)

f
o

Psim(f, V, A, t)dt.

(11)

Graphs of -_P~im(f, V, A) as a function of the frequency f, for various values of the average wind speed _If and a gust amplitude of A = 1 m/s, are presented in Fig. 1. While discussing this figure, it is also convenient (besides referring to the frequency f ) to also refer to the gust duration T~, which is the time between two consequent points, where v(t) becomes equal to _V.In the case of a sinusoidal gust, T~is equal to half of the time period which is (i/f). From Fig. 1 it is clear that for f < 0.0017 Hz (Tl > 30 s) the f u n c t i o n s _/~sim(J~ V, A) obtain constant values that do not change with f This applies to all the various average wind speeds. Thus, in this region ~im(f, _V,A) is independent of the dynamic characteristics of the system, namely this is the region where a quasi-steady modeling gives accurate results. The values of _Psim(f, _V, A) in this region should be identical to the results of the quasi-steady approach that was derived in Ref. [1]. In order

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287-302

291

1,15' 1.1 ~J
u.!

A = I ~
d7 m/$

......................................................................................................................

V=7m/see V_=8/ s e e m
........m/see V=9

~. 1.05-

V=10m / s e e
12 m/s
~
V=II m/see .- ......

I ..................................................................................................................................................

I 0.91 0.01

"~10 role
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1 f, Frequency [Hz]

Fig. l. l~sim(J~ ~ A) as a function of the frequencyf, for various values of the average wind velocity (7 m/s ~< _V 12 m/s) and a sinusoidal gust having an amplitude A = 1 m/s. ~<

0.44

0.42 ................................................................................................................................................

o,
6

(?.32

9
V [m/sec]

lo

1'I

12

Fig. 2. The power coefficientcurve of the Vestas V25.

to check the consistency of the calculations, -_Pq,(_Y, I~) was also calculated using Eq. (6). For that purpose the power coefficient curve (Cp) of the turbine was obtained, as shown in Fig. 2, using the complete numerical model of the Vestas V25. Then, after applying a spline smoothing algorithm, the first and second derivatives of Cp

292

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodvn. 51 (1994) 287

? ~

(with respect to V) were calculated. The calculated values were substituted into Eq. (7) and then into Eq. (6). The values of _Pq, that were obtained as a result of this substitution showed excellent agreement with the appropriate values of ~.,im(./i If, A) (from Fig. 1) for low frequencies (f< 0.0017 Hz). The curves in Fig. 1 exhibit local extremum points (in the value of ~sim(j~ IV, A) as a function o f f ) at a frequency f ~ 0.0625 Hz (T~ ~ 8 s). In addition, there are less pronounced local extremums at f ~ 0.04Hz and f ~ 0.025 Hz (Tl ~ 12.5 s and TI ~ 22 s, respectively). The extremum points at f ~ 0.0625 Hz are mainly results of the pitch control system. As indicated in Ref. [3], the complete accurate details of the pitch control system were not supplied by the manufacturer and, therefore, they were estimated after a careful inspection of the operation of the turbine at the Beit-Yatir site in Israel. Therefore, certain deviations between the actual pitch control system and the model may exist. As expected, at high frequencies the turbine fails to respond to the fast variations in the wind speed and, therefore _Psim(f, _IV,A) approaches u n i t y . A clear trend which is shown in Fig. 1 is that for _V< 9 m/s, Ps~m(f, _V,A) is greater than P j_V) (namely "_Psim(f _V, A) is greater than unity), while for _V~> 10m/s an opposite trend is shown. The reason for that behavior is clearly shown in Fig. 2, where a maximum in Cp defines two different regions, where Cp either increases or decreases with V. While the maximum point in Fig. 2 occurs at V = 8.43 m/s, the transition in Fig. 1 occurs between 9 m/s and 10 m/s. Examination of Eq. (7) indicates that this difference is expected since 8(_V) is not directly proportional to C'p and thus 8(_V) does not become negative when C'p changes sign. Examination of _P.,im(f, V, A), as presented in Fig. 1, indicates that there is a strong dependence of this variable on the frequencyf. This dependence is missing in Eq. (10). In order to overcome this drawback, a correction function, denoted Gl(f, _V),is added to Eq. (10) in order to account for the dynamic characteristics of the turbine. This extension results in a corrected value of the average power, _Pc(f, _V, A), which is defined by the following equation

_P~(.f, ~, A ) =

1 +2

1 A2 CpM

V--2Cp~GI(f,__ V)= 1 + 1,2~,oG1(

CpM

V_).

