A Quantitative Comparison of Three Floating Wind Turbines Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop December 2-3, 2009 Jason Jonkman, Ph.D.
17
Embed
A Quantitative Comparison of Three Floating Wind Turbines
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
A Quantitative Comparisonof Three Floating Wind Turbines
Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop
December 2-3, 2009
Jason Jonkman, Ph.D.
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 2 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
ShallowWater0m-30m Transitional
Depth30m-60m Deepwater
60m+
Onshore
Offshore Wind Technology
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 3 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Developer • StatoilHydro, Norway
• Blue H, Netherlands • Principle Power, USA • SWAY, Norway
Platform • “Hywind” spar buoy with catenary moorings
• Tension-leg concept with gravity anchor
• “WindFloat” semi-submersible with catenary moorings
• Spar buoy with single taut tether
Wind Turbine
• Siemens 2.3-MW upwind, 3-bladed
• Gamma 2-bladed, teetering, yaw-regulated
• Coordinating with suppliers for 5-MW+ units
• Swivels downwind• Partnering with
Multibrid
Status • $78M demonstration project in North Sea
• First PoC installed in Summer 2009
• Plans to license technology
• Deployed PoC system with 80-kW turbine in Italy in summer 2007
• Receiving funding from ETI for UK-based projects
• Extensive numerical modeling
• Tested in wave tank• Planning
demonstration projects
• Extensive numerical modeling
• Planning demonstration projects
Floating Wind Turbine Pioneers
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 4 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
6) Compare concepts against each other & to onshore
7) Iterate on design:• Limit-state analysis• MIMO state-space control
8) Evaluate system economics
9) Identify hybrid features that will potentially provide the best overall characteristics
Floating Concept Analysis Process
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 8 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
NREL 5-MW onOC3-Hywind Spar
NREL 5-MW onMIT/NREL TLP
NREL 5-MW onITI Energy Barge
Three Concepts Analyzed
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 9 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Sample MIT/NREL TLP Response
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 10 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
RootMMxy1 LSSGagMMyz YawBrMMxy TwrBsMMxy
Rat
io o
f Sea
to L
and
MIT/NREL TLP OC3-Hywind Spar ITI Energy Barge
4.4
Normal Operation:DLC 1.1-1.5 Ultimate Loads
Yaw Bearing
Bending Moment
Blade Root
Bending Moment
Tower Base
Bending Moment
Low-Speed Shaft
Bending Moment
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 11 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
MIT/NREL TLP+ Behaves essentially like a land-based turbine+ Only slight increase in ultimate & fatigue loads− Expensive anchor system
OC3-Hywind Spar Buoy+ Only slight increase in blade loads0 Moderate increase in tower loads; needs strengthening− Difficult manufacturing & installation at many sites
ITI Enery Barge− High increase in loads; needs strengthening− Likely applicable only at sheltered sites+ Simple & inexpensive installation
Floating Platform Analysis Summary
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 12 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
• Assess roll of advanced control• Resolve system instabilities• Optimize system designs• Evaluate system economics• Analyze other floating concepts:
• Verify simulations further under IEA OC3• Validate simulations with test data• Improve simulation capabilities• Develop design guidelines / standards Spar Concept by SWAY
Semi-Submersible Concept
Ongoing Work & Future Plans
Thank You for Your Attention
Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 14 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Summary of Selected Design Load Cases from IEC61400-1 & -3
Design Load Case Table
DLC Controls / Events Type LoadModel Speed Model Height Direction Factor
1.1 NTM V in < V hub < V out NSS H s = E[H s |V hub ] β = 0º Normal operation U 1.25×1.21.2 NTM V in < V hub < V out NSS H s = E[H s |V hub ] β = 0º Normal operation F 1.001.3 ETM V in < V hub < V out NSS H s = E[H s |V hub ] β = 0º Normal operation U 1.351.4 ECD V hub = V r , V r ±2m/s NSS H s = E[H s |V hub ] β = 0º Normal operation; ±∆ wind dir'n. U 1.351.5 EWS V in < V hub < V out NSS H s = E[H s |V hub ] β = 0º Normal operation; ±∆ ver. & hor. shr. U 1.351.6a NTM V in < V hub < V out ESS H s = 1.09×H s50 β = 0º Normal operation U 1.35
2.1 NTM V hub = V r , V out NSS H s = E[H s |V hub ] β = 0º Pitch runaway → Shutdown U 1.352.3 EOG V hub = V r , V r ±2m/s, V out NSS H s = E[H s |V hub ] β = 0º Loss of load → Shutdown U 1.10
6.1a EWM V hub = 0.95×V 50 ESS H s = 1.09×H s50 β = 0º, ±30º Yaw = 0º, ±8º U 1.356.2a EWM V hub = 0.95×V 50 ESS H s = 1.09×H s50 β = 0º, ±30º Loss of grid → -180º < Yaw < 180º U 1.106.3a EWM V hub = 0.95×V 1 ESS H s = 1.09×H s1 β = 0º, ±30º Yaw = 0º, ±20º U 1.35
7.1a EWM V hub = 0.95×V 1 ESS H s = 1.09×H s1 β = 0º, ±30º Seized blade; Yaw = 0º, ±8º U 1.10
6) Parked (Idling)
7) Parked (Idling) and Fault
Winds Waves
1) Power Production
2) Power Production Plus Occurrence of Fault
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 15 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 16 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
-4
-2
0
2
4
0 100 200 300 400 500 600Time, s
S-S
T-T
Def
l,m
No BrakeBrake
Brake Engaged
• Aero-elastic interaction causes negative damping in a coupled blade-edge, tower-S-S, & platform-roll & -yaw mode
• Conditions:– 50-yr wind event for TLP, spar, & land-based turbine– Idling + loss of grid; all blades = 90º; nacelle yaw error = ±(20º to 40º)– Instability diminished in barge by wave radiation
• Possible solutions:– Modify airfoils to reduce energy absorption– Allow slip of yaw drive– Apply brake to keep rotor away from critical azimuths
Idling:DLC 6.2a Side-to-Side Instability
AWEA Offshore Wind Project Workshop 17 National Renewable Energy Laboratory
• Aero-elastic interaction causes negative damping in a mode that couples rotor azimuth with platform yaw
• Conditions:– Normal or 1-yr wind & wave events– Idling + fault; blade pitch = 0º (seized), 90º, 90º– Instability in TLP & barge, not in spar or land-based turbine
• Possible solutions:– Reduce fully feathered pitch to allow slow roll while idling– Apply brake to stop rotor