(12)

In order that ~ c ( f _V,A) will agree with ~sim(f, _V,A) as presented in Fig. 1, Gl(f, _V) is defined as follows: _Psim(f _V, A ) - Ps(_V) (13)

GI(J; V ) = -Pqs,sim(- A ) - Ps(V)' V'

where Pq~,sim(V, A) is the quasi-steady value of the average output power. In light of the above discussion Pq~,~im(V, A) is defined as the average output power at low frequencies (in the case of the Vestas V 2 5 f < 0.017 Hz or T~ > 30 s), where the influence of dynamic effects is negligible. If the value of Pq~,sim(V, A) is known, then CpM(V)/Cpo(V)c a n be calculated using Eq. (10)

CpM = 2feqs, slm(_V A) ,

C,o L P~(_V)

1] v2 A-~"

(14)

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287-302

293

Curves of Gl(f, _V) as functions off, for various values of _V,are presented in Ref. [14]. The function Cpu/3Cpo (which according to Eq. (21) below is equal to 8(_1/)) is also presented in Ref. [14]. All the functions are given for the Vestas V25. In principle (CpM/Cpo)or GI~, _V) are also functions of the gust amplitude A. Nevertheless, investigation has shown that for the practical range of A, the influence of the amplitude on these functions is very small and it can be thus neglected.

3. A "real" wind

It is clear that a "real" gust cannot be represented as a single sinusoidal gust. Instead a real gust includes a wide spectrum of frequencies and amplitudes. The purpose of the present Section is to present how the results of the previous Section can be applied in order to analyse a wind turbine in a "real" (gusty) wind. Shinozuka [4] used the following discrete representation in order to describe a "real" gust;
Ns

u = ~ (2S,(f~)Af)cos(2nfit + 0s),

(15)

where Su(f) is the Power Spectral Density (PSD) function of the wind on the site and Ns is the number of frequency bins. 0I is a random phase angle, where 0 < 01 < 2r~. Af is the width of each frequency bin, whilef~ is the representative frequency of the ith bin. Shinozuka [5] showed that for Ns >/50 a good spectral representation of a typical wind is obtained. The above wind representation is widely used, especially in cases where the dynamic characteristics of the wind are of interest. For example, Sundar and Sullivan [6] used this representation in order to run a simple simulation of a wind turbine that operates in a gusty wind. There are various models of Su(f), and it is beyond the scope of this paper to review all the existing models. The model that will be used in the present investigation was presented by Kristensen et al. I-7] and Draget [8] and it appears in Ref. [14] for the Beit-Yatir site. Substitution of Eq. (15) into Eq. (8) and using simple trigonometric relations, lead to the following expression for nondimensional average quasi-steady output power ~q~(lS',S,, t) (which is obtained after the dimensional output power is divided by

P~(v)):
xCpM ~ 2S~(.]ii)Af -_Pq,(_V,S,) = 1 + 2 Cp~ ,=Z, _~ . (16)

It can be shown [9] that if Eq. (15) is used to describe the gust, then the intensity of turbulence, according to the basic definition by Eqs. (4,5), becomes

N, s

)Ai]

294

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodvn. 51 (1994) 287 302

Thus, Eq. (16) can be written, in a complete analogous manner to Eq. (6), as ~Pqs(V, Su)= 1 qt_ 38(V)I2, where 8(_V) ~---CpM( V)/3 Cpo (V). (19) (18)

In the previous Section, it was shown that the second term in Eq. (10) should be multiplied by a correction factor in order to account for the dynamic characteristics of the turbine. The correction factor Gl(f, V) was a function of the frequency and the average wind speed. In a completely analogous manner, the second term in Eq. (16) is multiplied by the same correction function Gl(f, _If)in order to obtain the corrected value of the nondimensional average output power Pc(V, S.): ~c(_V, S,) = 1 + ~

CpM,=, S.(J~)AfGa~J,, V). ~ ~5 ,r

(20)

In an analogous manner to Eq. (18), it is convenient to write the last equation as -P(_V, S , ) = 1 + 38(_V)(I. . . . dJ) 2, where (I . . . . all)2 = (21)

~ S"(~ - GlW,, _V). fi)Af t r

i=1

(22)

(Iv, modX) is a modified intensity of turbulence that takes into account the dynamic characteristics of the turbine and their influence on its response.

4. Comparison between calculated and measured values of the average output power In the previous sections four different calculated average power outputs of a wind turbine were defined: (a) The average static output power Ps(V), which is a function of the average wind speed and the turbine power curve. It does not take into account the dynamic characteristics of the turbine or the wind. (b) The average quasi-steady output power _Pqs(_V, Su), that takes into account the dynamic characteristics of the wind, but not the dynamic characteristics of the turbine. (c) The average "corrected" output power Pc(_V, S.) that takes into account the dynamic characteristics of both, the wind and the turbine. (d) The average output power of a direct numerical simulation Psim. In cases (b) and (c) above Sdf) (the PSD function of the wind on site) is used to describe the wind dynamic characteristics. Pslm in (d) above was defined by

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287-302

295

Eq. (11) for a sinusoidal gust and it is a straight forward matter [3] to extend it for any period T,, over which a "real wind" is blowing. In this case the detailed accurate dynamic characteristics of the wind and the turbine are taken into account
Ta _Psim ~---Taa o esim(t) dt (23)

Psim(t) is obtained when the actual measured wind speed, v(t), is used as an input of a detailed dynamic model of the wind turbine. As already was done in the previous Sections, it is convenient to nondimensionalize the last three average output power values, dividing them by Ps(ff). If the nondimensional value is smaller than unity then it is clear that the "static" approach is overpredicting the produced energy [3]. In order to investigate the accuracy of the calculated values of the average power, these values are compared with a nondimensionalized measured average power values, which are defined by the following equation
Ta

P_me~= T,I~(V_)
0

Pmes(t)dt,

(24)

where Pines(t) is the momentary measured value of the actual output power. Thus the investigation included the following stages: (1) The wind speed and output power of the Vestas V25 turbine in Beit-Yatir were measured over 153 h [3]. (2) The total measuring time was divided into time-segments of 600 s each, namely 918 different segments. (3) For each time-segment _V, av and Iv were calculated (Eqs. 4,5). (4) For each time-segment P~(_V) was calculated using Eq. (la). (5) For each time-segment _Pm~swas calcualted using Eq. (24). (6) The dynamic model of the turbine [2] was run for the entire 153 h and ~sim calculated (for each time-segment) using Eq. (23). (7) The function 8(V) was obtained based on Eqs. (14) and (19). Then -Pqs was calculated for each time-segment by using Eq. (18). (8) For each time segment (I .... dl) was calculated using Eq. (22). In these calculations S,(f) and the functions GI(_V,f) were applied. Then Eq. (21) was used in order to calculate ~c for each time-segment. The above described procedure resulted in a large amount of data. In order to analyze these data, all the time-segments were divided into intensity of turbulence bins. The intensity of turbulence of interest varies in the region Iv = 0.025 + 0.15. Since a bin width of 0.025 is chosen, there are five intensity of turbulence bins. For each bin, every average output power value (~ .... ~im, ~c and P_q,)is plotted as a function of _IV.The results are quite scattered as shown for example

296

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/d. Wind Eng. lnd. Aeroc(vn. 51 (1994) 287 302 1

0.99
...................................................................................................................................................

0.98. . . . . . . . .I'.................... ............ . . . . =-.---.--~.=

l i . =

.......................................................

0.97.......................... =,,r,_=.........,......,, ...................................................................

0.98 ..................................... =.m .............. =-=--..---.---.i---.-i .......................................... -"-......--~ ....

o.gs
0.94

..........................- ................................................... ' 1 " i ' " .,,. . - , ~ ................. . _

=.i, ............................................................. ~......L..~ L ,,.~. ...........

-i==

.....

.........................

0 . 9 3 ................... .............................................................. ~ am .........................................................................

0 . 9 2 .................. - n - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~. . . ......................................................................... u............................ .... . .

0,91 ..................................................................................................... ~ 0.9

........................................................

Ib V [m/sec l

1'I

12

la

(a)
1 0.99 ................................................................................................................................................... 0,98 ........................................................................................................................... 0.97 ........................................................................................................................................ 0,95 ................................................................................................ =~ 0.95 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 0.94 ................................................
0 . 9 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0.92 .....

2 1 7...................................................................................12 8 9 10 11
. i J + , L

13

V (m/Nc)

(b)
Fig. 3. ~ as a f u n c t i o n o f V in t h e b i n I~ = 0.1 + 0.125: (a) b e f o r e a v e r a g i n g , (b) a f t e r a v e r a g i n g .

in Fig. 3a, where ~m** for the bin I, = 0.1 + 0.125 is presented. In order to be able to analyze the results, the scatter of each curve is reduced by averaging each curve in velocity bins of a width of 0.5 m/s. This width is chosen according to the European standard [10] and the ASME recommendation [11]. The results after the averaging are shown in Fig. 3b.

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287-302

297

During each averaging procedure the standard deviation, which is associated with each averaged curve, is plotted as a function of V. The results indicate that relatively large scatter and thus large standard deviation values are obtained at combinations of low values of _Vand Iv (_V < 8 m/sec, Iv = 0 + 0.06). In these cases the wind profile is usually unstable 1-12] and thus using the wind speed at the hub as a representative value of the entire disc area (see the comment after Eq. (2)) may be inaccurate. In Fig. 4 curves of _P P_sim,_Pc and _Pqs,as functions of _V,are presented for the five .... intensity of turbulence bins. A careful investigation of Fig. 4 indicates that in general there is a good agreement between ~/~rnesand P_~im.Also the agreement -_Pcand _Pinesis better than the agreement between -_Pq,and ~mes"In order to further investigate the agreement between -_emcsand the rest of the curves, a statistical test is used. It is a two tail paired T-test [13]. This test design calls for matching or pairing the subjects into a number of pairs so that the individuals in each pair are as much alike as possible. If there is a sound basis for pairing, the idea is that within each pair a very precise comparison (of its individuals) is achieved. These precise comparisons can be combined. The outcome of the test provides an examination of the hypothesis: "Is the mean of the differences between each pair equal to zero in a constant significance level?". When the test outcome is less than the significance level, the hypothesis will be accepted, meaning that the mean of the differences will not be zero. For a value higher than the

Iv=0.025-0.05

1,~- . . ~ s ! ~ . ~ .

....................................................................................................................................

.......... ../...\I ... ..

..................................................................................................................................

Iii ! ;\ii...................................... .....................................

. .................................................

10 V (m/see)

11

12

13

(a)
Fig. 4. p .... _P,,,,, ~o and "_P,, as functions of V__,for the five bins of intensity of turbulence: (a) Iv = 0.025 .-' 0.05.

298

A, Rosen. Y. Sheinman/J, Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287. 302

Iv=0.05-0.075
1.06 1.04- ~ . ~ rues ~,.. 1.02 ....... Pines Esim

...........................................................

......................................................

_ oj

0.94

"~

~) 1'o _v (m/sec)

1'1

1'2

13

(b) Iv=0.075-0.1
1.06

pqs

1.04 ................llk:~:~ - ......................................................................................

~ ......................................................................................................
i
~ " '

_Pme Y~ Psirr

.......

"i 0.98o.9=0.9

I
6

P=~"
8 9
V (m/sec)

1'o

1'1

1'2

13

(c)
Fig. 4. (continued). (b) I, = 0.05 + 0.0?5, (c) I~ = 0.075 + 0.1.

significance level, the hypothesis will not be accepted (the mean of the differences will be zero). In this case the two groups are similar within their pairs. The significance level which was used in this examination is 95%. The results of the test are presented in Table 1. The ~, values that support the hypothesis (and thus indicate agreement) are marked by ( + ), while z, values that do

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287-302

299

~=0.1-0.125

1~

!iiiiiiiiiiiiii
:S .... ....... ,,;

[ 1t............ S..%~ .......::::::::::::::::::::::: ~_s,m S..%~ ....... ........................................................................ _Pc ~ Pqs

~o 0.98-t"";; .................................................................................. ................::::::: "~ ....................................................
-'/,~ ........

o.~
(d)

rls

815

91s
V (m/see)

1'o 16.s

1'1 li.5

12

Iv=0.125-0.15 1.02T
|

1.o11. .......... ..........................

_Pqs ~

.................. ~ ....\
.............................................................

i i ~ : .......... :............................ ~ - - - - - - ~

i o.o~ ................. ~ . . . . . . . . / / .
o.0~ ........... ~ ~

................................ \ ~

.......................................
......................

0.92. 7.5
(e)

8;5

9~5

lr0

_V{m/sec)

113,5

11

Fig. 4 (continued). (d) I~ = 0.1 - 0.125, (e) I~ = 0.125 + 0.150.

not support the hypothesis (indicate disagreement) are marked by_( - ). The results indicate very clearlythat the best agreement is obtained between _P~=~and _P,i~- The agreement between _P~=~and _Pis of lower quality, but still the hypothesis is accepted at the 95% significance level. The hypothesis is accepted in the _P~=,and _Pq~comparison only in one (I~ = 0.025 - 0.05) of the five intensity of turbulence bins.

300

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind~ Aerodvn. 51 (1994) ~87 30,

Table 1 The results of a statistical two tail paired T-test that examines the agreement between ffme~and ~ m,~ P_q~ 1, r, values for the comparison between:

bin
0.025 0.05 0.05 0.075 0.075 + 0.10 0.10 + 0.125 0.125 + 0.15

P ~ and ~im
{ (+ (+ (+ (+ ) 0.1837 ) 0.0932 ) 0.0870 ) 0.1483 ) 0.4107

_/~simarid _/~c
(+ ( (+ (+ [+ ) 0.2184 ) 0.1534 ) 0.0551 ) 0.0783 ) 0.0555

~s and ~qs
( ( ( -( ( ~0.1959 ~0.0126 ~0.0002 ~0.0002 ~0.0001

The results of the statistical test support the initial observation that the most accurate m e t h o d of calculating the average power is based on a direct complete simulation (_P~im). Nevertheless, the improved m e t h o d (_P~) that takes into account the dynamic characteristics of the wind and the turbulence gives very g o o d results which are more accurate than the results of the quasi-steady model (_Pq~) or the static model (P~).

5. Conclusions
F o u r different methods of calculating the average output power (over a certain time duration) of a wind turbine, in a turbulent wind, were presented: (a) The "static" m e t h o d (_Ps) requires a knowledge of the power coefficient curve of the turbine and the average wind speed over the same period of time. This m e t h o d does not take into account the dynamic characteristics of the wind or the turbine. (b) The quasi-steady m e t h o d (_Pq~) uses the power coefficient curve, the average wind speed and the intensity of turbulence. This m e t h o d accounts for the dynamic characteristics of the wind, but not the turbine. (c) The improved m e t h o d (_Pc) uses the power coefficient curve, the average wind speed and a corrected intensity of turbulence. This improved m e t h o d considers the dynamic characteristics of the wind and the turbine. This is achieved by defining a "new" extended intensity of turbulence that depends on the dynamic characteristics of the turbine. (d) A direct accurate calculation of the average output power (_P~im). This value is obtained after averaging the results of a direct simulation of the turbine power production when it is exposed to the same wind speed that was measured. F o r this simulation a detailed dynamic model of the turbine is used. It was shown that wind turbulence has an important influence on the average output power. Using the static value of the average power m a y result in increasing inaccuracy.

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287-302

301

The most accurate prediction of the average power is obtained when a direct simulation of the wind turbine power production is carried out. This m e t h o d is time consuming and requires a data (detailed v(t)) that usually does not exist. A n y effort to obtain this data usually requires variations in the c o m m o n measuring system and dealing with e n o r m o u s a m o u n t s of data. The new improved model for calculating the average power _Pc, that was derived in the paper, offers a very efficient m e t h o d of calculating the average power, taking into a c c o u n t the dynamic characteristics of the wind and the turbine, and their coupling. This model is based on defining a "corrected" intensity of turbulence that takes into a c c o u n t the wind turbine dynamic characteristics. It was shown that for this purpose a correction factor can be defined, which depends on the frequency and the average wind speed. The dependence of the correction factor on the gust amplitude is small and can be neglected. This correction factor is combined with the P S D of the wind on site, to yield the corrected intensity of turbulence. The present improved m e t h o d can be used in order to improve the accuracy of the prediction of the energy that will be produced by a wind turbine which is located at a certain site [14].

Acknowledgement
The research that lead to this paper was financed by the Israel Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure. The authors would like to thank Mrs. G o o d m a n for typing this manuscript.

References
[1] C.J. Christensen, J.B. Dragt, N.V.D. Borg, O. Carlson, I.R. Derdelinx, R. Hunter, D. Infield, M.A. Lodge, J. van Meel, E. Lyesen, K. Kieft, J.P. Molly and U.S. Paulsen, Accuracy of Power Curve Measurements, RISO-M-2632 Report, Riso National Lab., DK-4000, Roskilde, Denmark, November 1986. [2] Y. Sheinman and A. Rosen, A dynamic model for performance calculations of grid-connected horizontal axis wind turbines. Part I: Description of the model, Wind Eng. 15(4) (1991) 211-228. [3] A. Rosen and Y. Sheinman, A dynamic model for performance calculations of grid-connected horizontal axis wind turbines. Part II: Validation, Wind Eng. 15(4) (1991) 229-239. [4] M. Shinozuka and C.M. Jan, Digital simulation of random processes and its applications, J. Sound Vibr., 25 (1972) 111-128. [5] M. Shinozuka, Simulation of multivariate multidimensional random processes, J. Accous. Soc. Am., 49 (1971) 357-367. [6] R.M. Sundar and J.P. Sullivan, Performance of wind turbines in a turbulent atmosphere, Solar Energy, 31 (1983) 567-575. [7] L. Kristensen, H.A. Panofsky and S.D. Smith, Lateral coherence of longitudinal wind components in strong winds, Boundary Layer Meteorol., 21 (1981) 199. I-8] J.B. Dragt, The spectra wind speed fluctuations met by a rotating blade and resulting load fluctuations, Proc. European Wind Energy Conf. Hamburg, Germany, 22-26 October, 1984, pp. 453458. [9] E.L. Houghton and N.B. Carruthers, Wind Forces on buildings and structures: An Introduction, Edward Arnold Publishing, London, 1976.

302

A. Rosen, Y. Sheinman/J. Wind L)~g. Ind. Aerodyn. 51 (1994) 287 302

[10] A. Curvers and T.F. Pedersen, Recommendation for European Wind Turbine Standard on Performance Determination, ECN Report ECN-89-16, Netherlands Energy Research Foundation, Petten, The Netherlands, 1989. [11] Anon, Measurements Uncertainty, Part 1, Instruments and Apparatus, Supplement to ASMEPerformance test codes, ANSI/ASME PTC 19. 1- 1985. [12] D.L. Elliot, Wind Shear for Large Wind Turbine Generators at Selected Tall Tower Sites, PNL-4895, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA, 1984. [13] J.L. Folks, Ideas of Statistics, Wiley, New York, 1981. [14] Y. Sheinman and A. Rosen, A dynamic model of the influence of turbulence on the power output of a wind turbine, J. Wind. Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 39 (1992) 329 341.